TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
HEARINGS
BEFORE THE
SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS AND
COMPAEABLE OKGANIZATIONS
HOUSE OF BEPKESENTATIVES
EIGHTY-THIRD CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON N
H. Res, 217
WASHINGTON, D. C. {V}
PART 1, Pages 1-943
MAY 10, 11, 18, 19, 20, 24, 25, 26, JUNE 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, 15, 16, 17, 18, AND
JULY 2 AND 9, 1954
Printed for the use of the Special Committee To Investigate Tax Exempt
Foundations and Comparable Organizations
UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
49720 WASHINGTON : 1954
SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
CARROLL B. REECB, Tennessee, Chairman
JESSE P. WOLCOTT, Michigan WAYNE L. HAYS, Ohio
ANGIEB L. GOODWIN, Massachusetts GEACIE PFOST, Idaho
Bend A. Woemskb, General Counsel
Kathryn Casey, Legal Analyst
Norman Dodd, Research Director
Arnold Koch, Associate Counsel
John Marshall, Jr., Chief Clerk
Thomas McNiecb, Assistant Research Director
II
CONTENTS
Pago
Andrews, T. Coleman, Commissioner of Internal Revenue 418-463
Bureau of Internal Revenue: T. Coleman Andrews, Commissioner; Nor-
man A. Sugarman, Assistant Commissioner— 418-463
Briggs, Dr. Thomas Henry, Meredith, N. H 94
Capital Values and Growth of Charitable Foundations (Staff Report 2)__ 9-10
Casey, Kathryn, legal analyst :
Memorandum on National Education Association: ,. 64
Statement on duplication of Dodd report . 81
Staff Report No. 5 — Summary of Activities of The Carnegie Corpora-
tion of New York, The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of
Teaching, The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, The
Rockefeller Foundation, and The Rockefeller General Education
Board _ 668-709,869-943
Testimony _ 710-725
Dodd, Norman (Staff Report No. 1), director of research 5
Dodd, Norman (resumed) r 23,43,75,89
Earl, Kenneth, attorney, Lewis, Strong & Earl, Esqs., Moses Lake, Wash_ 729-793
Economics and the Public Interest (Staff Report No.. 4) : report of T. M.
McNiece, a^i&tant director of research____J. '. 627-665
Herring, Pendleton, president, Social Science Research Council 794-865
Hobbs, Dr. A. H., assistant professor of sociology, University of Penn-
sylvania _ 114-188
McNiece, Thomas M., assistant research director :
Staff Report No. 2 — Capital Values and Growth of Charitable Foun-
dations ; 9-iQ
Staff Report No. 3 — Relations Between Foundations and Education. 467-491
Between Foundations and Government 610-619
Staff Report No. 4— Economics and the Public Interest- 627-665
Testimony 492-520
Testimony (resumed) 601-626
National Education Association, memorandum on 64
Pfeiffer, Timothy, attorney for Social Science Research Council 794
Reece, Hon. B. Carroll, chairman :
Opening statement ; 2
Speech, July 23, 1953 25
Resolution, H. R. 217 1
Resolution, eliminating further public hearings : : 867
Relations Between Foundations and Education 467-491
Relations Between Foundations and Governments ( Staff Report No. 3) __ 610-619
Rippy, Prof. J. Fred, letter to Congressman Cox ■ 62
Rowe, Prof. David Nelson, director of studies on human resources, Yale
University 523-599
Rules of Procedure 3
Sargent, Aaron M., attorney, San Francisco, Calif 189-409
Social Science Research Council, statement of . 794
Staff Report No. 1, by Norman Dodd, director of research 5-94
Staff Report No. 2 — Capital Values and Growth of Charitable Foun-
dations 9-16
Staff Report No. 3 :
Relations Between Foundations and Education 467-491
Relations Between Foundations and Government . 610-619
Staff Report No. 4 — Economics and the Public Interest 627-665
Staff Report No. 5— Summary of Activities of The Carnegie Corporation
of New York, The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teach-
ing, The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, The Rockefeller
Foundation, and The Rockefeller General Education Board— 668-709, 869-943
m
IV CONTENTS
Page
Sugarman, Norman A., Assistant Commissioner of Internal Revenue 422-463
Summary of Activities of The Carnegie Corporation of New York, The
Carnegie Foundation for Advancement of Teaching, The Carnegie En-
dowment for International Peace, The Rockefeller Foundation, and The
Rockefeller General Education Board 668-709, 869-943
Webbink, Paul, vice president, Social Science Research Council 794
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
MONDAY, MAY 10, 1954
House op Representatives,
Special Committee To Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations,
Washington, J). G.
The special committee met at 10 a. m., pursuant to notice, in room
1301 of the House Office Building, Hon. Carroll Reece (chairman of
the special committee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Reece, Wolcott, Goodwin, Hays, and
Pfost.
Also present : Rene A. Wormser, general counsel ; Arnold T. Koch,
associate counsel ; Norman Dodd, research director ; Katharyn Casey,
legal analyst; and John Marshall, Jr., chief clerk of the special
committee.
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
This is the first session of this special committee. This committee
was created by House Resolution 217 of the 83d Congress, 1st session^
which resolution describes its purposes as follows :
The committee is authorized and directed to conduct a full and complete in-
vestigation and study of educational an philanthropic foundations and other
comparable organizations which are exempt from Federal income taxation to
determine if any foundations and organizations are using their resources for
purposes other than the purposes for which they were established, and espe-
cially to determine which such foundations and organizations are using their
resources for un-American and subversive activities; for political purposes;
propaganda* or attempts to influence legislation.
If agreeable I would like to ask the reporter to insert the entire
resolution in the record for information.
(The resolution is as follows:)
,[H. Res. 217, 83d Cong., let seaa.]
RESOLUTION
Resolved, That there is hereby created a special committee to be composed of
five members of the House of Representatives to be appointed by the Speaker,
one of whom he shall designate as chairman. Any vacancy occurring in the
membership of the committee shall be filled in the same manner in which the
original appointment was made.
The committee is authorized and directed to conduct a full and complete
investigation and study of educational and philanthropic foundations and other
comparable organizations which are exempt from Federal ineome taxation to
determine if any foundations and organizations are using their resources for
purposes other than the purposes for which they were established, and especially
to determine which such foundations and organizations are using their resources
for un-American and subversive activities; for political purposes; propaganda,
or attempts to influence legislation!
The committee shall report to the House(or to the -Clerk, of,, the House if the
House is not in session) on or before January 3, 1955, the results of its investiga-
tion and study, together with such recommendations as it deems advisable; ;
2 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
For the purpose of carrying out this resolution the committee, or any duly
authorized subcommittee thereof, is authorized to sit and act during the present
Congress at such times and places and within the United States, its Territories,
and possessions, whether the House is in session, has recessed, or has adjourned,
to hold hearings, administer oaths, and to require, by subpena or otherwise, the
attendance and testimony of such witnesses and the production of such books,
records, correspondence, memoranda, papers, and documents, as it deems neces-
sary. Subpenas may be issued under the signature of the chairman of the com-
mittee or any member of the committee designated by him, and may be served by
any person designated by such chairman or member.
Upon the passage of this resolution, the Sergeant at Arms of the House is
authorized and directed to ascertain the location of all books, papers, files,
correspondence, and documents assembled by the former select committee under
H. Res. 561, Eighty-second Congress, and take same into his custody,' depositing
such records with the Clerk under rule XXXVI. The Clerk of the House is
- hereby authorized to loan such records and flies to the special committee estab-
lished by this resolution for the official use of the special committee during the
Eighty-third Congress or until January 3, 1955, when they will be returned in
accordance with said rule.
The Chairman. The study assigned to the committee is one of great
importance. A similar committee had been appointed by the House
during the previous Congress. I shall refer to it as the Cox commit-
tee. The time allotted to the Cox committee was short and inadequate.
The present committee was created largely because* of "this, in order
that the work of studying the foundations might be continued to a
greater degree of thoroughness.
Because of the limitations of time and finances, we have decided
at this stage to confine ourselves to only some sections of the general
subject of foundations.
The term encompasses many types of institutions, such as universi-
ties, hospitals, churches, and so forth, except where peculiar circum-
stances dictate we shall limit our study to foundations as the term
connotes ordinarily in the public mind. A definition is difficult, but
to name examples of such institutions, such as the Rockefeller Founda-
tion, the Ford Foundation, and the Carnegie Foundation will illustrate
what we shall ordinarily mean when we use the term "foundations"
in these proceedings.
Moreover, and again with an occasional exception, we shall chiefly
confine our attention to the work of foundations in what are called
the social sciences. Little criticism has come to us concerning research
or other, foundation activities in the physical or exact sciences, such
as medicine and physics. We shall of course consider breaches of law,
and abuses of what may be desirable conduct wherever ^we find them.
We deem our function to be essentially and primarily factfinding.
The committee is unanimous in believing that foundations are de-
sirable institutions, that they have accomplished a great amount of
benefit for the people of our country, and that nothing should be done
to decrease their effectiveness. There have* been indicationg^Jiowever,
that foundations have not at all times acted in the best interests of the
people. Thiirmay sometimes happen by intention, but far more often
probably by negligence. Sometimes, also, there seem to be certain
weaknesses in the very structure or conventional operation of founda-
tions as an institution which readily permit them to fall into some-
times accidental and unintended, but serious error. As some of these
errors can be very serious and often fatal, it is our objective to try to
seek out causes and reasons to the end, first, of disclosing pertinent ma-
terial of which the foundations themselves may not always be aware;
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 3
and, two, of enabling them in consequence to take steps to avoid such
errors in the future; and, three, permitting Congress to consider
whether any remedial steps may be necessary or desirable.
There are, I believe, something like 7,000 organizations of the kind
we refer to as foundations, and Ibelieve they control some %7y 2 billion
of capital, of which a handful of these foundations control about one-
third. The size of the financial power which they wield measures
the gravity of the problem involved. Moreover, stimulated by our
high tax rates, more and more foundations are being created, and it
is probable that the aggregate foundation control in the country will
increase enormously in the ensuing years.
If we shall not spend much time in exposition of what great amount
of good the foundations have admittedly done, it is because we deem it
our principal duty fairly to seek out error. It is only through this
process that good can come out of our work. It will be for Congress,
the people, and the foundations themselves to judge the seriousness of
such error, and to judge also what corrective means, if any, should be
taken. Our intention has been, and I wish to make this doubly
clear, to conduct an investigation which may have constructive results,
and which may make foundations even more useful institutions than
they have been.
, In that statement, I have undertaken to set out the general purposes
of the work of the committee.
The counsel has submitted some suggested rules of procedure, which
have been sent to the members of the committee. Do the members of
the committee feel that those rules are acceptable, or are there othera
you wish to prefer ? If not, we can say they are adopted. What is
your position?
Mr. Hays. I do not see anything objectionable, but there might be
something we might want to add to them. We can consider them
adopted with the privilege of amending.
The Chairman. Without objection, then, the rules of procedure
suggested by the committee will be adopted.
Mr. Goodwin - . The only suggestion I have, Mr. Chairman, is No. 1.
with reference to a quorum, cf one member of each political party." 1
assumed that there would be no politics in this investigation, and I
would be satisfied if that said, "one member of both the majority
and minority," just to leave the word 'Apolitical" out.
The Chairman. I think that that suggestion is a good one.
Mr. Hays. I have no objection.
The Chairman. With that modification, the rules, without objection^
will stand as adopted, and if there are copies of these available for the
press, of course the press will be entitled to have them, and they will
be embodied in the proceedings.
(The rules of procedure are as follows :)
Rules of Prociidtfbe
The following rules have been adopted by the committee :
1. Executive and public hearings
A. General provisions: No hearing, either executive or public, shall be held
unless all members of the committee have been notified thereof and either a
majority of the members, or one member of both majority and minority member-
ship is present.
4 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
B. Executive hearings:
i. If a majority of the committee believes that the interrogation of a wit-
ness in a public hearing might unjustly injure his reputation or the reputa-
tion of other individuals, the committee shall interrogate such witness in a
closed or executive session.
ii. Attendance at executive sessions shall be limited to members of the
committee, its staff, and other persons whose presence is requested, or
consented to, by the committee.
iii. All testimony taken in executive sessions shall be kept secret and
shall not be released or used in public sessions without the approval of a
majority of the committee.
C. Public hearings : All other hearings shall be public.
2. Subpenainff of witnesses
A. Issuance of subpenas : Subpenas shall be signed and issued by the chair-
man of the committee, or any member of the committee designated by said
chairman.
B. Service of subpenas: Every witness shall be subpenaed in a reasonably
sufficient time in advance of any hearing in order to give the witness an oppor-
tunity to prepare for the hearing and employ counsel, should he so desire.
3. Testimony under oath
All witnesses at public or executive hearings who testify as to matters of fact
shall give all testimony under oath or affirmation. Only the chairman or a
member of the committee shall be empowered to administer said oath or
affirmation.
4. Advice of counsel
A. At every hearing, public or executive, every witness shall be accorded the
privilege of having counsel of his own choosing.
B. The participation of counsel during the course of any hearing and while
the witness is testifying shall be limited to advising said witness as to his legal
rights. Counsel shall not be permitted to engage in oral argument with the
committee, but shall confine his activity to the area of legal advice to his client.
5. Statement of witness
A. Any witness desiring to make a prepared or written statement for the
record of the proceedings in executive or public sessions shall file a copy of
such statement with the counsel of the committee within a reasonable period
of time in advance of the hearing at which the statement is to be presented.
B. All such statements so received which are relevant and germane to the
subject of the investigation and of reasonable brevity may, upon approval, at
the conclusion of the testimony of the witness, by a majority vote of the com-
mittee members present, be inserted in the official transcript of the proceedings.
6'. Witness fees and travel allowance
Each witness who has been subpenaed, upon the completion of his testimony
before the committee, may report to the office of the clerk of the committee,
room 103, 131 Indiana Avenue NW., Washington, D. 0., and there sign
appropriate vouchers for travel allowances and attendance fees upon the
committee.
1. Transcript of testimony
A. A complete and accurate record shall be kept of all testimony and pro-
ceedings at hearings, both in public and in executive session.
B. Stenographic transcripts of the testimony, when completed by the public
reporter, will be available for purchase by all those who may be interested in
procuring same.
The Chairman. The general counsel of the committee is Mr. Eene
Wormser, and associate counsel is Mr. Arnold Koch. The director
of research is Mr. Norman Dodd.
Mr. Wormser, what do you suggest this morning?
r Mr. Woemser. Mr. Chairman, by informal agreement with the com-
mittee, we hare suggested that Mr. Dodd take the stand first, in order
to give the committee a sort of full report of the direction which
our research has taken, and the reasoning behind the various steps
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 5
in research, and also to give "those interested, the public and the
foundations themselves, some idea of what our main lines of inquiry
in this investigation will be.
There are many what you might call collateral lines of investiga-
tion, and comparatively minor matters into which we may probably
go, depending upon time. But I have asked Mr. Dodd to take the
stand to give you what I think can safely be called our main lines
of inquiry r
With your permission I would like to put Mr. Dodd on the stand.
The Chairman. Mr. Dodd, will you tane the stand.
Do we have copies of his statement?
Mr. Wormser. It has been physically impossible to get them out
in final form at this moment. If you desire them, we can in the
course of the afternoon prepare them for you.
The Chairman". I understood they would be available this morning.
Mr. Wormser. Counsel did not have time to read them. It has
been quite an effort to get this done so fast. We can have the neces-
sary corrections made, and have it ready tomorrow morning, anyway.
Miss Casey thinks we can have it ready this afternoon.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Chairman, is there an agenda available at what
witnesses will be called during the balance of the week and next week?
The Chairman. As I understand, Mr. Wormser expects Mr. Dodd
to consume, in the scope of his portion of the committee's operation,
this morning's session, and tomorrow morning's session, and possibly
Wednesday morning's session, and that when Mr. Dodd completes
his statement, then we will go over until, if agreeable with the com-
mittee, next Monday, so that Mr. Dodd will be the only witness for
this period.
All right, Mr. Dodd.
Without objection, I think it is the understanding of the committee
that all of the witnesses will be sworn. Will you raise your hand?
I do solemnly swear.
Mr. Dodd. I do solemnly swear.
The Chairman. The testimony I shall give shall be the truth.
Mr. Dodd. That the testimony I shall give shall be the truth.
The Chairman. The whole truth.
Mr. Dodd. The whole truth.
The Chairman. And nothing but the truth.
Mr. Dodd. And nothing but the truth.
The Chairman. So help me God.
Mr. Dodd. So help me God.
TESTIMONY OF NORMAN DODD, RESEARCH DIRECTOR, SPECIAL
COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE TAX EXEMPT POTTNDATIONS
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Dodd, will you state your full name for the
record?
Mr. Dodd. Norman Dodd.
Mr. Wormser. I think that you are sufficiently identified as the
director of research for this committee. Will you then tell the com-
mittee the story of the direction of research, your approach to the
problem, and the various steps which you took in conducting your
research, please?
6 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Dodd. I will be very glad to, Mr. Worcnser. May I read a
brief statement beforehand ?
Mr. Wormser. By all means.
Mr. Dodd. As the report which follows may appear to have stressed
one aspect of foundation giving to the exclusion of others, I take this
opportunity to call attention to the fact that innumerable public bene-
fits are traceable to the philanthropy in which foundations have been
engaged. Both in volume and kind, these benefits must appear to any
student of this subject to have been without parallel, and in the vast
majority of instances, they must be regarded as beyond question either
from the standpoint of their conformity to the intentions of their
donors, or from the standpoint of the truly American quality of their
consequences.
I also wish to acknowledge the cooperation which without exception
has been extended by foundations to the staff whenever it was found
necessary to solicit information from them, either directly or in
writing.
And finally, I take this opportunity to state that in the degree the
following report appears to be critical, I sincerely hope it will be
deemed by the committee, foundations, and the public alike, to be
constructively so.
It was in this spirit that the work of which this report is a descrip-
tion was undertaken and completed.
Immediately the staff was assembled, studies were initiated to secure
a full understanding of the ground which had been covered by the Cox
committee, as disclosed in the hearings which it held, the files which
it maintained, and the report it rendered.
To determine the dimensions of the subject to be investigated and
studied, and to satisfy myself as to the contents and its probable rami-
fication, to define the words "foundation," "un-American," "subver-
sive," "political," and "propaganda," in the sense in which they were
used in House Resolution 217, and if possible to dispose of their con-
troversial connotations ; to familiarize myself with the expressions of
purpose customarily used in foundation charters.
I would like for a moment to go back to the first item which had to
do with our effort to understand what the Cox committee had covered,
in the way of this subject, and also what its files contained, and men-
tion that one of the first situations or conditions with which we were
confronted was the incompletion of the Cox committee files. That was
so marked that we had occasion to report the nature of that incomple-
tion to Mr. Snader, the Clerk of the House of Representatives.
Mr. Wormser, with your permission, I would like to read the letter
which we sent to Mr. Snader as a matter of record.
Mr. Wormser. Please do, sir. What is the date of that letter?
Mr. Dodd. This letter is dated January 26, 1954, and it was for-
warded to Mr. Snader by Mr. McKiece, our assistant research director,
who devoted a portion of his time to an intense study of these files.
This letter is to Mr. Snader, and from Mr. McNiece :
On December 1, 1953, Mr. John Marshall and I visited you in your office to
discuss the condition of the files of the Cox committee, as they were turned over
to us. At this time we advised you that in our opinion the files were not
complete, and it was understood that we would write you at a later date. We
are now in a position to give some definite, but not necessarily complete, informa-
tion on this subject.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 7
A cumulative list of tax-exemption organizations, published by Internal Reve-
nue Bureau : We have been advised that the foregoing publication of 1950 and
the 1952 supplement were used as a check list in making up the mailing list
for questionnaires submitted by the Cox committee. These publications are
definitely missing from the flies.
Jjarge questionnaires : The Cox committee designed three sets of question-
naires, namely, "large" form A and form B. The large questionnaires -were
sent to a specially selected list of foundations, with large endowments. This
list comprised about 50 of the large foundations, and questionnaires in duplicate
were received from them. One complete set of these 50 duplicate question-
naires is missing from the flies.
Hearing flies : An index in one of the filing drawers is labeled "Hearing file "
and we have no way of knowing positively what was in this section, but we have
reason to believe that considerable material should have been in there. As
received it contained very little, and some of the indexed folders were com-
pletely empty.
Statistical summaries : We know that considerable statistical work was done
over a period of about 4 months, but we have found no statistical material
whatever in the files.
Reports of interviews : In its final report, the Cox committee states that it
"interviewed personally more than 200 persons deemed to possess pertinent
information."
We would assume that a record of these interviews covering pertinent infor-
mation should be found in the flies. We have found very little material that
would conform to this description.
Prepared statements : The Cox committee in its final report says that it had
received the prepared statements of approximately 50 other persons deemed
to have had some knowledge of the subject. We find relatively little material
of this nature in the files. As outlined to you in our conversation, we are calling
this to your attentilon, because we wish to have it understood that we cannot
assume responsibility for such material as may be missing from the files as
loaned to us.
The Chairman. I think that that is very pertinent, especially in
view of the fact that this committee now has the responsibility for
those files, and it is well for it to become part of the record, that alL
of the files were not in the custody of the Clerk of the House of Bep-
resentatives when this committee was formed, and the committee took
over only such files as were in his custody at the time.
Does the committee have any other comment?
Mr. Hats. Does the witness intend to attach some special signifi-
cance to this, or is it just merely a report of what this committee
obtained?
Mr. Dodd. May I answer, sir ?
Mr. Hats. Yes.
Mr. Dodd. No significance ; merely a matter of record and for pur-
poses of protection on the basis we assumed we were responsible for
them, Mr. Hays.
Mr. Hats. I notice in the opening paragraph, and perhaps the
second paragraph, it says, "In our opinion the files were incomplete."
It seems to me an inventory of what we received would be about as
much authority as we have over these files, one way or the other.
Mr. Dodd. We were concerned with identifying, as best we could,
the nature of the material that was missing, rather than just taking
an inventory of what was there.
The Chairman. You may proceed.
Mr. Dodd. Simultaneously, I undertook additional studies, one to
determine the validity of the criticism which had been leveled against
the work done by the Cox committee, and two, to substantiate or
disprove the prevalent charge that foundations were guilty of favor-
itism in the making of educational grants, and three, to examine the
8 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
charge that as a result of this favoritism, a few selected universities
and scholars had been able to dominate the field of research to thfeit
•own advantage. Finally, it was to prove or disprove the accusations
that foundations had been responsible for a deterioration in the stand-
ards to which our scholars and teachers had previously conformed^
Once the aforementioned studies had been completed, keeping in
mind the 5 determinations which the committee had been directed
to make, we concluded that the dimensions of the subject to be investi-
gated and studied were some six to seven thousand foundations, capital
resources approximating $7y 2 billion, annual disbursements in the
form of grants amounting to at least $300 million, a time span of 50
years — that is, from 1903 to 1953 — and a number of grants conserva-
tively estimated at 50,000, with approximately 15 percent of these
funds concentrated in % of 1 percent of the number of foundations,
specifically Carnegie and Rockefeller, which happened to be the
oldest.
In content, I discovered the subject included grants for every form
of charity, and support of research, within the limits of the arts, the
sciences, and the religions and the philosophies, and the many sub-
divisions of these well-known disciplines.
It also embraced grants to cover the cost of such physical facilities
as school and university buildings, hospitals, churches, settlement
houses, homes for recuperation, libraries and art galleries, and the
permanent collections housed in each.
Finally I found that the subject included a myriad of fellowships
awarded to scholars and artists active in fields too numerous to men-
tion, let alone classify for the purpose of accurate evaluation.
I might mention here, Mr. Wormser, that out of many of the statis-
tical compilations which we indulged in, we were able to graphically
portray the growth of foundations, the growth of their capital re-
sources, which show a marked growth and tend to support the chair-
man's opening statement that these could be expected to continue to
grow from this point on.
The Chairman. Is that too extensive to be included in the
record?
Mr. Dodd. That is a rather long report, Mr. Chairman, of the method
we used to arrive at these estimates, but it certainly could be included
in the record, if you would like.
Mr. Wormser. I suggest that it would be very valuable, Mr. Chair-
man to have it included.
Mr. Hats. What is this again?
Mr. Dodd. It is a description, Mr. Hays, of the manner in which
we had to resort for a reasonable working estimate of the number
of foundations, the size of their resources, the rate at which they
had grown since roughly 1903, and the rate at which the capital
resources of foundations had grown on an accumulative basis.
Mr. Wormser. Would you like it read, Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Hays. As I understand, it is a description of how the staff
went at estimating the field that they had to work in, and it is com-
pletely factual and no opinions.
Mr. Dodd. No opinions.
Mr. Hats. All right, I have no objection.
- The Chairman. Without objection, it will be embodied in the
record.
£AX-£XEMPT FOUNDATIONS \)9
• i (The statement is as follows:) ■..■;: ■ :■•■■"'
•' : Capital Values and ■Growth of Charitable Foundations
It is apparent from the Cox committee hearings and from the available litera-
ture on the subject that there is relatively little information from which the
magnitude and growth of charitable foundations can be judged.
It seems rather illogical to devote serious and extended consideration to
this complex problem without having some idea of the number, size, and char-
acteristic ' of these charitable organizations that must exert such a great
irifltrence 6h J our social and economic life. ■
" The Russell Sage Foundation has published some excellent studies in which
the actual data available have been limited to a relatively small number
of foundations. ■■ ' •'■■■" ; - ; "' Ji
The Cox committee reported that it had sent questionnaires to more than
1,500 organizations. Based on the record in the files, there was a return from
approximately 70 percent of these organizations. These returns have provided
the basis for the analysis in this report
.The Jntemal Revenue Bureau every 4 years publishes a list of tax-exempt
organisations in the United States. ;in the intermediate 2-year period a sup-
plement is published, The latest major list is revised to June 30, 1950, , and
the supplement to- June 30, 1952. These are the latest lists available at the
present time'and it will be some time after midyear of this year before a new
list is available. It -so happens that there is quite a close agreement between
these publication dates just mentionejd and the effective dates of the question-
naires frpm the Cox committee. A large number of them were as of December
31, 1951, land a small number at the end of some fiscal period prior to 1952,
Analysis of this Internal Revenue Bureau list indicates that as of this
period there were approximately 38,000 tax-exempt organizations: in the. United
States. A sampling of the pages in an attempt to identify foundations included
in this list indicated that there may be &n approximate total of 6,300 out of the
38,000 organizations that might be called loniidations. We believe that we are
within clpae limits of accuracy if we state that there are between 0.O0& and 7,000
foundations in existence as of this period.
ACCURACY OF DATA AND DERIVED ESTIMATES
It should be realized that the ensuing tabulations cannot be accurate from the
standpoint of good accounting standards. A large proportion of the small
foundations is not endowed hut derives its capital itom recu*rfag c^otrtbBtions.
Some endowments are reported at book value andnoihers &t market yalne. -These
must be accepted as reported. It is believed that the greater, part of the total
value is based on' market value. In the ease of foundations with capital of $10
million and over, essentially all are endowed,
The questionnaires included in the analysis are of two types: the large and
form A as described by the Cox committee. Of the total of 952 included in the
financial summaries, 65 cover foundations with capital in excess of $10 million
and 887 of less than $10 million capital. Approximately 150 of the form A ques-
tionnaries were excluded from the financial summaries because information on
capital, income, or both were omitted from the answers returned. These were
included, however, in the numerical growth data.
: In the tabulations of capital, endowment capital and current contributory
capital are added to obtain total values.
ESTIMATED TOTAL VALUES
Data from 46 of the large foundations as included in this tabulation were cov-
ered by the large questionnaires. These are the big-name foundations and were
specifically and individually selected as such by the Cox committee. The total
values applying to this group were included without change in the grand totals.
Nineteen foundations with capital in excess of $10 million were included in
the tabulations with the 887 that are under $10 million because nearly all of
these were included with a form A questionnaire. This makes 906 question-
naires included in the form A group and these are considered to be about 15
percent of the total remaining foundations in the Bureau of Internal Revenue
list as previously mentioned. j ,*,- ":
10
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
For this reason, the actual values in this group of 906 were multiplied by 6,66 to
arrive at a total capital value of the foundations estimated to.be in the Internal
Revenue Bureau tax-exempt list. This estimate is" considered; to I be Jan. the
conservative side and in any event sufficiently accurate as a good indication of
growth trends and total values involved.
FINANCIAL CLASSIFICATION OF FOUNDATIONS
The financial classification of the foundations made in accordance with the
foregoing remarks is shown in table I. The first 3 columns show the actual
results derived from the questionnaires, the last 2 show the estimated total
values for each size classification listed. The values shown in the last 2
columns are 6.66 times their respective values in the 2 prior columns except ior
the 46 large ones and the resulting grand total as previously mentioned.
Table I
[In thousands of dollars]
Endowment classification,! Form A
questionnaires
Number of
foundations
Total en-
dowment l
Total
income
Adjusted en-
dowment •
Adjusted
income
Less than $60,000
$50,000 to $99,999 ......
$100,000 W $349,999
$250,000 to $499,999...
$500,000 to $749,999
$750,000 to $999,999...,
$l,QOO>0dOts $9,999,S99
$10,000,000 and over:.
Total, Form A .
Large questionnaires
Grand total
Total, $10,000,000 and over
379
99
125
87
34
30
133
19
6,198
7,076
19,348
29, 107
20, 604
25,365
■38$, 36g
304,882
6,510
1,893
5,389
8,430
3,355
4. 133
43,509
17,667
41,277
47, 248
128, 885
193, 850
137,221
' 168,933
2,586,530
2,029,405
36,698
12, 622
35,889
36, 162
22,343
■• S'il 5 -
•289,769
117, 660
906
46
800,948
2,129,746
86,888
96,062
5, 333, 319
2,129,746
578,669
96,062
952
2,930,694
182,950
7,463,065
674,731
65
2,434,623
113,729
4, 159, 141
213,722
1 "Endowment classification" includes endowments as well as contributions to nonendowed bt* "con-
tributory" foundations thrt were' on hand as of end of calendar or fiscal year 1961.
Adjusted data include total ■ endowment and income reported on>Form> A que%*i6nn4f*8s multiplied by
6.66 because the 906 questionnaires included in the summary are estimated to be 15 percent of those included
in the tax-exempt list.
It will be noted that the estimated total capital for the foundations is
nearly $7.5 billion and total annual income nearly $675 million. Both of these
figures will be subject to considerable variation from year to year, in part be-
cause of the proportion of "contributory" foundations in the smaller groups and
because of varying earnings between good years and bad.
The proportions or percentages of foundations, their capital and their income
in each capital classification as well as the percentage of income to capital in
each class are shown in table II.
Tabus II. — Percentage distribution
Endowment classification, Form A questionnaires
Percent of
total
number
Percent of
adjusted
endowment
Percent of
adjusted
income
Income as
percent of
capital
Less than $50,000
$50,000 to $99,999
$100,000 to $249^999
$250,000 to $499,999...... j
$500,000 to $749,999
$750,000 to $999,999
$1,000,000 to $9,999,999
$10,000,000 and over
Total, Form A
Large questionnaires
Qrand total
Total, $10,000,000 and over
39.8
10.4
13.2
9.1
3.6
3.1
14.0
2.0
95.2
4.8
100.0
6.8
0.5
.7
1.7
2.6
1.8
2.3
34.7
27.2
71.6
28.5
100.0
55.7
5.4
1.9
5.3
5.4
3.3
4.1
43.0
17.4
85.8
14.2
100.0
31.6
89.2
26.7
27.8
18.7
16.2
16.3
11.6
5.8
10.8
4.5
9.0
5.1
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS ll
It is of interest to note that the foundations of less than $50,000 capital are
shown to comprise about 40 percent of the total foundations, 0.5 percent of the
capital and 5.4 percent of the income with a ratio of income to capital of 89.2
percent. These strange ratios result from the fact that these small foundations
are largely of the nonendowed or contributory type and receive frequent contri-
butions of cash from creators and friends. Since much of their income is cur-
rently expended the ratio of income to capital is very high;
At the other extreme are the large foundations of capital of $10 million and
over. These account for 7 percent of the number, 56 percent of the endowment,
and 32 percent of the income. Some cash contributions are occasionally received
by these and their ratio of income to endowment is about 5 percent.
An interesting feature of this table is that the ratio of income to capital
decreases quite steadily as the capital classification increases as would be
expected from the foregoing remarka This decrease is evident in the last
column of table I.
The great increase in foundations created in the decade of 1940-49 is featured
by the large percentage of small foundations which in turn and as previously
stated are composed of a higher percentage of nonendowed or contributory
foundations. Based on the answers to the Cox committee questionnaires, the
following comparative figures apply :
Nonendowed foundations created : Percent of total
Decade 1930-39-.. . . 12. ^
Decade 1940-49 27, 5
CHARACTERISTIC DATA ON LAKGE FOUNDATIONS
Table III which follows shows data applying to the 65 foundations whose capi-
tal is $10 million and over :
Table III
Number of foundations , F _, 66
Original capital l $590, 752, 000
1951 capital x $2, 434, 628, 000
Ratio 1951 capital to original capital 4.1
Average annual total income, 1946 to 1951, inclusive $113, 729, 000
Ratio annual income to 1951 capital™. ___ 4. 7
Cash on hand, 1951 , $40, 559, 000
Cash, percent of income . 35, 7
Perpetual capital life $1, 120, 202, 000
Limited capital life $99,777,000
Conditional capital life $1, 214, 749, 000
Percent perpetual capital life 46.
Percent limited capital life 4.1
Percent conditional capital life 49. 9
Number of corporations . k 46
Number of trusts— , . 17
Number of associations.- . 2
Number of operating fpundations________„ ___„___ 19,
Number of nonoperating foundations 26
Number of combination foundations . 20
Average Capital per foundation $37,400,000
Average income per foundation : , $1,740,000
1 Includes capital of endowed and nonendowed foundations.
This table calls for little comment. The slight discrepancy between the figures
of 5.1 percent in table II and 4.7 percent in table III for earnings as percent of
capital is explained by the larger percentage of "adjusted" earnings estimated
for the 19 large foundations included in Form A group as compared with the 46
in the large group.
As previously outlined, contributions to the nonendowed organizations are
considered as income and unexpended funds largely constitute the capital in lieu
of securities in the portfolios of endowed organizations. This results in a higher
ratio of ihcome to capital than prevails in the endowed organizations.
It is also of interest to note the relative proportions of foundation capital in-
cluded in the perpetual, limited and conditional life classifications.
*2
TAX-BXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
, The, endowments of large foundations with definitely limited life comprise only
about 4 percent of the total endowments of this large foundation group while the
perpetual and conditional groups have 46 percent and 50 percent respectively of
the totals. There seems to be very little tendency for the trustees of the con-
ditional life group seriously to reduce their endowments. This might naturally
be expected.
The numerical data show the number of foundations created each year and
ifhe financial data show the values of the endowments reported for 1951 for the
foundations created each year. The accumulated endowments at 1951 values are
also shown. The values just described are shown in chart I- There is no appre-
ciable increase or decrease shown in the trend of endowment values added since
^9^0. The trend is. essentially horizontal for these large foundations.
■. ..; , , ..,,... GEOWTH OF LARGE FOUNDATIONS
, The rate of growth both numerically and in capital values of these large
fjiljfldattoijs during the last 50 years is shown in table IV.
d^AsLE IV .-—-Foundations with capital $1Q million and over {includes only those
reporting on questionnaires)
J: ., [In thousands of dollars]
' Year created
1900^——.
1901 .
1932—
1993
1904
1906
1906
l"907— . --.-■-.
1908..,.— —
1909
1910 -
1911
1912— -
1,913
1914 — _
1915 --
1916 ;.
1917
t918
1919.—..
1920.,
1921
1922. _-._
i923
11924
1825
Number
created
1951 en-
dow-
ment
1951 accu-
mulated
endowment
$11, 769
10, 856
16,376
13, 173
26,662
160,897
10, 545
335, 126
17, 118
28, 391
81,170
44, 762
16, 673
13, 703
41, 898-
210, 418
41, 685
$22, 625
39,001
52, 174
78, 836
78, 836
239, 733
250, 278
585, 404
602,522
602,522
602, 522
630, 913
712,083
756, 845
773, 518
787, 221
787, 221
829,089
1, 039, 507
1, 081, 192
Year created
1926— ....
1927 ...
1928— —
1929
1930
1931
1932........
1933—
1934
1935 —
1936
1937
1938—
1939
1940——
1941
1942
1943—
1944_
1945
1946
1947- — ..
1948
1949
1950
1951
Total
Number
created
4
4
1
1
4
1
1
3
4
2
2
2
3
2
1
1
3
1
1
65
1951 en-
dow-
ment
$52,911
56, 814
30.239
11,699
125, 369
12,000
15, 605
54,383
548, 409
66,981
57,292
29,334
55,120
27,291
14,080
14,507
154, 387
16, 817
10,300
1951 accu-
mulated
endowment
$1, 134, 103
1, 190, 917
1, 221, 155
1, 232. 855
1, 358, 224
1, 370, 224
1,385,829
1,385,829
1,440,212
1, 440, 212
1,988,621
2,055,602
2, 112, 894
2,112.894
2, 142, 228
2,197,34&
2,197,348
2,187,348
2, 197, 348
2, 224, 639
2,238,71ft
2, 253, 226
2. 407, 613
2, 424, 430
2, 424, 430
2, 434, 730
2, 434, 730
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
13
The influence of some of the large foundations of 1951, hut shown in the year
of their origin, is apparent on the chart. These are shown in the following
table:
Table Y
Foundation
Year
founded
Original
endowment
1951
endowment
Carnegie
Rockefelle
Corp..
1911
1913
1918
1924
1924
1930
1936
1937
1948
$25,000
100, 000
10,000
1,300
40,000
22,000
25,000
17,000
46,000
Million
$161
323
81
79
Duke --- - '-- --- -- - --
131
Kellogg- .
Ford
51
503
Pew
52
105
2JW
1 .
a«*
CHART 1.
.
y~
f
2301
FtNANaAL Growth
of
65 FOUNDATIONS
WITH
ENDOWMENTS </ 10MWON
ANOOVERASofffiSl
- — ( VALUES
/
22«
S"
J
ziot
r^
f-
Met
[
ISO*
woo
ACCUtAULATBD GROWTH
V
AT 1
9,57 V/
\LUE3
i
\
■
J~
<I
i
S*
-J
y
"*■ lux
/
O
o
z *•
IE
I
J
U
ANNUAL GROWTh
AT I9*i i/A/nm
1
±
r
.
$
tat
m
A
1 ■
A
,
-4vi
A
JW
V,A
\
*\ >
J\
4
06 19
9720-
OJ IS
-54— pi
i. 1
if i*
■2
U> IS
«r
w
io ia
W »
40
19
AT IS
%
»
V
14
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
NUMERICAL GEOWTH OF 1,097 FOUNDATIONS
The Cox Committee files contained about 1,100 questionnaires. We : have
■classified these numerically according to the year of their origin. The numerical
growth of these regardless of type or size is shown for each year since 1900 and
the accumulated increase year by year in table VI. These data are also shown
in graphic form on chart II. The numerical-growth trend shown in table VI and
on chart II is of course confined to the Cox Committee list. It should be reason-
ably indicative of the growth trend of the whole group of foundations on the tax-
exempt list.
Table VI
Number
Accumu-
lated 1
number
Number
Aqpumu*
•'lated
number
Prior to 1900 .
9
1
1
1
1
3
3
1
3
3
2
2
5
3
4
6
7
4
6
4
11
7
S
1926
7
14
10
20
10
6
9
2
7
10
14
17
20
; 16
25
30
27
76
123
206
116
132
70
24
8
3
102
1900
9
9
9
10
10
11
12
13
16
19
20
23.
■ 26
28
30
35
38
42
48
55
59
65
69
80
87
•95'
1927
116
1901 — —
1928
126
1902
1929
146
1903
1930
156
1904
1931
162
1905
1932
171
1906
1933
173
1907
1934
180
1908
1935
190
1909
1936
204
1910
1937
221
1911
1938
241
1912 ... ...
,1039^,
267
282
1913 —
1940.
1914
1941
312
1915
1942
339
1916
1943
415
1917
1944
538
1918
1945.
744
1619
1946
860
1920
1947
992
1921
1948
1,062
1,086
1,094
1,097
1922
1949
1923
1950
1924...
1951
1925
The high peak centering in 1945 is composed preponderantly of the smaller
foundations and is apparently a byproduct of a change in the tax laws and of
a profitable period in the American economy. Due to the sharp decline from
1945, the trend of the accumulated increase curve has flattened considerably since
1948.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
15
16
TAX-EXEMFE FOIMDATIONS
Comparative data on cash and income, supplement to capital valuer and •growth
of charitable foundations I
Founded
in—
Altman Foundation
M. D. Anderson Foundation .
Avalon Foundation
Hall Brothers Foundation. --
Louis D. Beaumont Foundation
Buhl Foundation -— —
Carnegie Corp. of New York..
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie Foundation for Advancement of teaching.
Carnegie Institution
A. C. Carter Foundation -.
Cullen Foundation -
The Commonwealth Fund ..-_
Danforth Foundation... —
Donner Foundation...
Duke Endowment. . ..—„_..-...
El Pomar Foundation.. i
Maurice and Laura Falk Foundation
Samuel S. Fels Fund
The Field Foundation...
Max C. Fleischman Foundation..
Ford Foundation
Henry Clay Frick Educational Commission
Firestone Foundation
General Education Board. .-._._:._..
Ed wm'Gould Foundation for Children
J. Simon Guggenheim Foundation... ^..-.
Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation
John A. Hartford Foundation i..
Charles Hayden Foundation ;...
Louis and Maud Hill Family Foundation
Eugene Higgins Scientific Trust
Houston Endowment
^Godfrey M. Hyams Trust
'Institute for Advanced Study
James Foundation of New York
Juilliard Musical Foundation .,
Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation .
W. K. Kellogg Foundation
Kresge Foundation.. — _
Kate Macy Ladd Fund...
E. D. Libbey Trust.. T — , .
illy Endowment ;...,_...
ohn and Mary Markje Foundation
Josiah Macy Foundation ._-._. i i..J_.
A. W. Mellon Educational and Charitable Trust
Mellon Institute of Industrial Research
R. K. Mellon Foundation :.
Millbank Memorial Fund ,—■-.. — i
William H: Minor Foundation —
Charles Stewart Mott Foundation ..-
William Rockhill Nelson Trust
New York Foundation >._'..
Old Dominion Foundation.. : ,j. ^ H .
Olin Foundation '.
Permanent Charity Fund... __
Pew Memorial Foundation
Z. S. Reynolds Foundation
Rockefeller Foundation.
Rosenberg Foundation
Sarah Mellon Scaife Foundation
Russell Sage Foundation
Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
Surdna Foundation
Twentieth Century .
Estate of Harry C. Trexler
William C. Whitney Foundation
William Volker Charities
1913
1936
1940
1926
1949
1927
1911
1910
1906
1926
1945
1947
1918
1927
1945
1924
1937
1929
1936
1940
1951
1936
1909
1947
"" 1903
1923
1925
1937
1929
1937
1934
1948
1937
1921
1930
1941
1920
1948
1930
1924
1946
1925
1937
1927
1930
1930
1927
1947
1905
1923
1926
1926
1909
1941
1938
1917
1948
1936
1913
1935
1941
1907
1934
1917
1919
1934
1936
1932
Average
income,
1946-51
Thou-
sands
$498
1,231
687
232
701
681'
5,941
646
1, 698
989
1,734
1, 171
1,996
865
697
4,913
507
417
248
696
9
29,061
62
57
520
315
1,083
108
88
1,746
334
1,000
1,622
601
687
2,130
519
13
3,253
4,776
440
665
1,462
728
378
1,763
3*668
.. 482
601
1,052
420
633
465
669
978
367
4,125
376
11, 364
196
200
542
1, 329
756
457
433
75
1,027
Cash,
1951
Thou-
$825
424
470
975
416
315
425
117
109
570
760
1,235
23
403
816
139
226
332
449
1
2, 68ft
307
L675
788
241
461
84
702
800
(?)
(?)
435
480
374
3,388
390
83
356
1,094
249
51
826
2
65
644
274
250
841
87
1,552
77
719
301
2,650
181
487
9
6,535
424
1
381
1,747
558
657
242
10
1,032
- Cash,
percent of
average
income
Average
Income,
percent of'
1961
endow-
ment
166.0
34.0
6.9
420.0
59.0
54.0
7.0
18.0
" Ji."6
33.
$5.0
62.0
26. 2
57.9
17.0
33.0
54.0
134.0
64.0
11.0
9.0
495.0
2, 765.
152.0
76.4
43.0
73.0
798.0
46.0
(?)
(?)
27.0
80.0
41.5
159.0
75.0
639.0
11.0
24.0
57.0
9.0
56.0
0.3
17.0
37.0
7.7
.51.8
140.0
8.0
370.0
12.0
154.0
45.0
271.
49.3
12.0
2.5
58.0
216.0
0.6
70.0
132.0
74.0
144.0
. 568.0
13.0
100.0
4.0-
5.4
3.9
3.7
■i 4.2
4.4
3.7
..i 4.T
15.6-
9.2
14. 4
22.2
2.4
■ 7.8.
4.6.
3.7
3.5
3.6
2.1
5.9-
.1
5.8
2.6
2.2
10.5
2.9
3.6
2.7
5.8.
3.3
2.7
2.9-
52,5
4.4
3.5-
6.S.
, 3.1
; .1
6.4
6.0'
3.1
3.6
■5.4
4.2-
1.9-
5.2
23.7
3,3-
5.2
8.4
2.9
5.3-
3.6
5.
3.2-
3.6
3.9-
3.3
3.6
2.7'
1.9
3.3-
4.5-
4.2.
4.6
3.4
5.0-
6.6.
It is believed that the data portrayed in this report, while not of provable
accuracy, are sufficiently representative of actual conditions to provide reason-
able guidance in appraising the magnitude of the problems involved. This,
should assist in the consideration of any suggestions that may seem advisable for
possible legislative action.
T. M. MoNiece,
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 17
Mr. WoBitSER. Is there anything you -would like to summarize out
of those statistics now, Mr. Dodd ?
Mr. Dodd. Only the pertinent figures which I gave ; namely, some
<6,000 to 7,000 foundations and $7.5 billion of resources, and so forth.
Coming now to the subject of definitions, and for our own working
purposes, from our point of view, foundations were defined as those
organizations resulting from the capitalization of the desire on the
part of an individual or a group of individuals to divert his or their
wealth from private use to public purpose." Un-American and sub-
versive were defined as any action having as its purpose the alteration
of either the principle or the form of the United States Government by
other than constitutional means. This definition was derived from a
study of this subject which had been made by the Brookings Institute
at the request of the House Un-American Affairs Committee some
time ago.
Political : Any action favoring either a candidacy for public office
or legislation or attitudes normally expected to lead to legislative
action.
Propaganda : Action having as its purpose the spread of a particu-
lar doctrine or a specifically identifiable system of principles, and we
noted that in use this word had come to infer half-truths, incomplete
truths, as well as techniques of a covert nature.
Mr. Wokmser. Pardon me, Mr. Dodd. I would like to interpolate
at this moment that we have asked the Bureau of Internal Revenue to
give us what guidance they can in their own interpretation of these
difficult terms, particularly the terms "subversion" and "political use
of propaganda." They have not yet come forward with that material.
I hope they do, and we shall introduce it in the record if they produce
it.
Mr. Dodd. These were essentially working definitions from the point
of view of the staff's research and are not to be regarded as conclusive.
. Charter provisions : The purposes of foundations were revealed by
these studies to be generally of a permissive rather than a mandatory
character. Customarily they were expressed to place the burden of
interpretation on either trustees or directors. Such words as educa-
tional, charitable, welfare, scientific, religious, were used predomi-
nantly to indicate the areas in which grants were permitted. Phrases
such as "for the good of humanity," and "for the benefit of mankind,"
occurred quite frequently. The advancements of such general con-
cepts as peace and either international accord or international under-
standing as a purpose for which foundations had been established.
To illustrate the extent to which the burden of interpretation is
frequently placed on trustees of foundations. I cite the following :
Administered and operated by the trustees exclusive for the benefit of it, the
income therefrom shall be distributed by the trustees exclusively in the aid of
such religious, educational, charitable, and scientific uses and purposes as, in
the judgment of the trustees, shall be in furtherance of the public welfare and
tend to assist, encourage, and promote the well-doing or the well-being of man-
kind or of any community.
Cox committee criticism : From our point of view there seemed to be
eight criticisms which had been made of the work of the Cox com-
mittee. These eight were that time and facility had been inadequate ;
that excuses concerning grants to Communists had been too readily
accepted; that trustees and officers had not been placed under oath;
18 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
that only a few foundations had been investigated; that the propa-
ganda activities of foundations had not been investigated ; that foun-
dations had not been asked why they did not support projects of ai
pro-American type; that extensive evidence had not been used
Mr. Hays. Just a minute, Mr. Chairman. Will you read that last
one again, please ?
Mr. Dodd. Yes, Mr. Hays. Foundations had not been asked why
they did not support projects of a pro- American type.
Mr. Hats. I would say that is the kind of a question that is some-
thing of the order of when did you stop beating your wife.
Mr. Dodd. Yes. I mention that because it bad come to our atten-
tion.
The Chairman. As I understand, you are now reading from the
report of the Cox committee, or the substance of it ; is that correct ?
Mr. Dodd. No. I am just summarizing, Mr. Chairman, the nature
of the criticisms which had come to our attention with respect to the
work of the Cox committee.
Mr. Hays. That question implies that the foundations gave nothing
to anything that was pro-American.
Mr. Dodd. Yes ; it does. That is one of the criticisms.
Mr. Hays. Where did the criticism come from ? Is it the criticism
of the stafiy or where did you dig it up ?
Mr. Dodd. No. This criticism, as we understood it was one of sev-
eral made of the work of the Cox committee by Mr. Reece.
Mr. Hays. If he wants to accept it as his criticism, that is all right.
I just want to know the source of it. Just be sure that I f>m not asso-
ciated with it, because I don't like those kinds of questions. I do not
know whether they gave anything to r>ro- American activities '*r not,
but I have my opinion that they probably did.
Mr. Dodd. Yes. The next one was that extensive evidence had not
been used, and finally, that the Ford Foundation had not been suffi-
ciently investigated.
Foundation criticisms: Our studies indicated very clearly how
and why a critical attitude might have developed from the assump-
tion that foundations operating within the sphere of education had
been guilty of favoritism in making their grants. After having
analyzed responses relating to this subject from nearly a thousand
colleges in the United States, it became reasonably evident that only
a few had participated in the grants which had been made.
Mr. Hays. I have a question right there. You say a thousand
colleges. How many questionnaires did you send out?
Mr. Dodd. Approximately that number.
Mr. Hays. You got practically complete response ?
Mr. Dodd. We got a very high percentage of responses.
Mr. Hays. What percentage?
Mr. Dodd. I would say the last I heard, Mr. Hays, was something-
in the neighborhood of TO percent.
Mr. Hays. I just wanted that in the record so when they investi-
gate foundations in the next Congress nobody will say that they
missed certain ones.
Mr. Dodd. Incidentally, a mathematical tabulation of the results
of those questionnaires is in the process of being completed now.
However, when the uniqueness of the projects supported by founda-
tions was considered, it became understandable why institutions suchi
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 19
as Columbia, Harvard, Chicago, and the University of California
had received moneys m amounts far greater than had been dis-
tributed to others. Originally scholars capable of handling these
unique subjects were few. Most of them were members of these
seemingly favored institutions. Now that these subjects no longer
appear to be regarded as unique, and sufficient time has elapsed within
which to train such competent specialists, the tendency of foundations
to distribute grants over a wider area has become noticeable.
The purported deterioration of scholarships and in the techniques
of teaching which lately has attracted the attention of the American
public has apparently been caused primarily by a premature ef-
fort to reduce our meager knowledge of social phenomena to the
level of applied science.
As this report will hereafter contain many statements which appear '
to be conclusive, I emphasize here that each one of them must be
understood to have resulted from studies which were essentially ex-
ploratory. In no sense should they be considered as proof. I men-
tion this in order to avoid the necessity of qualifying each statement
as made.
Confronted with the foregoing seemingly justifiable conclusions,
and the task of assisting the committee to discharge its duties as set
forth in House Resolution 217 within the 17-month period, August 1,
1953, to December 31, 1954, it became obvious that it would be im-
possible to perform this task if the staff were to concentrate on the in-
ternal practices and the grant making policies of foundations them-
selves. It also became obvious that if the staff was to render the
service for which it had been assembled, it must expose those factors
which were common to all foundations and reduce them to terms which
would permit their effect to be compared with the purposes set forth
in foundation charters, the principles and the form of the United
States Government, and the means provided by the Constitution for
altering either these principles or this form.
In addition, these common factors would have to be expressed in
terms which would permit a comparison of their effects with the
activities and interests connoted by the word "political," and also
with those ordinarily meant by the word "propaganda." Our effort
to expose these common factors revealed that there was only one,
namely, the public interest.
It further revealed that, if this finding were to prove useful to the
committee, it would be necessary to define the public interest. We
believe this would be found in the principles and the form of the
Federal Government as expressed in our Constitution, and in other
basic founding documents. This will explain why subsequent studies
were made by the staff of the size, the scope, the form, and the func- /„
tions of the Federal Government for the period 1903-53, the results ^^
of which are set forth in detail in the report by Thomas M. McNiece,
assistant research director, entitled "The Economics of the Public
~ These original studies of the public interest disclose that during
the 4 years 1933-36 a change took place which was so drastic as to 1
constitute a revolution. They also indicated conclusively that the \
responsibility for the economic welfare of the American people had I
been transferred heavily to the executive branch of the Federal Gov- \
ernment, that a corresponding change in education had taken place \
20 TAX-EXEMPT FOT7NBATIi3N&
from an impetus outside of the local community, and that this revo-
lution had occurred without violence and with full consent of an
-overwhelming majority of the electorate: In seeking to explain this
i unprecedented phenomenon, subsequent studies pursued by the staff
| clearly showed it could not have occurred peacefully or with the con-
, \ sent of the majority unless education in the United States had pre-
^> -A pared in advance to endorse it.
r"" These nn< iings appeared to justify two postulates, the first of which
I was that the policies and practices of institutions purporting or
! obliged by statute to serve the public interest Would reflect this phe-
nomenon, and second, that foundations whose trustees were empowered
to make grants for educational purposes would be no exception.
On the basis of these, after consultation with counsel, I directed
the staff to explore foundation practices, educational procedures, and
the operation of the executive branch of the Federal Government
since 1903 for reasonable evidence of a purposeful relationship be-
tween them.
- Our ensuing studies disclosed such a relationship and that it had
existed continuously since the beginning of this 50-year period. In
addition, these studies seemed to give evidence of a response to our
involvement in international affairs. Likewise, they seemed to reveal
that grants had been made by foundations, chiefly by Carnegie and
Rockefeller, which had been used to further this purpose by ( 1 ) direct-
ing education in the United States toward an international frame of
reference and discrediting the traditions to which it had been dedi-
cated, by training individuals and servicing agencies to render advice
to the executive branch of the Federal Government, by decreasing
the dependency of education upon the resources of the local com-
munity, and freeing it from many of the natural safeguards inherent
in this American tradition, by changing both school and college
curricula to the point where they sometimes denied the principles
underlying the American way of life, by financing experiments de-
signed to determine the most effective means by which education
could be pressed into service of a political nature.
At this point the staff became concerned with (1) identifying all
the elements comprising the operational relationship between foun-
dations, education, and government, and determining the objective to
which this relationship had been dedicated, and the functions per-
formed by each of its' parts (2) estimating the cost of this relationship
and discovering how these costs were financed. Understanding the
administration of this relationship and the methods by which it was
controlled (3) evaluating the effect of this operational relationship
upon the public interest and upon the social structure of the United
States (4) comparing the practices of foundations actively involved in
this relationship with the purposes for which they were established,
and with the premises upon which their exemption from taxation by
the Federal Government is based.
In substance this approach to the problem of providing the commit-
tee with a clear understanding of foundation operations can best be
•described as one of reasoning from a total effect to its primary or
secondary Causes. We have used the scientific method and included
both inductive and deductive reasoning as a check against the possi-
bility that a reliance upon only one of these might lead to an erro-
neous set of conclusions.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 21
Neither the formal books and records maintained by foundations
operating within the educational sphere, nor any of their supplemental
or less formal reports to the public make it possible to appraise the
effect of their grants with any degree of accuracy. We therefore
needed to turn to the grantees rather than the grantors for the infor-
mation required by the committee to make the specific determinations
requested by Congress in House Resolution 217, namely, have foun-
dations used their resources for purposes contrary to those for which
they were established, have they used their resources for purposes
which can be classed as un-American, have they used their resources
for purposes which can be regarded as subversive, have they used their
resources for political purposes, and finally^ have they resorted to
propaganda in order to achieve the objectives for which they have
made grants.
To insure these determinations being made on the basis of imper-
sonal fact, I directed the staff to make a study of the development of
American education since the turn of the century, and of the trends
and techniques of teaching, and of the development of curricula since
that time. As a result it became quite evident that this study would
have to be enlarged to include the accessory agencies to which these
developments and trends have been traced. The work of the staff was
then expanded to include an investigation of such agencies as the
American Council of Learned Societies, the National Research Coun-
cil, the Social Science Research Council, the American Council on
Education, the National Education Association, the League for Indus-
trial Democracy, the Progressive Education Association, the Ameri-
can Historical Association, the John Dewey Society, and the Anti-
defamation League.
Mr. Wbrmser, that covers the start and the scope and the manner
in which the work of the staff proceeded, and also constitutes' the base
from which such findings as it will from time to time provide you
with, were developed.
The Chairman. Mr. Goodwin.
Mr, Goodwin. I would like to reserve the right to comment later
on some portions of the data which Mr. Dodd has just submitted, not
having an opportunity to see it in writing. I have particular refer-
ence to that portion of the data which he has presented which referred
to criticisms of the Cox committee. It so happens, Mr. Chairman, as
you know, I was a member of the Cox committee. If what he says is,,
as I understand it to be said, with reference to criticisms that have
been made, that the effect of that only is that somebody said some-
thing about what the Cox committee had done or failed to do, I pre-
sume I have no objections. But I would like to see it actually before
me, and at that time I may want to have some comment to make.
The Chairman. Quite so.
Mr. Dodd. Mr. Goodwin, it does refer to that type of thing. We
wish to put this committee in a position, if possible, to understand
whether those were justified or not justified.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Mr. Hays.
Mr. Hats. It seems to me as I listened quite carefully to Mr. Dodd's-
statement, that there were several charges in there that represent
rather a serious indictment of foundations'. It is difficult to question
Mr. Dodd or anyone else about a prepared statement without having-
22 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
had a copy of the statement at least before you while it is being read,
in order to make marginal notes. It has been the custom of committees
on which I have sat in the past 5^ years that that be done. I would
suggest that before we go too much further that we recess and give
him time to get a prepared statement in order that we can intelligently
ask him some questions about that.
The Chairman. It was my thought that copies would be available
not only for the members of the committee, but also for the members
of the press as far as the press might be interested. Since that com-
pletes the statement that he prepared to make, unless Mr. Wormser
and Mr. Koch, you have further questions — the House anyway goes
in session at noon — I think the Chair would think that we might just
as well recess so that by morning the statement will be prepared.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Chairman, I like Mr. Hays' suggestion very
much. I deeply regret that we could not have copies at the beginning
of the hearing this morning. We can have them this afternoon. We
can have not only copies of the statement as far as it went today, but
what Mr. Dodd expects to present tomorrow.
Mr. Hats. I would certainly appreciate it, and I think it would
expedite the work of the committee if he is going to have a further
statement tomorrow to have it in our hands at least by morning. It
would facilitate matters if we could have a copy tonight.
Mr. Wormser. I quite agree. I think we can give it to you by
tonight.
The Chairman. The Chair apologizes for the statement not being
available, as it was his understanding that it would be available.
Mr. Hays. I am not blaming the Chair.
The Chairman. Yes, I understand. I assume without having any
information that it was due to the element of time. The committee
then will stand adjourned until 10 o'clock tomorrow morning in this
same room through the courtesy of the chairman of the Committee
on Banking and Currency, and Mr. Hays, who is also a member of
the committee.
(Thereupon at 11 a. hi., a recess was taken until Tuesday, May 11,
1954, at 10 a. m.)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
TUESDAY, MAY 11, 1954
House di* Representatives,
Special Committee To Investigate
Tax-Exempt Foundations,
Washington, D. C.
The special subcommittee met at 10 a. m., pursuant to recess, in
room 1301 of the House Office Building, Hon. Carroll Reece (chairman
of the special committee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Reece, Wolcott, Hays, and Pfost.
Also present: Rene A. Wormser, general counsel; Arnold T. Koch,
associate counsel; Norman Dodd, research director; Kathryn Casey,
legal analyst; and John Marshall, Jr.* chief clerk of the special
-committee.
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
Mr. Wormser, as I understand, Mr. Dodd will resume this morning.
Mr. Wormser. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Will you take the stand, Mr.
Dodd, please.
TESTIMONY OF NORMAN DODD, RESEARCH DIRECTOR, SPECIAL
COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE TAX EXEMPT 10TJNDATI0N&--
. Resumed
The Chairman. You may proceed, Mr. Dodd.
Mr, D^dd. Thank, you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Chairman, before Mr. Dodd goes on with his state-
ment of which we have a copy today, there are 2 or 3 questions about
Ills statement yesterday which have occurred to me since I have had
a chance to look at the record. I wonder if it might be well to get
those in the record now ?
The Chairman. Yes ; I think so. *
Mr. Hats. I think it is mainly to clarify some of the things that
were said. Mr. Dodd, one of the things you said yesterday was that
only a few foundations were investigated by the Cox committee.
•Could you give us a figure on that 2
Mr. Dodd. Offhand in any accurate terms, I do not think so, Mr.
Bays,, b/iiifc :<i!$Httpared to the number of f owa^tipns that . are involved,
iihe committee had very little time and* relatively very few were studied.
I should say probably 10.
Mr. Hats. You think about 10? . ■ .
Mr. Dodd. I think about 10. Yes, sir. They had questionnaires
•on almost 900 of them, Mr. Hays.
23
24 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hats. This might be a pertinent question. In view of the
fact this committee has had more time, perhaps 3 or 4 times more,
how many do you think we will investigate?
Mr. Dodd. We have gone about it a little differently. As I tried
to outline in the statement yesterday, we took up the general con-
cepts that fit all foundations, rather than attempt either by sampling
or tabulation to arrive at conclusions from a specific number of founda-
tions. We knew we could never cover the field and there is no pat-
tern that runs through foundations in general. For example, we
investigated, rather, we communicated with probably 60 or 70 of the
largest ones, just to see whether or not any pattern was discernible
and discovered that they vary so much, one from the other, that we
could not go at it from that standpoint. There was no basis for
sampling which would, in my judgment, end in any fair treatment
of them.
Mr. Hats. To get back to my question, how many will we be able
to cover, I do not expect you to be definite.
Mr. Dodd. In the ordinary sense that a deep investigation of a
single foundation is concerned, I would say not more than 1 or 2.
Mr. Hats. Another thing you said yesterday in response to a ques-
tion of mine was that you had received replies from 700 colleges.
That is replies to a questionnaire that you had sent out. Can you
tell me offhand how many of those colleges replying received any
grants?
Mr. Dodd. No, sir, I cannot yet, because the tabulations have not
been completed.
Mr. Hats. But they will be available later ?
Mr. Dodd. They will be available in very complete form.
Mr. Hats. I have one more question. We discussed a little bit
yesterday this matter of your statement that the foundations have
not been asked why they did not support projects of a pro-American'
type.
Mr. Dodd, That was one of the criticisms.
Mr. Hats, Yes. I objected to that because I do not like that kind
of question, but it might well be, since it is in the record, and since-
it is a statement that you attribute to the chairman of the committee,
if we could have along with your other definitions the definitions of
what you mean by pro- American.
The Chairman. Will the gentleman yield ?
Mr. Hats. Yes.
The Chairman. Since that question came up, I have taken' occasion-
to review the speech of mine to which it referred, and this is the
language preceding the quotation of the 12 criticisms that were listed,
and I am quoting :
The committee (referring to the previous so-called Cox committee) in its
report to the House, House Report 2554, listed 12 complaints and criticisms of
foundations in the form of the following questions.
And I simply quoted from what was contained in the report of the
House committee. So that they were not original criticisms of mine.
By what I say now, however, I am not disavowing the fact that
I might accept the criticisms. I just want to get the record straight
with reference to what was the basis for the so-called 12 criticisms,
whicl^were raised yesterday. They were taken from the report to
the House by the previous committee.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 25
Mr, Hays. In looking this over rather hurriedly I do not see any-
thing in there in exactly that same specific language. Why do we not
include this paragraph or two in the hearing record?
The Chairman. That is entirely satisfactory to me, if it is satis-
factory td' Mr. Dodd.-
Mr. Dodd. Yes, indeed.
Mr. Hays. Let us go back far enough to pick up the thought ol it.
In fact, I would say the beginning of the paragraph there, so we
tffiderstand what it is.
The Chairman. Yes. It is so-called part 1, stating that the time
and facilities were inadequate and goes down to part 2, I presume.
Mr. Hays. Yes.
The Chairman. So far as I am concerned, I would be glad to have
sithe whole speech put in the record.
Mr. Hays. I have no objection.
The Chairman. Without objection, it will be so ordered.
Mr. Hays. Just make sure it is labeled yourspeech.
(The speech referred to is as follows :)
Mr. Reece of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker* I do not say this lightly but In my
•opinion, the subject embraced in House Besolutioji 217, now before us, is one of
the very important matters pending in Washington.
7 No one seems to know the number of tax-exempt foundations. There are
' probably 300,000 foundations and organizations which have great tax exemptions:
These exemptions cover inheritances, income, and capital-gains taxes.
The majority of these organizations are honestly and efficiently conducted.
In the past, they have made a magnificent contribution to our national life. In,
/ the past, the majority have justified these tax exemptions, even though the
probable cost to the taxpayers runs into the billions.
Certainly, the Congress has a right and a duty to inquire into the purposes and
/ -conduct of "instituftbns to* which the taxpayers have made such great sacrifices.
In any event, the Congress should concern itself with certain weaknesses and
dangers which have arisen in a minority of these.
Some of these activities and some of these institutions support efforts to over-
throw our Government and to undermine our American way of life.
These activities urgently require investigation. Here lies the story of bow-r<j — •
•communism and socialism are financed in the United States, where they get their
money. It is the story of who pays the bill.
There is evidence to show there is a diabolical conspiracy back of all this.
Its aim is the furtherance of socialism in the United States.
Communism is only a brand name for socialism, and the Communist state
represents itself to be only the true form of socialism.
ff The facts will show that, as usual, it is the ordinary taxpaying citizen who
jf / foots most of the bill, not the Communists and Socialists, who know only how
f ' to spend money, not how to earn it.
i The method by which this is done seems fantastic to reasonable men, for
these Communists and Socialists seize control of fortunes left behind by capi-
talists when they die, and turn these fortunes around to finance the destruction
of capitalism.
The Members of this House were amazed when they read just recently that
/ the Ford Foundation, largest and newest of the tax-free trust funds, had just i^-"
appropriated $15 million to be* used to "investigate" the investigating powers of
Congress, from the critical point of view.
The^Members of the House Committee on Un-American Activities, of which
Judge Velde is chairman, have a great deal of personal knowledge, gained by
hours spent in listening to sworn testimony from Communists and ex-Com-
munists, and those who seek refuge in the fifth amendment, as to the extent of
the treasonous conspiracy in our Nation.
No Congressman, who has gone through such experiences, could fail to be
alarmed at the fact that $15 million from the fortune of the late Henry Ford,
who probably hated communism more than any other American of his day, was
to be expended to attack the Congress for inquiring into the nature and extent
■of the Communist conspiracy, on grounds that Congress was "abridging civil
/
^
26 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
liberties" of individuals by requiring them to answer whether or not they were
Communists.
After all, no committee of Congress ever had a fund of $15 million to finance
its inquiries, hire a staff, conduct its research, and print -and circulate its SndingB:
The House Committee Ba^-^ri^eaii Activities has ^budget of only* $8qgj000
for this biennium — one-fiftieth of the sum the Ford Foundation proposed to
expend for a refutation of its findings and those; of other committees of the
Congress engaged in similar pursuits.
The Communists have their own agency to smear the committees -of the United
States Congress and to defend Communists hailed before them. It is called
the Civil Eights Congress and has been listed by the Attorney General as
Communist and subversive. To give it liberal respectability, Mr. Paul Hoffman,
former president of the Ford Foundation, was made chairman of this king-
t sized Civir Rights Congress endowed by the Ford Foundation. The fund for
the Republic, as this Ford Foundation agency is named, has announced that
^_ it will make grants for an immediate and thorough investigation of Congress.
During the last few weeks of the 82d Congress, a select committee Of seven
Members of the House conducted — pursuant to House Resolution 561— a some-
what hasty, limited, and abbreviated inquiry into the administration of certain
tax-exempt foundations,- including the huge Ford Foundation.
The House passed the resolution to create this select committee on April 4,
1952, and on July 2, 1952, by a vote of 247 to 99, voted $75,000 for the investi-
gation. But actually, the counsel and the staff only started its work early in
September, and-thus, had only 4 months to carry out the task entrusted to it
it by Congress. Hearings were started late in November and only 17 days were
devoted to hearing witnesses.
The select committee's work was further handicapped by the fact that its
chairman, Hon. Eugene B. Cox; who was primarily; responsible for the creation
of the select committee, fell ill during the hearings and died before the com-
mittee submitted its final report to Congress. I was prevented from attending
these hearings, as a minority member of the select committee, by serious illness
in my family.
The select committee of the 82d Congress filed its report on January 1, 1953.
In signing the report, I inserted a notation at its end with the distinct intention
of introducing a resolution to continue the investigation of foundations and
their subversive activities in this Congress. Pursuant to this notation, I intro-
duced on April 23, 1953, a House Resolution 217, to create a committee by this
Congress to conduct a full and complete investigation and study of tax-exempt
foundations.
In introducing this resolution, I made some remarks on the work of the
s elect committee of the 82d CongresgJ So~that my colleagues may be acquainted
_ <p .^^wTttrVhat was revealed by this--^elect committee without reading nearly 800
'] . pages of testimony and documents of the hearings, which has no index, I
\J, presented the following summary of what was disclosed :
* First. The evidence presented at the hearings in this case by sworn testimony,
indicated that at least in one case, even some of the trustees of a supposedly
legitimate foundation, with over $10 million in assets, were Communists.
Second. The hearings disclosed that some officers of large and supposedly
legitimate foundations were Communists.
Third. Numerous Communists have received grants from foundations char-
tered by the Congress of the United States, and in some instances these Com-
munists received grants from more than one foundation.
Fourth. Foundation grants have been given to many organizations designated
by the Attorney General of the United States as Communists, or exposed by the
investigations of committees of the Senate and House as subversive organizations
subject to Communist Party discipline and control. A primary example of this
• v is the Institute of Pacific Relations, exposed by the Senate Internal Security
/' i > Subcommittee as subject to Communist discipline, which has received more than
^J $2% million from various foundations^
"* When introducing House Resolution 217, I listed some of the omissions and
faults of the work of the select committee of the 82d Congress which must be
remedied by this Congress.' I feel that .these omissions and faults should again
be brought to the attention of the House, and that I should not only elaborate
these faults and omissions, but should point out what the proposed new select
committee of this Congress intends to do to remedy them.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 27
I. TIME AND FACILITIES WERE INADEQUATE
The Committee To Investigate Foundations in the 82d Congress had completely
inadequate .time ami facilities* to do the /job <^ngre#s ;: entrust!ed to **• Tlie
committee, in its report to the House— House Report 2554 — listed 12 complaints
and criticisms of foundations in the form of the following questions :
1. Have foundation funds been diverted, from the purposes established by the
founders?
2. To what extent have foundations been infiltrated by Communists and Com-
munist sympathizers?
9.: Have foundation funds been channeled into the hands of subversive indi-
viduals and organizations ; and if so, to what extend ; .
4. Have foundations supported or assisted persons, organizations, and projects
which, if not subversive in the extreme, senserof that word, tend to weaken, or
discredit the capitalistic system as it exists In tjjie United States and to favor
Marxist socialism?
5. Are trustees of foundations absentee landlords who have delegated, their
duties and responsibilities to paid employees of the foundations? ......
6. Do foundations tend to be controlled by interlocking directorates composed
primarily of Individuals residing in the North and Middle Atlantic states?
7. Through their power to grant and withhold funds, have foundations tended
to shift the center of gravity of colleges and other institutions to a point outside
the institutions themselves?
8. Have foundations favored Internationalism?
9. To what extent are foundations spending American monest in foreign
countries? •
10. Do foundations recognize that they are in the nature of public trusts and
are, therefore, accountable to the public, or do they clothe \ their activities In
secrecy and resent aiid repulse efforts to learn about them and their activities?
• 11. Are foundations being used as a device by which the control of great cor-
porations are kept within the family of the foundation's founder or creator*
12. To what extent are foundations being used as a device for tax avoidance
and tax evasion?
Before attempting to answer any of these questions, the report of the com-
mittee of the 82d Congress immediately points out :
In dealing with these questions, the committee , recognizes all too clearly
that which must be apparent to any intelligent observer, namely, that it was
"allotted Insufficient" time for the magnitude of its task. [Quoted matter
added.]
Obviously, the select committee had insufficient time to investigate fully these
matters and make seasoned and timely recommendations to the House for
legislative corrections of those evils which may exist and require serious-
consideration.
A special committee of this Congress, in accordance with House Resolution 217,.
would have sufficient time to undertake extensive research and investigation^
for holding public hearings, and to report Its findings and recommendations to-
Congress. It should be noted that despite its serious limitations, the select
committee of the 82d Congress disclosed, as indicated by my previous four-
point summary, substantial, evidence regarding support given to Communists
by foundations. If considerable evidence can be revealed by an incomplete
investigation, which had so little time, it can be reasonably expected that a
new committee, . which has the time to explore the various ramifications of"
support given to Communists by foundations, will produce startling evidence.
II. EXCUSES CONCERNING GRANTS TO COMMUNISTS TOO READILY ACCEPTED
The select committee in the 82d Congress permitted the officers and trustees,
of foundations, exercising control over the disbursement of hundreds of millions
of dollars in tax-exempt funds, to give the excuse, without being challenged
for their veracity or the reasonableness of their statements, that foundation
grants were made to Communist organizations and individuals unwittingly
and through ignorance. A new special committee of the 83d Congress should
ask these officers and trustees who' testified to give evidence under oath that
grants to Communists were, in fact, given unwittingly and if precautions arfr
being taken so that the practice of making grants to subversives would, be-
stopped.
A
tf
1/
28 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
III. TRUSTEES AND OFFICERS WEBE NOT UNDER OATH
The committee to investigate foundations failed to require the officers and
trustees of foundations who appeared before it as witnesses to give their testi-
mony under oath. It did not require the representatives of the foundations
to swear to the truth of the information they furnished the committee in answer
to its questionnaires. The usual jurat was omitted. As a result of this,
neither the Congress nor the people know whether these officers and trustees
were telling the truth. For the sake of tHe foundations, this error should be
rectified. In fact, under this practice some officers and trustees of foundations
used the hearings as a soundingboard for their opinions and views rather than
• giving sworn testimony regarding questionable activities of their foundations.
The only witnesses I can find who were actually sworn and placed under oath
were 2 antiOommunists, 2 Department of Justice employees, and Ira Reid
and Walter Gellhorn. Only § witnesses out of 40 were sworn. In view of
these circumstances, much of the testimony has no more validity than common
gossip, and no proper : .investigation has taken place. House Resolution 217,
to create a special' committee of the 83d Congress, explicitly charges the proposed
committee to administer the oath so that the serious omission of the former
committee in this respect would be remedied.
IV. ONEY A FEW FOUNDATIONS WERE INVESTIGATED
The committee of the 82d Congress had only time to consider evidence about
a few foundations, and much of the information it received in answer to its
questionnaires it did not have time to digest. It did not publish the voluminous
but revealing answers to its questionnaires, which would have been valuable
source material for anyone interested in what the foundations are doing. The
select committee of this Congress would have time to digest, utilize, and publish
the answers that the foundations have given to the questionnaires. In fact,
House Resolution 217 specifically charges the Sergeant at Arms of the House
to obtain the records of the former select committee and to make them available
to the new committee.
■<i-__J^ V. PROPAGANDA ACTIVITIES OF FOUNDATIONS WERE NOT INVESTIGATED
The select committee of the 82d Congress did not ask the representatives of the
foundations to explain why they were indulging in propaganda, in view of large
grants to organizations, projects, and persons which are promoting special inter-
ests or ideologies. These representatives were also not requested to explain
activities of foundations which are, in fact, influencing legislation, inasmuch as
their grants frequently have an outright political objective rather than an educa-
tional one.
Foundations, in their statement of policy, say that because of the legal exemp-
tion from income tax they cannot undertake to support enterprises carrying on
propaganda or attempting to influence legislation. Such large foundations as
Rockefeller, Carnegie, Ford, Sloan, and Field explicitly make this assertion in
their published reports. Although foundations contend that they are promot-
ing education, documentary evidence in my possession raises the question whether
, some large foundations are not actually engaged in propaganda.
Large foundations have a tremendous influence on the intellectual and educa-
tional life of our country. These foundations, possessing huge sums of untaxed
wealth, seem to be dedicated to promoting specific views on such matters as the
welfare state, the United Nations, American foreign policy, the nature of the
American economy, and so on, rather than presenting objective and unbiased
examination of these issues. Extensive evidence that I have examined shows
that organizations which are primarily committed to a given ideology have
received large grants from some big foundations over many years, and in numer-
ous instances they have received such grants simultaneously from different
foundations.
The assets of the large foundations are tax exempt and, therefore, ought to
be spent on projects and organizations representing the views of all of the people
and not only of a segment dedicated to a specific ideology. 'Since the activities
of some of the large foundations appear to be biased in favor of a particular
ideology, in reality they are indulging in propaganda calculated to influence
legislation on both domestic and international matters. Under such circum-
stances, these foundations are violating their charters given to them by the
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 29
United States Congress and are betraying a public trust. I do not mean to imply
that all foundations and all of their activities are not serving the public welfare.
Some foundations by some of their grants have made great contributions to
medical and technological research an$ have improved the health and general
welfare of the people. But in the realm of the social sciences many f oundations
have not observed the highest standards of scholarship and ethics, wbich require
the presentation of only factual and unslanted material. In fact, thewant of
ethics and the misrepresentations of some foundations are so low that a business
corporation doing the same thing would be condemned by the Federal Trade
Commission and held guilty of false advertising.
The foundations must be investigated in terms of the above-mentioned state-;
jnents of fact, and should be given an opportunity to try to disprove them.
The all-important question of the foundation's propaganda activities and at-
tempts to influence legislation was cbmpletely ignored by the previous com,
mittee. However, House Resolution $17 explicitly authorizes the new committee
to determine which foundations are using their resources for political pur-r
poses, propaganda, and attempts to influence legislation. ' _
VI. FOUNDATIONS WEBE NOT ASKED w!HY THEY DON'T SUPPORT PEC- AMERICAN
' 'PROJECTS
A very important question, which is vital to the future of the American
Republic, was never raised at all during the inquiry of the 82d Congress:
This question is: Why do the pro-American projects find it so dinlcult to get
grants from some of the foundations? Some large foundations must answer
questions' such as the following: *
A. Have they financed studies regarding the excellence of the American
Constitution, the importance of the Declaration of Independence, and the pr6-
fundity of the philosophy of the Founding Fathers? And, if not, what Is their
accuse' for neglecting the study of the basis of the American Republic? :
B Have they given support to the educational programs of the American
Legion; the Veterans of Foreign Wars, and Catholic and Jewish veterans'
organizatiionsT And, if not, what* is their explanation of the ' fact that tfiey 5
have been supporting agencies which i are ieft of center and are internationalists,
and Hot similarly favoring nationalist organizations?
C. Have they supported studies which are: critical of the welfare state and
socialism, and demonstrate the merits of the competitive private-property sys-
tem? 1 Arid*** not, what justification do < they have for such negligence, while*
they have given numerous grants to persons and organizations which f avo* th§
welfare state and socialism? ' '
D. Have they given grants to active antfcCommunists and repentant dom-
munists who' Mave served the United States bravely and at great self-s&criflce!
by exposing the Communist conspiracy within our borders? And,' if nofc, ; what
are their reas&ns for. not giving grants to such persons, while they have
admittedly supported Communists and^ro-Communists?
These large foundations must be given every opportunity to answer fully
such questions to the committee of the 83d Congress and to submit evidence
to the extent they are able, to provethat they have given support to pr(H
American projects and organizations. Should they not be able to do thfe
or should their contribution to such, projects arid organizations be very- scanty,
they must furnish a detailed justification for policies which overlook , the
preservation of the American Republic.
VII. EXTENSIVE EVIDENCE WAS NOT USED
The select committee of the 82d Congress did not use a great deal of the docu-
mentary evidence that was actually in its possession. Much of this extensive
evidence snowed subversive and tin- American propaganda activities on the part
of foundations, as well as outright political activities which, attempted to in-
fluence legislation. It is obviously impossible for me to even summarize this
voluminous evidence, but I feel that my colleagues should have at least a few
examples of foundation-flnaoced projects which are not only unseholarly, but
of such nature as to aid and abet the Communist and; Socialist movement.
Since time does not permit the full documentation of these examples on the- floor
of this Chamber, the documentation will be presented as an appendix in a revi-
sion and extension of my remarks in the Record.
49720— 54-+pt. 1 3
A
30
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
VIU, FOBD FOUNDATION WAS NOT INVESTIGATED
Important and extensive evidence concerning subversive and un-American
propaganda activities of the Ford Foundation, which was available to the com-
mittee of the 82d Congress, was not utilized. Thus, the Ford Foundation — which
is the wealthiest and the most influential of all f^undations^-was not actually
Investigated, ii fact, the hearings on the Ford Foundation constituted merely
a forum for the trustees and officers of this foundation to make speeches instead
of answering specific questions regarding the many dubious grants made by
them. Documentary evidence in my possession raises some serious questions
regarding some of the officers and activities of the Ford Foundation. Again,
time does not permit the presentation of this evidence regarding the Ford
Foundation on the floor of this Chamber, therefore, the evidence^ will be given
in the extension of my remarks in the Record.
I have submitted for the consideration of this Chamber ah eight-point analysis
of the omissions and faults of the work of the select committee of the 82d Congress
and justification of the vital need to remedy these faults and omissions by a
special committee of this Congress, to be created by House Resolution 217.
The matters to which I drew your attention are not only vital for the ftiture
of our Nation, but have also very practical consequences for the pocketbooks of
every American taxpayer. Foundations actually operate by Federal subsidy
through enjoying tax exemptions by authority of section 101 of the Internal
Reyenue Code. Considerable revenue is lost to the Government by the tax ex-
emption given to foundations. This revenue must be made up by augmented
payments on the part of the average American taxpayer. Thus, tax-exempt
large foundations may be abusing their status at the expense of the American
taxpayer. This abuse of tax exemption is particularly relevant at this time,
when we end up the fiscal year over $9 billion in the red and the Secretary of the
Treasury has to go out and borrow this amount in cash to keep the Government
operating.
Should the investigation disclose that some foundations, because of their activir
ties, are not entitled to tax exemption, the Federal Government would actually
obtain additional revenue in taxes, which, in turn, would lessen the tax burden
of average citizens. I mention this fact because in view of the need for Gov-
ernment economy, and because Congress is already spending money for .'investi-
gations, it is important to justify the creation of a new investigating committee
in terms of what it may do to assist the Government to close loopholes in the
tax laws.
The assets of tax-exempt foundations already run into billions. Tax-exempt
foundations are bound to become more and more important due to the trend of
putting more and more businesses in such trusts. The present laws governing
the inheritance and transfer of property are creating a great many tax-exempt
foundations whose assets are based on corporation securities. In view of this
trend, the foundations may soon become the dominant ownefcs of tax-free Ameri-
can business. Under such circumstances, a very large segBient of American
business will be under the control of a few trustees who will be also spending
the large tax-exempt funds entrusted to them. Such 'a tremendous concentration
of control and power would be in itself an unhealthy development and tf«&!t%et
completely out of control; furthermore, such concentrated power and control
could easily be abused. This is still another reason why a careful investigation
of the tax-exempt foundation situation is imperative.
The questionable activities of foundations are of such vital concern to the
American people that in recent weeks two committees of the United States
Senate — the Internal Security Subcommittee and the Committee on Government
Operations — have announced their intention to look into the activities of founda-
tions. Thus, it appears that my recommendation made in signing the report of
the select committee of the 82d Congress was well taken. Howeverj the Internal
Security Subcommittee is specifically concerned with the subversion, and with
matters directly affecting the internal security of the United States. Since the
scope of the committee is limited, it would be impossible for it to investigate
adequately the propaganda activities of foundations and their attempt to in-
fluence legislation. These activities are in a sense much more important than
foundation grants to Communists. Similarly, the jurisdiction of the House
Committee on Un-American Activities is limited to subversion.
Moreover, these three committees, as well as the Ways and Means Committee or
any other standing committee, are too preoccupied with other matters to be able
to undertake a thorough and complete investigation of the complex and extensive
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 31
activities of numerous foundations. This, of course, is not intended as a reflec-
tion on the excellent work done by these committees, but is merely a statement
that only a special committee of the House could do the job properly. Only a
special committee would have the time, specialized staff, and facilities to under-
take a thorough inquiry into the complex problems raised by the foundations'
activities, which require exclusive concentration on the part of an investigating
body. ^ •
The House must undertake this task not only because its previous committee
was not able to complete the job entrusted to it, but also because some founda-
tions chose to interpret the report of that committee as a mandate for continued
support of subversive and un-American propaganda activities and for undermining
the investigative processes of Congress. For instance, the previously mentioned
Ford Foundation grant makes available $15 million for investigating congres r
sional methods of inquiries into communism and subversion. On the other
hand, the House Committee on Un-American Activities has an appropriation
of only $300,000 ; the Senate Committee on Government Operations, $200,000 ; the
Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, $200,000. It would seem that because of
the large sum provided for this task, the Ford Foundation considers the
investigation of Congress highly important. This intention of the Ford Founda-
tion constitutes an insult not only to the Congress of theUnited States but the
American people as well, since this body is the representatives of the American-
people. It is up to the House to meet such a challenge by establishing a ne\tr
special committee for a thorough and complete investigation of the Ford and!
other foundations. .,
Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I submit that House Resolution 217 deserves the
immediate and serious consideration of all those interested in the safety and
welfare of our Nation and the dignity and accomplishments of our Congress.
PKO-COMMUNIST AND PRO-SOCIALIST PROPAGANDA FINANCED BY TAX-EXEMPT
FOUNDATIONS \
rA few examples of foundation-financed unscholarly projects which a^-e, in
fact, pro-Communist and pro-Socialist propaganda are the following : .
A. The Encyclopedia of Social Sciences is slanted toward the left
The Encyclopedia of Social Sciences, financed by tax-exempt funds, is con,-
f/^sidered a sort of supreme court of the social sciences. It is the final authority
" to which appeal is made regarding any question in the field of social sciences.
The encyclopedia has influenced the thinking of millions of students and other
persons who have consulted it since the appearance of its consecutive volumes
during 1930-35. Alvin Johnson, who has been the moving spirit behind the
encyclopedia and was its associate editor and is now president emeritus of the
New School for Social Research, estimated that "there are at least half a million
consultations of the encyclopedia every year, in spite of the fact that it is out
Y of date." The Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Russell Sage Foundations initially
/ subsidized the encyclopedia to the amount of $600,000. The eventual cost of
V the encyclopedia was $1,100,000. "- '
Although the preface of the encyclopedia says that it endeavored to include
all important topics in the social sciences, it does not contain an article on the
American Revolution, while it has articles on the French Revolution and the
Russian Revolution.
Johnson, in his book Pioneer's Progress, on pages 310-312, said that two of
his assistant editors were Socialists and that another editbr was a Communist.
Johnson, in his great naivete, expected that these editors would not try to slant
the encyclopedia in favor of communism and socialism. Yet articles dealing
with subjects on the left were primarily assigned to leftists, while articles
dealing with subjects on the right were also assigned primarily to leftists.
The article on bolshevism and Gosplan were written by Maurice Dobb, an
economist sympathetic to the Soviet point of view. The articles on bureaucracy
and Lenin were written by the Socialist Harold Laski. The articles on Fabian-
ism and guild socialism were written by the Socialist G. D. H. Cole. The article
on communism was written by Max Beer, of the University of Frankfort, who
was a devoted, wholehearted disciple and enthusiastic biographer of Marx. The
article on socialism was written by Socialist Oscar Jaszi. Otto Hoetzsca, of
the University of Berlin, in his article on Government, Soviet Russia, says,
among other things : \ «— -
y
<l
/
32 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
"National autonomy is thus guaranteed in theory and largely in practice as
well ; there is no legal discrimination between the rates of the Soviet Union * * *.
The Soviet principle thus results in a parliamentary democracy functioning on
the basis of indirect representation, but exclusively for the proletariat. Although
the elections are subject to the pressure of Communist dictatorship, this worker's
democracy is not entirely a Action."
The following articles on the subjects dealing with the right were also
written by leftists : The article on Middleman was written by Maurice Dobb.
The articles on The Else of Liberalism and Liberty were written by the Socialist
Harold Laski. The article on Individualism and Capitalism was written by
Charles Beard, who at the time he wrote this article was a leftist. Capitalism
was written by Werner Sombart, a former Marxist who became eventually
affiliated with the Nazis. Laissez Faire was written by the Socialist G. D. H.
Cole, who refers to laissez faire as "unworkable' and as "theoretically bank-
rupt." He concludes :
"As a prejudice, laissez faire survives and still wields great power; as a
doctrine deserving of theoretical respect, it is dead."
The fair and scholarly "procedure would have been to assign articles on subjects
of the left to leftists a:nd the articles on subjects of the right to believers in
limited government and classical economics. Since this was not done, the
encyclopedia is to a large extent propaganda for communism and socialism. It is
indeed regrettable that this encyclopedia, financed by tax-exempt funds, should
have sponsors which were listed in the preface of the first volume of the en-
cyclopedia as follows:
American Anthropological Association
American Association of Social Workers
American Economic Association
American Historical Association
American Political Science Association
American Psychological Association
American Sociological Society
American Statistical Association
Association of American Law Schools
National Education Association
The student or anyone else consulting the encyclopedia is thus misled, be-
cause, upon noting the sponsorship, he assumes that the encyclopedia is bound
to be unbiased and is representative of the highest available scholarship.
B. The University of Chicago Roundtable is propaganda, not education
The University of Chicago Round table has received during the last 12 years
over $600,000 as of 1950, from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. The listening
audience of these Sunday noon roundtable radio broadcasts has been estimated
by Its staff to be between 5 to 8 million persons. The roundtable claims to be
an educational program, but this is doubtful. To be a genuinely educational
program, everyone of the roundtable broadcasts dealing with controversial
subjects should have participants who are truly representative of each side
of the problem discussed. However, on the basis of my examination of tran-
scripts of a great many of these roundtable discussions, it appears that in
most cases the background and ideology of the participants were so similar
that no genuine discussion of controversial subjects could take place and no
fair presentation of all sides of these issues could be expected. And in many
cases thet ideology of the participants was leftist.
For example, the August 18, 1946, broadcast dealt with What Is Communism?
The participants were Milton Mayer, a Socialist journalist, and Arthur M.
Schlesinger, Jr. of Harvard University and of Americans for Democratic Action,
and Lynn A. Williams, vice president of the Stewart-Warner Corp. and subse-
quently vice president of the University of Chicago. Part of the discussion
said :
"Mr. Schlesinger. It certainly would appall the editors of Pravda to know
that you, an American capitalist, are teaching the Communist manifesto to your
workers.
"Mr. Williams* I certainly did not sell it to them, because, try as I would
to teach them all the merits of what Marx had to say, they would have none of it.
"Mr. Mayer. * * * socialism, as we see it operating under the labor govern-
ment in Great Britain, has collective or social ownership of the means of pro-
iductipn just as communism does. But socialism is still parliamentary, non-
violent, gradualist, democratic, progressive."
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 33
In view of the opinion of participants of the broadcast, where is the capitalist,
anti-Communist and anti-Socialist viewpoint?
The March 14, 1948, broadcast, entitled "The Communist Manifesto, 1848 to
1948," had the following participants : Herman Finer, a British Socialist, Abram
Harris of the University of Chicago, and Malcolm Sharp, professor of law at the
University of Chicago, who was associate attorney for the Rosenbergs, executed
Communist spies, has numerous Communist-front affiliations, and was quoted
by the Chicago Maroon as saying that Communist professors should not only
be hired, but should be sought after.
The December 17, 1950, broadcast, entitled "Freedom in an Age of Danger,"
had the following participants : Robert Horn, William R. Ming, Jr., and Louis
Wirth, all of the University of Chicago. All three participants criticized the
Attorney General's list of Communist organizations and the MeCarran Internal
Security Act. Since no one who recognized the patriotic purpose of this list or
of the act participated in the program, it was definitely unbalanced and slanted
to the left.
The June 29, 1952, broadcast, a discussion of how to deal with Communist
subversion, had as participants Daniel Bell of Columbia University, Dwight
MacDonald, a journalist, and Quincy Wright of the University of Chicago. Mac-
Donald attacked the Attorney General's list of subversive organizations, Sen-
ators McCarthy and MeCarran, and the Smith Act Bell also attacked the Smith
Act. Wright attacked Senator McCarthy and the MeCarran committee. No
one participated in the program who had anything to say in favor of Senators
McCarthy and MeCarran, the Smith Act, or the Attorney General's list of sub-
versive organizations.
I also found that on such controversial issues as the human-rights program of
the United Nations, American foreign policy, and political and economic ques-
tions, little chance was given to conservative and nationalist views. Had the
ideological balance of the program's participants alternated from week to week,
we would not be forced to the suspicion that this was a propaganda sounding
board.
C. The dtizenshi>p education project is slanted toward the left
Between 1949 and 1951, the Carnegie Corp. has granted to the Teacher's Col-
lege of Columbia University for its citizenship-education project the sum of
$1,417,550. Examination of this project indicates that, like the Encyclopedia
of the Social Sciences and the University of Chicago roundtable broadcasts, it
is slanted toward the left. One of the main accomplishments of the citizenship
education project was a card file of 1,046 index cards which are sold to high
schools for use of civics 1 teachers. Each of the cards contains a summary and
annotation of a book or pamphlet on political and social issues for the teacher's
guidance in presenting a social problem to a class.
Examination of the 1950 card file shows that the great majority of books
and other items selected for summary and annotation are leftist, liberal, and
internationalist in their viewpoint and only a v few are conservative and national-
ist in their outlook. Actually there are only about 2 dozen cards which refer
to material that is conservative in outlook — this is a very small percentage out
of over 1,000 cards. Thus, the teacher who uses this card file has very few
items to contrast against the liberal, leftwing, and internationalist items in the
file.
In addition, leftist materials in the card file are most often annotated as
"factual," and the few rightist materials are most often annotated as "opinion-
ated." For example, card No. 554 refers to We Are the Government, by Biting
and Gossett, and describes it as "factual, entertaining, descriptive, illustrative,"
while the book in reality is pro-Communist. Card No. 249 refers to a Mask for
Privilege, by Carey McWilliams, and is described as "historical, descriptive."
McWilliams is a notorious Communist. Card No. 901 refers to Building for
Peace at Home and Abroad, by Maxwell Stewart, and is described as "factual,
dramatic." Stewart has been named as a Communist. Card No. 1020 refers
to The American, by Howard Fast, another notorious Communist who actually
went to jail for contempt of this House, and is described as "historical,
biographical."
The following are examples of how conservative works are torn down by the
annotations: Card No. 809 refers to the Road to Serfdom, by Frederick A.
Hayek, and is described as "factual, strongly opinionated, logical." Card No. 730
refers to Be Glad You're a Real Liberal, by Earl Bunting, diector of the National
Association of Manufacturers, and is described as "opinionated, biased, descrip-
i~—-^> E.
J
34 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
tive." While the works of Communists and fellow travelers are often referred
to as factual, this pamphlet by Bunting is called opinionated. In addition, on
the card, where the summary is given, the synopsis starts out by saying :
"Meaning of the word 'liberal' {as defined by the National Association of
Manufacturers)."
While Communists and fellow travelers are not identified as such, this item
is clearly labeled as to its political orientation. I shudder to think about the
fate of those thousands of schoolchildren who are given this kind of misleading
instruction, financed by a tax-exempt foundation.
D. The public affairs pamphlets edited by a Communist
The public affairs pamphlets have received support in the amounts of several
hundreds of thousands of dollars from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. These
pamphlets are prominently displayed and sold in many public libraries and are
frequently used in high schools. Many hundreds of thousands of copies of these
pamphlets are distributed annually. For numerous years Maxwell S. Stewart
has been the editor of the public affairs pamphlets, which are published by the
public affairs committee. He has been an associate editor of the Moscow News,
and has taught in Moscow, Dr. Louis F. Budenz has identified Stewart as a
member of the Communist Party in sworn testimony given before the McCarran
committee.
The House Military Subcommittee charged in 1949 that the publications of the
Public Affairs Committee, Inc., "are recommended by the Affiliated Schools for
Workers" — Communist— "and sold by Communist bookstores." George Seldes,
in his pro-Communist publication called In Fact, offered a free public affairs
pamphlet as a bonus for renewal subscription for In Fact. Seldes said, in part :
■ "These pamphlets prepared by the Public Affairs Committee are, though popu-
larly written, authoritative. You will find them an excellent source for depend-
able information,"
One of the public affairs pamphlets, entitled "The Races of Mankind," by Ruth
Benedict and Gene Weltfish. published in 1943, was banned by the USO and the
Army. Ruth Benedict had Communist-front organization affiliations, and re-
cently Weltfish refused to answer the Question whether she has been a Commu-
nist, before a Senate committee. Maxwell Stewart has written numerous pam-
phlets, such as Industrial Price Policy, which is slanted toward the left; the
American Way, which casts grave doubt on the value of the free-enterprise sys-
tem ; Income and Economic Progress, which follows a similar line of argument ;
and the Negro in America, in which he lauds such undoubted Communists as
Paul Robeson, Langston Hughes, and W. E. B. DuBois, and does not consider
anti-Communist Negroes as outstanding Negroes. Charles Edward Amory Wins-
low's pamphlet, Health Care for Americans, was recommended as supplementary
reading in the Jefferson School of Social Science. Carey McWilliams, who has
been named a Communist, also write such pamphlets as Small Farm and Big
Farm, What About Our Japanese-Americans. Louis Adamic, an admitted Com-
unist, wrote a pamphlet called America and the Refugees.
E. The NBA and PEA propagandize for socialism
The National Education Association and the Progressive Education Associa-
tion have received major contributions from the General Education Board, one
of the foundations dispersing Rockefeller tax-exempt money. The National
Education Association and Progressive Education Association are very important
because through them the foundations are reaching right into the public
schools and are affecting millions of schoolchildren./ By 1947, some $8 million
was spent by the General Education Board on new educational goals and pro-
cedures, and among others the National Education Association and Progressive
Education Association were generously supported in educational reorganization
and experimentation. During the 1930's these 2 educational organizations re,
ceived particularly large sums of money, and by 1940 the National Education
Association received a total of $456,100 and the Progressive Education Associa-
tion a total of $1,635,941. Just what kind of educational reorganization and
experimentation was supported by the tax-exempt funds of the General Educa-
tion Board?
The Progressive Education Association — PEA — in its official magazine called
Progressive Education, on page 257 of the November 1947 issue, had a lead arti-
cle by John J. DeBoer, president, American Education Fellowship— the American
^Education Fellowship is the present name of the PEA. DeBoer has extensive
Communist-front affiliations. In his lead article, DeBoer said that the 1947 con-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 35
vention of the American Education Fellowship — AEF — had such speakers as
Langston Hughes and W. E. B. J>uBois, whose affiliation with communism has
already been indicated, and Curtis McDougall, who was a senatorial candidate
on the Communist-dominated Wallace-Taylor-Kremlin ticket.
In the same magazine, on page 258, there is an article by Theodore Brameld,
entitled "A New Policy for AEF." This article is a resolution for the American
Education Fellowship, which was adopted at the 1947 convention to which
DeBoer referred. The platform proposed by Brameld says on page 260 of the
magazine:
"The two great constructive purposes which should now govern the American
Education Fellowship follow directly from this brief analysis. They are:
"I. To channel the energies of education toward the reconstruction of the
economic system, a system which should be geared with the increasing socializa-
tions and public controls now developing in England, Sweden, New Zealand,
and other countries ; a system in which national and international planning of
production and distribution replaces the chaotic planlessness of traditional free
enterprise ; * * * a system in which the interests, wants, and needs of the
"consumer dominate those of the producer ; a system in which natural resources,
such as coal and iron ore, are owned and controlled by the people ; a system in
which public corporations replace monopolistic enterprises and privately owned
'public' utilities. * * *
"II. To channel the energies of education toward the establishment of genuine
international authority in all crucial issues affecting peace and security; * * *
an order in which international economic planning of trade, resources, labor dis-
tribution and standards, is practiced, parallel with the best standards of individ-.
ual A&k%m& * * * an order in which world citizenship thus assumes at least
equal status with national citizenship."
Is this an educational program or is it propogahda in favor of socialism
and world government ? '
The id(eoU2Bj_jiLJJi&.ISaliojQal E ducation Association was stated in 1934 by
WillardnTGivens, who attibaT^ime^wSs superinteifdent of schools at Oakland, ^
Calif., and subsequently become executive secretary of the NBA, a post which % /
he held for 18 years. Under the title "Education for the New America," in ^
the Proceedings of the 72d Annual Meeting of the NBA, Givens said in 1934;
"This report comes directly from the thinking together of more thha 1,000
members of the department of superintendents (school superintendents). * * *
"A dying laissez-faire must be completely destroyed and all of us, including
the owners, must be subjected to a large amount of social control. A large sec-
tion of our discussion group, accepting the conclusions of distinguished students,
maintain that in our fragile, interdependent society, the credit agencies, the y
basic industries, and utilities cannot be centrally planned and operated under v
private ownership.
"Hence they will join in creating a swift nationwide campaign of adult educa-
tion which will support President Roosevelt in taking these over and operating
them at full capacity as a unified national system in the interests of all of the
people."
Is this an educational program or is it propaganda in favor of socialism? And
why should the General Education Board, whose funds came from Rockefeller,
who made his money under the free-enterprise system, support such propaganda?
In 1940 the General Education Board gave $17,500 to the National Associa-
tion of Secondary School Principals and the National Council for the Social
Studies, both divisions of the National Education Association, to prepare several
teaching units which would provide teachers with resource material on social
problems. One of these units was prepared by Oscar Lange and Abba P. Lerner
and was called the American Way of Business. Both Lange and Lerner have
been socialists for a long time, and Lange eventually renounced his American
citizenship in order to become the Kremlin's Ambassador for Communist Poland
to the United Nations. The American Way of Business, which was published
by the National Education Association, is not an analysis of American business,
but a propaganda tract for communism, Why should tax-exempt funds be
used to enable two Socialists to write a propaganda piece on American businesa
enterprise?
I also want to raise the significant question whether it is a coincidence that
during the time when the National Education Association and the Progressive
Education Association received particularly large grants and the American Way
of Business was financed, the director for General Education, the division of the
36 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATION'S
General Education Board under which these grants were made, was Robert J.
Havighurst, who has extensive affiliations with Communist fronts.
The five examples I have given of the use of tax-exempt funds are just indi-
cations of the kind of problems which a committee of the 83d Congress should
thoroughly explore. These few examples are in my mind sufficient to justify
a thorough inquiry. These examples do not involve just a grant of a few thou-
sand dollars to a person who happens to be a Communist, but involve giving
millions of dollars for many years to pro-Socialist and pro-Communist prop-
aganda projects that are vitally affecting our children in our schools and have
a tremendous influence over the public mind.
SUBVEBSIVE AND PE0-COMMTJNIST AND PBO-SOCIALIST PBOPAGANDA ACTIVITIES OF THE
FOBD FOUNDATION
To illustrate the dubious staff and the many subversive and propaganda
activities of the Ford Foundation, I offer the following examples from the
extensive documentary evidence which I have in my possession :
1. Dubious staff of Ford Foundation
A. The record of Messrs. Berelson and Moseley: Bernard Berelson is the
director of the Ford Foundation's Behavioral Sciences Division, which has just
been allotted $3,500,000 for the creation of a center for advanced study in be-
havioral sciences, which will consider social relations in human behavior. Berel-
son, while on the faculty of the University of Chicago, served on a committee to
welcome the Bed dean of Canterbury, the Very Reverend Hewlett Johnson,
world renowned apologist for communism who sports a Soviet decoration for his
work in behalf of his Kremlin masters. The welcoming committee for the Red
dean of Canterbury was organized under the auspices of the National Council
of American-Soviet Friendship, an agency which has been cited as subversive and
Communist by the Attorney. General of the United States.
The East European fund was established by the Ford Foundation, is financed
by it and deals with issues relating to the Soviet Union and its European satel-
lites, and particularly with the settlement and adjustment of S6viet refugees
who have come to the United States. The president of this fund is Philip E.
Moseley, who is also director of the Russian Institute at Columbia University.
Some years ago Professor Moseley made the following evaluation of the Soviet
Union in a pamphlet he wrote for the Foreign Policy Association, also sup-
ported by foundations :
"Over the long run, great numbers of people will judge both the Soviet and
American systems, not by how much individual freedom they preserve but by how
much they contribute, in freedom or without it, to develop a better livelihood and
a greater feeling of social fulfillment."
Garet Garett, editor of American Affairs, said that this is straight Communist
Party ideology :
"It means only that pure Communist ideology may be thus imparted by Co-
lumbia University's Russian Institute through the Foreign Policy Association."
Philip O. Jessup and Ernest J. Simmons are members of the administrative
board of the Russian Institute at Columbia University, which is headed by
Moseley. Professor Simmons is the editor of a book entitled "U. S. S. R.," which
grew out of studies at Cornell University that were financed by the Rockefeller
Foundation. At least 15 of the 20 contributors of this symposium edited by
Simmons are pro-Soviet and none of the other 5 has ever been known as critics
of the Soviet Union. Moreover, Professor Simmons has affiliations with Com-
munist fronts.
B. The record of Mr. Gladieux : Another officer of the Ford Foundation is
Bernard Louis Gladieux, former secretary to and protege of Henry Wallace.
Gladieux entered Federal service in 1938 in Chicago with the Federal Works
Agency, transferred to the Labor Department, Wage and Hour Administration,
from there to the Bureau of the Budget, then to War Production Board, leaving
the WPB on November 23, 1944, to go with UNRRA. On March 2, 1945, Henry
Wallace was sworn in as Secretary of Commerce, and on April 30, 1945, he named
Bernard L. Gladieux as his executive assistant. Gladieux remained in the
Department of Commerce until October 1, 1951, when he was appointed as an
officer of the Ford Foundation in charge of the New York office and as assistant
to the president of the Ford Foundation.
I have been advised by a reliable and responsible source that Bernard L.
Gladieux, while in Government service in Washington, had in addition to official
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 37
association in the ordinary course of business, social contacts with the following
persons : William W. Remington, Michael J. Lee, Harry Samuel Magdoff, Philip
M. Hauser. MagdofE was identified before a committee of the House in 1948 as a
member of a Soviet spy ring. He recently appeared before the Senate Internal
Security Committee and dived behind the fifth amendment when asked the $64
question. William W. Remington is in jail serving a term for denying that he
was a Communist Party member while in the secret cell of Communists in the
Tennessee Valley Authority. Michael J. Lee was fired from the Department
of Commerce for disloyalty. Dr. Philip M. Hauser, a former professor at the
University of Chicago, who wrote pro-Russian speeches for Henry Wallace, has
not as yet been called as a witness by the committees who have investigated
him and his activities.
Advice was also furnished to me that no investigation of Bernard L. Gladieux'
loyalty had even been requested or made while he was in Federal service. But
a review of hearings held pursuant to Senate Resolution 230, 81st Congress, 2d
session, by a subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Interstate and Foreign
Commerce, certainly indicated that Gladieux' loyalty should have been investi-
gated. A Member of the Senate took the witness stand before the committee and,
after first being duly sworn as a witness, testified as follows :
"I understand that one Bernard L. Gladieux, of the Secretary's office, who is a
protege of Henry Wallace, has exercised the power of nullifying decisions of the
so-called loyalty board. In other words, if it found he was cleared of actual
disloyalty but recommended as a poor security risk, not a good security risk, then
someone overruled that finding."
Now, I am informed that it could be, probably is, Mr. Gladieux.
Mr. Gladieux never appeared before the Senate committee to answer the
changes against him which were made on March 28, 30, and April 4, 1950. How-
ever, Mr. Gladieux was a witness on February 27, 1950, before a House Appro-
priations Subcommittee, of which the gentleman from New York, Mr. Rooney,
was chairman, and the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. Flood, the gentleman
from Georgia, Mr. Preston, the late Hon. Karl Stefan, of Nebraska, and the
gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Cliff Clevenger, were members.
At page 2341 the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rooney) stated :
"The story this year is that the Department of Commerce has taken the place
of the State Department; that the Department of Commerce is the outfit in
Government which is honeycombed with people belonging to the Communist
Party."
Mr. Flood, on page 2346, made the following statement :
"You are executive assistant to the Secretary of Commerce, and after 2 hours
of examination and cross-examination here I have not the faintest idea of your
personal attitude toward this kind of case, which is a borderline case, or frankly
on a case where anything else is concerned. I am very unhappy about your own
point of view. Do you appreciate that?"
On page 2362, Mr. Gladieux, as the hearings were about to close, made a lengthy
statement, to which the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rooney), on page 2363,
replied as follows :
"That is all so much nice language. To me it does not mean a thing. You
have come up here this afternoon to acquaint us with the situation in the Depart-
ment of Commerce. The results have been nil. We have not had the cooperation
from you that we have had from the Department of State.
"You refused to take us into your confidence with regard to these things, and
I have tried to handle it in an amicable way so that if questions were raised
on the floor we might have the answers to them. You have reacted in the other
direction, away from us. So now we are far apart, and we will have to stay
that way. There is nothing that I can see that we can do about it."
Senator Karl Mundt, speaking before the Senate, made the remark that —
"In 1950 the junior Senator from Nevada (Mr. Malone) rose on this floor
to suggest that certain persons in the Department of Commerce were dangerous
security risks."
Senator Mundt went on to say that a committee was created to investigate
the charges made by Senator Malone, but that "after 3 or 4 days' hearing, Secre-
tary of Commerce Sawyer rushed up to the Hill and agreed to fire the two men
whom I had drawn into the net— Lee and Remington — if the hearing could be
Stopped." Continuing, Senator Mundt stated :
"I did not hear that agreement, but I know it was made, because I could never
get the committee together again.
"I was really after Mr. Gladieux, secretary to the Secretary of Commerce, and
38 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mi*. Blaisdell, who was and had been during the troublesome* period in China
in charge of that matter under my attack. They, Mr. Gladieux and Mr. Blais-
dell, subsequently quit for reasons best known to themselves— they knew we
were on their trail.
"I believe that is why they quit."
Is it possible that the trustees of this huge foundation never made any investi-
gation of Mr. Gladiuex or checked with the FBI to determine his loyalty to his
country?
B. The record of Robert Maynard Hutchins : The keyman in the Ford Founda-
tion is Robert M. Hutchins, formerly chancellor of the University of Chicago.
His formal position with the Ford Foundation is that of associate director, but,
in effect, he has been running the foundation. While Hoffman was the presi-
dent, Hutchins' prominent position was made possible by the fact that Hoffman
considers Hutchins as the greatest living educator and literally worships him.
With the resignation of Hoffman as president of the foundation, H. Rowan
Gaither, a San Francisco attorney, became president of the foundation. But
Gaither is a mere figurehead and Hutchins is still running the foundation.
Gaither has accepted the presidency only for a year, and thus Hutchins may yet
become the- formal head of the organization. But even without such a formal
presidency, in view of the facts stated above, Hutchins in effect runs the Ford
Foundation.
In his capacity as the policymaker of the Ford Foundation, Hutchins possesses
a completely unprecedented financial power over education, the humanities, and
the social sciences. By giving or withholding grants, Hutchins is in position
to insinuate his views into any aspect of American intellectual life. Therefore,
it is essential to inquire about Hutchins' views and his record concerning the
Communist menace.
Testifying in 1949 under oath before the Illinois Seditious Activities Investiga-
tion Commission inquiry into subversive activities at the University of Chicago,
Hutchins admitted that he was a sponsor of the October 1948 meeting of the
bureau on academic freedom of the National Council of Arts, SGi<ewces, and
Professions.
Regarding the Methodist Federation of Social Action, Hutchins has said :
"Believe you are advancing the cause of true Americanism."
The first page of the publication of the Methodist Federation for Social Action,
where this quotation appears, asserts that the federation rejects the profit motive
and favors a classless society. Does Hutchins think that such an ideology con-
stitutes true Americanism?
The University of Chicago, under Hutchins' administration, has distinguished
itself as the only institution of higher learning in America which has been in-
vestigated five times for immoral or subversive activities. These investigations
are : First, Illinois State Senate inquiry, 1935 ; second, University of Chicago
alumni committee, 1947-48 ; third, University of Chicago board of trustees,
1948 ; fourth, Illinois Seditious Activities Investigation Commission, March-
June 1949 ; fifth, investigation and subsequent report to the Illinois Legislature
by State Representative G. William Horsley, Springfield, 1949. The first investi-
gation was a whitewash ; the second requested the resignation of Hutchins ; the
third held its deliberations in secret ; and the fourth and fifth did not clear
the university. Both the majority report of the Illinois Seditious Activities
Commission and the independent report of Representative Horsley condemned the
university's administration severely and asked the legislature to deny tax
exemption.
At the hearings of the seditious activities commission of the Illinois Legislature
at the 1949 investigation of the University of Chicago, Hutchins, after being
sworn in, testified as follows :
"The subpena which I have received summons me to testify concerning sub-
versive activities at the University of Chicago. This is a leading question, and
the answer is assumed in the question. I cannot testify concerning subversive
activities at the University of Chicago because there are none."
At the same hearings, Hutchins was asked the following question and made the
following response:
"Question. The records which I shall present through other witnesses show, in
summary, that some sixty-odd persons listed in the latest available directory of
the University of Chicago as professors or professors emeritus have been affili-
ated with 135 Communist-front organizations in 465 separate affiliations. Is
that not something for which the university might well be alarmed?
"Answer. I don't see why."
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 30
' *
In the course of the same investigation it was disclosed that there were Conv
munist and pro-Communist student organizations on Hutching' campus. The
student Communist club was freely admitted by Chancellor Hutchins, who said
"the club has not sought to subvert the government of this State." !_
In his testimony before the same investigation, Hutchins stated that "It is
not yet established that it is subversive to be a Communist."
It must be noted that this testimony was given more than a year after the^
start of the Berlin airlift.
At the same investigation Hutchins was asked the following question to which
he made the following response :
"Question. Do you consider that the Communist Party in the United States;
comes within the scope of a clear and present danger?
"Answer. I don't think so."
Hutchins was also asked : "Are you aware that the Communist-front organiza-
tion is a part of the Communist movement, just as much as' the party itself ?
"No." '
Then he was asked : "You haven't attempted to make a study of the Commu-
nist Party?
"No, I haven't," Hutchins replied.
He was also asked : "Is there any doubt that the Communist Party is a con?
spiratorial fifth column operated in the interest of a foreign state?
"I am not instructed on this subject," Hutchins answered.
Such was the attitude of Hutchins toward communism after the start of the
Berlin airlift, and at a time when the United States was spending billions of
dollars abroad to fight communism.
On June 25, 1951, the Daily Worker, on page 2 under the headline "Ford
Foundation Head Joins Blast at High Cost 0. K. for Smith Act," the following
item appeared under a Chicago dateline of June 24:
"Prof. Robert M. Hutchins, former chancellor of the University of Chicago
and now associate director of the Ford Foundation, joined with Osmond K.
Fraenkel, noted New York attorney, opposing the Supreme Court decision up-
holding the conviction of the 11 convicted Communist Party leaders. Dr.
Hutchins said that the majority decision indicates that we are at last rap
against a great crisis in this country. He spoke of the ruling as a complete
reversal of earlier precedents set by the high Court * * *. • Speaking here at an
American Civil Liberties Union meeting in his honor, Dr. Hutchins declared
that 'it may now become more difficult for us to take some of the positions
we have in the past.' He referred to his stated willingness to hire Communists
as university professors. Hutchins told the Illinois Legislature that he would
even take back into the university faculty Oscar P. Lange, who, as I pointed
out before, renounced his American citizenship to become Moscow's Ambassador
for Communist Poland to the United Nations. 'We may even have to decide
whether we must violate the law in order to remain in conformity with our
convictions,' he said."
Hutchins wrote the introduction to a book entitled "Character Assassination,"
published in 1950, which was written by Jerome Davis, who has been in more
than 40 Communist-front organizations. Hutchins also wrote the foreword
to a book entitled "Political and Civil Rights in the United States," published
in 1953 by Thomas I. Emerson and David Haber. Louis Budenz, testifying
under oath, named Emerson as a member of the Communist Party, a charge
which Emerson denied. But Emerson has been in a large number of Communst
fronts and was head of the Communist-controlled National Lawyers Guild, the
legal arm of the Communist Party in the United States. There is no doubt
that the National Lawyers Guild is a subversive organization, and it has been
cited officially as much.
Hutchins, whose attitudes I have illustrated, is the key man in the Ford
Foundation, which owns outright some 374,000 shares of stock of the 400,000
shares of stock in the Ford Motor Co., one of the biggest industrial giants in the
whole world. The stockholdings, according to Henry Ford II, amount to 90
percent of the outstanding stock of the Ford Motor Co. Recently the New York
Times magazine pointed out that the Ford Foundation is the "virtual owner of
the gigantic Ford Motor Co." According to Paul Hoffman, then president of the
Ford Foundation, the Ford Foundation had made grants of $72 million in
2 years, 1951-52.
So it may readily be seen that a grant of $15 million, to protect the civil
liberties of Communists and to investigate the Congress of the United States,
from the tax-exempt millions of the income from the stock of the late Henry
40 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Ford, a man of sterling character and unblemished reputation whose industrial
genius helped build America, and whose faith in our institutions and our
American way of life was never shaken, is really peanuts to the Ford Founda-
tion which deals out grants with a lavish hand, both to the left and the right,
mostly left. Here is the last of the great American industrial fortunes,
amassed in a competitive, free market place in the last 50 years, being used to
undermine and subvert our institutions, $15 million being set aside to investigate
the Congress of the United States. What a sad tribute to the man we all
respected and loved, Henry Ford. He was a symbol of outstanding common-
sense and public virtue. Never would he have approved such tactics by the
Ford Foundation, to which he left his fortune estimated at over a half-billion
dollars in stock in the Ford Motor Co., the earnings of which go directly into
the tax-exempt Ford Foundation.
In view of the attitude of Hutching toward communism, it is not at all
surprising that the Ford Foundation has made some highly dubious grants.
I offer the following examples for your consideration :
#. Ford Foundation's support of communism and Socialist propaganda
A. Grant to aid Communists and to discredit their investigation : I have already
referred to the $15 million grant to investigate the Congress of the United States
and its committees. In a recent broadcast Eric Sevareid, a CBS commentator
who has long opposed congressional investigations of communism, and openly
defended John Stewart Service, 1 of the 6 persons arrested by the FBI in the
Amerasia case, enthusiastically praised this $15 million fund and called Hutch-
ins "the driving spirit behind this new crusa.de." There can be no question that
Hutchins is behind this new Ford Foundation project, for he has consistently
expressed his concern for the civil liberties of Communists. Since we know
Hutchins' attitude toward communism and we know that his conception of civil
liberties is similar to that of the Communists, we can be sure that the new Ford
Foundation project will aid the Communist conspiracy and will try to discredit
all those who fight it. This will undoubtedly happen, for the chairman and the
president of the new Ford Foundation project are mere figureheads and fronts
and Hutchins is dominating the project.
The gentleman from California, Mr. Jackson, said on this floor that "Needless
to state, the investigations proposed by the Ford Foundation will be greeted with
enthusiastic approval from Shanghai to Bast Berlin. The approval will not be
given voice by the silent millions of captive peoples, but by the commissars and
their agents."
He aptly characterized this 15 million project by saying that it "will serve
only to lend additional aid and comfort to the Communist Party." The Ameri-
can Legion's newsletter, the Firing Line, stated that this project is regarded by
many anti-Communists as "a huge slush fund for a full-scale war on all organiza-
tions and individuals who have ever exposed and fought Communists."
In passing, it should be pointed out that the Ford Foundation's effort to dis-
credit legislative inquiries into Communists activities is not unique inasmuch as
the Rockefeller Foundation has undertaken, on a smaller scale, a project with
the same intention. In 1947 the Rockefeller Foundation made a grant of
$110,000 to Cornell University to conduct a study on civil liberties and the con-
trol of subversive activities. This project resulted in the publication of a series
of books attacking legislative investigations of Communists activities, volumes
full of typical pro-Communist distortion. One of the authors of these volumes
was Prof. Walter Gellhorn, of Columbia University, who has Communist-front
affiliations and who has explicitly demanded the abolition of the House Com-
mittee on Un-American Activities. Recently Gellhorn was identified, in testi-
mony given under oath, as a member of the Communist Party, a charge which he
denied.
It should also be pointed out that at least one foundation has used its funds
not only to discredit the investigation of Communists, but to support directly
Communists fronts and to aid Communists on trial.
On September 24, 1942, the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Dies], in a speech in
the House, showed that the Robert Marshall Foundation of New York was sup-
porting Comjnunist fronts and Communist causes, and he listed the actual
disbursements made from the estate of the late Robert Marshall, a Red New
Dealer from the Department of Agriculture, who left an estate of over a mil-
lion and a half dollars to the foundation and named trustees, most of whom
were radicals and Reds. This is the same foundation which the gentleman
from Illinois [Mr. Velde], in a speech in the House on October 17, 1951, exposed
TAX-EXEMPT FOtrNDATIONS 41
as being the provided of the sum of $20,000 in attorney fees to Joe Raiih, chair-
man of the executive committee of Americans for Democratic Action and at-
torney for the convicted perjurer and Soviet spy, William Walter Remington;
who is" now in jail serving time for betraying his country in wartime and falsely
denying Communist Party membership while in a secret cell of the Communist
Party in the Tennessee Valley Authority. One of the trustees of the Robert
Marshall/ Foundation was and is Edwin S. Smith. This is the same Smith that
President, Roosevelt put on the National Labor Relations Board. On May 21,
1953, this same Edwin S. Smith was summoned before the Senate Internal Se-
curity Subcommittee, and when asked if he was a Communist, he immediately
dived behind the fifth amendment and claimed privilege.
B, Arthur Sehlesinger, Jr., of Americans for Democratic Action employed *y
Ford Foundation ; According to. page 34 of the 1951 AwwaJ* Report of £hs FUpd"
for Adult Education, a subsidiary of the Ford Foundation, the TV-Radio Work-
shop, administered by the fund for adult education, hired Arthur Sehlesinger,
Jr., as commentator for a series of 12 weekly broadcasts. Sehlesinger, of course,
is a big shot in the ADA. The following public statements by Sehlesinger are
worthy of note :
In 1946 Sehlesinger wrote that the present system in the United States makes
"even freedom-loving Americans look wistfully at Russia."
On December 11, 1949, on page 3 of the New York Times, Sehlesinger said :
"I happen to believe that the Communist Party should be granted freedom of
political action and that Communists should be allowed to teach in universities,
so long as they do not disqualify themselves by intellectual distortions in the
classrooms."
On August 18, 1946, on a University of Chicago Round Table broadcast en-
titled "What Is Communism?" Sehlesinger said:
"Surely the class struggle is going on in America. I would agree completely
with the Communists on that."
Sehlesinger was then asked:
"Do you mean that capitalism is dead everywhere except in the United States?"
He replied : "It is dead."
In answer to the question, "What did it die of?"', he said :
"It died of itself. There is much to what the Marxists used to say about
capitalism containing the 'seeds of its own destruction',"
Sehlesinger, in a public-affairs pamphlet of 1950, entitled "What About Com-
munism?" criticized the Committee on Un-American Activities and said that it
was more interested in slandering and smearing liberals than in exposing real
Communists, Be said.:
"The methods of the witchhunt, especially when employed from the ambush
of congressional immunity, are sometimes almost as dangerous to democracy
as the methods of the Communists themselves."
He also said :
"With the formation of Americans for Democratic Action, liberals who believed
in a non-Communist left acquired an organization of their own."
As the gentleman from California [Mr. Jackson] pointed out concerning the
grant of $15 million to investigate the House and Senate, the money might
have been better spent by the Ford Foundation to help ferret out and expose
the subversion in our schools and our universities, or the Ford Foundation might
have ddne something about the Ford plants in the Detroit area which the gentle-
man from California described as a seething mass of Communist conspiracy and
intrigue, where thousands of unsuspecting and loyal American workers were
being duped and held in a tight grip by the Communist leadership of Local 600
of the United Automobile Workers of America. Local 600 is the largest labor
union in the world and has, or did have, some 60,000 members, and still it is
classified as just one local union of the United Automobile Workers of America.
In February, March, and April, 1952, the House Committee on Un-American
Activities held open public hearings in Detroit, and witness after witness took
the stand and testified under oath as to the Communist domination and control
of local 600 by the Kremlin. So the committee issued subpenas for the officers
of local 600 at the Ford plants and brought them before the committee and
asked them if they were Communists. Not a single officer of local 600 answered
the question. They took refuge in the fifth amendment, refusing to answer on
the grounds to do so would incriminate them. Yet they still work for FopL
Now you would think that when a congressional committee, a eomiiii«t**e df.
this House, goes to Detroit to hold hearings regarding Communists in the Ford
plants that the Ford Motor Co. would assist. Exactly the opposite was true. Not
42
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
only did they offer the committee no assistance, but when requested to cooperate
With the committee in ferreting out and exposing these agents of the Kremlin
in the Ford plants, they refused.
The House Committee on Un-American Activities got absolutely no help from
tyie Ford Motor Co., but, even worse, the national leadership of the United Auto-
mobile Workers headed by Walter Reuther, now president of the CIO, was no
better off. They finally had to pass an amendment to the union constitution
at the national convention, held in Atlantic City recently, to authorize the
national officers to remove these Communists from the domination and control
of local 600.
So, instead of the Ford Foundation voting $15 million to investigate Congress,
they might well clean up their own backyard first, their plants and the Ford
Foundation, too.
B. Grant to a Communist : Another example of the kind of grants the Ford
Foundation makes was revealed in the testimony of William M. Canning, a
f6rmer member of the faculty of the City College and of Xavier University, who
said under oath at the hearings of the Internal Security Subcommittee that
Moses Finkelstein, a City College teacher and later a professor at Rutgers Uni-
versity, under the name of Finley, was a member of the Communist Party and
that recently this man received a grant from the Ford Foundation.
C. Grant to an organization supposedly controlled by a Communist: I have
been advised by a reliable source that an organization which has received
substantial grants not only from the Ford Foundation, but also from the Car-
negie Corp., is supposed to be dominated by a Communist who dictates the
policy of the organization. It would be unfair for me to provide specific infor-
mation on this matter until witnesses are put on the stand to give their testi-
mony under oath.
D. Grant to a person who wants to abolish the United States : Another dubi-
ous grant of a different character was made*to Mortimer Adler, who received
$600,000 from the Ford and Mellon Foundations to set up the Institute of Philo-
sophical Research. Professor Adler is such an ardent advocate of world govern-
ment that, according to the Cleveland Plain Dealer, October 29, 1945, he said:
"We must do everything we can to abolish the United States."
It would be interesting to find out just what kind of philosophical conclusions
Professor Adler will arrive at with reference to the virtues of patriotism and
government based on unalienable rights of men.
E Grant to promote socialism : According to the Ford Foundation Annual
Report for 1951, the foundation has. granted $50,000 to the Advertising Council,
Inc., for "a restatement of the principles of American society." The council's
public policy committee includes, in addition to Paul Hoffman, former president
Of the Ford Foundation, and Chester C. Davis, its associate director, several
persons who have Communist-front affiliations.
The Miracle of America, a publication of the Advertising Council, Inc., states
that the public-policy committee of the Advertising Council approves and en-
dorses the economic-education program of the council. This program is de-
scribed in the Miracle of America under the title "Platform for All Americans."
This platform starts out like a firecracker Fourth of July patriotic speech and
then turns out to be a rewrite of the British Labor— -Socialist— Party program.
Adoption of this platform would guarantee the success of any Socialist legislation
in America. The Miracle of America, containing this platform, has been cir-
culated by hundreds of thousands by the Advertising Council as a part of its
campaign of public information. Is this an educational program or is it propa-
ganda in favor of socialism?
F. Grant to pro-Communist India: The Ford Foundation has singled out
India for some of its largest grants and is spending millions of dollars in that
nation. Is there some special significance to singling out India for large Ford
Foundation grants, in view of the fact that the head of the Indian Government
is more sympathetic to the Soviet Union than toward the United States, and
that he wants the United States to recognize Red China and admit that Com-
munist nation, which is slaughtering Americans in Korea, to the United Nations?
I am greatly concerned with what is being done with the Ford Foundation mil-
lions in India. That nation is a potential ally of the Soviet Union, and if the
Ford Foundation projects in any way are fostering a pro-Soviet attitude in
India, the consequences may be disastrous for the future of America.
The stakes are very high, for if India should definitely become a Soviet ally,
the power of the Kremlin's bloc would be immeasurably increased. My fear
of what the Ford Foundation might be doing in India is increased by the fact
that in the case of China the activities of the Rockefeller Foundation in that
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 4$
nation helped, instead of hindered, the advance of communism. The late gentle-
man from Georgia, Mr. Cox, on August 1, 1951, made the following statement lii
this Chamber, with reference to the guilt of the Rockefeller Foundation for thtf
triumph of the Communists in China :
"The Rockefeller Foundation, whose funds have been used to finance individ-
uals and organizations whose business it has been to get communism into the
private and public schools of the country, to talk down America and to play-
up Russia, must take its share of the blame for the swing of the professors and
students in China to communism during the years preceding the successful Red
revolution in China. For two generations, the Rockefeller Foundation played a
guiding role in higher education in China. Over a period of 32 years $45 million
of Rockefeller money was expended in China, most of it going to Chinese institu-
tions of higher learning. If the Rockefeller fund spenders had had even an
elementary conception of what was going on among the Chinese teachers and
students, they would have taken steps to halt the stampede of the Chinese col-
leges to communism. When the crisis of the Chinese revolution came, it was
the stiident and teacher element, educated largely with Rockefeller money, who
were the backbone of the Red success. Our boys are now suffering and dying
in Korea, in part, because Rockefeller money encouraged trends in the Chinese
colleges and schools which swung China's intelligentsia to communism."
What has happened once can happen again, and I am sure that my colleagues
in this Chamber share my anxiety as to the future of India and what the Ford
Foundation is doing there — whether its activities are of such nature as to hamper
India's orientation toward the Kremlin or to assist and augment it? In
addition to the Rockefeller Foundation's activities in China, the Institute of
Pacific Relations, supported mainly by foundations, played a major part in the
success of the Chinese Red revolution. The McCarran committee's extensive
investigation of the Institute of Pacific Relations showed how this organization,
financed primarily by the Rockefeller Foundation and the Carnegie Corp., played
the Kremlin's game with reference to China, and how it made possible the
transformation of Nationalist China, our ally, into Red China, our enemy, with
whom we are engaged in a bloody war. This investigation was a post mortem —
it took place after China had been sold out to the Kremlin. But how much more
useful it would he for a congressional committee to try to prevent by exposure
any sort of activity, financed by the Ford Foundation, which may have a similar
effect in India as the Rockefeller and Carnegie Foundations' activities had in
China.
The few examples I have given in regard to some of the officers of the Ford
Foundation and its subsidiaries, and in regard to some of their activities, cer-
tainly warrant a thorough inquiry into their officers and all of their extensive
activities, which reach not only into every area of American intellectual life,
but also into the far corners of the earth.
^ Mr. Hays. I want to finish on this — and I do not see anything
similar to the paragraph that Mr. Reece has shown me. If you are
going to leave the statement, that foundations have not been asked
why they did not support projects of a pro- American type, it leads
me to believe that the staff is of the opinion that they did not or have,
not. If you are of that opinion— —
Mr. Dodd. It was not meant to convey that, Mr. Hays.
Mr. Hats. I would still like to have a definition of pro- American.
Mr. Dodd. May I answer?
/Mr. Wormser. May I interrupt Mr. Dodd?
Mr. Hats. If you mean by pro- American, if they have not con-
tributed research that led them to the thinking of McKinley, Ulysses
S. Grant, and Cohn and Schine, I am not for that in any case. But
if pro- American means what I think it means, that is a very serious
indictment. If pro- American means the pre-1900 isolationist policy
of one of the political parties, I want to disagree with that definition
of pro- American, because that does not mean pro- American to me.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Hays, may I make a suggestion? We can, I
think, give you a reference to the Cox hearings in which that question
44 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
was asked and the term pro- American activities was used. That is
where it was gotten.
Mr. Hays. Yes ; but Mr. Dodd makes the statement here, the implied
statement that foundations have not contributed to the pro-American
activities.
Mr. Wormser. I would like him to answer that, but I do not think
he meant to imply that.
Mr. Hats. I think that is the crux of the whole statement he made
so far. If the thing is going to turn on that, then we ought to have a
definition of this term.
The Chairman. If the gentleman will yield, I never understood
Mr. Dodd to say that the foundations had not contributed anything
of so-called pro- American activities, but he said the charge had been,
made or the criticism had been made that their donations, grants, or
assistance had been weighted against the so-called pro-American activ-
ities. But Mr. Dodd can best answer that himself.
Mr. Hays. Let me read again what Mr. Dodd said yesterday. It
is on page 39 of the report. He says, "From our point of view there
seem to be eight criticisms which had been made of the work of the
Cox committee." I will not read all of them, but he goes down to
this one, which looks like the sixth, that foundations jnad not been
asked why they did not support projects of a pro- American type.
If that does not imply that they did not support it, I do not know
what does. I want that clarified right now.
Mr. Dodd. May I answer it, Mr. Hays?
Mr. Hays. Surely, I would like you to.
Mr. Dodd. That was nothing more than listing what had been set
forth as the type of criticisms, and we found they had been leveled
against the work of the Cox committee. The effort of the staff was
to include that portion of research which would enable eventually
to have those criticisms answered. That is all that statement is in
there for.
Mr. Hays. Then has the staff found any evidence that the founda-
tions have granted aid to pro- American projects ?
Mr. Dodd. Yes, sir. If you will refer to the statement which I made
in the foreword, in which I believe
Mr. Hays That is clear enough for me. I just wanted to clarify the
point that there had been, and we are not starting out with an in-
dictment that they had never done anything pro- American.
Mr. Dodd. Oh, no.
The Chairman. If the gentleman will permit an interruption; I
undertook to make that clear in my opening statement yesterday.
Mr. Hays. I appreciate that. I did not want that statement to go
unchallenged. I still say I think we ought to have from the point of
view of the staff a definition of what you mean by "pro- American."
I do not insist on it at this minute, but I think along with your defini-
tions, I think we ought to get it in the record.
The Chairman. You can do that, can you not ?
Mr. Hays. Later.
Mr. Dodd. Not only that, sir, but it would seem to me to be the op-
posite of the working definition which the staff used as to what was
un-American, which was the definition that we obtained from
Brookings.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 45
The Chairman : You and Mr. Wormser work out that in connection
with your other definition.
Mr. Dodd. Mr. Chairman, may I refer Mr. Hays to this statement
in the foreword that bears on this question which he has asked.
Mr. Hats. Do you have the page number ?
Mr. Dodd. I have not.
Mr. Hays. All right: read it.
Mr. Dodd. I am reading from the foreword, which was the state-
ment made by me as I started yesterday's testimony.
And in- the vast majority of instances, they—
That is the benefit created by foundations —
must be regarded as beyond question either from the standpoint of their corr-
fiormity to the intentions of their donors or from the standpoint of- the truly
American quality of their consequences.
Mr. Hats. That is fine. I am glad to have that read again, because
yesterday the public address system was not working too well, and we
did not have a copy of what you were saying. It is very probable that
we missed several important things that you said.
Mr. Dodd. May I ask if you can hear me all right now ? /
Mr. ; Hats. I can hear you ; yes.
That is all I have, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. You may proceed, then.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Chairman, I would like to give the committee
the benefit of a few excerpts which illustrate some of the things Mr.
Dodd said yesterday, and is to say today. I think it woulcTBe better
if I introduced those or offered them after he has finished his com-
plete recitation.
The Chairman. Without objection, and any of the insertions, I
think, should come at the end of Mr. Dodd's statement, rather than
during.
Mr. Dodd. May I proceed, Mr. Chairman?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Dodd. I am going on from where we left off yesterday where I
mentioned that there were several entities other than strictly educa-
tional institutions which we felt we would have to include in our
studies. I mentioned them by name. To characterize some of these
briefly:
The American Council of Learned Societies was founded in 191^
to encourage humanistic studies, including some which today are
regarded as social sciences. It is comprised of 24 constituent mem-
ber associations. In its entirety, it appears to dominate scholarship
in this country.
The National Research Council was established in lQl^originally^
as a preparedness measure in connection with World War I. Its
charter was renewed in 1919, since which time, on behalf of its eight
member associations, it has been devoted to the promotion of re-
search within the most essential areas ordinarily referred to as the
exact and applied sciences.
The Social Science Research Council was established in 1923 to
advance research in the social sciences. It acts as spokesman for
seven constituent member associations representing all of the major
subdivisions of this new field of knowledge, i. e., history, economics,
sociology, psychology, political science, statistics, and anthropology-
49720—54 — pt. 1—— -4
46 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The American Council on Education was founded in 1918 —
to coordinate the services which educational institutions and organizations
could contribute to the Government in the national crisis brought about by
World War I.
Starting with 14 constituent or founding organizations, this for-
midable and influential agency has steadily expanded until today its
membership is reported to consist of 79 constituent members (na-
tional and regional educational associations) ; 64 associate members
(national organizations in fields related to education) ; 954 institu-
tional members (universities, colleges, selected private school sys-
tems, educational departments of industrial concerns, voluntary as-
sociations of colleges and universities within the States, large public
libraries, etc.).
The National Education Association was established in 1857 to
elevate character, advance the interests of the teaching profession,
and to promote the cause of popular education in the United States.
Broadly speaking, this powerful entity concentrates on primary and
secondary schools. Its membership is reported to consist of 520,000
individuals who include, in addition to teachers, superintendents,
school administrators, and school secretaries. It boasts that it is —
the only organization that represents or has the possiblity of representing the
great body of teachers in the United States —
thus inferring a monopolistic aim.
The League for Industrial Democracy came into being in 1950,
when it was known as the Intercollegiate Socialist Society, for the
purpose of awakening the intellectuals of this country to the ideas
and benefits of socialism. This organization might be compared to
the Fabian Society in England, which was established in 1884 to
spread socialism by peaceful means.
The Progressive Education Association was established around
1890. Since then it has been active in introducing radical ideas to
education which are now being questioned by many. They include
the idea that the individual must be adjusted to the group as a result
of his or her educational experience, and that democracy is little
more than a system for cooperative living.
The American Historical Association was established in 1889 to
promote historical studies. It is interesting to note that after giving
careful consideration, in 1926, to the social sciences, a report was
published under its auspices in 1934 which concluded that the day
of the individual in the United States had come to an end and that
the future would be characterized, inevitably, by some form of col-
lectivism and an increase in the authority of the state.
The John Dewey Society was formed in 1936, apparently for the
twofold purpose of conducting research in the field of education and
promoting the educational philosophy of John Dewey, in honor of
whom the society was named. It could be supposed that those who
were members of this organization would be devoted to the premises
upon which Mr. Dewey had based his experiments in education since
1896. Basically, these were pragmatic and a stimulus to empirical
thinking. He held that ideas were instruments and their truth or
falsity depended upon whether or not they worked successfully.
The broad study which called our attention to the activities of these
organizations has revealed not only their support by foundations,
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 47
but has disclosed a degree of cooperation between them which they
have referred to as "an interlock," thus indicating a concentration of
influence and power, By this phrase they indicate they are bound by
a common interest rather than a dependency upon a single souree for
capital funds. It is difficult to study their relationship without con-
firming this. Likewise, it is difficult to avoid the feeling that their
common interest has led them to cooperate closely with one another
and that this common interest lies m the planning and control of
certain aspects of American life through a combination of the Federal
Government and education.
This may explain why the foundations have played such an active
role in the promotion of the social sciences, why they have favored
so strongly the employment of social scientists by the Federal Govern-
ment, and why they seem to have used their influence to transform
education into an instrument for social change.
We wish to stress the importance of questioning change only when
it might involve developments detrimental to the interests of the
American people, or when it is promoted by a relatively small and
tightly knit group backed by disproportionately large amounts of
money which could threaten the American ideal of competition.
In summary, our study of these entities and their relationship to
each other seems to warrant the inference that they constitute a highly
efficient, functioning whole. Its product is apparently an educational
curriculum designed to indoctrinate the American student from ma-
triculation to the consummation of his education. It contrasts sharply
with the freedom of the individual as the cornerstone of our social
structure. For this freedom, it seems to substitute the group, the will
of the majority, and a centralized power to enforce this will — pre-
sumably in the interest of all. Its development and production seems
to have been largely the work of these organizations engaged in re-
search, such as the Social Science Research Council and the National
Eesearch Council.
The, demand for their product seems to come from such strong and
sizable aggregations of interests as the National Educational Asso-
ciation and the American Council on Education, whose authorities
seem to see in it the means by which education can render a national
service. They make frequent reference to this service as "synonymous
with the cause of education" and tend to criticize strongly anyone who
dares to doubt the validity of their conclusions.
Its promotion appears to have been managed by such organizations
as the Progressive Education Association, the American Historical
Association, the League for Industrial Democracy, the John Dewey
Society, and the Antidef amation League. Supplementing their efforts
were others, such as the Parent-Teachers Association, the National
Council of Churches, and the Committee for Economic Development*
each of which has played some part in adjusting the minds of Ameri-
can citizens to the idea of planning and to the marked changes which
have taken place in "the public interest."
Others, too, are engaged in the dissemination of this idea as being
essential to the security of this country. Neither time nor funds have
permitted me to direct the attention of the staff to the operations and
influence of any but a few of these, beyond taking notice of their
existence and the purposes which they serve.
X J
48 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
From our studies, it appears that the overall administration of this,
functioning whole and the careful selection of its personnel seem to
have been the peculiar interest of the American Council of Learned
Societies. It is interesting to note that, by legislative action recently,,
another entity has been brought into being known as the National
Science Foundation, whose purpose is to develop a national policy
with respect to science. Its additional purpose is to serve our Gov-
ernment in an advisory capacity in connection with the huge appro-
priations now being made for research in the interests of effective
controls. Evidence exists of close cooperation between privately
endowed foundations, the agencies through which they have operated
and the educational institutions through which they have been accus-
tomed to make grants for research. This process may contribute to
an undesirable degree of concentrated power.
It is also interesting to note that by comparison with funds for
research provided by foundations, those now flowing from our Gov-
ernment are so large that they dwarf foundation contributions. This
promises to be true for some time to come and indicates that founda-
tions may extend their influence over a wider area than in the past.
The result of the development and operation of the network in.
which foundations have played such a significant role seems to have
provided this country with what is tantamount to a national system of
education under the tight control of organizations and persons little
known to the American public. Its operations and ideas are so com-
plex as to be beyond public understanding or control. It also seems
to have resulted in an educational product which can be traced to
research of a predominantly empirical character in the inexact or
social sciences.
In these fields the specialists, more often than not, seem to have been
concerned with the production of empirical data and with its applica-
tion. Principles and their truth or falsity seem to have concerned
them very little.
In what appears from our studies to have been zeal for a radically
new social order in the United States, many of these social science spe-
cialists apparently gave little thought to either the opinions or the
warnings of those who were convinced that a wholesale acceptance of
knowledge acquired almost entirely by empirical methods would result
in a deterioration of moral standards and a disrespect for principles.
Even past experience which indicated that such an approach to the
problems of society could lead to tyranny, appears to have been
disregarded.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Chairman, I do not like ,to interrupt Mr. Dodd,,
but I have several questions. Right here it seems to me there is one
that it might be well to ask him to clarify. He is tossing this word
"empirical" around with a good deal of abandon, and I wonder
if you would mind defining what you mean by empirical?
Mr. Dodd. It is based upon the accumulation of observable facts,,
Mr. Hays, and the tabulation of those. What we would ordinarily
know as a statistical approach.
Mr. Hays. Thank you.
Mr. Dodd. May I continue, sir?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Dodd. For these reasons, it has been difficult for us to dismiss
the suspicion that, latent in the minds of many of the social scientists
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 49
lias lain the belief that, given sufficient authority and enough funds,
luman behavior can be controlled, and that this control can be exer-
cised without risk to either ethical principles or spiritual values and
that, therefore, the solution to all social problems should be entrusted
to them. .
In the light of this suspicion and the evidence which supports it,
it has been difficult to avoid the conclusion that social scientists of the
persuasion I have been discussing have been accepted by foundations,
Government, and education as though their claims were .true— this is
in the face of the fact that their validity has been disputed by men
well trained in these same disciplines.
In spite of this dispute within his own ranks, the social scientist
is gradually becoming dignified by the title "Social Engineer." This
title implies that the objective viewpoint of the pure scientist is about
to become obsolete in favor of techniques of control. It also sug-
gests that our traditional concept of freedom as the function of
natural and constitutional law has already been abandoned by the
"social engineer" and brings to mind our native fear of controls —
however well intended.
In the face of this, it seems strange that foundations made no
reference in their reports to the consequences to be expected from a
new science of society founded on empiricism and undisciplined by
■either a set of principles or proved experiments. Apparently they
were content to operate on the theory that they would produce usable
data for others to employ and rely upon them to account for the
effects. It may not have occurred to their trustees that the power
to produce data in volume might stimulate others to use it in an
undisciplined fashion without first checking it against principles
discovered through the deductive process.
Their position that they need not closely follow the effects of
their support of such" grants also seems strange. Their reports often
show that they were supporting such a new "science." The descrip-
tions, however, made it very difficult to judge the ultimate purposes
for which this support was being given.
To summarize, both the general and the specific studies pursued
by the staff during the past 6 months lead me to the tentative con-
clusion that, within the social-science division of education, the
foundations have neglected "the public interest" to a severe degree.
In my judgment, this neglect may be found by the committee to
have stemmed from :
The willingness of foundations to support experiments in fields
which defied control; to support these uncontrollable experiments
without first having proved them to be "in the public interest" ; and
to extend this support without reporting its purpose in language
which could be readily understood.
I suggest that the committee give consideration to the tendency
of foundation trustees to abdicate responsibility. To illustrate: The
following statement has been taken from An American Dilemma,
the Negro Problem and Modern Democracy, a book by Gunnar
Myrdal, with the assistance of Richard Sterner and Arnold Rose,
volume II:
This study was made possible by funds granted by Carnegie Corp., of
New York. That corporation is not, however, the author, owner, publisher, or
proprietor of this publication, and is not to be understood as approving by
virtue of its grant any of the statements made or views expressed therein.
50 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
While this refers to but one project out of many, it becomes
significant when it is realized that the project to which these books
relate involve some $250,000, and. led to the publication of state-
ments which were most critical of our Constitution.
The similar tendency to delegate responsibility will be seen in
the support given by foundations to agencies such as the Social
Science Research Council, which disregards the legal concept: "He
who acts through an agent, acts himself."
Ford Foundation : Finally, I suggest that the committee give
special consideration to the Ford Foundation. This foundation
gives ample evidence of having taken the initiative in selecting pur-
poses of its own. Being of recent origin, it should not be held re-
sponsible for the actions or accomplishments of any of its prede-
cessors. It is without precedent as to size, and it is the first founda-
tion to dedicate itself openly to "problem solving" on a world scale.
In a sense, Ford appears to be capitalizing on developments which
took place long before it was founded, and which have enabled it to
take advantage of the wholesale dedication of education to a social
purpose, the need to defend this dedication against criticism, the
need to indoctrinate adults along these lines, the acceptance by the
executive branch of the Federal Government of responsibility for
planning on a national and international scale, the diminishing im-
portance of the Congress and the States and the growing power of
the executive branch of the Federal Government, the seeming indis-
pensability of control over human behavior.
As if they had been influenced directly by these developments,
the trustees established separate funds for use in the fields of educa-
tion, national planning, and politics. They set up a division devoted
to the behavioral sciences, which includes a center for advanced study,
a program of research and training abroad, an institutional-exchange
program, and miscellaneous grants-in-aid.
Supplementing these major interests are such varied activities as :
a TV radio workshop, "external grants," intercultural publications,
and an operation called the East European Fund, which is about to be
terminated.
When it is considered that the capital resources of this foundation
approach, or may exceed, $500 million, and that its income approxi-
mates $30 million each year, it is obvious that before embarking upon
the solution of "problems," some effort should be made by the trustees
to make certain that their solution is "in the public interest."
It is significant that the policies of this foundation include making
funds available for certain aspects of secret military research and for
the education of the Armed Forces. It becomes even nlore significant
when it is realized that the responsibility for the selection of the
personnel engaged in these projects is known to rest on the foundation
itself — subject as it may be to screening by our military authorities.
In this connection, it has been interesting to examine what the edu-
cational aspect of these unprecedented foundation activities can be
expected to produce. The first example is a pamphlet in which the
Declaration of Independence is discussed as though its importance
lay in the fact that it had raised two, as yet unanswered, questions :
1. Are men equal and do we demonstrate this equality ?
2. What constitutes "the consent of the governed" and what does
this phrase imply in practice?
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 51
By inference, the first question is subtly answered in the negative.
By direct statement, the second is explained as submitting to majority
ru l e — but the restriction of the majority by the Constitution is hot
mentioned. Only an abridged version of the Declaration is printed.
It is interesting that this should omit the list of grievances which
originally made the general concepts of this document reasonable.
It seems incredible that the trustees of typically American fortune
created foundations should have permitted them to be used to finance
ideas and practices incompatible with the fundamental concepts of
our Constitution. Yet there seems evidence that this may have
occurred.
I assume it is the purpose of this inquiry to gather and weigh the
facts.
Respectfully submitted by myself.
Mr. Chairman, that is the end of the statement.
The Chairman. What does the following page refer to, which makes
reference to charts ?
Mr. Dodd. You will recall that I mentioned in my statement yester-
day that the staff had made a study of the changes which had taken
place in the elements comprising the public interest from the turn of
the century to the present day. That study was entitled "The Eco-
nomics of the Public Interest." In that study, Mr. Chairman, are
these 12 charts.
The Chairman. Are those charts to be submitted ?
Mr. Dodd. At counsel's convenience, I believe he plans to do so.
But I also believe he plans to do so when he submits that particular
study itself. Of that I am not sure.
Mr. Wormser. I think we will introduce it later. You may have
it now if you wish, but it would come in more logically later, Mr.
Chairman.
May I now offer certain material which Mr. Dodd might read into
the record to illustrate some of the things he had discussed in his testi-
mony. For example, on page 45 of the record, he made a statement
discussing the extent to which foundations like Carnegie and Rocke-
feller had made contributions or expended funds for the purpose of
directing education in the United States toward an international frame
of reference.
Mr. Hats. That is a good place for a question right there, Mr.
Chairman.
The Chairman. Were you submitting something, Mr. Wormser?
Mr. Wormser. I was about to ; yes.
The Chairman. Mr. Hays has a question.
Mr. Hats. I would like you to explain a little more fully, you say
that these foundations have furthered this purpose by directing educa-
tion in the United States toward an international frame of reference
and discrediting the traditions to which it had been dedicated.
What are these traditions to which it has been dedicated? That
seems to me to be a rather critical thing, and I would like to know more
about it. I may get educated all over. I am reading from the report
on page 45, where you stopped. I read a little more.
Mr. Wormser. It is page 14 of your manuscript copy, Mr. Dodd.
Mr. Dodd. May I answer, Mr. Hays ?
Mr. Hats. Yes.
52 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Dodd. That which appeared most frequently, Mr. Hays, would
relate to an adage or viewpoint which was to avoid entangling alliances
and which had come down through the years. That would be a perti-
nent aspect of it with respect to international affairs.
Mr. Hats. You mean you are taking that from George Washing-
ton's Farewell Address.
Mr. Dodd. I am just taking that because they make reference to it.
Mr. Hays. I do not think we can keep something that George Wash-
ington said 150 years ago as being a basis for guidance today and say
anything contrary to it is 100 percent wrong. I think George Wash-
ington was a pretty smart man, and I respect him and revere him, but
certainly the Monroe Doctrine was an entangling alliance, and it also
is one of those revered cliches that we use a good deal now. I would
rather that this investigation got off without using any more cliches
than we can help.
Mr. Dodd. This is not designed to say whether it is good or bad or be
critical or otherwise. This is the way it appeared, and this is the way
it unfolded.
Mr. Hays. I got the pretty firm impression that it was going to ap-
pear this way the first time I ever talked to you about it. Do you
remember last fall, more than 6 months ago, I tried to find out just
where this investigation was going, and I got pretty much the impres-
sion that I could have almost written this myself from that first con-
versation. That is all right. I do not want to find fault with that.
But let us bring in the facts to prove it. Let us not stand on a bunch
of assertions.
Mr. Dodd. As I understand it, that is what counsel intends to do,
Mr. Hays.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Hays and Mr. Chairman, we expect in the course
of hearings to introduce in addition to the testimony of witnesses,
various extracts from printed material produced or supported by the
foundations themselves. There will be a considerable oody of that
kind of evidence.
In this particular connection, Mr. Hays, we suggest that a proper
subject of inquiry for the committee is whether or not propaganda
is desirable for a foundation which operates as the fiduciary manager
of public funds. In the case of the Carnegie endowment we will be
glad to introduce evidence later to show that they were consciously
produced, a propaganda machine. We are anxious to get the facts.
If there is an adequate explanation of that which takes it out of the
class of propaganda which public funds privately managed should
not be used for, we will be glad to hear it. But it seems to me that
this committee has the duty to inquire whether or not propaganda by
foundations with public money is desirable.
Mr. Hays. You say that the Carnegie Foundation consciously pro-
duced a propaganda machine ?
Mr. Wormser. Yes.
Mr. Hays. And that is bad per se.
Mr. Wormser. I am presenting that to the committee to decide. I
am not trying to decide.
Mr. Hays. If a foundation has produced consciously a propaganda
machine, it is the Facts Forum. I have not much evidence that the
staff has done much digging there. They not only have a propaganda
machine, but that outfit puts money in to defeat people like me for
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 53
Congress. That is pretty essential to me. That is bad propaganda
from my viewpoint. '.-•'•'
The Chairman. Another foundation, or at least an organization
that comes within the definition of a foundation, has been called to the
attention of the committee, and that is the so-called Christian Laymen's
Movement, which it certainly would appear from some documents
which I have seen circularized, engages in. propaganda.
Mr. Hays. The chairman knows that he and I have discussed that,
and we are in complete agreement, that in the first instance it is not a
foundation, and in the second instance, we ought to bring them in and
find out why they have used the name.
The Chairman. If any foundations have contributed money for
political purposes, I think that ought to"be developed.
Mr. Hays. Directly or by purporting to present facts, and doing so
in a biased manner.
The Chairman. If any of the foundations have contributed money
for political purposes to defeat or elect any candidate, I think that
ought to be developed.
Mr. Wormser. May I say regarding the Facts Forum, may I say
that the Bureau of Internal Revenue is making a study of its own of
that institution.
Mr. Hays. May I say I talked to the Bureau of Internal Revenue,
and they have finished their study. If you cannot get it, they will
make the facts available to you.
Mr. Wormser. The second thing I want to say in explanation is
that we have had considerable difficulty in getting access to forms
990-A, as you know. The return of this particular foundation was
finally made available to us last Friday at 4 : 30.
Mr. Hays. I talked to the Assistant Director about 3:30. He
really acted fast. He told me you would get it. I appreciate the
speed with which he made it available.
The Chairman. However, the chairman might say that with ref-
erence to making available the tax return form 990-A which is the
document in which the committee is particularly interested, it has
been authorized to be made available by an Executive order. The
delay and the difficulty has come through the slowness of the ad-
ministrative action in the Department, as I understand it, but that
matter is now pretty well cleared up; is it not, Mr. Wormser; so that
these forms are now available. In fairness to the staff, there has been
really
Mr. Hays. I realize that, Mr. Chairman, and I just got into the
picture because the staff informed me that they were having trouble
getting hold of this particular one, because it seemed to be lost or
something. When I called, it was not lost ; they found it right away.
The Chairman. It is my understanding that you had difficulty
getting some of the others also.
Mr. Wormser. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. So, it was not this particular one that was an
isolated case.
Mr. Wormser. We gave them a list of those foundations whose re-
turns we wanted particularly to examine. When they finally gave
us access to them, we found that many of those we wanted were still
not there, and the problem was that they had not been gotten into
the Washington office from some of the field offices. So, we still have
54 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
not got a complete story to tell. Moreover, we have the mechanical
difficulty with our small staff that they will not let us photostat any
of these returns and permit us only to examine them on their premises
which, makes it very difficult for us to work with them.
Mr. Hats. I assume that on this complete story, Mr. Dodd says* he
thinks the Ford Foundation ought to be gone into pretty thoroughly.
I suppose we will develop that story by having them in. If the staff
is too busy, it would suit me to bring in Mr. Hunt and the rest of the
Facts Forum people and develop their story right here, too. He
seems to have trouble getting publicity. Maybe we will get him a
little.
The Chairman. As a result of my consultation with the staff, it is
expected that the foundation, generally will have opportunity to ap-
pear, in fact will be invited to appear. The presentation by Mr. Dodd
is more or less forming the basis for the appearance of the representa-
tives of the various foundations.
Mr. Hats. This is the indictment or the bill of particulars.
Mr. Wormser. The bill of particulars is a good term, Mr. Hays.
Mr. Hats. That is what I was going on. I just want to be sure
that we get this one I am talking about in the bill of particulars. I
want to amend it right here and get them in.
The Chairman. As I understand it, the staff have had certain rea-
sons for proceeding this way. One was that they thought it was
desirable for the foundations themselves to understand the approach
which the staff had made in this study. From some of the conversa-
tions that Mr. Wormser, as well as myself, have had with foundations,
I think they are rather satisfied with this method of procedure; not
that it is either favorable or unfavorable to them, but they think it
is a sound and logical method in which to proceed.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Chairman, let me say that I may be seeming to ask
some critical questions, but I do not want to imply that there has been
any trouble between myself and the staff. It may be that I do not
see eye to eye on a good many things, but the staff has been very
responsive any time I have asked them a question to come up and
explain it, or to make the files available, or anything like that. There
has been no difficulty whatsoever on that score.
The Chairman. Certainly I never so understood you to infer, that
is, not only the staff, but the members of the committee themselves.
Mr. Hats. Let us not be too optimistic.
The Chairman. I am only speaking up to the present time. I am
not projecting that into the future. If there are no further questions,
Mr. Wormser, you may proceed.
Mr. Wormser. This statement was not intended to cover every-
thing we are going to cover in the hearings. This was intended to
cover what we might call the most important or main lines of inquiry
we suggest. The reason for doing it now is, as the chairman said, to
give the foundations an opportunity to know what most important
matters we want to go into in relation to them.
The Chairman. You may proceed.
Mr. Wormser. I think Mr. Dodd might wish to read an extract
from the report of the Carnegie Endowment which is taken from their
1937 yearbook, being part 01 the report of the division of intercourse
and education.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 55
Mr. Dodd (reading) :
One of the regular branches of work of the division of intercourse and educa-
tion is the distribution of the International Mind Alcove Collection. The public
libraries of small communities welcome these carefully selected books on foreign
countries and international relations as a distinct help in developing and broad-
ening the point of view of their communities often isolated from reading material
of this type. During the past 14 years 739 towns have benefited by this service
with 490 on the Alcove list at the end of 1936.
The Chairman. What is that number ?
Mr. Dodd. 490.
Mr. Hays. What is this Alcove list, before you go any further?
Would you enlighten the committee ?
Mr. Dodd. The list, Mr. Hays, is a composite of titles of boohs
which go as a single collection into libraries in communities. I think
the name "Alcove" is to designate that it stands by itself in whatever
library it happens to be put. I think that is how they happened to
hit on "Alcove" as a word. Their full title is "International Mind
Alcove Collection." I think that is to set the tenor of the books them-
selves. In other words, the general subject of international matters.
Mr. Hays. I take it that the staff does not approve of this collection ;
is that right ?
Mr. Dodd. No, Mr. Hays. I think counsel is introducing this as an
example of the fact that the Carnegie Corp. or the Carnegie Endow-
ment for Peace was interested in awakening the people of this country
to an international viewpoint. This is not to mean that it is good
or bad, sir.
Mr. Hays. All right. That is what I want to get clear. That suits
me.
Mr, Dodd. I sincerely hope, as that statement was read, that there
are no instances of an attempt at what we call quality judgments.
May I proceed, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. You may proceed.
Mr. Dodd (reading) :
After a collection has reach 100 titles, no further books are sent. In this way
funds are released to establish new Alcoves elsewhere.
The librarian agrees when accepting the initial installment to interest readers
in every way possible in the books and in their purpose and often this personal
enthusiasm and cooperation add greatly to the success of the work. The local
press is generous in giving space for the announcement and description of new
Alcove titles, 4 of which are sent every 3 months, thus permitting the very latest
publications to be chosen.
Then on page 59 of this same yearbook :
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS CLUBS
The international relations clubs organized under the auspices of the division
throughout the world show an increase in 1936 to 66, making a total of 805.
These clubs are most numerous in the 48 States of the United States, in all of
which they are active. Clubs are also organized in 32 other countries reaching
halfway round the globe to distant Siam and including such parts of the United
States as Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and also the Philippines. For 20 years
the work of the international relations clubs has been described in these reports.
It is an integral part of the work of the division carried along the lines so often
laid down in these pages.
On page 62:
There are now (that is as of December 31, 1936) 157 groups organized in
foreign countries.
56 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
On page 63 :
The international relations clubs in high schools have been a natural out-
growth of the work of the clubs in colleges and universities. Members of these
latter clubs have spoken at the high schools in their communities and have-
invited high-school students to come to their meetings. Also club members
graduating from college frequently go into the teaching profession which puts
them in direct touch with high-school students who are eager to learn more
about international relations. On December 31, 1936, there were 206 high school
international relations clubs, and applications are constantly being received.
To these clubs a package of pamphlet material is sent twice a year to aid them
in their studies.
And finally this comes* from President Butler's report to the annual
meeting of the board of trustees on page 179 :
As you see from the annual report, we have now in the United States between
800 and 900 international relations clubs, chiefly in the smaller institutions of
learning, college and high school. They meet on the average of once a week.
They read and discuss endowment publications, the news of the day, everything
bearing upon economic cooperation and peace.
We have in addition about 800 International Mind Alcoves in public libraries.
These bear our name. They consist of books, 30, 40, 50, sometimes 100 in number,
which can be read either by young people or old, as the case may be, and which
give an account of the characteristics, the geography, the history, the literature,
the products, the life of other peoples. Sometimes there is included a novel
dealing with the psychology and the habits of other people than our own. These
are producing a very profound effect upon the mind of the young people in the-
United States and have shown themselves to be very practical, indeed.
Mr. Wormser. Again in the same area, I would like with your per-
mission, Mr. Chairman, for Mr. Dodd to read from the 1947 yearbook
of the Carnegie Endowment, which contains a report called Recom-
mendations of the President. The president, incidentally, in passing,,
at the moment was Alger Hiss. I would like Mr. Dodd to read starting,
at page 16. ■ ' ■
Mr. Hays. Would you describe that again, and tell us what it is ?
I am sorry I did not hear everything you said. I did hear the name
Alger Hiss.
Mr. Wormser. Yes. It is from the 1947 yearbook of the Carnegie-
Endowment for International Peace. Entered at page 15 is a reprint
of a document called Recommendations of the President to the
Trustees. It is signed by Alger Hiss, president.
Mr. Hats. It was an unfortunate thing when the Secretary of State
recommended him to the Carnegie Foundation, was it not %
Mr. Woemser. I think we would all agree on that.
Mr. Dodd (reading) :
Ainong the special circumstances favorable to an expansion of the endowments-
own direct activities, the most significant is the establishment of the United!
Nations with its headquarters in New York, and with the United States as its
leading and most influential member.
The United States was the chief architect of the United Nations and is its chief
support. The opportunity for an endowed American institution having the ob-
jectives, traditions, and prestige of the endowment, to support and serve the
United Nations is very great. No other agency appears to be so favorably situated
as is the endowment for the undertaking of such a program-
So far as we have been able to ascertain, no other agency is contemplating the
undertaking of such a program. Consequently, I recommend most earnestly that
the endowment construct its program for the period that lies ahead primarily
for the support and the assistance of the United Nations. I would suggest that
this program be conceived of as having two objectives. First, it should be
widely educational in order to encourage public understanding and support of
the United Nations at home and abroad. Second, it should aid in the adoption
of wise policies, both by our own Government in its capacity as a member of the
United Nations, and by the United Nations Organization as a whole.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 57
The number and importance of decisions in the field of foreign relations
with which the United States will be faced during the next few years are
«f such magnitude that the widest possible stimulation of public education in
this field is of major and pressing importance. In furthering its educational
objective, the endowment should utilize its existing resources, such as the inter-
national-relations clubs in the colleges and international conciliation, and should
strengthen its relationships with existing agencies interested in the field of
foreign affairs. These relationships- should include close collaboration with
other organizations principally engaged in the study of foreign affairs, the
Institute of Pacific Relations, the developing university centers of international
relations, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Foreign Policy Association,
and local community groups interested in foreign affairs, of which the Cleveland
Council on World Affairs and the projected World Affairs Council in San
Francisco are examples.
Of particular importance is the unusual opportunity of reaching large seg-
ments of the population by establishing relations of a rather novel sort with
the large national organizations which today are desirous of supplying their
members with objective information on public affairs, including international
issues. These organizations, designed to serve, respectively, the broad interests
of business, church, women, farm, labor, veterans, educational, and other large
groups of our citizens, are not equipped to set up foreign policy research staffs
on their own. The endowment should supply these organizations with basic
information about the United Nations, and should assist them both in selecting
topics of interest to their members and in presenting those topics so as to be
most readily understood by their members.
We should urge the Foreign Policy Association and the Institute of Pacific
Relations to supply similar service on other topics of international significance.
Explanation should also be made by the endowment as to the possibilities of
increasing the effectiveness of the radio and motion pictures in public education
on world affairs.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Wormser, may I ask a question?
Mr. Wormser. Please, Mr. Hays.
Mr. Hats. What was the purpose of putting that in the record?
Mr. Wormser. I am trying to give a few illustrations of some of
the more important statements which Mr. Dodd made in his report
to give some justification for lines of inquiry. As I said before, we
asked the committee to consider whether propaganda by a public
foundation privately managed but consisting of public money in es-
sence is desirable or proper. We believe we have evidence to show
that the Carnegie Foundation or Endowment for International Peace
has created, as I said, a propaganda machine. Its propaganda might
be good.
Mr. Hats. Let us explore while we are at it and see if it is in any
way responsible for the present floundering foreign policy we have.
There seems to be some connection between Mr. Dulles and this Car-
negie Foundation. Maybe we will get to the bottom of that.
There might be something useful out of this after all.
The Chairman. I suggest we can make our observations on that
after the hearing has been further developed.
Mr. Wormser. These are merely illustrations and not the complete
story in any way.
Mr. Hats. I do not expect the staff to follow that suggestion, but
it is the line of inquiry I would like to follow.
The Chairman. Do you have further suggestions there?
Mr. Wormser. Yes.
The Chairman. I am sure the staff will give full support to the
suggestion of the gentleman.
Mr. Hats. I will: even try to get them some more money for that.
Mi". Wormser: I believe at page 26 of the record Mr. Dodd referred
to the operations or activities of the foundations in changing our edu-
5S TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS.
cational and to some extent, I believe, our cultural life somewhat
radically. I would like him to read with your permission from a book
of Ernest Victor Hollis, Philanthropic Organizations and Higher
Education, published in 1938. Mr. Dodd will read from page 81.
Mr. Hats. This refers to what paragraph on page 26 of the record ?
Mr. Wormsbr. I have not the record in front of me, Mr. Hays.
Mr. Koch. The last full paragraph of Mr. Dodd's statement.
Mr. Dodd (reading) :
Foundations have been so skillful in overcoming these obstacles that they
now exercise a maximum of initiative. Today they have a vital part in practi-
cally every type of progressive educational experiment underway in America.
Possibly there has been no more radical and forward-looking study of the Ameri-
can scene than is presented in the 16-volume report of the Social Studies Commis-
sion of the American Historical Association, which was begun in 1927 and very
recently completed.
The report demands a radical change in many of the major premises under-
lying our economic, social, and cultural life. This uliraprogressive study was
sponsored and supported to the extent of $340,000 by the Carnegie Corp. In
addition, the corporation has contributed an aggregate of $1,404,840 to experi-
mentation in adult education, $309,500 to the study of radio in education, and an
aggregate of $5,700,000 to the endowment and support of progressive experi-
mental college programs in general, and specifically at Chicago, Bard, Colgate,
Stevens, Southwestern, and over $5 million to the promotion of educational
efforts in the fine arts, especially the pictorial and graphic arts and music.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Chairman, this appears, I believe, on page 31
of the mimeographed statement.
Mr. Hats. We will have an oportunity to come back and question
some of these statements later.
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Dodd mentioned in connection with the book,
American Dilemma, by Gunnar Myrdal, that there were some state-
ments in that book critical of our Constitution. With your permis-
sion I would like him to read several of these statements to illustrate
what he means.
Mr. Dodd. This is the first of approximately four such statements,
Mr. Chairman.
Indeed, the new republic began its career with a reaction. Charles Beard in
An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States, and a group
of modern historians, throwing aside the much cherished national mythology
which had blurred the difference in spirit between the Declaration of Independ-
ence and the Constitution, have shown that the latter was conceived in con-
siderable suspicion against democracy and fear of "the people." It was domi-
nated by property consciousness and designed as a defense against the democratic
spirit let loose during the Revolution.
This conservatism, in fundamental principles, has, to a great extent, been
perverted into a nearly f etishistic cult of the Constitution. This is unfortunate
since the 150-year-old Constitution is in many respects impractical and ill-suited
for modern conditions and since, furthermore, the drafters of the document made
it technically difficult to change even if there were no popular feeling against the
change.
Modern historical studies of how the Constitution came to be as it is reveal
that the Constitutional Convention was nearly a plot against the common people.
Until recently the Constitution has been used to block the popular —
The Chairman. Will you repeat that last sentence ?
Mr. Dodd. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Modern historical studies of how the Constitution came to be as it is reveal
that the Constitutional Convention was nearly a plot against the common people.
Until recently the Constitution has been used to block the popular will: the
14th amendment inserted after the Civil War to protect the civil rights of the
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 59
poor freedmen has, for instance, been used more to protect business corporations
against public control.
Another cultural trait of Americans is a relatively low degree of respect of
law and order.
Mr. Wormser. I would like to call your attention again, Mr. Chair-
man, to the fact that this two- volume book was financed by the
Carnegie Corp. to the extent of a quarter of a million dollars.
Mr. Hats. On that that you just read, did I understand you to say
that is four different excerpts ?
Mr. Dodd. I said it was about four different excerpts.
Mr. Hays. All lifted out of context, no doubt.
Mr. Dodd. I personally read the book, Mr. Hays, but I would not
say it had been lifted out of context.
Mr. Hays. The way you read it, I thought it was all one statement.
It is four different places in the book. Is that correct ?
Mr. Dodd. Yes. The first one appears on page 7, the second one on
page 12, the third one on page 13, and the fourth which I read was
sentence No. 1 in a paragraph appearing, on page 14. Broadly speak-
ing it is a sequential statement.
Mr. Hays. There are statements in there that I certainly disagree
strongly with, and; I think are damaging and untrue, but I want to get
the page so I can read the whole thing, and find out what they are
related to.
The Chairman. I think to have the; pages listed is a very good
thing.
Mr. Hays. I want to make it perfectly clear that I think some of
those statements are certainly statements that the committee has every
valid: reason to find fault with.
Mr. Dodd. It goes on, Mr. Chairman :
This trait, as well as the other one just mentioned is of paramount importance
for ttoe Negro problem as we shall show in some detail in later chapters. There
is.a—
Mr. Hays. Bead that sentence again about the Constitution being
difficult to amend. It sounds almost like Mr. Bricker might have
said it.
Mr. Dodd (reading) :
This Is unfor ttmate since the 150-y ear-old Constitution is in many respects
impractical and ill-suited for modern conditions and since, furthermore—
Mr. Hays. That is not the one.
Mr. Dodd (reading) :
The drafters of the document made it technically difficult to change even if
there were no popular feeling against change.
Mr. Hays. Part of that statement is certainly true, we will have
to admit. I do not admit your premise.
Mr. Wolcott. Is that bad?
Mr. Hays. No ; I am for it being difficult to change. I rather
enjoyed the attempt that was made here not long ago.
Mr. Dodd. Then it goes on, Mr. Hays :
Bach legislative statute is judged by the common citizen in terms of Ms con-
ception of the higher natural law. He decides whether it is just or unjust and
has the dangerous attitude that if it is unjust he may feel free to disobey it.
60 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
That relates to our evidence of disrespect for law and order.
This anarchistic tendency in Americans' legal culture becomes even more dan-
gerous because of the presence of a quite different tendency, a desire to regulate
human behavior tyranically by means of formal laws. This last tendency is a
heritage from early American Puritanism, which was sometimes fanatical and
dogmatic and also had a strong inclination to mind other people's business.
So we find that this American who is so proud to announce that he will not
obey laws other than those which are good and just, as soon as the discussion
turns to something which in his opinion is bad and unjust, will emphatically
pronounce that there ought to be a law against it. To demand and legislate all
sorts of laws against this or that is just as much part of American freedom
as to disobey the laws when they are enacted. America has become a country
where exceedingly much is permitted in practice, but at the same time exceedingly
much is forbidden by law.
And the final statement is as follows :
The popular explanation of the disparity in America between ideals and actual
behavior is that Americans do not have the slightest intention of living up to
the ideals which they talk about and put into their Constitution and laws. Many
Americans are accustomed to talk loosely and disparagingly about adherence to
the American creed as lip service and even hypocrisy. Foreigners are even
more prone to make such a characterization.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Chairman, I have here a quotation which, if
you will turn to the bottom of page 31, Mr. Dodd referred to the
tendency by trustees to delegate their responsibility. There are
apparently several types of delegation. This very short quote which
I shall read myself with your permission illustrates one type. It is
from a book by Shelby M. Harrison and F. Emerson Andrews, pub-
lished by the Russell Sage Foundation in 1946, at page 44: ,
The primary function of a board of trustees is the broad determination of
policies in harmony with the foundations' charter. However, while complete
authority has been vested in the board, it has neither the time nor usually the
special knowledge required for detailed administration of the work of the larger
foundations.
I would like to have Mr. Dodd read most of two letters addressed by
Prof. J. Fred Rippy, of the University of Chicago to the Honorable E.
E. Cox, who was chairman of the previous committee which we re-
ferred to as the Cox committee. The first is dated August 4, 1951 ; the
second is dated November 8, 1952.
With your permission, I have deleted two small sections of the first
letter for the sole reason that they name individuals, and in conform-
ance with our desire to keep individuals out of these, hearings as much
as possible, I would prefer not to have them read into the record.
If the committee wants I can show them the original letters.
Mr. Hays. I think it would be a good idea for the committee to see
the letters before you read them. Who is this Professor Rippy, and
what is his ax to grind ?
Mr. Wormser. I have here an extract from Who r s Who.
Mr. Hats. Of course, he writes that himself. That is their honest
estimate of themselves.
Mr. Wormser. It will give you his university connections. He got
his A. B. at Southwestern, his A. M. at Vanderbilt and his Ph. D. at
the University of California. He has had three fellowships, one from
the Guggenheim Foundation, one from Carnegie. He has been an
assistant professor of history at the University of California. He
was before that I believe an instructor in history at Chicago, then
assistant professor or associate professor. He was a full professor
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 61
of history at Duke, and a full prof essor at Chicago. He has also taught
at Johns Hopkins, at the National University of Mexico, at the Uni-
versity of Louisiana, and the University of Washington. He belongs
to many of the societies. He has had two Government posts, a member
of the United States National Commission on History and Geography.
In 1935 he was a delegate to the Panamanian Conference on History
and Geography. p
Mr. Hats. Is he now associated with the University of Chicago ?
Mr. Woemsek. These 1951 and 1952 letters say the department of
history. Yes, he is still there.
Mr. Hays. I assume the letters are critical of the university.
Mr. Woemsee. They are not critical of the university; no.
Mr. Hats. I do not see any reason to delete. He mentions his opin-
ion about these people. If they are not so, let them come in and say
so. If you are going to put his letter in, let us not get in the habit
of dropping out things.
Mr. Dodd. I better read from their original.
Mr. Hats. They will go in in their entirety ?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Hats. It is only his opinion.
Mr. Wormser. I did it for their protection.
Mr. ILvts. Never mind. If you are going to put it in, let them
come in and protect themselves. Maybe they will have something
to say about him.
Mr. Wolcott. I think Mr. Wormser's idea was that we should not
turn these hearings into an investigation of individuals' morals
or attainments or qualifications and so forth. I respect the fact that
if his opinions of individuals are not germane to this subject, they
probably should be deleted. But I recognize also a member's right
to object to deleting any part of them. I suppose that as Members
of the Congress and congressional committees are immune from
publishing libelous statements, so I think we are safe in reading it.
I do not know that we want to contribute to it.
Mr. Hats. I do not want to contribute to any libelous statement,
but I think it might turn out this man— and I am saying it might,
because I don't know and I have not had a chance to read the letters —
but it might turn out he is a little bit disgruntled, and frequently you
get letters from people like that. He said he had some sad experi-
ences. Maybe from his viewpoint they were sad. I do not know.
He mentions his names of people who gave him sad experiences and
says they are arrogant, and let them come in and say what they think
about him.
Mr. Wolcott. If you want to think of the sadness of others, you
will make others sad.
Mr. Hats. Let us leave the letters out. I do not like to put in parts
of letters, because when you start deleting you make the public sus-
picious that everything is not right. Let us either leave them out
or put them in. If you are solicitous about the people he mentions,
I am just willing to forget them.
Mr. Wolcott. I surely am not. I have not seen the letters. I
might agree with you.
Mr. Hats. It may be a good thing if the committee read the letters
so we would all know what we are talking about, and put them in
tomorrow. That might illuminate the subject.
49720— 54-^pt. 1 -5
62 TAX-EXEMI*T FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Wormser. That is perfectly acceptable to me.
Mr. Hays. If there is disagreement as to whether they go in or not.
Mr. Wolcott. I thought if they are not germane to the subject
matter, I think the staff is right in requesting that part be deleted.
But I have no objection to not having it deleted, and that it be read.
Mr. Wormser. May I make the suggestion that Mr. Dodd read the
second letter, which has no deletions in it.
The Chairman. Very well.
Mr. Wormser. Will you read the second one, Mr. Dodd ?
Mr. Dodd. I am reading from a letter dated November 8, 1952, from
a Prof. J. Fred Kippy, University of Chicago, department of history.
It is addressed to the Honorable E. E. Cox :
Dear Congressman Cox : Since I wrote you on August 4, 1951, Dr. Abraham
Flexner, a man who has had much experience with the foundations, has pub-
lished a book entitled "Funds and Foundations," in which he expresses views
similar to those contained in my letter. I call your attention to the following
pages of Flexner's volume : 84, 92, 94, 124, and 125. Here Dr. Flexner denies
that the foundation staffs had the capacity to pass wisely on the numerous
projects and individuals for which and to which grants were made, and contends
that the grants should have been made to universities as contributions to their
endowments for research and other purposes.
The problem is clearly one of the concentration of power in hands that could
not possibly be competent to perform the enormous task which the small staffs
had the presumption to undertake. This, says Flexner, was both "pretentious"
and "absurd." In my opinion, it was worse than that. The staffs were guilty
of favoritism. The small committees who passed on the grants for projects
and to individuals were dominated by small coteries connected with certain
eastern universities. A committee on Latin American studies, set up in the
1940's, for instance, was filled with Harvard graduates. A single professor of
history on the Harvard faculty had the decisive word regarding every request
for aid presented by historians.
By granting these subsidies to favorite individuals and favored ideas, the
foundations contribute to inequalities in opportunity and interfere with "free
trade and ideas." They increase the power of favored groups to dominate our
colleges and universities. Men whose power exceeds their wisdom, or men who
are not guided by the principle of equality of opportunity, could become a menace.
If possible, under the terms of our Federal Constitution, these foundations should
either be taxed out of existence or compelled to make their grants to colleges
and universities, to be distributed by faculty committees of these institutions.
Evenhanded justice may not prevail even then because such justice is rarely
achieved in human relations. But a greater approximation to evenhanded jus-
tice will be made because these local committees will have more intimate knowl-
edge of recipients. This, as you know, is the fundamental justification for de-
centralization of power, for the local autonomy which was so prominent in the
thinking of our Founding Fathers.
Very sincerely,
J. Feed Rippy.
The Chairman. Mr. Wormser, do you have anything further ?
Mr. Wormser. Just one thing, Mr. Chairman. I have here a long
memorandum
Mr. Hays. Wait a minute. Are we leaving Professor Hippy now?
I wanted to ask a question or two before we leave him completely.
Mr. Wormser. I thought you were going to read the letter which
has not been introduced.
Mr. Hays. We are going to read it, but maybe we will never intro-
duce it. If we are going to introduce letters from isolated — and I
would not like to use the word "obscure" because I never heard of
him — professors, maybe we ought to know a little more about him.
Maybe we ought to have him in here to ask a few questions. Does the
staff have any knowledge whether he ever applied to Harvard and
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 63
got turned down for a job? He seems to have a craw for Harvard.
I am no defender of Harvard. I never went there. It would be inter-
esting to know these things.
I might interpolate to say that in my experience in Congress when
people are moved enough to sit down to write you a letter, they usually
have some personal reason for it. I have never gotten a flood of let-
ters about the foundations inquiry. In fact, I have not gotten a
letter, and I am not soliciting any either. But being the suspicious-
minded person I am, I would just like to know more about what moti-
vated him to write this, who he is, why that is his opinion. So what?
There are 165 million other people who might have a different opinion.
So where do we go from there ?
Mr. Wormser. It is introduced only as his opinion.
Mr. Hays. He says the board of trustees of a university would be
better, in a bald statement, to decide what to do with this money. I
would not want to get into personalities, but I each think of some boards
of trustees that I would not trust with a $5 bill. I know some of them
personally, and who appointed them. Maybe I would not trust the
foundations either, but I would not say it is better without something
to back it up. If you put this stuff in the record, it has a sort of
sanctity. It has the force and effect as though it were true.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Hays, the only way you can judge, I suppose,
is by putting things in the record and weighing them when they are
in there.
Mr. Hays. That is all right. Go ahead. I got my observations in
about them. If I have cast any doubt about it, I am glad.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Chairman, I have a memorandum here which
Miss Casey prepared for Mr. Dodd on the National Education Asso-
ciation. We would like to introduce it into the record. It is prob-
ably too lengthy to read. It is 27 pages. Mr. Dodd might identify it,
and go over its general import, and then I would like you to give us
permission, if you will, to have it physically incorporated in the
record.
Mr. Hays. It is a memorandum Miss Casey prepared on what?
Mr. Wormser. A staff memorandum on the National Education
Association.
I might say, Mr. Chairman, that the National Education Associa-
tion is an extremely important factor, obviously, in the work of the
foundations in the educational field insofar as it is the organization
which represents the teachers who ultimately use the work, we sug-
gest, produced by the foundations in the educational area.
Mr. Hays. It is not a suspect organization ? .
Mr. Wormser. How do you mean "suspect" ?
Mr. Hays. Having any devious motives or subversive influence?
Mr. Wormser. No, no subversive influence.
Mr. Hays. I used to belong to it. I want to be sure I do not get
in trouble here.
Mr. Wormser. We do think they are subject to your examination
for various reasons.
Mr. Hays. I do not mind. They used to take money out of my
paycheck for membership without asking me. I just wanted to get
that in, if k "^s a subversive organization.
64 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The Chairman-. Is that sufficiently identified now ? If so, it would
not be necessary for Mr. Dodd to identify it further. It is your desire
that it be submitted for the record.
Mr. Wormser. I think it ought to be written right into the record
so you can read it.
The Chairman. Without objection it will be so ordered.
Mr. Dodd. May I identify its source, Mr. Chairman ?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Dodd. It arises from a study of a volume issued by the associa-
tion in 1948 entitled, "Education for International Understanding in
American Schools," with a subtitle "Suggestions and Eecommenda-
tions." The gist of it, Mr. Chairman, is to ,clarify the important role
the teacher has to foster two things in this couatry : a development of
an understanding of international affairs, and, at the same time, the
teacher must lead the way to a breakdown, so to speak, of our allegi-
ance to a local or nationalistic viewpoint.
(The memorandum is as follows :)
Memorandum to : Mr. Dodd. Mat 5, 1954.
From : Kathryn Casey.
Subject : National Education Association.
One example of foundation support of organizations which display an unusual
philosophy in their publications is the National Education Association.
This association has received from the Carnegie and Rockefeller Foundations
approximately one and a half million dollars (a complete tabulation is available
by year of grant and nature of project ) .
In 1948 the association issued a volume entitled "Education for International
Understanding in American Schools — Suggestions and Recommendations." pre-
pared by the Committee on International Relations, the Association for Super-
vision and Curriculum Development, and the National Council for the Social
Studies — all departments of NEA. The representatives of each of these depart-
ments on the committee as stated in the front of the book is :
Representing the Committee on International Relations of the National Educa-
tion Association :
Ben M. Cherrington, director, Social Science Foundation, University Denver,
chairman.
Rachel Evans Anderson, chairman, Physical Science Department, Andrew
Jackson High School, New York, N. T. (since September 1947).
Rufus E. Clement, president, Atlanta University {since September 1947).
Vanett Lawler, associate executive secretary, Music Educators National
Conference, and music education consultant, Pan American Union (since
September 1947).
William F. Russell, dean, Teachers College, Columbia University.
Howard E. Wilson, associate director, Division of Intercourse and Educa-
tion, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (since March 1947).
James T. Shotwell, director, Division of Economics and History, Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace (until September 1948).
Representing the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, a,
department of the National Education Association :
C. O. Arndt, professor of education, New York University.
Gertrude A. Hankamp, executive secretary, Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Gordon N. Mackenzie, professor of education, and chief, Division of Cur-
riculum and Teaching, Teachers College, Columbia University.
Helen Frances Storen, assistant professor of education, Teachers College,
Columbia University.
Representing the National Council for the Social Studies, a department of the
National Education Association :
Howard R. Anderson, chief, instructional problems, Division of Secondary
Education, United States Office of Education.
Merrill F. Harshorn, executive secretary, National Council for the Social
Studies.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 65
Erling M. Hunt, professor of history, Teachers College, Columbia University.
Wallace W. Taylor, professor, and head of social studies, Milne High School,
New York State College for Teachers, Albany, N. Y.
The preface signed by "The Committee" states that the book represents the
consensus of "the committee on the basis of information and opinion from many
sources during 2 years of investigation and discussion — from April 1946 to April
1948" (p. v). According to the preface (p. vi), the first question demanding an
answer was: Why should American schools be concerned with education for
international understanding? The committee's answer to that question will be
found in chapter 1 of this report. The second question was : What schools and
what teachers have the responsibility for educating children and youth for inter-
national understanding? The committee's answer: All elementary and second-
ary schools have that responsibility; and every administrator and supervisor
as well as every teacher of every subject on every grade level shares a part of it.
Another fundamental question to which the committee and staff devoted ex-
tended consideration in the early stages of the project was : What should be
the specific objectives of school programs for international understanding? E'er
assistance on this point the committee sent letters of inquiry to 300 distinguished
Americans of wide experience in world affairs, two-thirds of whom replied with
considered and useful statements. These statements were evaluated by 16
scholars, journalists, and public officials who met with the committee at Pocono
Manor, Pa., in January 1947 for a 3-day discussion of the same basic question.
Ideas obtained from these sources, as revised after review by others and by
committee discussion, are presented in chapter 2 and elaborated in chapter 3.
The next question was : How can educational effort be most effectively focused
on, and most efficiently expended in, the achievement of these agreed-upon objec-
tives? At this point the help of curriculum experts and classroom teachers was
solicited. Arrangements were made to have this question given systematic con-
sideration by experienced teachers enrolled in the 1947 summer sessions of 23
colleges and universities and 2 city school systems in the United States, and in
the UNESCO Seminar for Teachers at Sevres, France. Faculty members" repre-
senting 12 of these 26 cooperating summer schools met with the project staff
and 3 members of the committee for a 3-day conference in Washington in May
to make advance plans for the summer program. During June and July staff
members visited 14 of the summer-school groups to assist them in their work on
the project and to receive their oral suggestions and written materials. Reports
from the other 12 summer groups were received by mail. During the spring and
summer of 1947 additional help was obtained by mail from teachers, supervisors,
and administrators in all parts of the country. The results of these several
undertakings are embodied in chapters 4 and 5.
The preface {page vii) also states: "Original financial support for the project
was a grant of $13,500 from the National Education Association's war and
peace fund, a fund established by contributions from many thousands of teacher
members during 1943-45 in order to enable their association to play a more
significant role in "winning' the war and securing the peace." A subsequent
grant of $13,000 from the Carnegie Corporation of New York, in October 1946,
which permitted a substantial expansion of the scope of the project, is hereby
acknowledged with deep appreciation. Although funds from the Carnegie Cor-
poration of New York materially aided the preparation of this report, it should
be stated that that corporation is not the author, owner, publisher, or proprietor
of this publication, and is not to be understood as approving by virtue of its
grant any of the statements made or views expressed therein."
In addition to stressing the Building America series and UNESCO material
throughout, the volume contains the following statements :
In the foreword by Warren Robinson Austin, then United States representative
at the U. N. he states : "The Assembly of 1947 unanimously passed a resolution
calling upon the member states of the United Nations to provide for effective
teaching about the United Nations in the schools. Education for International
Understanding in American Schools is one appropriate response on the part of
the American people to the United Nations call. It suggests practical ways and
means of extending the fine work American teachers have already undertaken
for international understanding.
"The United Nations is properly presented as a facility to be used by peoples
and government, and to be changed by them from time to time to fit their needs,
not as an isolated institution to deal with problems for which the member
nations might like to escape responsibility.
66 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
"Through educational processes we must develop a habit of individual think-
ing about international affairs which will cultivate a sense of public responsibility
for the success of the United Nations.
"In my judgment, this involves a more fundamental acquisition of knowledge
than we have yet gained. To be responsible participants in a United Nations
world, a citieens roust have a clear and accurate picture of their world as it
really exists. They must understand, in the fullest sense, the facts which make
interdependence of nations and peoples basic. They must achieve a vivid sense
of functional geography, and thus come to recognize that they, as individuals,
their community, and their country depend upon resources and products from
every part of the globe. They must understand why it is impossible for any
group of people to survive long in modern society isolated from others.
"This, in my judgment, is the foundation stone of international understanding.
"One of the reasons that education is a precondition of peace in the modern
world stems from the fact that conflicts are basically caused by contradictions
between popular conceptions on the one side, and the realities of the 20th century
on the other side. In the last hundred years, science and technology have radic-
ally changed the conditions of life and the relationships of peoples. We have
introduced mass production and specialization and rendered obsolete the old
handicraft economy. Nation-states must adapt themselves to the changes which
have taken place through some such machinery as the United Nations.
"This involves rationalization of production and distribution on a world-
wide basis. It means, for example, that peoples and nations must learn to
act cooperatively on such essential matters as employment, expansion of agri-
culture, health, and trade. Solution of economic problems on a purely national
basis without regard to the effect of their conduct on other peoples and nations
breeds economic war.
* * * * » * *
"Development of international collaboration is going on at a remarkable
pace. Witness the cooperative planning of the nations of the Western Hemi-
sphere, the European recovery program and the steps toward European union,
and the work of the Food and Agriculture Organization and the International
Trade Organization on a worldwide basis.
"All of these and many other activities are limited and inhibited to the
extent that citizens of the member states cling to obsolete ideas and attitudes
contrary to the facts of the 20th century. Therefore, the United Nations
Telies upon education to develop the understandings essential to its successful
operation. The modern rate of change is so rapid that we cannot content
ourselves with passing on the old skills and beliefs generation to generation,
"In carrying forward this task of enlightenment for adaptation to the
requirements of a changing world, teachers have a vast new reservoir of vital
informaton in the documentation of the United Nations. Here is a challenge
to the interpreters — the writers of books, producers of educational films, and
educational radio— to translate the findings of United Nations organizations
in terms that can be understood by the average citizen. Without his under-
standing cooperation, rational plans of political leaders cannot be carried
out.
"The rapid adaptation of modern people to the potentialities of our times
can result in knitting them together in such relationships of interdependence
that peace becomes the only practical condition of existence. The facts are
on the side of international collaboration. It is the high mission of education
to teach these facts. If this is done, the youth of today, and succeeding gen-
erations, will become increasingly competent to unite the strength of nations
to maintain peace."
CHAPTER 1. THE CHALLENGE
Page 2 :
"* * * It is no longer possible to draw sharp distinctions between foreign
and domestic policies, for the decisions on many questions that seem to con-
cern only the United States and its people now cause serious repercussions
throughout the world. Our traditional pillars of national self-confidence —
geographic invulnerability, military supremacy, and economic independence—
now seem less secure than they once did. The awareness of this changed
situation is being diffused rapidly and forcibly among our people. It is under-
standable that- this growing awareness is accompanied Ijy confusion and
anxiety."
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 67
Page 2:'
•<* * * The United States, in spite of its present position and power, is
therefore forced to consider the problem of attaining and maintaining peace
not from the point of Tiew of domestic security and well-being alone but
also from the point of view of the security and well-being of the world in
general."
Page 6 :
"* * * As a first step in this process (establishment of a world order), the
United Nations has been created. Through its Security Council, every dispute
that affects the peace of the world can be brought before an international body
endowed with authority to take all necessary steps for the restraint of aggres-
sion. Its General Assembly is an international forum for the discussion of all
matters of international concern. Collaboration among the nations for economic,
social, and cultural welfare is being organized and given administrative instru-
ments through the Economic and Social Council and the specialized agencies : the
International Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the Food and 'Agriculture
Organization, the World Health Organization, the International Trade Organiza-
tion, the International Labor Organization, the United Nations Educational,
Scientific, and Cultural Organization, and others. The fundamental problem of
formulating standards acceptable to all peoples to guide the relationships of
groups with one another receives the continuous attention of a Commission on
Human Rights,
"The United States has assumed full obligations under the charter and has
repeatedly declared officially that it regards full participation in United Nations
activities as a fundamental tenet of its foreign policy. The* creation and opera-
tion of the United Nations, however, is not the whole answer to the problem."
Page 7 :
«* * * The beginning has been made, but it is only a beginning. " Much remains
to be done and it is this 'much' that is the crux of the challenge that faces Ameri-
can teachers today.
'•'*■' * * * * * *
"Today's problems must be solved by the adults of today. The immediate
obligation of teachers, therefore, is to act as adults among adults, and to place
whatever knowledge and ability they have in the service of the. community in,
an effort to achieve responsible public decisions that will arrest the trends that
may result in another conflict. Teachers must do more than this. They must
improve their own grasp of the world's problems and the new relationship of the
United States to these problems in order to exert a positive and constructive
influence for peace.
"The other situation facing the teaching profession today is the long-term one —
the education of our children. The obligations here are manifold and they
encompass the needs of the next few years as well as the years beyond. The
needs of the next few years are of immense importance, for our youth are growing
up in the midst of crisis. It is therefore imperative that they (our youth) be
equipped to understand the nature and complexity of problems that surround
them and that they be trained in the ar^ of judgment that will be ultimately
reflected in the public decisions that constitute the foundation of official govern-
mental policies. Since it seems evident that the firm establishment of a world
organization and the achievement of a world order will be a slow and gradual
process, the children in our schools will be called upon to sustain, and strengthen,
this movement and to lend their efforts to its advancement.
"Teachers, thus, carry a larger responsibility than most of their fellow
citizens for contributing to the maintenance of enduring peace. More than
average influence in adult community life can properly be expected of them
because of their special qualifications of training and professional status.
And, in addition, they are invested with a unique obligation to influence citi-
zen action for peace for years to come by reason of their position of leader-
ship with respect to the younger generation. As citizens, teachers must try
to give children and youth a chance of survival; as teachers, they must equip
children and youth to make use of that chance."
Page 8 :
«* * * it is more important than ever that teachers recognize the importance
of educating for international understanding in our elementary and secondary
schools. This is not to say that the responsibility ends here, for it does not.
However, it can be said that acceptance of the responsibility to educate our
children in international understanding is to give them a basic preparation that
can be utilized in facing the problems that now and will continue to emerge."
Page 10:
68 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
«* * * if this educational challenge is to be accepted, it must be accepted
boldly ; that is to say, educators must be prepared to take the matter seriously
and to embark upon a soberly conceived program with a determination to reach
the objective. This will certainly involve curriculum revision and the recasting
of many time-honored educational policies and practices. It is a case in which
half -measures and lipservice will not be adequate, for if these are the substance
of the effort, the challenge will go unanswered.
"This report summons the teaching profession of the United States to unite
in planning and executing an educational program for a peaceful world."
CHAPTER 2. THE GOAL
Page 11 :
"The long-range goal of education for international understanding is world
peace and human welfare, achieved and maintained through a peaceful world
order operating through international organizations. The immediate purpose
of such education in the elementary and secondary schools of the United States
is the development of American citizens who are conscious of their new obli-
gations to mankind.
"The measure of success for a school program in international understand-
ing is the extent to which the young people who are graduated from high school
after 11, 12, or 13 years of opportunities to grow in international understand-
ing can demonstrate both individually and in their communities throughout the
Nation, an ability to think and act as Americans who see beyond the confines
of their own Nation and its own problems. Such a citizen might be called a
world-minded American."
Page 12 :
"* * * These 16 experts met with the commitees sponsoring the present proj-
ect for a 3-day conference at Pocono Manor, Pa., January 18-20, 1947. At this
conference exhaustive discussion was devoted to the question of what the world-
minded American should know, feel, and do. The names of members at the
Pocono Conference are given in the acknowledgments.
"Out of the 200 letters and the 500-page transcript of the proceedings of the
Pocono conference, the staff and sponsoring committees formulated a series of
statements designed to identify some of the characteristics of world-mindedness
toward which school programs in 'education for international understanding'
might be directed. After criticisms and suggestions from many persons, leading
to a succession of revisions, a list of 10 marks of the world-minded American
was agreed upon by the committees. The list is as follows :
"Marks of the World-Minded American
"I. The world-minded American realizes that civilization may be imperiled
by another world war.
"II. The world-minded American wants a world at peace in which liberty
and justice are assured for all.
"III. The world-minded American knows that nothing in human nature makes
war inevitable.
"IV. The world-minded American believes that education can become a power-
ful force for achieving international understanding and world peace.
"V. The world-minded American knows and understands how people in other
lands live and recognizes the common humanity which underlies all differences
of culture.
"VI. The world-minded American knows that unlimited national sovereignty
is a threat to world peace and that nations must cooperate to achieve peace and
human progress.
"VII. The world-minded American knows that modern technology holds prom-
ise of solving the problem of economic security and that international coopera-
tion can contribute to the increase of well-being for all men.
"VIII. The world-minded American has a deep concern for the well-being
of humanity.
"IX. The world-minded American has a continuing interest in world affairs
and he devotes himself seriously to the analysis of international problems with
all the skill and judgment he can command.
"X. The world-minded American acts to help bring about a world at peace in
whicb 'iberty and justice are assured for all."
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 69
Page 14 :
"* * * The 10 marks of the world-minded American as stated above in this
chapter are the goal of education for international understanding toward which
all teachers of all subjects in American elementary and secondary schools should
direct their instruction. The fuller meaning of each of these marks is elaborated
in chapter 3. Instructional problems involved in educating children and youth
to the attainment of each of the 10 marks, together with suggested learning
experiences appropriate to each, are considered in chapter 5."
CHAPTER 3. THE MARKS OF THE WORLD-MINDED AMERICAN
Page 21 :
"* * * More recently, the idea has become established that the preservation
of international peace and order may require that force be used to compel a
nation to conduct its affairs within the framework of an established world
system. The most modern expression of this doctrine of collective security is in
the United Nations Charter."
Page 31 :
"* * * The social causes of war are overwhelmingly more important than the
attitudes and behavior of individuals. If this be true, the primary approach to
the prevention of war must involve action in the area of social and political
organization and control. The role of the individual, however, is not unim-
portant. It must be recognized that individuals do have tendencies toward
pugnacity and aggression, that they react to frustration, that they respond to
emotional appeals of aggressive leaders, and that they can develop callousness
toward violence and human suffering. All these human traits make war more
possible, but by no means inevitable. The educational problem both in and out of
school is to assist individuals to recognize their own behavior tendencies and to
assist them in directing their behavior toward peaceful and other socially
approved ends."
Page 34 :
«* * * While we need not demonstrate the proposition that a world-minded
American has a deep faith in the power of education generally, something re-
mains to be said of the power of education as a force for achieving international
understanding and world peace. Here the matter is mueh broader than formal
education in American schools. Education for international understanding in-
volves the use of education as a force for conditioning the will of a people, and
it comprises the home, the church, the school, and the community. It utilizes
old techniques and mass media such as the printed word, the cinema, the radio,
and now television. It involves, too, the efficacy of education for peace as a force
among all peoples of the world and not merely the United States.
"In an absolute sense, there is no empirical evidence to prove that education
can become a powerful force for world peace. It is not, however, necessary to
have this proof for the world-minded American to place a faith in education as
an instrument for world peace. We do know that education has contributed
substantially to the attainment of lesser goals and with this knowledge there is
reason to believe that education can make a substantial contribution to the
achievement of this high purpose.
"It is not enough, however, for the world-minded American to believe that
simply because education has accomplished certain ends, it can assist in attain-
ing world peace. Such a belief, if carried no further, rests on a tenuous base of
assumption that mere exposure to a bombardment of ideas and the completion
of certain mechanical processes will produce a desired result."
Page 35 ;
"* * * The world-minded American believes that the force of education as a
factor for peace lies in the capacity of the educative process to develop standards
and values, and to supply knowledge and perception, and from these two to pro-
duce citizens who understand the necessity and desirability of peace and the role
they can play in achieving it."
Page 36 :
"Education for Peace Through Mass Media
"World-minded Americans are aware of the tremendous educational potency of
the media of mass communication — the press, film, and radio. Teachers from 28
different countries, assembled at Endicott, N. Y., in August 1946 for the World
Conference of the Teaching Profession, declared :
"'The influence of the press is limited only by the extent of literacy; the
radio leaps across national boundaries to inform and inspire all who have ears
70 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
to hear ; the cinema teaches its lessons, wholesome or detrimental, with a power
and persuasiveness beyond those of the most skillful teachers and the most
highly organized educational systems. These, and other modern media of mass
communication, have in the past and may in the future work either with
teachers or against them in their efforts to develop international understanding.'
"It is important that the world-minded American develop an ability to dis-
criminate and analyze what he reads, sees, and hears through these mass
media. At the same time, he should use these media in promoting the ideal of
peace and in convincing others of the validity of the objective."
Page 37 : ■ • .
"* * * UNESCO is devoted to formulating and carrying out on a world-wide
scale a positive program for promotion of international understanding through
education."
Page 37 :
"* * * UNESCO offers a direct means through which the power of education
may be channeled for the gradual achievement of its overall objective. There
has seldom been an opportunity of this kind offered to the people of the world.
It behooves the world-minded American to know what UNESCO is and what
it is attempting to do. Having discovered this, he should lend his efforts to
its support. Every person has a part to play in promoting the purposes of
UNESCO, but because of the nature of the job to be done an extraordinarily
large responsibility rests upon members of the teaching profession."
Page 44 :
"The World-Minded American Believes that Unlimited National Sovereignty
Is a Threat to World Peace and that Nations Must Cooperate to Achieve
Peace and Human Progress
"* * * The nation-state system has been in existence for about three centuries.
Although serious attempts have been made by many of the nations during this
period to establish permanent peace on a worldwide basis, all such attempts
have failed. The nation-state system has not been able to the present time to
abolish wars. Many persons believe that enduring peace cannot be achieved so
long as the nation-state system continues as at present constituted. It is a
system of international anarchy — a species of jungle warfare. Enduring peace
cannot be attained until the nation-states surrender to a world organization
the exercise of jurisdiction over those problems with which they have found
themselves unable to deal singly in the past. If like conditions continue in the
future as in the past, like situations will arise. Change the conditions, and
the situations will change."
Page 45 :
"* * * Unfortunately man did not attain peace through the nation-state
system on a worldwide basis.
"So long as these narrow nationalistic ideas continue to be held by many
people in all nations today, there is a threat to peace.
Page 46 :
"The Society of Nations Today
"We are likely to take the present nation-state system for granted ; but in so
doing, we are likely to overestimate its permanence and underestimate its
significance. A study of the development of nation-states in world history
raises the possibility that since the society of nations is only three centuries
old, the system is not necessarily permanent but may be only a stage in the evolu-
tion of political groups. On the other hand, since we are faced today with the
actuality of some 60 independent, sovereign political entities, recognition must
be given to the difficulty of reconciling the objectives of their foreign policies.
Attempts to bring about world cooperation in trade, social welfare, control of
armaments, and education are blocked by nations who are either too selfish or
too unenlightened to be willing to cooperate. Since collective action by states
frequently calls for unanimity to achieve a desired goal, the failure of one of
the powers to cooperate will block the attempt. World organizations derive
their strength from the voluntary participation and support given by the
member nations."
Page 53 :
"* * * Role of public opinion : Some knowledge of governmental structure is
of particular importance in understanding the role of public opinion in foreign
policy, for in democratic countries, the public is ultimately the judge of all gov-
ernmental actions. In these countries, therefore, the public will be the ultimate
arbiter of the issue of peace or war.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 71
"In our own country, there is and there will always he a gap between the
formulation and execution of policy by the Government and its scrutiny by the
public except on major issues. This is true because issues arise from day to
day that require action within the framework of established policy. Some-
times these day-to-day operations create new policy. The point is that except
on matters involving treaties, appropriations, and appointments, there is no
constitutional requirement that the public or Congress be consulted, and in
many cases it is doubtful if this could be done even if it were required.
"Our system is one in which the public can, does, and should express its
opinions through established means, thereby affecting the course of foreign
policy. In many matters, the Congress has a significant voice and the public
has a full opportunity to bring its judgment to bear. In others, the pubac has
the role of approval or disapproval after a course of action has been embarked
upon. ,
"There is one characteristic of our system that does not obtain in many other
democracies — the pressure group. These are individuals or groups devoted to
special pleading of all types and trained in the art of influencing legislation.
They are often very influential in determining the course of govermental
action.
"In parliamentary systems, much the same situation obtains. It may be
said, however, that in some parliamentary systems, notably the British system,
official conduct of policy is even more responsive to public opinion than in the
United States since the group in control of the Government may be more easily
deposed from office.
"In totalitarian countries, there is the facade of popular control of government ;
but with opposition carefully controlled and representative bodies carefully
chosen, there is seldom if ever any decision except approval of what the leaders
desire. This may not always be the case, however, and it behooves the world-
minded American to give some attention to the role of public opinion in totali-
tarian states."
Page 54 :
"International Organization
"The world-minded American is deeply concerned with the problem of how
world organizations can be made to work most effectively — how they can be used
to gain big ends as well as little ones — above all, how the United Nations can be
made to contribute maximally to world peace and human progress. And his
concern for these matters is not confined to feeling and wishing ; he also studies
them and does what he can to contribute to the success of the United Nations
and other international organizations."
"* * * The demonstration of the feasibility of international organization in
nonpolitical fields and the failure of the League of Nations makes even more clear
the fact that it is in the area of 'political' organization where failure seems to be
consistent. This suggests that the difficulty may be traceable to the dogma of
unlimited sovereignty — that nothing. must be allowed to restrict the complete
independence of the state. It suggests also that the dogma of sovereignty has a
high emotional content that is self-generated and self-sustained and that so long
as the dogma of illimitability obtains, international cooperation of a political
nature will at best be tenuous."
Page 60 :
"* * * The development of international cooperation as a contributing force
to economic well-being is possible only insofar as it is applied to give direction
to common positive aims and to condition the effects of national economic policies
that would otherwise be serious disruptions of the interdependent world
economy."
Page 62 :
"International Cooperation for Economic Well-Being
"* * * And we cannot hope to achieve the objective of an increase of well-being
for all men without planned economic cooperation on a worldwide scale. This
proposition has already been accepted by most of the nations of the world and
is evidenced.in the establishment of new means to effect cooperation. The most
notable of these are the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations and
certain specialized agencies : The International Monetary Fund, the International
Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the Food and Agriculture Organiza^
tion, the International Labor Organization, and the International Trade Organ-
ization which is now in the process of being formed. The world-minded Amer-
72 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
ican realizes this cardinal proposition, but he realizes, too, that in order to
translate it into action, he must understand the meaning of 'planned cooperation,'
the purposes for which the new organizations have been established, and the
extent to which they can contribute to the attainment of the objectives.
" 'Planned cooperation' in the economic field needs some definition. It is not
simply a matter of many nations doing something together for the whole economic
system. The world economic system is so complex that there are many areas
in which better results may be obtained by not planning. It is, in large measure,
a question of determining 'what' and 'when.' Planned cooperation is therefore
a deliberate cooperative effort in the economic areas in which a careful study of
the problems and circumstances will give better results than no planning."
Page 66 :
"* * * Educators as well as our youth, if they are to be world-minded have a
considerable obligation in achieving this particular mark of world-mindedness.
They will support the present efforts being made toward cooperative solution of
world economic problems. But to do this intelligently they must first make a
concerted effort to understand economic forces and economic complexities. They
can then assess the role of American economic foreign policy ; they can then
judge its validity in terms of the contribution it will make to the attainment of
the eventual goal. They can also then lend a more intelligent support to the
international efforts now being undertaken."
Page 78 :
"Awareness of Techniques and Channels of Action
"* * * The American citizen can bring his personal influence directly to bear
on international affairs in ways * * * and he can become an active member of
one or more nongovernmental international organizations."
Page 80 :
"* * * An individual can increase his effectiveness in influencing foreign
policy by associating himself with organizations and by helping to formulate
their attitudes on international questions. The groups most suitable for this
purpose are the political party and those generally called pressure groups."
Page 81:
"* * * The world-minded American, as a part of his program of action, should
concern himself with how these groups operate. He will find that he himself
can probably have a greater influence through this technique. He will also find
that since a great deal of official action is determined by pressure group action,
the use of this device will enable him to be heard and will also enable him to
urge his interest for peace against those he considers to be urging a contrary
interest. He will find that the variety and interest of the groups with which
he can affiliate are endless ; and he must, therefore, examine carefully the aims
of the group or groups to which he will devote his energies."
Page 82 :
"* * * Teachers must act. As citizens, their obligation to act on behalf of
peace and international cooperation is a responsibility shared with all other
citizens. But teachers cannot be content merely to do just as much as others ;
they must do more. Teachers in almost any American community have greater
competence in leadership skills and in knowledge than most of their fellow
citizens. With greater capacity goes greater responsibility for bringing personal
influence to bear on civic action on the local, State, and National levels."
CHAPTER 4. PLANNING FOE THE DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNATIONAL UNDERSTANDING
THROUGH THE SCHOOL PROGRAM
Page 83 :
" * * * Responsibility of the school : What is the responsibility of American
schools for comprehensive program planning focused on the goal of international
understanding? The urgency and the magnitude of the world crisis that
now confronts the world's people make it mandatory that every person and
institution devote maximum efforts toward building the foundations of peace.
This means that schools must assume responsibility for helping all children,
youth, and adults to have experiences which will advance understanding of
international affairs and which will aid them in recognizing the significance of
decisions in which they share, either directly or indirectly. This comprehensive
approach is necessary in order that the entire population, young and old, may
have experiences which will aid them to become increasingly effective world-
minded citizens.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 73
"To involve all citizens, a program in the field of international understanding
must move beyond the conventional school-community relationships and organi-
zations. In many communities economic and social groups are already at
work on programs designed to increase understanding of international prob-
lems. The school, as a public agent, should seek to coordinate such efforts
in order that the total Impact of community thinking may be brought to bear
on major issues. Such a role brings the school into working contact with those
agencies in the community which are keyed to action, thus helping youth to
function directly with adults and community agencies. By such procedure,
too, the danger is lessened that the schools may remain ideological islands in a
culture in which decisions are based on values remote from those taught in the
school."
Page 91:
"» * * How can schools organize to assume their responsibility?
"Some of the elements and major tasks of developing a program of education
for international understanding have been delineated in the preceding pages.
The problem of organizing schools, school systems, and school-community rela-
tions must yet be considered. The principles and procedures suggested in the
paragraphs which follow are not peculiar to the field of international under-
standing ; they apply to any curriculum area."
Pages* 92-98.:
"Faculty planning.
"Community participation.
"Teaching aids and procedures.
"Student participation.
"Individual teacher initiative.
"Administration and supervision."
Page 98:
«* * * rpjjg. administrative officials, together with the interschool planning
committee, should develop such guiding principles as the following:
"The school system is committed to the task of educating for international
understanding, which is recognized as an integral part of the total curriculum
program. The task takes its place with other imperatives in the school program.
"Each established part of the school system is involved.
"An interdepartmental planning committee in each school is desirable for the
purpose of releasing and coordinating individual school developments.
"Bach school is encouraged to develop individual programs as effectively and
rapidly as possible.
"An interschool planning committee exists for the purpose of interchange
of information and stimulation. Individual school-planning committees may
pool ideas through it and thus move toward more effective general school-system
procedures."
Page 1005 :
"The School in Community Organization for World Understanding
"The last chapter, VI, is entitled 'Aids and Sources,' and has four sections :
"Readings on the 10 marks of the world-minded American.
"Reading materials especially for pupils.
"Films and nlmstrips.
"Continuing sources."
On page 217, under the first of these sections, it is stated :
"Readings on the 10 Marks of the World-Minded American
"This section is devoted largely to books and pamphlets, but a few magazine
articles are also listed. Items in this bibliography have been selected with two
criteria in mind : Authoritativeness and representativeness. Authors of works
cited are in nearly all cases recognized authorities in their respective special
fields. Readings listed have been chosen to represent different points of view
and different facets of each of the 10 marks. No title is cited more than once in
this 10-part bibliography ; for, even though many of the references might con-
tribute to understanding of 2 or more marks, each is classified under the mark
to which it can make its most distinctive contribution. All readings in this
section are written on the adult level and may, therefore, be expected to be of
most usefulness to teachers, but many of them may also be used profitably by
secondary-school students.
74 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
"The books and pamphlets have not all been checked, because of the limitation
of time, but a casual glance reveals such names as Manley O. Hudson, Philip C.
Jessup, W. E. B. DuBois, Max Lerner, Alvin H. Hansen, Stuart Chase, Commis-
sion to Study the Organization of the Peace (Eichelberger), Maxwell S. Stewart,
Mortimer Adler, Lowell Mellett, Joseph Kise as well as pamphlets from U. N.
and the Foreign Policy Association, Institute of International Education, the
Public Affairs Committee, and World Peace Foundation.
"In a section headed 'Acknowledgments' at the end of the book, these names
appear:
"Chandoe Reid of the Horace Mann-Lincoln Institute of School Experimenta-
tion, Teacher's College, Columbia University, E. U. Condon, Vera Micheles Dean,
Frank Fleming, Donald Stone, Quincy Wright, Harry Bard, David Adler.
"In addition, Willard E. Givens, under the title 'Education for the New
America' in the proceedings of the 72d annual meeting of the National Educa-
tional Association, is quoted as follows :
" 'This report comes directly from the thinking together of more than 1,000
members of the department of superintendence * * *.
" 'A dying laissez-faire must be completely destroyed and all of us, including
the "owners," must be subjected to a large degree of social control. A large
section of our discussion group, accepting the conclusions of distinguished stu-
dents, maintain that in our fragile, interdependent society the credit agencies,
the basic industries, and utilities cannot be centrally planned and operated under
private ownership.
" 'Hence they will join in creating a swift nationwide campaign of adult educa-
tion which will support President Roosevelt in taking these over and operating
them at full capacity as a unified national system in the interests of all of the
people. * * *'
"Mr. Givens became executive secretary of NEA in 1935 and remained in that
post until 1952 according to Who's Who. Briefly he has a 'diploma' from Union
Theological Ssminary, A. M. from Columbia, was a fellow of Educational Insti-
tute of Scotland 1947, was a member of the American Youth Commission of the
American Council on Education, member of Educational Policies Commission of
American Academy of Political and Social Science, member of United States
education mission to Japan, 1946, Board of Visitors, Air University, 1946-50;
member, combined Armed Forces educational program, 1949-53; chairman, Na-
tional Conference for Mobilization of Education, 1950 ; chairman, second United
States educational mission to Japan, 1950.
"This organization began back in 1865 as the National Association of School
Superintendents, and 1870 became one of the four original departments of the
NEA. Under the act of incorporation (1906) it was called the department of
superintendence, and in 1921 was reorganized with a full-time executive secre-
tary at NEA headquarters. In 1937 the department adopted a revised constitu-
tion and bylaws, and its name was changed to the American Association of School
Administrators. According to the NEA Handbook, 1953-54, it has a membership
of 8,700" (p. 290).
Mr. Wormser. That is all we have to offer you today, Mr. Chair-
man. Mr. Dodd has been on the stand almost 2 hours.
The Chairman. There may be some questions.
Mr. Hays. I have a whole series of questions. I hope they will not
take as long as Senator McCarthy is taking with Mr. Stevens. I
think I can do it in an hour or less. I think in view of the fact that it
is almost time for the House to go into session we might defer them
until the morning. I can start.
The Chairman. We do have 15 minutes, but that is entirely with the
convenience of the committee.
Then if agreeable we will resume Tuesday morning, concluding with
Mr. Dodd, and then having the other witnesses v So we will tentatively
schedule the hearing for the Public Works Committee room on Tues-
day, at 10 o'clock. The committee will be adjourned.
(Thereupon at 11:55 a. m., a recess was taken, the committee to
reconvene in the Public Works Committee room, on Tuesday, May 18,
1954, at 10 a.m.)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
TUESDAY, MAY 18, 1954
House or Representatives,
Special Committee To Investigate
Tax-Exempt Foundations,
Washington, D.-C;
The special subcommittee met at 10 a. m., pursuant to recess, in
room 429 of the House Office Building, Hon. Carroll Reece (chair-
man of the special committee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Reece (presiding), Hays, Goodwin, and
Pfost.
Also present: Rene A. Wormser, general counsel ; Arnold T. Koch,
associate counsel; Norman Dodd, research director; Kathryn Casey,
legal analyst; and John Marshall, Jr., chief clerk of the special com-
mittee.
The Chairman. The committee wilj come to order.
I think Mr. Dodd remained to be questioned.
Will you take the witness chair, Mr. Dodd ?
Mr. .Wormser. Before Mr. Dodd starts, may we introduce a com-
posite copy of the Cox committee record and their report? I cer-
tainly hope it does not need to be reprinted, but I think it ought to
be part of our record.
The Chairman. It is submitted to be a part of the record but not
for printing, you mean ?
Mr. Wormser. Yes.
The Chairman. I see no objection to that. Without objection, it
will be accepted.
(The documents referred to are on file with the committee.)
TESTIMONY OP NORMAN DODD, RESEARCH DIRECTOR, SPECIAL
COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS—
Resumed
The Chairman. Congressman Hays had some questions he wanted
to ask you. .
Mr. Hays. The record will show that Mr. Dodd is still under oath ;
is that right ?
The Chairman. Oh, yes. I am assuming that is the case. That
is the case, is it not, Mr. Wormser?
Mr. Wormser. Oh, yes.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Dodd, I would like to ask you if you prepared the
statement that you made to this committee on Monday and Tuesday,
May 10 and 11?
Mr. Dodd. Did I prepare it, Mr. Hays ?
75
76 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hays. Yes. Did you prepare it ?
Mr. Dodd. Yes, sir ; I prepared it, sir.
Mr. Hays. Do you have a copy of that statement in front of you ?
Mr. Dodd. I have.
Mr. Hays. You may want to refer to it.
Mr. Dodd. I have a mimeographed copy right here, Mr. Hays.
Mr. Hays. On page 14 of the prepared statement, you said, and I
quote:
We have used the scientific method and included both inductive and deductive
reasoning as a check against the possibility that a reliance upon only one of these
might lead to an erroneous set of conclusions.
Is that true?
Mr. Dodd. That is true, sir.
Mr. Hays. In the foreword of the same document, you expressed
the hope that your research report would be determined by this com-
mittee, the foundations, and the public to be ''constructively critical,"
and I quote the last two words, is that true ?
Mr. Dodd. That was my hope ; yes, sir.
Mr. Hays. The research report which you presented was your per-
sonal report based on the work of the research staff under your direc-
tion, is that true?
Mr. Dodd. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hays. Conclusions of your report are presented therefore and
represent your personal honest conclusions as to the results of the
research work done under your direction ?
Mr. Dodd. In a descriptive sense, yes, Mr. Hays.
Mr. Hays. You have not by omission or alteration set forth these
conclusions in any way so as to mislead this committee or the public
with respect to your findings ?
Mr. Dodd. On the contrary, I have done everything that I could
do to make it helpful to the committee.
Mr. Hays. I have some notes being typed up which I thought would
be here by this time. I have been a little handicapped by not hav-
ing a complete staff, and there are two quotations in those notes that
I would like to read to you from your report. Perhaps I can find
them before the girl gets here.
While I am waiting for that, looking for that, have you been able
to get together with the staff on a definition of what you mean by
pro-American yet ?
Mr. Dodd. I have, sir.
Mr. Hays. Could we have that definition at this point ?
Mr. Dodd. A working definition for this purpose would to me be
that which fosters and furthers the principles and the form of the
United States Government and the constitutional 'means set forth
to change those principles.
In other words, it would be the reverse of the definition which we
used as to what was un-American.
The Chairman. And the institutions under which we have pros-
pered for some 160 years.
Mr. Dodd. I have confined it entirely to the Government, for work-
ing purposes, Mr. Hays.
Mr. Hays. Well, that is merely a working definition, so that we
have it in there when we talk about this term and we will have a
general idea what is meant by it.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 77
Mr. Dodd. I would like to feel that we were very specific in that
sense and we knew that we didn't mean something else.
The Chairman. While you are waiting, would you permit an in-
terjection ?
Mr. Hays. Surely.
The Chairman. I might ask, Mr. Dodd, if any efforts to influence
you or the research staff have been made by the chairman or, for
that matter, any other member of the committee ?
Mr. Dodd. On the contrary, sir, I know of no such efforts to in-
fluence, if I understand the word "influence."
Mr. Hays. I might ask a question right there which is brought to
my mind. Have you had very much direction from the chairman or any
member of this committee in the way your research would go? I
mean, have you been told what general lines to follow, or have you
just, more or less, gone on your own ?
Mr. Dodd! I think it has been <a matter «£e«mpflete i freedom of ex-
change, and keeping the chairman absolutely informed, Mr. Hays.
The Chairman. But has not the chairman, from the very beginning,
advised the staff, as he so advised the committee, that his hope was that
the study of this committee would be completely objective m an effort
to draw a picture of the w T hole foundation question for the benefit of
the Congress and the people in the years to come ?
Mr. Dodd. Mr. Chairman, everybody with whom I have had con-
tact in this has taken that exact stand.
Mr. Hays. I thought I would have these questions typed. But in
the meantime I can ask you a couple of others and then we will go back
to this original group.
I have here an editorial from the New York Herald Tribune of
Saturday, May 15, and I will quote you a statement. It says :
The assumption seems to be —
referring to these hearings —
The assumption seems to be that there is a public interest or an American,
idea or an accepted body of dogma to which the facts must be made to conform
in these hearings.
Now, do you take that attitude, that there is a definitely outlined
public interest, and this is in quotes "or an American idea," or an
accepted body of dogma that all things must conform to or else they
are not in the public interest, and un-American ?
Mr. Dodd. No, sir. I felt, Mr. Hays, that there was an accepted
body of principles which were traditionally American to which these
facts, as they unfolded, should be related. It is not made to conform,
if I understand what you mean correctly.
Mr. Hays. You say that you think there is an American body of
principles. That is a kind of vague term. I do not exactly know
what you mean by that. Could you define that a little more ?
Mr. Dodd. I can define it by describing exactly how we approached
this matter.
Starting with the obligations set forth in the resolution, it seemed to
me that the committee was obliged to look over a set of facts against
a background of those elements which were used as the basis for a
definition, as to what was un-American or subversive.
Now, that working definition referred us to the Constitution and a
set of principles. Only to that extent do I believe that there is a de-
finable basis against which these facts must be looked at.
49720— 54— pt. 1-^6
78 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hays. The reason I am so careful about this series of ques-
tions is that I want them to be exact because there is a considerable
principle involved here, Mr. Dodd.
Mr. Dodd. We have tried to be very exact, too, Mr. Hays.
Mr. Hats. Well, that will come.
Now, I will repeat this question No. 6, 1 am sure that I am just doing
this in order to get back on the track, because question No. 7 that I am
going to ask you is the key question.
Number six, have yon not by omission or alteration set forth these
conclusions in any way so as to mislead the committee or the public
with respect to your findings?
Mr. Dodd. No, sir.
Mr. Hays. Your answer was "No, sir"?
Mr. Dodd. That is right; yes, sir.
Mr. Hays. Now, Mr. Dodd, I received several copies of your mineo-
graphed statement which you distributed publically last week. I was
amazed to find that these include two significantly different versions of
your public testimony. I just got a group of your first day's hearings,
and I was going over them, and the thing did not seem to be exactly
the same, and I got to comparing it more closely.
Upon close examination, it appeared to me that one version has been
clearly edited and changed from the other.
Now, under oath, you just said that you had made no omissions or
conclusions which might mislead the committee. I have not had time
to analyze all of the variations between the 2 editions of the report,
both of which you say set forth your conclusions of 8 months' study.
Mr. Dodd. May I ask a question, Mr. Hays?
Mr. Hays. Let me finish this.
But I find, for example, this specific omission which would appear
to have been made solely for the purpose of deleting a conclusion of
your study, which would have been favorable to foundations.
Specifically, on page 10 of the undoctored version, you conclude
that foundations' grants were not directly responsible for an alleged
deterioration in the standards of American scholarships. The actual
words used in the undoctored version, with reference to the purported
deterioration, were :
Cannot be said to have been due directly to foundation grants.
On page 9, with reference to the charge of favoritism in the un-
doctored version, you conclude that —
We analyzed thoroughly, what was favoritism in the mind of the critic seems to
have been litle more than a reasonable response to circumstances.
Now, here is the question : Is it true that both of these favorable con-
clusions were deleted in the version which you subsequently gave to
this committee on Tuesday, not having, as you said then, a mimeo-
graphed statement ready, and which you presented to the press?
Mr. Dodd. To the best of my knowledge, as I sit here right now,
both of those conclusions are in the report.
Mr. Hays. They are in the report that you gave to the committee on
Tuesday ?
Mr. Dodd. To the best of my knowledge, yes, sir, as I sit here now,
because they were a definite part of it.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 79
Mr. Hays. Let me ask you this, Mr. Dodd: Are there two separate
and distinct mimeographed statements that you purported to have
made?
Mr. Dodd. Not to my knowledge, sir.
Mr. Hats. Not to your knowledge?
Mr. Dodd. No. The mimeographed report, Mr. Hays, that I have
here is
Mr. Hats. I have in my hand, Mr. Dodd, two reports, with the
same cover sheet on them. They are starting out with page i, and with
an identical foreword, and that is page ii, it is identical. Then we com©
to page 1, part 1, page 1, and they are identical. And page 2 seems to
be identical. Page 3 seems to be identical. Pages 4 and 5 are identical.
But we come over to page 6, and there are several deletions. The
two things do not read the same. And from page 6 on, you cannot
compare them because what is page 6 on one, on the Cox Committee
criticisms, and that goes on for 3 pages in the undoctored version, is
all on 1 page in the doctored version.
Mr. Dodd. I can only answer it this way, Mr. Hays, that those are
two of our findings, and were reported by me. Those two findings
are as you have expressed them.
Mr. Hats. Well, Mr. Dodd, is it or is it not true that these conclu-
sions that I have read were cropped out of the document you read
to this committee ? * -
Mr. Dodd. Not to my knowledge, sir.
Mr. Hats. They were not?
Mr. Dodd. No.
Mr. Hats. Well, we will have to go into thS actual hearings. But
the version^ which purported to be the version that came to me on
Tuesday is not the same as the one I got by accident when I asked
for some extra copies, apparently.
The Chairman. Will you yield? I would assume that you had
various working memoranda and data preliminary to reaching the
final draft which you actually presented to the committee. Ordi-
narily that would be the case. I do not know whether it was in this
particular instance or not.
Mr. Dodd. There were many working papers, Mr. Chairman, out
of which I distilled this report, sir, and the 2 conclusions to which
Mr. Hays makes reference are practically engraved in my memory,
because they are two conclusions, that you cannot hold foundations
responsible directly for this supposed deterioration in scholarship,
and the other one is that this charge of favoritism, while it is
understandable how it grew up, does not appear to me to be. anything
more than just what Mr. Hays read, an understandable and logical
response to circumstances. I can understand how the criticism
grew up.
Mr. Hats. Well, Mr. Dodd, if you recall last Monday, I was very
much surprised, as was the chairman apparently, and I am sure the
press must have been, to find that there were no mimeographed copies
of your statement. You read, as T recall it, your statement from a
looseleaf notebook.
Mr. Dodd. I did, sir, and I read it just as you saw me read it, from
my own carbon copy.
80 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hays. Do you mean to tell me that you do not have any knowl-
edge of the fact that there was a mimeographed statement like this
prepared and then another one which are significantly different?
Mr. Dodd. I don't know of any two mimeographed statements, one
of which contained that statement and another one which did not.
Mr. Hays. Well, I have a copy of each one which came up from
the committee office, and they are mimeographed obviously on the
s;ame mimeograph machine, if we have to go into that.
Mr. Dodd. As far as I am concerned, Mr. Hays, I personally have
spent and concentrated entirely on the content of the report and the
mechanics of it, I have not
Mr. Hays. I thought there was a little something funny about it
the other day, about the fact there was no mimeographed statement,
and the thing sort of began to add up in my mind when I found these
two different statements. I thought perhaps that it had been decided
that you would not present your statement, but would change it.
Now, was there any editing done at any time prior to your
appearance here ?
Mr. Dodd. Yes, sir ; there was editing done.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Hays, may I interrupt?
Mr. Hays. I want to ask Mr. Dodd, and then, Mr. Wormser, if you
want to go under oath and have me ask you some questions I will.
But I want to get to the bottom of who edited that and when,
Mr. Dodd. All right, sir.
Mr. Hays. That is what I am interested in right now. Can you tell
me on what day and hour these changes were made, Mr. Dodd ?
Mr. Dodd. I don't look upon them as specific changes, Mr. Hays, but
Mr. Wormser and I first went over this report on Thursday morning,
which would have been 10 days ago. I was in the process of editing it
and tightening it up, but that was a normal editing piece of work.
Mr. Hays. That was not done after it was mimeographed ?
Mr. DooDi No, sir..
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Hays, may I just suggest that Miss Casey can
explain. Mr. Dodd does not know the circumstances. And if you will
trade, for a moment, Miss Casey for Mr. Dodd, she will explain the
mechanics of what happened.
Mr. Hays. If you can put somebody on the stand who can explain
this, I will be glad to have him do it.
The Chairman. May I interject an amplifying question, Wayne?
During the period that you were formulating this statement and
making the various changes which led up to the final draft, did you
have any important consultation with anyone other than the members
of the committee and the members of the staff involved ?
Mr. Dodd. None, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Hays. Before you leave the stand temporarily, Mr. Dodd, I
want to make clear what I am trying to get at. I have gone over this.
You say that this purports to be your conclusions, after long months
of study. The one version has two very significant statements in it
that the other does not. And whatl am driving at is : How after long
months of study can you suddenly throw out these two important con-
clusions ?
Mr. Dodd. I can readily understand the importance of the question,
Mr. Hays. This report, if you will recall, at the committee meeting,
was my effort to describe for the benefit of the committee the nature of
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 81
the work done, a description of its own findings in general terms, and
the direction in which the facts tended to point.
That was the purpose of this report, and that report in my estima-
tion should have had in it everything significant to be helpful to the
committee.
Now, the two questions and the two statements to which you make
reference have in my judgment been an important aspect of it all
along.
Mr. Hays. Then you would say that you want in that the conclu-
sion that foundation grants are not directly responsible for any deteri-
oration in the standards of American scholarships ?
Mr. Dodd. That is my feeling, sir. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hays. And you want in there, also, with reference to the pur-
ported deterioration, that it cannot be said to have been due directly
to foundation grants?
Mr. Dodd. Yes, sir. And the other has to do with this inferred criti-
cism of favoritism.
Mr. Hays. All right.
I would like to have whoever can explain these two mimeographed
versions to take the stand, and I would like to ask some questions
about it.
The Chairman. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are
about to give shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
truth?
Miss Casey. I do.
TESTIMONY OF KATHRYN CASEY, LEGAL ANALYST, SPECIAL
COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hays. Miss Casey, do you have any knowledge of two different
mimeographed versions of Mr. Dodd's statement?
Miss Casey. Yes, I do, may I explain
Mr. Hays. Yes. I would like in your own words to have you tell
us about it. .
Miss Casey. Well, at the time the hearings were set and it was de-
cided that Mr. Dodd would present a staff report, it was thought that
we should have mimeographed copies available. When the report was
I thought close to its final draft, I will have to confess I jumped the
gun and had the stencils cut. We ran
Mr. Hays. Right there, when was that? Can you give us an exact
date of it?
Miss Casey. It was only Friday and Saturday, because we had
quite a bit of difficulty getting the copies done by the duplicating office
here in the Capitol.
Mr. Hays. That was Friday and Saturday, prior to Mr. Dodd's
appearance on Monday?
Miss Casey. That is right. No distribution was made, and not even
to the members of the committee.
Mr. Hays. I am aware of that.
Miss Casey. One reason Mr. Hays, was, that we were at the office
until midnight Saturday, and I thought perhaps your office might be
closed.
Mr. Hays. I am sure it was. If it was not, it should have been.
82 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Miss Casey. I think ours should have been, too. I am sure the girls
in the office thought so. But on Monday morning it developed
there was going to be a slight rearrangement on one tiling, after Mr.
Dodd and Mr. Wormser had again gone over it. So new stencils were
cut on certain pages, and page numbers changed on the others.
But in reference to what you are talking about, which appears, I
believe, first on page 2, at the top of the page of the final report, it says :
Simultaneously, I undertook additional studies —
I believe this is what you read —
to the validity of the criticism leveled against the work done by the Cox com-
mittee, to substantiate or disprove the prevalent charge that foundations were
guilty of favoritism.
But, Mr. Hays, if you turn over to pages 9 and 10 — the reference to
foundation criticism starts at the bottom of page 8- ■
Mr. Hats. That is 9 and 10 of which version now %
Miss Casey. This is the only version that was distributed.
Mr. Hays. The distributed version?
Miss Casey. Yes, sir, and let us call it the final version, because the
other was' a draft.
Mr. Hays. All right.
Miss Casey. And for which I will take full responsibility, as far as
the duplication is concerned.
The Chairman. It was primarily an effort to be helpful to the
members of the committee and the members of the press f
Miss Casey. That is right.
Mr. Hays. Miss Casey, right there, now we have got this thing
pinned down pretty well, and you mimeographed these on Friday
and Saturday. And now when were the changes made ?
Miss Casey. The changes' were made when Mr. Wormser and Mr.
Dodd met on Monday. Actually, Mr. Hays, they were not "changes"
such as you say. If you will turn to pages 8, 9, and 10, the statement
which I read before, from page 2, is elaborated in the same way that
you found it in the next to final draft. That is on pages 8, 9, and 10,
Mr. Hays.
Mr. Hays. Do you have any completely assembled versions, like the
one I have, of the original, before it was cut ?
Miss Casey. No, sir, everything, including the stencils were de-
stroyed, and every copy of that was taken to the incinerator, so that
there would be no possibility
Mr. Hays. Every copy was not, because I have one.
The Chairman - . Every copy so far as you knew ?
Miss Casey. It was my understanding that every copy had been sent
to the incinerator— taken there personally by a staff member.
Mr. Hays. Now, I think we could argue indefinitely about whether
changes have been made, but in order to get the record straight, would
you have any objection, Mr. Eeece and Mr. Goodwin, to making this
undistributed version a part of the record, just so we can compare the
two?
The Chairman. My own feeling is that the director of research who
submitted his statement should be advised on that, as well as the
general counsel.
As I analyze this thing, this situation, Mr. Dodd is the director of
resarch and he had an initial and primary responsibility for digesting
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 83
and putting this into written form for presentation to the committee,
and he made numerous notes and drafts.
He had made, after consulting with his assistants, what he thought
was essentailly a final draft for presentation to the committee. But
at that time, he had not consulted with the general counsel or the as-
sistant general counsel with reference to the exact wording of part of
the report, and they also have a responsibility,
Over the weekend that consultation was : had among themselves,
that is, among the members of the staff, and certain modifications were
made, as Miss Casey states, in some instances something was taken out,
and it is amplified in another part of the report.
It seems to me like a prefectly logical way to develop a statement
for a committee, that is, for the members of the staff to consult among
themselves. They have stated, even under the affirmation of an oath,
that they did not consult with anybody, any outside interests, as to
what this preliminary presentation to the committee might obtain.
So far as I am personally concerned, I have no objection for their
work notes and preliminary drafts to go into the record. But I do not
feel that it is the logical way to proceed with a presentation.
That is my reaction to it.
Mr. Goodwin. Mr. Chairman, I regret that I had to come in late.
As a matter of fact, I would have been here when the gavel fell, as
you know, except for the fact that I felt I ought to be up in the Armed
Services Committee to help save for the Commonwealth of Massa-
chusetts a facility which we believe is very important to us.
So I am a little lost to know what is going on here. Apparently,
the question is whether or not there should be put into the record
preliminary drafts of a certain statement, is that it ?
The Chairman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Goodwin. Do I understand that it is a fact that the preliminary
drafts show some change of heart, or change of mind on somebody f s
part?
Mr. Hats. I would say not that
Mr. Goodwin. I should not press that question.
Mr. Hats. Go ahead and press it.
Mr. Goodwin. It is in my mind that if this is something simply
cumulative, and if what my distinguished friend from Ohio now wants
to put into the record is something cumulative and will be of no value
to us in the future, I should think that it should be kept out.
If, however, it states a frame of mind on somebody's part who is
going to have a portion of the responsibility of directing this investi-
gation, it seems to me that it might be well that we should have it.
The Chairman. Would you permit Miss Casey— —
Miss Casey. Mr. Goodwin, may I say this: That your first state-
ment about it being cumulative is more accurate than any change of
heart.
Actually, it is merely a rearrangement that was agreed on, and a
particular statement on page 2 is not elaborated. Mr. Dodd's report
said to "substantiate the prevalent charge that foundations were guilty
of favoritism in the making of educational grants," and then that
is elaborated in the same manner that it was in all of the drafts on
pages 8, 9, and 10. Mr. Dodd's statement contains the same language
that Mr. Hays read, "we analyzed thoroughly," that is a very rea-
sonable thing to have happened, "the way in which the grants were
84 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
originally made by some of the foundations to the larger institutions,"
and he explains why.
All of that is in the final version which was distributed to the press
and to the people who asked for it. It was only rearranged from the
next-to-final version for which, as I explained, I had stencils cut
with the idea that it would be available first thing Monday morning,
sultations among themselves, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Wormser, Mr. Koch,
Mr. Hays. To put this back in the language of the chairman, he
says that this represents a digestion of your findings over a period of
8 months. "What I am trying to find out is who caused you to get
indigestion over Sunday, here. I will read you some more changes
that were made in this, if you would like me to, and in fact I want to
question about them.
The Chairman. I don't remember the chairman's exact words, but
lie did not intend to say that this was a digest of the findings. I
would not want to say that it was a digest of findings.
Mr. Hats. I don't want to quibble about your words, but I made
some notes about them, and if I am wrong, the record will show it.
The Chairman. I would like to ask Mr. Wormser whether he feels
there is any objection to the part that is in the working draft being
put in the record along with the presentation which Mr. Dodd made
to the committee.
Mr. Wormser. Before I answer that, may I respectfully request
Mr. Hays to excise his word "doctored," and I think that there is no
evidence at all that anything was doctored, Mr. Hays. That has
rather unpleasant significance.
The Chairman. That is the purpose of my-- —
Mr. Hats. Mr. Chairman, I am not going to delete my language
from my statement, and I used the word "doctored" and I am going
to stand on it until someone shows me it wasn't doctored, and I am
going to right now read you another sentence, and I will use the
word "changed," if that makes you feel better, Mr. Wormser.
The Chairman. Will you permit an interjection there again? As
I stated earlier, the staff developed a presentation for the committee.
During the course of that they consulted no one except the members
of the staff, and the members of the committee, insofar as they did
consult the members of the committee. No outside person was con-
sulted. In the process of developing the statement, they had various
working data and they had preliminary drafts, and, as is a natural
consequence, they ultimately had a preliminary final draft, which
might very well have become the final draft. After additional con-
sultations among themselves, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Wormser, and Mr. Koch,
Mr. McNiece, and Miss Casey, made some consolidations, tighten-
ing it up, and may have taken some things out. But whatever was
done was their own work. The chairman can't see any possible
grounds for any inferences except that the staff in good faith tried
to develop the most perfect and complete presentation for the benefit
of the committee.
I, as one, want to commend the members of the staff in their indus-
try and effort in developing and putting out their fullest efforts to
develop the best statement possible for presentation to the committee;
That, now, is the chairman's analysis of the way this was handled,
and I don't see any possible grounds for any adverse inferences to be
drawn from that method of procedure, which is a normal one. I have
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 85
been on committees up here around the Hill now for some 30 years,
and when I could get a staff to proceed in that way I always felt
very grateful.
Mr. Wormser. May I now answer your question, Mr. Chairman.
You asked whether I had any objection to introducing the preliminary
draft. I do have an objection, and I think it is unfair to Mr. Dodd,
and I think it would be just as unfair as asking a man to publish a
draft of a book when he has published the book itself. Mr. Dodd's
opinions, as far as I know, have not altered one bit between the
drafting of the first one and drafting the second one, but the actual
wording of the instrument, or the document, which he wanted to pre-
sent to the document and read at hearings was in some respects
changed and rearranged and what not. I think that he has personal
responsibility for issuing this report, and he is entitled to rest on the
final report which he gave, and not be confused or made responsible
for a draft of any kind. The draft has not been made public, and no
effort was made to distribute what we call the preliminary report
in any way, and it was not made public as far as the committee was
concerned, as far as the staff was concerned. It was not distributed
to anyone.
Mr. Hays. Let me say, Mr. Wormser, that I am not trying to con-
fuse Mr. Dodd. God forbid. According to some of the newspaper
editorials, some of the responsible newspapers think he is. confused
enough as it is, and I am just trying to straighten him out a little bit.
I want to say, though, that whether you agreed to introduce it or not
is immaterial to me. Apparently I have the only living copy of the
so-called preliminary final draft, and I still say that I want to get
to the bottom of why this was done after 10 months, Mr. Wormser,
after 10 months of study, and so on.
I am sure that you have known for a long time that these hearings
were going to start last Monday, and as a matter of fact they have
been postponed 2 or 3 times, and it seems to me a little bit queer,
tb say the least, that after this draft was mimeographed on Saturday,
that it was gone over and completely edited on Monday morning, and
the committee itself didn't even have a copy of it, and only by acci-
dent I got a hold of a copy when I phoned down to one of the staff
the other day, and I can't even remember the gentleman's name. I was
sent up a couple of copies, and only probably by accident I discovered
the changes in them. But to me, after 10 months of study, the fact
that these significant changes were made either Sunday night or at
breakfast Monday morning or sometime, deserves a little bit of com-
ment. If this 10 months of study hasn't firmed anything up at all yet,
why, then, let us develop the testimony here in hearings and throw
Mr. Dodd's statement clear out and start afresh. I think that that
would be an invigorating way of doing it.
Mr. Goodwin. Mr. Chairman, I always like to be on even terms
with my associates on the committee, and might I inquire whether
there would be any facilities for all members of the commission to
have made available to them whatever there is by way of working
sheets, and I don't know what it is that my distinguished friend from
Ohio has before him. Whatever is available to me, should it not be
made available to other members of the committee ?
Mr. Hats. It seems that I have the say about that, and since I have
the only copy, I will promise right now I am not going to yield it to
86 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
anybody, but I will have my staff make some, exact duplicates of it,
but I am not going to trust it out of my hands.
The Chairman. For Mr. Goodwin's benefit, I think Miss Casey
might state how this draft came into being.
Mr. Goodwin. Perhaps she stated it once, and I don't want her to
repeat anything.
Miss Casey. I will be glad to, Mr. Goodwin. At the time Mr,
Wormser left, after going over the statement with Mr. Dodd on
Thursday — and at this point I would like to say that I hope we are
not asked to give copies of all of the drafts, because that would entail
a considerable amount of work
Mr. (joodwin. I am sure Miss Casey will know I was somewhat
facetious. I don't like to feel that I am at a disadvantage, and here
is my associate here with a lot of material before him, which appar-
ently he finds most interesting, and I haven't anything.
Miss Casey. The chairman and the staff are at the same disadvan-
tage, because we don't have copies of the document that Mr. Hays
has now, except perhaps in a penciled draft that is crossed out and
whatnot from which we would have to make another copy just like
that, if we were asked to do it. I don't say it is impossible, but it
might vary from comma to comma unless we had access to proofread
it against his copy.
Mr. Hays. I will be glad for you to do that.
Miss Casey. If it is decided that we cut the stencils, Mr. Hays, I
will take advantage of it. To answer Mr. Goodwin, after telephone
conversations between Mr. Dodd, and Mr. Wormser, and Mr. Koch,
and myself, the last copy of Mr. Dodd's report seemed to me to be
approaching a point where it was possible to mimeograph it. I had
the stencils cut, and I had the stencils run with two things in mind.
The hearings started at 10 o'clock on Monday, and Saturday was
half a day, as far as the duplicating room at the Capitol was con-
cerned. We had them run, I have forgotten the exact number of
copies, but there were enough for copies to be available to the press,
and available for each member of the committee.
On Monday morning, it developed that — well, a rearrangement
and not a deletion, Mr. Goodwin, was made in Mr. Dodd's report.
The entire material that is in the unpublished draft version that
Mr. Hays has, is in this one, but it is in a slightly different position.
It may not be expressed at as great length, but everything is there*.
Now, I am responsible for having the stencils cut, and having the
stencils run and finally having those stencils destroyed, and I thought
all of the copies were taken to the incinerator.
Mr. Goodwin. Could I ask Miss Casey one question, whether or
not when she started work on whatever was necessary to be done before
it was actually distributed, whether or not the material placed in your
hands then appeared to be a finished product, and ready to go ahead
with?
Miss Casey. Yes, I knew in a sense there might be — or rather,
there is always a possibility that changes might be made afterward,
but considering the length of this, Mr. Goodwin, and I think it runs
some 36 pages, the sheer mechanics of it somewhat overwhelmed me
between Saturday morning and Monday. It may have been an error
in judgment on my part to have had the stencils cut and run.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 87
Mr. Hays. Were there two complete? Now, this thing comes to us
in two sections, the Monday section and a Tuesday section. Did you
rerun both of them ?
Miss Casey. Yes, we reran it. You see, by rearranging it, some of
the page numbers varied, and so in those cases, I think that I am right,
we had to rerun it. We had to rerun most of it, let me put it that way.
Mr. Hays. I only have the original of Monday's version, and it is
hard to tell what has been lost to the world by the fact I didn't get
Tuesday's, too.
Mr. Goodwin. Is there something else you want, Mr. Hays ?
Mr. Hays. Well, Mr. Goodwin, this is a little bit serious, I think,
because some of the changes in language, in here, would indicate that
the staff was prepared after 10 months of study to damn these founda-
tions pretty severely, and then apparently somebody came along and
said, ^'Look, I don't think we can get away with quite this, we had
better tone this thing down a little Dit, because if we go out at it too
badly we may just get run clear out of the Capitol. We had better
move into this thing a little more gradually."
So, instead of saying in some places, for instance, here it says, these
penciled notes are mine, but in one place it said, "Our studies indi-
cated conclusively that the responsibility for the economic welfare of
the American people had been transferred completely to the executive
branch."
Well, in the new version, they took out the word "completely" and
said ^'heavily" and you see they didn't want to go whole hog on that
particular one. .
The Chairman. There is nothing unusual in changing phraseology
and words.
Mr. Hays. Now, Mr. Chairman, may I finish ? There is something
unusual in this whole procedure. It was unusual Monday, and I was
amazed — and maybe this isn't true; Miss Casey is still here, and she
can tell us to read in the papers that when the press came up to look
at the final complete version, or we have used so many terms here, this
is the preliminary final version, but then the final version — which
was in looseleaf typewritten pages, that Miss Casey grabbed it and
refused to let them look at it.
Miss Casey. Let me clear that up. In the first place that was not
the final draft. Those were Mr. Dodd's notes, and he had a great
many penciled notations for his own guidance. I did not feel, and I
don't feel now, nor I feel sure would you that the press could just
take that and say, "Well, Mr. Dodd said this," because it happened
to be a notation. That could be misconstrued, and I felt in justice to
the committee it should not be done.
Mr. Hays. That is an explanation, and I just wondered about it,
but of course the whole crux of the matter goes back to the fact that
you did have a version ready, and then that version was changed
Monday morning rather significantly, and then you didn't have any
ready.
Miss Casey. I would give you the same protection if you were
going to make a speech on the floor of the House and had some pen-
ciled notations on what you were going to read which might even be
in a sort of , in hybrid shorthand, which could easily be misconstrued.
I would feel you should be protected against someone misconstruing
it.
88 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hats. I will say this, Miss Casey, you needn't worry much
about that, because if you will sit on the floor and hear what some of
the Members say and then read the Congressional Eecord the next
day, you will know that we have complete protection.
Miss Casey. If you were speaking at a dinner perhaps it would be
a better illustration.
Mr. Hays. As a matter of fact, and I am sure the chairman won't
take anything personal about this, I read with great interest just
recently what he is alleged to have said when he was getting this
resolution through and there was a lot of stuff that was introduced by
unanimous consent that he didn't say, but it looks like he said it in the
record. You see, we are protected, you don't need to worry about us.
The Chairman. Anything I didn't say in the record was for want of
time and not disposition. Are there any other questions ?
Mr. Hays. I have some more questions.
Mr. Wormser. May I correct the record in one respect? You have
been talking about 10 months of preparation and it has been. 6 months
and not 10, and may I recall also that this report was drawn in great
haste. I am not trying to detract from its character, but at a com-
mittee meeting, and I don't know whether you were there or not,
Mr. Goodwin, it was agreed that Mr. Dodd would prepare such a
report for the express purpose not only of informing the committee,
but of giving the foundations notice of what our main lines of in-
quiry would be. It was done in great haste, and we had only a week,
or something slightly over a week, to produce the thing and get it out.
I could not see it nor could Mr. Koch until it had been finally drafted.
Mr. Hays. You don't need to apologize, Mr. Wormser. You told
me a month ago that Mr. Dodd was going to be your first witness, at
least a month ago. As a matter of fact these hearings were set down
originally for sometime way back in April, and even then I knew
he was going to be the first witness. Let us not quibble about a week
or so.
Mr. Wormser. It was not intended then, Mr. Hays, that he would
file a report. Now, this report had to be finished in approximately
a week.
Mr. Hays. I have some more questions I want to ask Mr. Dodd.
The Chairman. Mr. Dodd, did you want to make a statement ?
Mr. Dodd. May I make a comment on something Mr. Hays said a
few minutes ago ? Mr. Hays mentioned that the atmosphere behind
this whole thing is as though the staff had set out to damn the
foundations.
Mr. Hays. Now, just a minute, don't put words in my mouth. I
think what I said was that it would appear from this original, what
do we call it, the final preliminary draft, I can't remember that
term
Mr. Goodwin. How about the unexpurgated ?
Mr. Hays. That is a good word.
Mr. Dodd. May I ask that that be read.
Mr. Hays. I would say that this report would seem to indicate that
and then it was changed and they decided not to go quite so heavily.
That is what I meant.
Mr. Dodd, I don't think that that is exactly what you have said, sir.
Mr. Hays. The record will show.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 89
Mr. Dodd. In any event, I would like to go on record as emphatically
as possible that there has never entered into this work to my knowledge
a desire to damn the foundations, and thereby get in a position such
as Mr. Hays mentioned, namely, "Do we dare go this far at this time?"
This investigation has been carried on in a manner which permitted
the facts to tell their own story, and I am certain that as these hear-
ings go forward that is the way in which it will be done. Nothing
that I have had anything to do with has ever lost sight of that one
purpose, to actually permit the" facts to tell their story.
The Chairman. Certainly, so far as the chairman has had anything
to say, with you or the other members of the staff, he has certainly
indicated that he wanted that course to be followed. And, as chair-
man, I want to say that I have not observed any other disposition on
the part of Mr. Dodd, or Mr. Wormser, or Mr. Koch, or Miss Casey,
Mr. McNiece, or any other member of the staff to do otherwise.
Do you have some further questions?
Mr. Hays. I sure do.
Miss Casey. Could I make one statement further, and that is Mr.
Hays asked this of Mr. Dodd and he might want to ask it of me. No
one has ever attempted to influence my opinions, or the way in which
I brought out the facts on any of the foundations that I worked on,
and no one attempted to gear my thinking in any respect at all.
The Chairman. However, it is not at all illogical to me to learn
that members of the staff, especially as important members of the staff
as we have here, might have different views, at least in a tentative way,
that would ultimately need to be harmonized and brought together
among themselves. There is nothing unusual about that that I can
see at all, if such should happen to be the case. I cannot imagine that
group of men and women starting out with exactly the same views
expressed in the same language.
TESTIMONY OP NORMAN DODD, RESEARCH DIRECTOR, SPECIAL
COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS—
Resumed
Mr. Hays. Do you consider the New York Times to be a rather fair
and impartial newspaper ?
Mr. Dodd. May I answer that to give my opinion or judgment ?
Mr. Hays, I want your opinion, and I have my opinion, and Mr.
Reece has his.
Do you consider that to be a fair and impartial newspaper?
Mr. Dodd. My own opinion of it, Mr. Hays, is no.
Mr. Hays. In the light of the editorial they wrote, I suppose that
you wouldn't be consistent if you didn't say that.
Mr. Dodd. Mr. Hays, may I remark that I have not read the edi-
torial ?
Mr. Hays. Let me read a sentence of it to you, and see if you think
so, and may I say that I have gotten several dozen letters which drew
the same conclusions from your statement: The New York Times
on May 13 says :
What is alarming about Mr. Dodd's opening statement is that it indicates
a belief that intellectual advancement, if any, must conform to a rigid pattern of
those set in the 18th century.
90 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
And you know something, independently I arrived at just the same
conclusion from reading your statement, because I didn't see this
editorial until this morning. I have been questioning you trying to
bring that out.
The Chairman. You don't reach the same conclusion yourself, did
you, Mr. Dodd?
Mr. Dodd. No, sir, I did not, Mr. Chairman, and I don't know where
it says that in the statement.
Mr. Hays. Well, do you recall having a conversation with me back
in November, at Bethesda Naval Hospital ?
Mr. Dodd. Very definitely, Mr. Hays.
Mr. Hats. Now, perhaps fortunately for both of us, I will tell you
right now, there is no transcript of that conversation available, and
we will have to rely upon our memories. But do you recall telling
me generally that you believed there had been some sort of — and I may
be using the wrong word when I say plot or arrangement — among all
of these foundations to change the whole concept of the social sciences?
Mr. Dodd. I remember talking to you about' that, that that is what
the facts would ultimately disclose, but it is not between the founda-
tions.
Mr. Hays. But you told me back in November that that is what the
facts
Mr. Dodd. That is what the story would unfold, probably.
Mr. Hays. That there is some kind of a big plot ?
Mr. Dodd. Not a plot.
Mr. Hays. What do you want to call it? Let us get a terminology
there.
Mr. Dodd. It is a happening.
Mr Hays. Well, now, there is a good deal of difference, Mr. Dodd,
isn't there between a happening, and something that is brought about
deliberately ?
Mr. Dodd. Very definitely, sir and I am one of those who strongly
advocates and takes the stand that this has not been brought about
deliberately by the foundations.
Mr. Hays. It is just sort of an accidental thing?
Mr. Dodd. I don't know as you could call it accidental ; it is a de-
velopment. But I do not feel that it has been brought about deliber-
ately by foundations.
Mr. Hays. Do you think it is bad ?
Mr. Dodd. I have attempted to be objective, and I don't think of it
in terms of bad or good, and I think it is something we should know
about.
Mr. Hays. Well, I don't think that there are any of us here who
wouldn't know that the concept of the social sciences has changed even
in my generation.
Mr. Dodd. Yes; but I don't think it is a question of whether it is
good or bad ; I think we should know that it changed.
Mr. Hays. Well, we don't need a $115,000 investigation to know
that, and you can find that out. Most anybody on the street could tell
you that ; is that right ?
Mr. Dodd. But this is in relation, as I understand it, to a resolution
which asks 5 Members of Congress to make 5 determinations.
Mr. Hays. The way we are going, we may wind up with five de-
terminations; I don't know.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 91
The Chairman. Will you permit an interjection? I was going to
say, Mr, Dodd, after he had his conferences with you at the naval
hospital, expressed to me great satisfaction with the conference, and
reported to me something to the effect that if he followed the factual
line of presentation which he discussed with you, that you hoped he
wouldn't be blocked by the majority members of the committee, or
impeded by the majority members of the committee in the proceeding.
He was very much pleased.
Mr. Hays. I was too weak to argue with him much then. But I
want to say this, for the benefit of counsel, and Mr. Dodd : I like Mr.
Dodd as an individual. He and I don't see eye to eye on a great many,
shall we say, concepts about social sciences, but I believe Mr. Dodd is
sincere in what he thinks he believes, as I am, and perhaps in the
process that he will educate me or I will educate himj I don't know.
But I want to make that perfectly clear. In any questions that I may
ask you, Mr. Dodd, they are not asked in a, spirit of animosity at all,
and I am trying to get some answers that .we can hang something onto
here before we go any further.
Mr. Dodd. I feel that that is the spirit in which they are being asked,
Mr. Hays.
Mr. Hats. But the only reason I ask you about that conversation —
and, of course, you recall, it lasted for some little time, and we talked
about many things, but I was disturbed then as I am still disturbed in
the light of what has transpired so far— that the impression at least is
getting abroad that we think that this committee may come to the
conclusion that change is bad, per se. Now, if we are going to accept
the premise here that there has been a lot of change, and we will bring
the facts out as they are, and then let the public decide whether it is
good or bad, that is one thing, but if this committee is going to come
to the conclusion or try to arrive at a conclusion about what is good or
bad in education, I think that perhaps we are a little bit out of our
field, and we have strayed pretty far.
Mr. Goodwin. "Will you yield there?
Mr. Dodd, with reference to something in between Mr. Hays' plot
and your
Mr. Hays. Don't call it my plot.
Mr. Goodwin. Mr. Hays' reference to a plot, and your designation of
a happening, would it help any if the suggestion were made that what
you had in mind was a trend or a tendency ?
Mr. Dodd. It is a very noticeable trend, Mr. Goodwin, and it involves
the coordinated activity of a variety of seemingly separate institutions.
What to call it, and what name to give it, I don't know. I think we
will just have to wait until the facts appear, and allow the committee
to characterize it for itself.
But I have been guided all along here by the fact that nothing
that this staff did, or nothing that the staff plus counsel attempted to
do should be other than that which would make it helpful or help the
committee to discharge its obligations under that resolution. The
guiding factor behind that was an assembly of the facts as they fell.
Now, Mr. Hays is making reference to the fact that I had ideas on
this subject, seemingly, prior to my assumption of my duties. It is
very hard to have been a student of these changes and these trends
for 25 years and not to haVe some knowledge of it. It was out of that
knowledge that I was able to give Mr. Hays assurance the day we first
92 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
met, that this investigation could be carried out in terms of trends,
in terms of practices, in terms of events, and in terms of political
action, and in terms of historic changes, and not have to be carried
out in terms of personalities or general opinions.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Dodd, in the final draft which you made available
to the press and the committee of your first day's statement, among the
criticisms that you directed at the Cox committee was this, and we
have been over it before :
Foundations were not asked why they did not support projects of a pro-
American type.
Now, I am going to read you a short sentence, and ask you if you
ever heard this before :
The significance of this was bound to be missed unless the determination of
foundations to break with tradition had been previously identified.
Mr. Dodd. Yes, sir, that is in the first draft.
Mr. Hays. But not in the second draft?
Mr. Dodd. That is right, sir.
Mr. Hays. Why was that taken out?
Mr. Dodd. Well, it was deemed by counsel to be too conclusive.
Mr. Hays. That is a good anwser.
Mr. Goodwin. It seems also to have been a very good determination.
Mr. Hays. What do you mean, "It is a good determination"? Is
that the determination of foundations to break with tradition or the
determination to take this out?
Mr. Goodwin. I think the substance as appeared in the final draft
is certainly nearer to what I think ought to be a statement to come
from this staff than what appeared or what you say appeared in the
other draft that you have there.
Mr. Hays. Let me say this
Mr. Goodwin. It was the result of some careful thinking on some-
body's part.
Mr. Hays. If that is true, then I am very happy, but I am wonder-
ing if it was a result of the fact that they have arrived at this con-
clusion, but didn't want the public to know it just yet.
The Chairman. The discussion, as I recall, which the members of
the staff had with the members of the committee as a whole, as well
as the chairman individually, indicated very clearly that they were not
stating conclusions, and I am sure and I can very well understand, in
a preliminary draft some might use a word that after reflection or
after another member of the staff who had not been quite so closely
associated with the writing itself, would readily recognize it as being
too conclusive or too strong a language, which would result after a
conference in a modification of language.
That is the way good results are arrived at. And again I just feel
that I want to say that I feel the staff went about this m a very satis-
factory way to get the kind of presentation which the committee was
interested in having.
Mr. Goodwin. I am sure, Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Ohio
will expect me to be a little jealous of the Cox committee because I
happened to be a member of that committee.
Mr. Hays. Let me say to you, Mr. Goodwin, right here, to
get the record straight, that I think the Cox committee did a good
and adequate job, and I think that the Congressional Record will show
TAX-EXEMPT FOIJFNDATIQNS 93
that I said on the day this resolution was being debated ,thatX felt ^he
Cox committee had done the job and it was unnecessary to r^§rkv|he
ground. So, let me compliment you, and I hope this £omi30^tee i . will
come up with §s good a one. ; . ,
The Chairman. As a member of the Cox committee, I am veryi&ujGh.
gratified. . , -^
Mr. Hats. As I recall it, you were a little critical of the Cox com-
mittee.
Mr, Goodwin. I compliment Mr. Hays for coming along with me.
Mr. Hats. I hope the investigation that we are conducting will have
as salutory and final effects as the Cox committee did.
The Chairman. You may proceed.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Dodd, in the original speech on the floor last year,
which is now part of the record of this committee, there were quite a
number of pages devoted to the Ford Foundation. There is one
whole series of statements under a subtitle called, "Subversive and
Pro-Communist, and Pro- Socialist Propagaiida Activities of the Ford
Foundation." Have you found any evidence of such activity ?
Mr. Dodd. That will come forward, Mr. Hays, if I may say so, and
that will be brought out in the formal testimony here in the hearings
which is about to consume one or more hearings in its. own right. I
would not like to anticipate that at this time.
The Chairman. I hope, Mr. Hays, that you won't hold Mr* Dodd
responsible for my speech. .
Mr. Hats. Oh, no, as a matter of fact, after discussing it, I won't
even hold you responsible.
Mr. Dodd. May I mention, Mr. Hays, that the strict definition that
we have been guided by as far as the word "subversive" is concerned is
quite different than that used in the excerpt that you have mentioned. 1
The Chairman. What is your definition, or would you mind re-
stating your definition ?
Mr. Dodd. We used the one, Mr. Chairman, that Brookings arrived*
at after having been requested to study this subject. I believe it was.
for the House Un-American Activities Committee. That was : That
which was action designed to alter either the principles or the form of
the United States Government by other than constitutional means,
was subversive.
Mr. Hats. In other words, then, we wouldn't call social security
and bank insurance subversive under that definition would we ?
Mr. Dodd. I wouldn't think so.
Mr. Hats. I wouldn't think so either;
Mr. Dodd, do you know anybody, and I am sorry, I don't at the
moment have the notes I made on it, and have the man's first name,
but I think you will recognize a man by the name of Conrad from
Chicago?
Mr, Dodd. Yes, I do, sir.
Mr. Hats. What is his first name?
Mr. Dodd. Arthur.
Mr. Hats. That is right; I thought it was Arthur. Has he been
in touch with the staff at all during your preliminary work ?
Mr. Dodd. He was at the first day's hearings, and I met him, I only
met him once during the time that I have been here.
Mr. Hats. He hasn't offered any advice or information to the staff,
has he?
49720 — 54— pt. 1 1
94 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Dodd. No, sir. ^ r
Mr. Hays. Mr. Dodd, I have some more questions, but the Chairman
has suggested that you have a* witness here who wants to be heard
today, or tomorrow, and since it will give me more time^to get some of
these notes I have in form, if it is satisfactory then we will excuse you,
and call you back sometime subsequently in the hearings.
Mr. Dodd. All right, Mr. Hays.
The Chairman. Is that satisfactory ?
Mr. Goodwin. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Who is the other witness ?
Mr. Wormser. Professor Briggs, will you take the stand, please ?
The Chairman. Mr. Briggs, will you be sworn. Do you solemnly
swear the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God ?
Dr. Briggs. I do.
TESTIMONY OF DR. THOMAS HENRY BRIGGS, MEREDITH, N. H.
Mr. Wormser. Will you state your name and address for the record ?
Dr. Briggs. My name is Thomas H. Briggs, and my legal residence
is Meredith, N. H.
Mr. Wormser. Professor Briggs, to save you the effort ? may I iden-
tify you by reading part of your record, and if I make a mistake, please
correct me. You have the degrees of doctor of literature, and doctor
of philosophy, and on January of this year, received the honorary
degree of doctor of human letters from Columbia University. You
have been a teacher in various secondary schools, and later in Eastern
Illinois State Normal School where you were professor of English.
Before that you were professor at Stetson University. You were a
professor at Teachers College at Columbia from 1912 or at least you
were on the faculty from 1912 and you became a professor there in
education in 1920, and held that position until 1942. You have been
emeritus since 1942, is that correct ?
Dr. Briggs. That is correct.
Mr. Wormser. You have been on quite a multitude of commissions,
I notice, consumer education study, of the National Association of
Secondary School Principals, and you were a director, I believe, of
that organization for many years. You were on the commission on
the reorganization of secondary education, the commission on teach-
ing science and industrial subjects in war emergency, the syllabus com-
mittee on junior high schools in the State of New York, on the review-
ing committee of the National Education Association, on the National
Committee on Research in Secondary Education, on the Teachers Col-
lege Faculty Committee, and on the committee on orientation in sec-
ondary education of the NEA, and on the World Congress on Educa-
tion for Democracy at Teachers College, and you were chairman of
that group, and on faculty advisory committee to the dean at Teachers
College, and you were chairman of that group.
You are the author of numerous books, Formal Grammar as a Dis-
cipline, and the Junior High School, Curriculum Problems, The Great
Investment, Secondary Education, Improving Instruction, Pragma-
tism and Pedagogy, The Meaning of Democracy, and you have con-
tributed to numerous publications.
Dr. Briggs. Yes.
TAX-EXEMPT: FXWJNDATIGJsFg 9^
The Chairman. Do you liave a formal statement that you. wishf to
first present, Professor Briggs?
Dr. Briggs. I do, Mr. Chairman. ; i
The Chairman. You may proceed. ';'■'■ j
Mr. Hats. Do we have copies of this statement, sir, so that we ean
annotate it and make notes of it as we go along, or do we have to
pick it out of the air.
Mr. Wormser. I have only one copy which I am- perfectly willing
to let you have before you if you wish it.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Wormser, 7C want to be very patient about 'this, but
in case I haven't I, would like to feake it very clear that when you are-
bringing in witnesses to set up your case— and I assume they would"
be called committee witnesses, since they have been secured by the staff,
and you have invited them here—it seems only fair that you should
fet the statements ready so that the committee can have a copy to
ollow along, as the witness reads it in case we would like to make a
note. Now, it is going to be pretty difficult to try to write down what
he says and then write down your question, if you have one, after-
ward, it is just not in line with committee procedure around here.
Mr, Wormser. Well, of course, the statement would be-r—
Mr. Hays. You have a copy but we, don't, I don't want to take
unfair advantage of Mr. Goodwin here, and I have already done it
once today.
The Ch4irman. It will be here for reference.
Mr. Goodwin. We can take care of that.
•Mr. Wobmsbr. I would like to say, Mr. Chairman, that Professor
Briggs' testimony is somewhat out of order in this sense, that I Would
have .preferred to call him later, bu^ he is retired and he is leaving
for New Hampshire in a few days, and I took the liberty therefore
of calling him today.
The Chairman. We will receive his testimony.
Mr. Hays. Suppose we let him read it in, and then defer ques-
tioning until we get a copy of the hearings tomorrow so we can have
a chance to look it over and see what he said. •
Dr. Brig#s. It is my fault. I didn't finish this until Sunday. •
Mr. Hays. I don't think it is your fault, sir, and I think the com-
mittee should have forewarned you and helped you have the copies
ready. ,'. - • 7 - - . - ••"
Mr: Wormser. We couldn't, Mr. Hays, if you will pardon me, ber
ca,use I didn't want to bring- Professor TBriggs down from New Hamp-
shire and he is leaving on the 23d.
The Chairman. The chairman might state, when it is feasible and
convenient, we will ask, Mr. Wormser to have the statements avail-
able in advance to the members of the committee, or at least during
the hearings, but in some cases it is not and I am sure when it is
feasible and convenient that he will do so. It has been my ex-
perience in the past on committees that it was not unusual for a
witness not to have statements available, for members of the commit-;
tee, although I will agree with you, it is a convenience to have the-
statements. ■ - • ■ • ..- ■ ... M
Mr. Hays. It has been customary in the committees I. have been
on. -. . >.'•-. 7 ■-.. .' ...■'- , ■ ■ .". ....
The Chairman. You may proceed. - 7
96 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Dr. Briggs. There are now in the United States several thousand
foundations, most, if not all of them, chartered by the Federal Govern-
ment or by individual States and freed from obligation to pay taxes on
their income. The purposes for which they were established are
variously stated, but in general the establishment is said to be a —
recognition of the obligation involved in stewardship of surplus wealth, abetted
by a reverent faith in man and his possibilities for progress.
But whatever the stated purpose or purposes, the public has a deep
concern and an actual responsibility to see that the activities of each
and every foundation, whether its resources are large or small, not
only does not harm but also contributes to a maximum degree possible
to the welfare of the Nation. This right and this responsibility are
derived from the fact that the public has chartered the foundations
and also that by remission of taxes it is furnishing a large part of the
available revenue. In the case of the Ford Foundation, which has
an annual income in excess of $30 million, the public contributes more
than $27 million, or $9 to every $1 that comes from the original donor.
In addition to the right and the responsibility of the public to insure
that foundation moneys are spent for the maximum good of society in
general, the public is concerned that no chartered foundation promote
a program which in any way and to any extent militates against what
society has decided is for its own good. To ascertain if foundations
have either intentionally or because of poor judgment contributed
to the weakening of the public welfare this committee, as I understand
it, was authorized by the Congress.
I should like to insist at this point that the committee should be
equally concerned to consider whether or not any foundation is
spending its income wastefully or on projects that promise benefit to
only a favored section of the country or to arbitrarily favored
individuals.
Two principles that should govern all foundation appropriations
are, first, that each supported project should promise to result not
only in good but also in the maximum possible good; and, second,
that each supported project should promise to benefit, either directly or
indirectly, the Nation as a whole. Since, as already noted, a large part
of the income of every foundation is contributed by the general public
through the remission of taxes, these principles are incontrovertible.
My competence to testify before this committee is based largely on
my knowledge of the Fund for the Advancement of Education, a
subsidary of the Ford Foundation. This fund was established on
recommendation of a committee of which the late Commissioner of
Education of the State of New York, Francis T. Spaulding, was chair-
man. Announcement of the establishment of the fund was greeted
with enthusiastic approbation by the entire educational profession,
the members of which saw in it great potentialities for the betterment
of public schools. The expectations of the profession were raised by
the announcement of the membership of the board of directors, each
one a citizen of the highest reputation for integrity and sound
judgment.
But unfortunately these hopes have been in large measure disap-
pointed by the selection of the administrators and the staff of the
fund and by much of the program that they have developed. Not a
single member of the staff, from the president down to the lowliest
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS ffl
employee, has had any experience, certainly none in recent years, that
would give understanding of the problems that are met daily by the
teachers and administrators of our schools. It is true that they have
from time to time called in for counsel experienced educators of their
own choosing, but there is little evidence that they have been mate-
rially influenced by the advice that was proffered. As one prominent
educator who was invited to give advice reported, "any suggestions
for changes in the project (proposed by the fund) were glossed _over
without discussion." As a former member of a so-called advisory
committee I testify that at no time did the administration of the fund
seek from it any advice on principles of operation nor did it hospitably
receive or act in accordance with such advice as was volunteered.
Of course, one can always secure acceptable advice by the selection
of advisers, and equally, of course, advice, however wise, can be ignored
or interpreted as favoring a policy already determined upon.
There are educators who holding to a philosophy to that generally
accepted will give advice that is wanted, and unfortunately there are
individuals who can be prevailed on by expectation of grants of money
to cooperate in promoting projects that have no general professional
approval.
Because of the failure of the fund to clarify the functions of the
so-called advisory committee, an able body that was given far more
credit by the administration than it was allowed to earn, or to use
it in any effective way, in March of this year I submitted my resigna-
tion in a letter that was later published in School and Society.
Although this journal has only a modest circulation, the number of
commendations that I have received, both orally and in letters from
all parts of the country, have been surprising and gratifying. It may
be asserted that I am disgruntled because policies and projects which
I favored were not approved by the fund. Whether or not I am dis-
gruntled is not important. What is important for the committee—
and, for that matter, for the public at large— to consider is the validity
of the criticism that is leveled against the fund as administered.
Especially disturbing in a large number of the responses to my letter
of resignation was the fear, often expressed and always implied, of
making criticisms of the fund lest they prejudice the chances of the
institution represented by the critic or of some project favored by him
of getting financial aid from the fund at some future time.
It is tragic in a high degree that men who have won confidence and
position in the educational world should be intimidated from express-
ing criticism of a foundation whose administrators and policies they
do not respect.
I am not inclined to criticize severely the board of directors of the
fund, for they are busy with their own affairs and naturally are in-
clined to put trust in their elected administrative officers, all of whom
were directly or indirectly nominated by a formerly influential officer
of the Ford Foundation who is notoriously critical — I may even say
contemptuous- — of the prof essional education of teachers.
These administrative officers doubtless present to the board, as they
do to the public, a program so general as to get approval and yet so
indefinite as to permit activities which in the judgment of most compe-
tent critics are either wasteful or harmful to the education program
that has been approved by the public.
98 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Uninformed laymen are likely to accept with proud endorsement,
for instance, a proposal to raise the standard of teachers, without being
concerned to consider critically the projects proposed to achieve that
desirable goal as related to a philosophy of education or as contrasted
with other possible and perhaps more practicable means.
I charge that the present officers of the Fund for the Advancement
of Education have arrogated to themselves an assumption of omnis-
cience, which responsibility for distributing- millions of donated dol-
lars does not automatically bestow, nor does it bestow a becoming
humility and respect for the judgment of others.
Presidents Jessup and Keppel and Dr. Abraham Flexner have been
honest enough to say that the great foundations which they repre-
sented made mistakes. But the officers of the fund under discussion
have as yet admitted no such frailty. Whenever foundation officers,
subordinate as well as chief, confuse position with ability and power
with wisdom, losing the humility that would keep ears and mind
hospitably open to what others think, the welfare of the general public
is endangered.
It can hardly be wondered at that the officers of a foundation stead-
ily tend, as Dr. Keppel once said, toward "an illusion of omniscience or
omnipotence." Even a chauffeur feels that the powerful engine in
the car that he is hired to drive increases his importance, is in a sense
his own personal power.
The fund officers have either made grants to any of the professional
organizations of teachers or of school administrators, nor has it even
sought their counsel. But it is obvious, or it should be obvious, that
no proposed program that affects education, however heavily financed
by a foundation, can be successful unless it is understood and approved
by those who will be called on to interpret and to administer it. The
officers of the fund may feel themselves superior in wisdom and fore-
sight to teachers and administrators, but the fact remains that these
people are employed by the public and have been entrusted with the
responsibility for carrying on an approved program of educating the
young people of the Nation.
All thinking about education should start with an understanding
that it is not primarily a benevolence but, rather, a long-term invest-
ment by the public to make each community a better place in which
to live and a better place in which to make a living. Like stockholders
in any other enterprise, the public has a right to determine what it
wishes the product to be. The principle that the public should decide
what it wants in order to promote its own welfare and happiness is
unquestionably sound. An assumption that the public does not know
what is for its own good is simply contrary to the fundamental prin-
ciples of democracy.
Having decided what it wants its schools to produce, the public
leaves, or should leave, to management the selection of employees and
decisions about materials and methods to be used. No-more than a
stockholder of General Motors, General Electric, or General Mills
does it have a right to go to employees and tell them how to do their
job.
This the officers of the Fund for the Advancement of Education
are assuming to do. But the public does have a rjght and an obliga-
tion, which it seldom fully satisfies, to require an audited report of the
success of the management that it employs. If the product is not
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS ( Qf
satisfactory, the public must decide whether to modify its demands as
to objectives, to employ new management, or to make possible the pro/-
curement of better operatives or the purchase of better materials with
wh^ch they can work. ,
All this being understood, we can assert without fear of successful
contradiction that any attempt by outside agencies, however heavily
they may be financed and however supported by eminent individuals,
to influence school administrators and teachers to seek other objectives
than those which have public approval or to use methods arid mate-
rials not directed by responsible management is an impudence riot to
be tolerated. Though cloaked with declared benevolence, it cannot
hide the arrogance underneath.
This argument with its conclusions is easily seen to be sound when
applied to military or industrial organization and administration. It
ought to be easily apparent as well when applied to public education.
It would be manifestly absurd to assert that all of the activities of
any foundation have been bad in intent or jn effect. As a matter of
fact, the activities of all but a minority of the foundations of which I
know anything have been both benevolent and beneficial to the public
at large. It is only when a foundation uses its resources, which in
large part you and I made available through waiving their payment
of income taxes, to propagandize for something that the public does
not recognize as for its best interest, that there is reason for concern,
alarm, and perhaps control.
It is admitted that in this country an individual is free to argue for
or to spend his own money to popularize any theory or any proposed
change that he approves, so lpng as it does not violate the laws of the
land. But that is very different from authorizing or condoning the
use of our money to promote what we do not approve.
. I should like to say at this point that if a fraction of the money and
effort that has been spent recently to detect and to eradicate the ad-
vocacy of communism had been spent to inculcate in youth an under-
standing of the American way of life there would now be no danger
from communism or from any other alien philosophy.
It would be a great contribution to the promotion of the welfare of
our Nation if agencies of the public were to devote themselves to a
constructive campaign to educate our young people to enthusiastic
devotion to what we know is the best way of life possible in this
modern world. Cultivation of a good crop is far more sensible and
economical in terms of ultimate results than neglect of cultivatiori f or
the puropse of eradicating a few weeds.
Representing, as I think I do, the sentiment of the vast majority of
educators of the country, I am deeply concerned that a major part of
the program of the Fund for the Advancement of Education depre-
cates the professional education of teachers and of school administra-
tors. . '.''■'■'"
It apparently is assuming that a good general education is sufficient
to insure effective professional work. Such a belief underlay a pro-
gram which proved unsatisfactory not only in England, Germany,
France, and other civilized countries, but also during earlier days in
the United States.
Consequently, realizing the necessity of professional education; we
have developed during the past two generations a program which,
approved by legislation and by financial support, has resulted in a
100 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
system of schools unparalleled elsewhere in the history of the world.
Whatever their shortcomings, our schools enroll a larger percentage
of children and youth, retain them longer, present courses of study
more continuously adapted to the life of today, and use better methods
developed by science as well as by common sense than any other schools
have ever done before.
There can be no sound argument against an assertion that teachers
need more liberal education than they now in general have. But we
are getting what we are willing to pay for. If we demand teachers
who have a broader background and more cultural education, we must
pay enough to justify young people in spending the necessary time and
money to get it.
This, as is well known, we are not now doing. The salaries of teach-
ers do not compare favorably with the wages of workers in fields
that require little education and even less special training. During
the renaissance one Italian city devoted half of its income to education.
In the United States today we devote only a little more than 2 percent,
with 1 State spending as little as 1.75 percent. If we want teachers
with a larger amount of general education, we simply shall have to
pay salaries that will justify young people in making the necessary
investment in themselves to qualify to satisfy our demands.
The desired increase in general education of teachers will not result
from the projects, costly as they are, of the Fund for the Advancement
of Education. They may improve a small fraction of teachers, but
they are unlikely to have any widespread national effect.
One of its projects finances for 200 or 300 high-school teachers
annual fellowships that permit advanced cultural studies. At the
present rate the fund would require 750 years and an expenditure of
$1,200 million to give such advantages to all secondary-school teachers
at present in service, and even at that, because of the turnover of staffs,
it would never catch up. The officers of the fund have stated that they
hope their project would stimulate local school boards to finance simi-
lar leaves for study by other teachers.
But after 3 years of what the fund erroneously calls "a great experi-
ment" there is no evidence that the hoped-for result is in sight. Nor,
according to reports from a number of schools from which the favored
teachers were selected, has the expenditure of several million dollars
on the project produced any material improvement in education or
in the increased ambition of other teachers.
This is but one of several expensive projects that the fund has
financed for a purpose praiseworthy in itself but wastefully unlikely
to have any significant results on education throughout the country.
The relatively few fortunate teachers probably profited from their
year of study, but it was unrealistic to expect that their experience
would materially affect all, or any considerable part, of the schools
of the Nation.
There is no time to comment here on several other projects financed
by the fund. It is sufficient to assert that though some good may come
out of them they are for the most part propagandistic of the idea that
professional education is of far less importance than the public is con-
vinced that it is and also of the idea that secondary education is im-
portant only for naturally gifted youth.
TAX-EXEMPT ftdt&feTlONS 101
Moreover, these projects violate t&$$r$$ipe that foundation ftth$3
should be expended economically with a reasonable expectation Of
beneficent results for the whole Nation.
It cannot be successfully denied' f ttia& schoolteachers and admin-
istrators need professions;! . tf ainMgV |ust as doctors, dentists, and
ministers of the Gospel doi The MuMfciOn of otjr children cannot
safely be entrusted to untrained teacher's 'any more than their health
and moral development can safely be entrusted to untrained physicians
and ministers.
How much professional education and of what kinds is needed we
are trying by experiment and by experience to ascertain. It may
be that in the rapid development of professional-education programs
there are now some wasteful courses aM some poor instruction,
which may also be found in liberal-arts colleges, and that there is an
overemphasis on theory and on techniques. But the improvement
that is needed and the desired balancing of general and professional
education will not come about hy a condemnation of the whole pro-
gram and an attempt so to discredit and subordinate it that it becomes
insufficient and ineffective.
What is needed, and what as a member of the Advisory Com-
mittee I recommended with what seemed to be the approval of my
fellow members, is an objective study Of the whole program of pro-
fessional education of schoolteachers and administrators, a study
conducted by an impartial and able investigator that will show up
any existing faults, including an overemphasis on pedagogy, and at
the same time recognize and record practices that are sound in theory
and of proved effectiveness.
Such an objective study was made of medical education some years
ago by Dr. Abraham Flexner with an appropriation from the Carnegie
Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Flexner's objective and sensible report caused a revolutionary
improvement in medical education, a revolution so sound that it
has been universally approved by physicians and by the public alike.
But concerning the professional education of school people the officers
of the fund begin their propaganda against current practices by an
assumption that they know what the preparation should be with
such an assumption,' however unsound, would not be disturbing if
these, officers did not have at their disposal millions of money, yours
and mine, as well as Mr. Ford's to promote their theories. To what-
ever extent successful their propaganda, disguised under declared
benevolence, the effect is likely to be decreasing, public confidence
and perhaps decreased public support for what is desirable and
necessary.
In this extended statement I am not attacking the phenomenon
of foundations that are established with benevolent intent. They
have great potentialities for benefiting mankind, and I say without
reserve that on the whole the major foundations deserve and have
won by their activities the respect, the confidence, and the gratitude
of informed people.
It has been stated that, unlike colleges and universities, founda-
tions have no alumni to defend them. But they do have influential
people as members of their boards, and these members have powerful
friends, some of whom are more inclined to be partisanly defensive
than objectively critical. Moreover, there laiie also thousands who,
102 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
hopeful of becoming beneficiaries of future grants, either conceal
their criticisms or else give expression to a defense that may not
be wholly sincere.
Asking nothing for myself and at my age having nothing to fear
by way of reprisal, such professional reputation as I have being firmly
established, I make my criticisms of the foundation that I know
best as a matter of duty. To be constructive, I propose the following
statement of functions which seem proper for any loundation :
1. To seek the advice of official or generally recognized representa-
tives of the public in formulating policies or on the soundness, feasi-
bility, relative importance, and timeliness of important proposed
projects. The advice received, along with the recommendations and
supporting reasons of the administrative officers, should be considered
by the board of trustees iri making final decision as to appropriations.
This stated function does not suggest that the administrative officers
should refrain from seeking counsel from other individuals of their
own choosing. But it emphasizes the wisdom and the responsibility
not only of getting counsel from representatives of the public but also
of transmitting their advice to the ultimate authority of the founda-
tion.
The responsibility of spending the resources of a foundation —
which to repeat, are contributed largely by the public — are too great
to be assumed by any individuals without the advice and cooperative
planning of the professional organizations that will be responsible
for the success of any project that is undertaken.
2. To conduct — or, better still, to finance — scientific research that
will reveal facts needed by the public or its representatives in special-
ized fields in order that it can proceed wisely in planning action.
It should go without saying that a foundation should never- —
attempt to influence findings and conclusions of research and investigations
either through designation of personnel or in any other way.
This principle was stated some years ago by the Laura Spellman
Rockefeller Foundation as follows :
To support scientific research on social, economic, and governmental questions
When responsible educational or scientific institutions initiate the request, spon-
sor the research, or assume responsibility for the selection and competency of
the staff and the scientific spirit of the investigations.
3. To support projects having promise of making the widest possi-
ble contribution to the whole population.
This rules out appropriations for projects that are local in character
or promotive of the interests of favored individuals.
4. To popularize objectively ascertained facts in order that being
widely known they will influence thinking and action.
This stated function implies that all pertinent and important facts,
not merely those that are favorable to a favored side of disputed issues,
should be popularized.
5. "To make possible under the auspices of scientific" or professional
organizations truly representative of the public "demonstrations
which may serve to test, to illustrate, or to lead to more general adop-
tion of measures * * * which have been devised * * * and recom-
mended by responsible agencies."
6. To support the beginnings of activities which leaders of the
public especially concerned approve but for which financial support
has not been made available.
TAX-EXEMPT. FOUNDATIONS 103
This implies that foundation support should be gradually with-
drawn as the public is convinced of the wisdom of assuming
responsibility. . :
1. To aid institutions and other reputable organizations that seel?
to carry out the same or other similar functions.
In summary, I charge :-.'-.
1. That the fund for the advancement of education is improperly;
manned with a staff inexperienced in public elementary and secondary
schools, ignorant at firsthand of the problems that daily .con-front
teachers and school administrators, and out of sympathy with the
democratic ideal of giving an appropriate education to, all the chil-
dren of all of the people ;
2. That the fund is using its great resources, mostly contributed by
the public by the remission of taxes, to deprecate a program of pro-
fessional education of teachers and school administrators that has been
approved by the public with legislation an4, appropriations; \ ...... ; „ . , :
3. That the fund has ignored, the professional organizations of
teachers and school administrators, neither seeking their advice and
cooperation nor making appropriation to support projects proposed
by them;
4. That the fund has made grants to favored localities and indi-
viduals for projects that are not likely to have any wide or important
influence;
5. That the fund has given no evidence of its realization of its obli-
gation as a public trust to promote the general good of the entire
Nation; - .
6. That the fund has. in some cases been wastefully prodigal in
making grants beyond the importance of the projects ; and
7. That the fund either has no balanced program of correlated con-
structive policies, or else it has failed to make them public.
The Chairman. Dr. Briggs, we appreciate a man with your backT
gound of experience taking time to make this statement to the com-
mittee.
There may be some questions. We have a few minutes remaining, if
it is agreeable to the committee to run for a few minutes after 12,
we might dispose of the questions today. If not, we will have to con-
sult Dr. Briggs convenience as to when we might do so. ^
I have only one question that I had in mind asking; If you will
permit, I will get that out of the way, because it is. a general one* ?
In his report to the committee, Mr, Dodd referred to the tendency
of foundation trustees to embark upon projects without having made
an adequate effort to make certain that in the eyes of the ex per ts such
projects could be regarded as being in the public interest. What evi-
dence have you found in your experience of the way in which the
public interest was taken into consideration before decisions were made
in an effort to serve this interest ?
Dr. Briggs. I am not competent to speak, Mr. Chairman, about the
operation of all of the foundations. But as I have said in my state-
ment, there is no evidence that the Ford fund has consulted the repre-
sentatives of the public They have consulted pnly advisers of their
own selection. - ...■-..-•
The Chairman. That was all. - ■■<•
Mr. Goodwin. I have only one question, Mr. dhairman.
104 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
I preface that a little, perhaps, by a brief observation that my
belief is that one chief justification for the use of these collosal sums
of money tax exempt is that by the use of that money things may
be done for the general good which cannot be done by the expenditure
of public funds. Assuming, also, that one thing much to be desired
is to forestall Federal aid to eduction, then in order to help out in
that line State departments of education certainly should be encour-
aged to use their funds and funds made available to them to the best
possible advantage.
Now, if that is true, then these foundations, using their money for
the general purpose of education, would naturally, I would say, be
expected to work with State departments of education to the end that
public funds available to the State departments might be released for
other purposes.
What is your estimate as to what this fund of which you are speak-
ing has been doing along that line? Has there been a spirit of
cooperation with State department of education?
Dr. Briggs. There has not. There is only one instance in which
this fund has made an appropriation that looks to the end that you
mentioned and that was an appropriation to the State of New Mexico
to finance the high-school education of gifted boys who could other-
wise not go to school. But that was not directly and not with the
initiation and cooperation of the State department.
On the other hand, the General Education Board some years ago
responded to the appeal of the Southern States for help in initiating
research department in their State departments of education, which
the public was not willing to support at that time. And so the
General Education Board appropriated money which was used by
the State departments to organize and continue the statistical divi-
sions until the public was convinced of the wisdom of taking them over,
which they did.
Does that answer your question ?
Mr. Goodwin. Yes.
Mr. Wormser. I would like, Mr. 'Chairman, to ask a few questions.
Mr. Hats. Just a moment, I have a few questions.
The Chairman - . Since we have asked the questions, perhaps Mr.
Hays would like to ask some questions.
Mr. Hays. Dr. Briggs, are you a member of the NEA?
Dr. Briggs. I am.
Mr. Hats. Do you believe the charge is true that the aim of the
NEA is to create a monopoly over United States education?
Dr. Briggs. I do not.
Mr. Hays. "Well, that is something, I am glad to have that. That
is a charge that was made here on page 20 of Mr. Dodd's statement.
Would you say the charge is true or untrue that the NEA and other
educaional agencies with which it cooperates are characterized by
one common interest, namely, the planning and control of certain
aspects of American life through a combination of "the Federal Gov-
ernment and education ? .
Dr. Briggs. I don't know what that means, Mr. Hays.
Mr. Hays. Neither do I. But I thought perhaps jou would, since
you are an educator. That is another charge that was made
against the NEA. It is that it and other educational agencies with
which it cooperates are characterized by one common interest, namely,
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 105
the planning and control of certain aspects of American life through
a combination of the Federal Government and education.
You do not find any evidence in your tenure in the NEA of any
such thing?
Dr. Beiggs. Not in the slightest. There has been an effort on the
part of the National Education Asosciation to get funds from the
Congress for the aid of States of low educational standards. If that
is what it means, why that is true.
May I just add, so far as I see, there is an extreme lack of coordina-
tion between the National Education Association and even its oto
subordinate associations.
Now I am a member of the National Association of Secondary
School Principals, and I have been prominent since its organization,
and I was one of the founders of it. I would say that the National
Education Association has had practically no influence on the policies
and the program of that association.
Mr. Hats. What you are saying then just tends to be the apposite
of the statement I read ?
Dr. Briggs. If I understand it.
Mr. Hays. If I understand it, I would agree that it does.
Well, now, there is another change that I have heard against the-
NEA, that is that the result of the Work of the NEA and other educa-
tional organizations with which it has Worked over the years— »this i»
the quote :
Had an educational curriculum designed to indoctrinate the American student
from matriculation to the consummation of his education.
In other words, to put that in common-e very-day language, as I
get it, that is that the NEA has set about to lay out a planned curricu-
lum to indoctrinate these students^ from the day they go into school
until the day they get out, with their ideas,
Would you say that is a fair charge?
Dr. Briggs. Well, I will have to back up to answer that question.
Of course, the NEA and all teachers try to indoctrinate their children
to tell the truth and to be honest and to be loyal to the Amerie»n (gov-
ernment, and to learn the meaning of allegiance, and to live up to it.
That is indoctrination, and if thai is what that means, it is guilty.
If on the, other hand, if you mean the statement means that in that
the NEA or any of its subordinate organizations has attempted a
curriculum to indoctrinate contrary to the generally accepted program
of American education, I would deny it absolutely.
Mr. Hays. All right. In other words, you say they do try to in-
doctrinate their students with what we are commonly calling Ameri-
canism, but you deny absolutely that they try to indoctrinate them
with anything that is un-American.
Dr. Briggs. I certainly do.
Mr. Hays. Thank you.
Now, there is another charge made against the NEA, that it tends
to criticize strongly anyone wno dares to doubt the validity of its con-
clusions. Do you think that is a fair charge?
Dr. Briggs. It doesn't have any conclusions, Mr. Hays.
Mr. Hays. You know, Dr. Briggs, I think you— I would like to talk
further with you, because I have been a member of the NEA, too, and
that is just the same thing that I thought about it.
106 TAX-fcxEMPT iWrNDATroSris
Then there is another charge made that the NRA in cooperation
with other educational agencies, and the great foundations, have pro-
vided this country with what 'is- tantamount to a national system of
education, under the tight control of organizations and persons little
known to the American public.
Dr. Briggs. Well, if you would ask Dr. Carr about the appropria-
tions that the NEA has got from foundations, I think that you would
find, that they are practically nil. The NEA has been one organiza-
tion that has profited very little from appropriations by the founda-
tions.
Mr. Hats. In other words, you would say that there is nothing to
this charge that the foundations and the NEA and other educational
agencies have got a sort of a tightly knit superdirectorate that no one
knows who they are ?
Dr. Briggs. Well, you have three units there, the foundations, the
NEA, and other organizations. What organizations are included?
Mr. Hays. That is a question I cannot answer, I am quoting from
some of the testimony that has gone on here and I am as much in the
dark about it as you are. ^
Dr. BrIggs. I certainly am in the dark, because the NEA and the
foundations don't cooperate. Whether the NEA cooperates with
other agencies or not, no one can say until the other agencies are
named. '
Mr. Hats. Now, Dr. Briggs, what was the name of this group again,
the advisory committee of the Ford Fund ?
Dr. Briggs, Yes i; the advisory committee of the Ford Fund for the
•Advancement of Education. ,
; Mr, Hats. How many members were there of that advisory board ?
• Dr. Briggs. I think there were 9 or 10.
Mr. Hats. Do you think the other members agree with your con-
clusions, as you have read them here 1
• Dr, Briggs. Mr. Hays, they are friends of mine, and I would like
to be excused from answering that question,
- Mr. Hats. Do you think it woulclbe fair if we asked them to come
in and tell us what they think about it ?
Dr. Briggs. May I cite a paragraph of my statement?
Mr. Hays. I wish that you would, just, because I cannot keep it all
in mind. .
1 Dr. Briggs. I have said in my statement, which I read, that unfor-
tunately there are people who, through the expectation of grants from
"funds, are afraid to criticize them.
" Mr. Hats. Do you mean by that statement— —
Dr. Briggs. I don't mean anything. .
Mr. Hats. You do not want to indict your fellow members?
Dr. Briggs. I would also state that there are some verjr able per-
sonnel in that committee, very able people, but it is interesting to note
that one has teen put in charge of a $2 million project of the Ford
Foundation, and it is interesting to note that another One represents
the Arkansas project which I don't like. . ,
It is also. interesting to note that another ,one has been employed as
an adviser, pf the Ford Fund. : That is a "guaranty of 200 days of
Service during the year. It is also , interesting to note that anptpie*,
fourth member of tfie committee, was employed! Or a year' as chairman
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 107
of one of the committees developing the Ford Fund project, and so on.
Mr. Hays. You are about the only unemployed one on the commit-
tee.
Dr. Briggs. May I again cite the paragraph of my statement. It
has been said, or it may be said that I am disgruntled because my
pol icies and projects have not been approved. That is not important.
What is important is the list of criticisms that are leveled at the Ford
fund.
Mr. Hats. Doctor, I made a little note about that disgruntled thing,
and I kind of disagree with you. I think probably that is the first
place we might be in serious disagreement.
I think if you are testifying about an organization, whether you,
are disgruntled with them or not might have some bearing on it.
Mr, Wormser. Mr. Chairman-^this applies to what you say.
Mr. Hats. Now just a moment, I have some more' questions. I am
more than sligtitly interested in this, as I got it from hearing your
statement read, and I will admit I do riot know anything about this.
But one of your indictments seemed to be that this fund thought there
was too many professional courses required of teachers and not enough
cultural; is that a fair assumption of what you said? i
Dr. Briggs. Yes.
Mr. Hats. Would you think it would be more important for a'
teacher '.'-of French to know French ot to know the psychology and,
philosophy of education?
Dr. Briggs. He could not teach French without knowing French,
of course. ,
Mr, Hats: I am afraid that some of the universities are turning out
teachers who hate a lot of required courses, and I might tell you that
I spent about 2 years taking them, and I cannot remember offhand
the name of any professor, except one, or anything they said.
Dr. Briggs. You did not take my courses.
Mr. Hats^ I am sure that I Would have remembered some of yours.
But a great many of those so-called courses in professional education
to me, as I saw it then, and as I look back pn it now, were a complete
waste of my time.
Dr. Brigjss. May I again cite my statement?
Mr. Hats. Surely.
Dr. BKiGGg. I said it is quite possible that in the rapid development
of these' prof essional institutions that there are courses that are waste-
ful arid that there is instruction which is poor. We are trying to find
Out what is a proper balance between cultural demands for education,
and deinands for professional education.
I think this objective study that I proposed would take care of that.
It would show pp the sham, and I admit that there is sham and waste,
as you found out, in professional courses, and there is some in liberal
arts colleges, too. I judge you went to a liberal arts college, did you
not?
Mr. Hats. I did not want to get the name of it in the record, in any
unfavorable light, but it was Ohio State University, and I suppose it is
considered a liberal arts college. It has a number of colleges, as you
know. .
Dr. Briggs. Well, you found some courses that were not much good
in theliberal arts division, did yon not ?
Mr. Hays. Yes, I think so, and I would not want to name tfc<«-
108 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
.,Dr., Bpjgcis. W$ will not press that any more than you would not
prsssthe question about my fellow members on the advisory commit-
tee.
. Bu^^r^at,;! am saying is, is that we do not know what thejpraper
balan^jsyiyetween knowing French and knowing how to teach French.
I have known many people who knew their subjects and could not
teach, and unfortunately, I have known some people who had some
techniques of teaching and did not know their subjects.
Mr. Hays. Now, I think we are in agreement on that. A lot of peo-
ple know how to teach but do not know what they are supposed to
teach.
Dr. Briggs. And other people know what to teach and do not know
how to teach.
Mr. Hays. As I get it, your main indictment then of this organiza-
tion is thai; you think, in your opinion, that it stresses too much the
cultural to the lack of the professional type of education, is that right ?
Dr. Briggs. No; they assumed to know that that is the answer, and
I do not think anybody knows the answer now. I think that we have
got to find out what the proper balance between professional and cul-
tural education is. Just because you have the administration of mil-
lions of dollars <loes not bestow on you the wisdom to make that
decision.
Mr. Hays. You, made a statement there, as I made a quick note on it
here, that lead me to believe that you were saying that educators
are intimidated by the Ford Foundation.
Dr. Briggs. I do.
Mr. Hays. Well,, now, to what extent would you say they are?
As far as I would know out in my Stat© I would, guess that 99.99
percent of educators don't even know that there is such an or^h-
lzation.
Dr. Briggs. Oh, yes, they do.
Mr. Hays. As this subgroup of the Ford Foundation, so they couldn't
very well intimidate them ?
Dr. Briggs, 99.9 pereent of them have made application for grants.
Mr. Hays. I am afraid that that is a bald statement that is open
to serious question.
The Chairman. You are speaking figuratively now ?
Dr. Briqgs. Yes, that is a hyperbole, but MacCauley said you had to
speafe: in hyperbole in order to get the point over. No, Mr. Hays, I
wish I had brought with me the file of letters i received since my
resignation was published. They came from all over the country.
Time after time these men have said, "We feei exactly as you do, but
we don't dare say anything because if we do, if we make an application
for a grant from the fund, what we say will be prejudiced."
Mr. Hays. Who are these men, are they college professors, second-
ary school teachers, or who ?
Dr. Briggs. Well, within a month, two college presidents have said
that to me, and I don't know how many college professors, and super-
intendents of schools, and high school principals.
Mr. Hays. Well, of course, within a month I have talked to a few
college presidents who say just the opposite, and that this wholg, in-
vestigation is stupid and what should they do with the questionnaire.
It is costing them a lot of money and they thmlk it is silly, and
that is a matter of opinion.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 109
Dr. Briggs. Wait a minute, I am not sure we are talking about
the same thing. Have these people that you have talked to been vocal
in their criticism of foundations ?
Mr. Hays. No, they haven't.
Dr. Briggs. That is the point ; that is what I am saying.
Mr. Hays. That is exactly the point; there are two schools of
thought on this.
Dr. Briggs. I thought that you thought we were in disagreement.
I think we are in agreement that these people who have been en-
trusted with responsibility in the administering of colleges and uni-
versities and school systems, are afraid to express their criticism odi
the foundations lest they prejudice their chances of their institutions
for help.
Mr. Hays. Well, I think the way to get the story on that is to have
them come in and testify as to that and I don't see how we can accept
any outsider's opinion, yours or mine, about that.
Dr. Briggs. It is immaterial whether you accept it or not. I made
the statement on the basis of the letters that I have had, and the
statements that have been made tome. I thought that is what you
wanted me to do.
Mr. Hays. That is all.
The Chairman. There is just one question I wanted to raise which
is for you, Mr. Hays. In your earlier questioning, you appeared t® be
quoting language which I presume will appear in quotes in the record,
and with those quotations from the statement which Mr. Dodd made
to the committee.
Mr. Hays. Yes ; I can give you the page number,
The Chairman. Or the preliminary draft.
Mr. Hays. The first question whiclv the; witness answered, was, "Do
you believe the charge is true that the aim of the NEA is to create a
monopoly over education." That is on page 20. That is the second
question. The first question was, "Are you a member of the NEA,"
which, of course, was not a quotation.
The next question, "Is the charge true or untrue that the NEA and
other educational agencies with which it cooperates are characterized
by one common interest, namely, the planning and control of certain
aspects of American life through a combination of the Federal Govern-
ment and education," and that is on page %%
The next question, which I won't take the time to read.., comes, in Mr.
Dodd's statement on page 23, and the next one on page 24, and I don't
happen to have noted the page number of the last one, also a quote, but
it is there.
The Chairman. I wondered whether you quoted from the statement
he made to the committee.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Chairman, Professor Briggs would like to get
away today if he possibly can.
Mr. HAYSi Would you have any obj ection at this point if we recessed
for lunch, and we find this out this afternoon ?
The Chairman. Do you have further questions?
Mr. Hays. I haven't had a chance to read his statement, and I might
have. There were several things that occurred to me at the time, but
I didn't have the exact language and I didn't want to question him.
Mr. Wormser. I would waive any further questioning, Mr. Hays,
and I would just ask to introduce his letter of resignation to the fund
49720 — 54— pt. 1—8
110 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
for the advancement of education. Would you identify it, Prof essor
Briggs?
Dr. Briggs. Yes ; that is a photostat of it.
Mr. Wormser. I would like to save him the burden of reading it and
may it be copied into the record ?
Mr. Hats. Before I say whether or not I would object to that, I
suppose that is the same letter that is in this little magazine, School
and Society. Is that essentially the same thing?
Dr. Briggs. I think the School and Society editor omitted a little
of it in order to get it into his space, but it is practically the same, Mr.
Hays.
Mr. Hats. Now, before we introduce this in, do you have any plans,
Mr. Wormser, to call any of these other people who sit on this com-
mittee, or did sit on this committee with Dr. Briggs ?
Mr. Wormser. No; I do not, sir.
Mr. Hats. Well, I think in order to keep these hearings objective,
it might be nice if we had 1 or 2 of them to come in, at least 1 of them,
and just pick 1 at random.
Dr. Briggs. Don't pick one at random.
Mr. Hats. I want to pick him at random. Now, look, Doctor, I
don't want you, to pick the one, and I am sure you would try to pick
one who would agree with you.
Dr. Briggs. I would suggest that— — '■■
Mr. Hats. Can you name one who disagrees with you ?
Dr. Briggs. Oh, yes.
Mr. Hats. That is what I would like to hear.
Dr. Briggs. Would you like the name?
The Chairman-. Well, now— —
Mr. Hats. I am asking this for my own information.
The Chairman. I certainly have no objection* but I was thinking
about the name of the person, the individual.
Mr. Hats. I can undoubtedly get the list of people^ and I will pick
one out.
The Chairman. I don't want to put someone else's name in the
record, in what somebody might construe as ah odious position.
Mr. Hats. Could we have an agreement that we will call in One of
these other people ?
The Chairman. So far as I personally am concerned, if it fits in.
Mr. Hats. We will make it fit in.
Dr. Briggs. lean give you the name personally, if you would like.
The Chairman. But I see no objection to this letter of resignation
going into the record and it would occur to me it is pertinent to his
testimony. ■,.:■■
Mr. Hats. I may object to it, because you objected to my putting
into the record something that I thought was pertinent this morning
and I am only trying to keep these hearings objective. Now, if you
will agree we are going to call in at least one other member of this
committee and get his views, that is one thing, but if we are only
going to get one side of it then I will tell you right now, I am going
to object.
Dr. Briggs. I have said practically everything in the statement that
I said in this letter of resignation, and so I think it is immaterial.
The Chairman. I assumed that you had.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS HI
Mr. Wormser. I would like to bring^ into the record then, if Pro-
cessor Briggs will confirm it, that he resigned entirely voluntarily, and
lie was made a member of this advisory committee of the fund for the
advancement of education and served some years, and resigned with a
letter of resignation to Dr. Faust, the president. It is dated March
16, 1954.
The Chairman. Are there any other questions? If not, you are
•excused, Doctor.
Mr. Wormser. May we take it for granted that subpenas are con-
tinued if a witness is not able to appear today, it will carry over to the
next day ?
Mr. Hays. May I have an understanding that the next witness who
comes in without a prepared statement and you undertake to question
him and get him out of here, all the same morning, there won't be any
meeting. If the minority isn't here, there can't be a meeting, and the
minority is not going to be here unless we are going to run this thing
on an adequate basis so we have a chance to find out what it is all about.
Mr. Wormser. Do you mean a witness can't testify without a state-
ment ?
Mr. Hats. Let him come back when I have had a chance to look at
his statement so I can ask him some questions about it.
Mr. Wormser. The next witness will not have a prepared statement.
Mr. Hats. You had better make plans to let us look at his state-
ment and question him later.
The Chairman. He can be made available for questioning later ?
Mr. Wormser. Yes.
The Chairman. The committee will meet in this same room to-
morrow morning, Wednesday, and Thursday morning we will have to
reserve the announcement of the place of the meeting, and we may be
able to meet here. If not, we will make the announcement tomorrow.
Being a special committee, we are more or less in a difficult situation
when it comes to meeting places. We will recess now.
(Whereupon, the committee recessed at 12 : 30 p. m., to reconvene on
Wednesday morning.)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
WEDNESDAY, MAY 19, 1954
House ot Representatives,
Special Committee to Investigate
Tax Exempt Foundations,
Washington, D. G.
The special subcommittee met at 10 a. m., pursuant to recess, in room
429, House Office Building, Hon. Carroll Eeece (chairman of the
special subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Reece, Hays, Goodwin, and Pfost.
Also present: Rene A. Wormser, general counsel; Arnold T. Koch,
associate counsel; Norman Dodd, research director; Kathryn Casey,
legal analyst; and John Marshall, Jr., chief clerk to the special
committee.
The Chaieman. The committee will please come to order.
Who is the next witness, Mr. Wormser ?
Mr. Wormseb. Dr. Hobbs, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Dr. Hobbs, will you please stand and be sworn.
Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give in this
proceeding shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
truth, so help you God ?
Dr. Hobbs. I do.
Mr, Hays. Mr. Chairman, just in view of the statement you made
on the opening day about all of the witnesses being sworn, I think it
would be well that the record show that Dr. Briggs yesterday was not
sworn.
The Chairman. Professor Briggs was sworn and I think the
record will soshow, or at least it should show.
Mr. Hats. On discussing it last night, we thought he had not been.
We started to swear him and we got off the track.
The Chairman. I have not looked at the record.
Mr. Koch. Page 251.
Mr. Hats. He was sworn.
The Chairman. Yes ; I did swear him in. Thank you very much.
Mr. Wormser, do you wish to make a preliminary statement of any
kind?
Mr. Wormser. Yes ; I want to say that Dr. Hobbs will testify chiefly
on the nature of social-science research. I think we may take it for
granted, and I think the foundations will agree, that social-science
research in this country now is financed virtually entirely by the foun-
dations and the United States Government. There is very little pri-
vately financed social research.
Dr. Hobbs will analyze some of this research for methods and type
and discuss some of the results of the type of research that is used.
113
114 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
STATEMENT OF DR. A. H. HOBBS, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF
SOCIOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
The Chairman. As I understand it, Professor Hobbs, you do not
have a prepared statement.
Dr. Hobbs. That is correct.
The Chairman. In view of the fact that you do not have a pre-
pared statement, the committee will be free to propound questions as
you go along.
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. When a witness has a prepared statement, we
ordinarily then defer questioning until the witness has concluded with
his prepared statement. But where that is not the case, we feel it is
better procedure to be questioned as you go along. You may proceed.
Mr. Goodwin. Mr. Chairman, might I inquire whether or not the
witness is available later in the event that we might feel after we have
seen the record that we want to interrogate him concerning the part of
his testimony which we had not caught when he gave his testimony %
The Chairman. I assume he could be made available, could he not?
Mr. Wormser. I think Dr. Hobbs is prepared to stay tomorrow if
we want him. I am sure he would be glad to come back if necessary.
May I ask you first to identify yourself with a short biographical
note ?
Dr. Hobbs. I took undergraduate work at what was then Penn State
College. It is now Penn State University. I took graduate work
at the University of Pennsylvania and received a Ph. D. in 1941. . I re-
ceived a Ph. D. in sociology there. I began teaching sociology and
social science in 1936 at the University of Pennsylvania, and except
for 3 years in the military service, I taught continuously.
Is that sufficient ?
Mr. Wormser. What is your position now?
Dr. Hobbs. I am an assistant professor at the University of Penn-
sylvania.
Mr. Wormser. Of sociology ? v
Dr. Hobbs. That is correct.
Mr. Wormser. Dr. Hobbs, you have written^ quite a number of arti-
cles and several books. I am interested particularly in your most
recent book which is called Social Problems and Scientism. I think
you might launch into a discussion of "scientism" giving your expla-
nation of how you use that term.
Dr. Hobbs. All right, sir. There is, or at least there seems to be,
and I think most people would agree with this who have been involved
in the matter in teaching or studying, there is a good deal of confu-
sion about the term "science." There is a tendency to designate as
science a number of things which are not science, or at least there is
serious question as to whether they are scientific or not. So I at-
tempted to analyze this problem by going to the books dealing with
scientific methods to find out in what way it could be analyzed and
interpreted.
By way of background, I would just like to mention a few things
which are usually included in scientific investigation.
The method of science is one which has been tremendously success-
ful in solving a variety of types of problems, but, as we all know, it
began in fields such as physics and chemistry and astronomy.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 115
Mr. Hats. Are those what you would term, Doctor, the exact
sciences?
Dr. Hobbs. That term is frequently applied to them, although tech-
nically there would be some question if you strained the term "exact"
even in those areas. Some of them are not exact.
Mr. Hats. In other words, what you are saying is that there is no
such thing as an exact science ?
Dr. Hobbs. In absolute terms I think most scientists would agree
with that.
This method involves, for one thing, controlled observation. By
that is meant that if I express my opinion on something, my belief on
how to raise children, you express your opinion, we can debate these
opinions back and forth from now until kingdom come, and in no way
that will necessarily reach agreement. That, of course, was the situa-
tion in philosophy for many centuries. But with the scientific
method, they gradually learned to use this technique of controlled
observation, a means whereby anybody, no matter what his feelings
on the matter, no matter what his beliefs or prejudices, in observing
the results, is compelled to agree as to them.
In order to use this technique of controlled observation, which is
fundamental in scientific procedure, you have to reduce the things
that you are studying to quantitative units — units which are quantita-
tive, units which are not only quantitative, but which are homogene-
ous, and units which are stable. A quantitative unit is a thing in turn
which can be measured in terms of weight, distance, velocity. In
science as you know, they have gone a step further and developed
instruments, ammeters, speedometers, scales, things of that type, by
means of which these units can be measured with a sufficient degree of
precision to justify the type of experiment which is at that time being
done.
Congressman Hays, that is the general context of exactness or pre-
cision in science for the purpose of experiments. The measurements
must be exact. But that does not mean exact in the sense of perf ecta-
bility.
Mr. Hays. What I am trying to get at is this : Is there any science
in which after these experiments the conclusions which are arrived at
can be termed "exact" ?
Dr. Hobbs. The conclusions can be measured and in terms of the
purposes for which the measurements are being made, they can be said
to be exact. There will inevitably be some element of error which
scientists always attempt to reduce to the least possible terms.
Mr. Hats. I believe you said that you are now teaching sociology
and social science ?
Dr. Hobbs. I am teaching sociology ; yes, sir.
Mr. Hays. Is there such a thing as social science ?
Dr. Hobbs. In the sense in which the term "science" is applied to the
physical sciences, I think it is extremely questionable that the great
bulk of the work in sociology, history, political science, could be desig-
nated as beingscientific. In that sense, I would say very little.
Mr. Hays. But that is a term that has become quite common, and is
used rather generally to bulk all of the sciences dealing with the
sociological aspects of civilization, is it not ?
Dr. Hobbs. That is correct. The terms "social science" and "politir
cal science" and similar terms are very widely used. I think it would
116 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
be desirable for one thing, if the public were to understand that the
designation "science" in that context is somewhat different than the
designation in the context as applied to the usually called physical
sciences. ■
Mr. Hats. In other words, it was never intended to connotate an
-exact science.
Dr. Hobbs. Unfortunately, in many of the writings that connota-
tion is not only present but it is emphasized. For example, you will
see books on social science — textbooks on sociology — coming out with
drawings of calipers on the advertising blurbs, test tubes on the cover,
to give the teachers the impression that this is science in the sense
that the term is used in physical science. Unfortunately, there is a
great deal of that, and it confuses not only the general public but
many of the people in the field who are not too familiar with scientific
methods themselves.
The Chairman. You have read the statement which Mr. Dodd made
to the committee?
Dr. Hobbs. I have not, sir.
The Chairman-. You are not familiar with it, then?
Dr. Hobbs. I am not, sir.
The Chairman. He raised the question of some trouble arising
from the premature acceptance of the social sciences. You are not
ready to comment on that. If you are, I would be interested in hav-
ing you comment.
Dr. Hobbs. I would, sir. I do intend to comment after I have given
this background which I think is essential.
The Chairman. Very well ; you may proceed.
Dr. Hobbs. As for reducing human behavior, particularly the
aspects of human behavior which are most significant in the relation-
ships between people and in civilized society, to attempt to reduce
those to quantitative units is extremely difficult, and for the most part
at the present time impossible.
With human beings there are some things which are quantitative ;
that is, your bodily temperature could be called a quantitative thing,
which in turn can be measured with an instrument, the thermometer.
Similarly with your blood pressure, your corpuscle count, the propor-
tion between white and red, the number of hairs on your head, and
things like that, can be counted. Sometimes it is pretty easy to count
the number of hairson your head. The other things, though, like
the sentiments — patriotism, love, bravery, cowardice, nonesty, things
of that sort — have never been' reduced to quantitative units. There
is still a large element of the qualitative in them. That is, if you say
you are patriotic, your patriotism cannot be measured in precise units
which will be agreed upon by all the observers.
Mr. Hats. Professor, I think we are agreed on that. Is there any
argument on that score ?
Dr. Hobbs. The impression is given in many works, and I will cite
some of them, that that is not the case. It is a crucial and funda-
mental point which I want to give by way of background.
Mr. Hats. You mean you say that you can measure patriotism?
Dr. Hobbs. That is implied.
Mr. Hats. I was aware that there are people who think you can
measure patriotism, but it is always according to their standards.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 117
Dr. Hobbs. Unfortunately, that is the same way with some who call
themselves social scientists.
Mr. Hats. That has been true always.
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hats. As long as there have been human beings.
Dr. Hobbs. Yes.
Mr. Hays. Maybe they did not call it patriotism, but whatever it is.
Dr. Hobbs. Loyalty or whatever you call it. Then the other item,
the matter of the stability of the units which are being studied, also,
I think, is quite crucial. If you are studying electrons, if you are
studying matter, or the behavior of matter, the method of study you
employ, the amount of the time you spend on studying it, the attitude
which you have while you are making the study, does not affect the
object which is under study; that is, it you think electrons are nasty
or unpleasant or things like that, that is not going to affect the be-
havior of electrons. But unfortunately, with human beings again,
sometimes the very fact that a study is being made can change their
behavior. That is always a possibility which you have to be very
consciously aware of. An illustration of that of course would be
the Kinsey report. The mere fact that you ask people questions in
the rapid fire nonemotional manner which Professor Kinsey says he
uses, would put a different aura on sexual behavior than might other-
wise be present. It could change your attitude toward sex.
Similarly, if you are studying juvenile delinquents, and if your
attitude in the study is that delinquency is caused by their environ-
ment, or caused by the fact that the mother was too harsh with the
children in their youth, or overwhelmed them with affection, then
there is always the possibility — and some investigators contend that
this is a fact— the delinquents themselves become convinced that this
is the case. They begin to blame their parents, their early environ-
ment, and the situation which you have attempted to study has been
changed in the very process of making the study.
Mr. Hats. As I get it, then, you are saying in effect that there are
dangers in studying hazards.
Dr. Hobbs. That is right.
Mr. Hays. But you would not advise that we give up studying juven-
ile delinquency ?
Dr. Hobbs. Absolutely not. These things certainly need study.
The Chairman. Professor, since you referred to the Kinsey report,
what do you consider the significance of the fact that the initial Kin-
sey study was financed by a foundation grant ?
Dr. Hobbs. Sir, I intend to use the Kinsey report as an illustration
of some of these pseudoscientific techniques, and as an illustration of
the possible influence which this type of study may have. In that con-
text, I would prefer to take it up that way.
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Hats. You are saying that Dr. Kinsey is a pseudoscientist, is
that right?
Dr. Hobbs. "No, sir.
Mr. Hays. He has used the pseudoscientific approach.
Dr. Hobbs. I said that he has used techniques which are pseudoscien-
tific.
Mr. Hays. I would not know anything about that. I am not ac-
quainted with his books or techniques.
118 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Dr. Hobbs. I am, sir, and I will explain something about them a little
bit later.
So with the study of human behavior you have the difficulty that in
many instances it is virtually impossible to reduce the type of be-
havior to a quantitative unit. There is always the hazard that the
mere fact that you are studying the thing and the way in which you
study that may change the very thing you are studying.
I will cite specific illustrations of that a little bit later.
The findings of the study can affect the type of behavior which is
being studied. Again if you come out and say in your findings that
sexual behavior of a wide variety is prevalent and so on, that in it-
self can — do not misunderstand me, I am not saying that studies
should not be published because of this factor, but it should be
recognized that the findings of a study can affect the type of behavior
which is being studied.
Mr. Hays. To get the emphasis off sex and on something else that
I am more interested in, say, juvenile delinquency, you would probably
agree with me that the very fact that the newspapers constantly say
or have been recently that juvenile delinquency is increasing, and it
is becoming an ever-greater problem, might have a tendency to make
some juveniles think about delinquency. But on the other hand,
we cannot hide our heads in the sand and say it does not exist, can
we?
Dr. Hobbs. I certainly believe that the facts in this case, those
findings are from the uniform crime reports of the Federal Bureau
of Investigation, and they are factual findings, and they certainly
should be publicized. But they are not publicized in the newspaper
as being scientific findings. That is the extent of delinquency is not
being published as being a scientific finding. If it were, then it could
have a different effect.
Mr. Hays. I am inclined to agree with you that it could have an
effect, and perhaps various effects. I think you would perhaps agree
with my thinking that when you are dealing with juveniles or the
subjects in Dr. Kinsey's books you are dealing with human beings,
and there are just as many variations as the people you are dealing
with ; is that not right ?
Dr. Hobbs. There are tremendous variables which have to be taken
into consideration, which make the problem of a study of human
beings an extremely difficult one.
Mr. Hays. In other words, if you approach a study of a thousand
juveniles, you might get conceivably 1,000 different reactions to the
same situation. The chances are that you would not, but it is possible
that you could.
Dr. Hobbs. It is quite possible.
Mr. Hays, Just the same as every one of the thousand have different
fingerprints.
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir. With this scientific method being developed,
another thing you have to have is that even if you are able to reduce
the things you are studying to quantitative, uniform, and stable units,
then merely doing that does not constitute the scientific method.
Merely counting things is not science. The philosopher of science,
Alfred North Whitehead, said in effect, if we had merely counted
things, we would have left science exactly in the state in which it
was 1,000 years ago.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 119
Unfortunately, also, in social science, you do get this tendency
which is particularly pronounced now to rely, I would say, and many
of the outstanding people in the field will agree with me, an over-
emphasis on the tendency merely to count. Again, do not misunder-
stand me. I do not say that none of that should be done. It is a
matter of degree.
Mr. Goodwin. I do not understand, Doctor, what you mean by say-
ing that the result of a count is not something exact. If you take a
complete count of it you have the full picture, have you not?
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir, but to go back to Congressman Hays' question
about juvenile delinquency,, if you were merely going to count these
deliquents and measure the lengths of their noses and the size and
shape of their ears, and so on, you could make such measurements
which might be exact to a high degree. You could make such meas-
urements for a long, long time. I think you will agree you probably
would not find out anything basic about delinquency.
Mr. Hats. You mean the size of their noses has nothing to do with it.
Dr. Hobbs. I would not venture to hazard a guess. I don't know.
I would say probably not.
Mr. Hays. I would be brave and guess that it would not.
The Chairman. But as I understand, you mean to say that it would
not get at what might be the basic causes of juvenile delinquency.
Dr. Hobbs. I would be extremely doubtful, of course.
Mr. Hays. We would all agree on that, would we not?
Dr. Hobbs. In other words, mere accounting is not enough. Even if
you can count with relative accuracy, you still have to have a hypo-
thesis. A hypothesis is a statement as nearly as exact as you can
make it, a statement of what you are going to try to prove, or what
you are going to try to disprove, and then you make your controlled
observations. Then you will find that the hypothesis is not valid or
you find that it has been validated by your observations, by your in-
ductions and by your deductions.
The final test of scientific method is verification. This, of course,
is particularly vital when you are dealing with human behavior and
where the findings of the study could influence human behavior. In
these cases, the findings should be verified not only by the person who
made the study himself, but they should be verified by other people
who are skeptical of it before you make any attempt to change human
behavior or the society on the basis of the supposed scientific studies.
One test of verification is prediction. Even here you have to be
extremely careful because sometimes what seems to be a prediction is
merely a lucky guess. That is, if I predict the Yankees are going to
win the pennant this year, they might win the pennant — I am a little
bit afraid they will— but the fact that my prediction came true does
not prove that I had worked it out scientifically. A prediction could
be a lucky guess, it could be a coincidence, or it could be the result of
factors other than the factors which you are investigating under your
hypothesis.
Another common mistake is to confuse projection with prediction.
] could predict that women will wash. on Monday and iron on Tues-
day. When I am doing that, I am not making a prediction, but I am
assuming merely that the pattern of behavior which held true in the
past will continue to hold true in the future. Many of the so-called
120 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
predictions of population growth are merely projections in this sense,
X'ather than scientific predictions.
Of course, as you know, most of those projections themselves have
been erroneous because the pattern of behavior does change.
Mr. Hats. That is one of the reasons, though, is it not, Professor,
that women have always been interesting. It has always been unsafe
to predict about them.
Dr. Hobbs. That, Congressman, is a situation which neither you nor
I would like to change. Let us not make that too scientific.
Mr. Hays. I agree with you.
Dr. Hobbs. With the scientific method having been so successful,
and then employed
Mr. Wormser. Dr. Hobbs, may I interrupt to ask you, is not experi-
ment an essential mechanism in ordinary natural science whereas it
is unavailable in social sciences ?
Dr. Hobbs. As a generalization that would be correct, yes. It is
very much more difficult to set up conditions to conduct a controlled
experiment in social science than it is in physical science, and the
ability to set up those controlled experiments in physical science has
been a keystone in the tremendous success of the physical sciences.
Mr. Koch. Do you say that in connection with juvenile delinquency
some social scientists have actually measured noses or something
similar?
Dr. Hobbs. No. I just used that as an extreme illustration.
With the tremendous success of physical science, particularly as
the findings of physical science were translated by technologists into
practical things, like steam engines, and automobiles, and so on, it is
quite understandable that many people who have been studying and
have been interested in human behavior, should apply the same meth-
od — and this is crucial — or should apply what they think is the same
method, or what they can lead other people to believe is the same
method. Throughout the history of social science you can see this
correspondence between the attempts to apply the type of scientific
method which is at that time successful m science to the study of
human behavior.
Mrs. Pfost. Dr. Hobbs, you related a while ago about these habits
of individuals, such as women washing on Monday and ironing on
Tuesday. In what manner, now, do you feel that relates to the foun-
dations, this study that we are making here ?
Dr. Hobbs. I want to give this background to show the difference —
and it is an essential difference — between science as it is used in the
physical sciences, and science as it is used in the social sciences, which
is the type of thing that is sponsored by the foundations.
Mr. Hats. Doctor, I have always been aware of that difference.
Do you think that there is a general unawareness of it?
Dr. Hobbs. I believe that is quite common. I am sorry if I am
taking too long.
Mr. Hats. No, take all the time you want.
Dr. Hobbs. I do want to give this background. Then I will give
specific illustrations of the point you have in mind, where there is a
definite effort to convince people that the two things are the same.
I will bring that out.
Mr. Hats. There has always been a loose term— at least I have
always been familiar with it — in which we differentiated between the
TAX-EXEMPT FOtJNDATlONS 121
so-called, and I used the word "so-called" there, exact sciences and
the social sciences. I have always understood that social sciences, if
you want to use that terra, or sociologists would be a better term,
are groping their way along knowing they have no exact way to
measure the thing they are studying.
Dr. Hobbs. That is, of course, the way, with many. But unfortu-
nately there are some, and this is particularly pronounced in text-
books, for example, where the impression is given, and sometimes the
flat statement is made, that this is science, and that it is the same kind
of science that exists in the study of physical phenomena.
Mr. Hays. Yes; but do you not think we are going to have to rely
somewhat upon the intelligence of the people to differentiate? This
committee or the Congress cannot legislate what people are going to
think or what they are going to derive from certain statements in the
newspapers. It might be desirable— I say very definitely it might be,
I do not think it would be— but we cannot do it.
Dr. Hobbs. I would agree with you that the improvement, call it
the reform, in this should come from within the fields, and not through
legislation. That is, in the use of such terms as science. The people
in the fields themselves should govern that* and should be more careful
in their usage, which may happen. I don't know. But that is not the
case now. The confusion is greater now than it was in the past. That
is, the attempt to convince the readers of the textbooks, and trade
books, is definitely there, and it is on the increase, rather than being
on the decrease.
Mr. Hats. Yes; but do you not think any tendency on the part of
the Congress to try to legislate about that might conceivably get you
in the situation where you would cut off valuable exploration into the
unknown?
Dr. Hobbs. I had no intent of suggesting that in any way. As a
matter of fact, I explicitly stated otherwise.
Mr. Hats. I am not trying to put words in your mouth. I am trying
to clarify in my mind and the people who read this hearing just what
we are discussing here.
Dr. Hobbs. To legislate in that sense, to tell what words should be
used, and how they should be used, would be extremely undesirable.
Mr. Hats. In other words, we could not any more define it than
you can define it.
Dr. Hobbs. I think, sir, I can define it. But that does not mean
that everybody should agree with me in any way.
Mr. Hats. In other words, it will be your definition.
Dr. Hobbs. That is correct. Of course, the definition is based on
the interpretation of the outstanding philosophers of science. I make
no claim that it is original with me, or unique with me. It is a common
type of definition.
So in earlier days, the social scientists or what were then social
philosophers, tried to apply the type of scientific technique which was
successful at that time. The success in physical science has been in
the area of mechanics. So the social philosophers attempted to de-
scribe human beings in terms of molecules and atoms and things like
that and contend that human beings came into social groups because
of factors of centripetal force. They dispersed and came in because
of factors of electrical attraction. Looking back on that now, we
would say it was very naive. As the techniques 1 of physical science
122 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
change, the techniques of social science change along with them. That
is understandable; they want to try to use the techniques which are
being used in physical science, or want to try to use what seem to be
the techniques used in physical science.
Unfortunately, however, many of these techniques — even though
they may seem to be the same techniques as used in physical sciences —
in their application to social studies or studies of social behavior, are
different. It is further unfortunate that the difference is not made
sufficiently clear to the readers and to the general public.
Mr. Hats. Right there, do you have any specific suggestions about
what coud be done about that ?
Dr. Hobbs. I think it should be the burden and the positive re-
sponsibility of persons making the study and publishing the study.
If they call it science, it should be their positive responsibility to point
out the limitations, and not only point them out, but to emphasize
them to avoid misleading the reader into the belief that it is science
in the same sense that it is used in physical science. I think it should
come from the individuals concerned, rather than from legislation.
Mr. Hats. I am inclined to agree with you, that is a desirable thing,
but the specific thing I am getting at is ; is there anything we can do
about it, or is it just something that is desirable, that we would like it
to happen, and if it does it is fine, and if it does not, that is all right, too ?
Dr. Hobbs. Sir, what I am leading up to, and I am very sorry it takes
this long but I think the background is essential, is studies which
have been sponsored by the foundations which have done, and some
of them in exaggerated form, the type of thing which you agree and
I agree should be avoided if it is at all possible, and that is to give
the impression that the social science in the same sort or virtually the
same as physical science.
Mr. Hats. In other words, to avoid giving the impression that it
is exact.
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hats. And probably prefacing the study by saying that these*
studies are made under certain conditions, and have arrived at cer-
tain conclusions but everybody should know they might not be exact,,
because we are dealing with human beings.
Dr. Hobbs. That is correct, sir.
Mr. Goodwin. How about a combination of physical science with
mental or social? I am thinking about the lie detector. That ap-
parently is an attempt to measure mechancially what is in a man's-
mind.
Dr. Hobbs. As I understand it, sir, it is not so much an attempt to
measure what is in his mind, but it is a measure of fluctuations in
blood pressure.
Mr. Goodwin". Has not that some relation ?
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, and to assume from those fluctuations whether he
is mentally disturbed or concerned or not in a manner which could:
indicate that he were lying. But it rests on an assumption, and the-
assumption may be invalid in some cases. In using such devices, that-
i? something you have to be careful about.
J would like to cite a number of these studies to emphasize the man-
ner in which they can and apparently do influence important aspects,
of human behavior, One of these studies I would like to cite as an in-
fluence on moral behavior. Another one is as an influence on political
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 123
behavior. A third one is as an influence on military strategy and
military policy and principles.
. The first one, the one relating to morality, includes two volumes
on sexual behavior. The first volume is entitled, Sexual Behavior in
the Human Male, with the authors being Alfred C. Kinsey, Wardell
B. Pomeroy, Clyde E. Martin, published in 1948. The second one, en-
titled, Sexual Behavior in the Human Female, the authors being Al-
fred C. Kinsey, Wardell B. Pomeroy, Clyde E. Martin, Paul H. Geb-
hart, published in 1953.
In the foreword of these books, it is stated that a grant was made
to make these studies possible through the Committee for Kesearch
in Problems of Sex of the National Research Council of the National
Academy of Sciences, and that the Rockefeller Foundation made
the grant.
Professor Kinsey, in connection with his first volume, stated or
reiterated or emphasized that he was merely interested in finding the
fact of human sexual behavior. However, in the book (and numerous
reviewers, have pointed this out) Professor Kinsey departs from mere
statement of fact of human sexual behavior, and includes numerous
interpretations, interpretations which do not follow from the type
of data which he collected.
Mrs. Pfost. Dr. Hobbs, may I ask you, these books that you are
relating here, they all have to do with donations that have been made
by foundations in publishing the books. Is that the reason you are
enumerating the particular books ?
Dr. Hobbs. In this case, the grant was apparently made so that the
study could be conducted. In the second case, the grant was made
so that the study could be conducted. The book was published by a
commercial publisher. Whether any grant was made for purposes
of publication, I do not know.
Mr. Hays. Dr. Hobbs, I am sure that I am safe in assuming that
you are implying that these Kinsey reports are not very valuable.
Dr. Hobbs. I do not mean to imply that, sir. A tremendous amount
of work was involved in conducting these studies.
Mr. Hays. But you do more or less imply that the scientific ap-
proach was not very good.
Dr. Hobbs. There were numerous statistical fallacies involved in
both Kinsey reports; yes, sir.
Mr. Hats. You had no connection with the Kinsey project in any
way, have you?
Dr. Hobbs. No, sir. I have written articles relating to them for
the American Journal of Psychiatry, but no connection.
Mr. Hays. You have no desire to promote the sale of the book ?
Dr. Hobbs. Oh, no.
Mr. Hays. The reason I ask you that is that all the publicity about
Kinsey has sort of died down and now we are giving it a new impetus
here, and I suppose that will sell a few thousand more books.
Dr. Hobbs. I have no financial interest in that or in any of the
publishing companies, sir.
Mrs. Pfost. Dr. Hobbs, you mean to imply that tax-free funds
were used for the Kinsey report ?
Dr. Hobbs. Yes.
Mrs. Pfost. Thank you.
124 TAX-EXEMPT FOtJNDATIONS
The Chairman. As I understand, you are raising a question about
the scientific approach which Dr. Kinsey made in conducting this
research in the first place, and then some of his comments and con-
clusions which he wrote into his report, which did not necessarily
arise from the basis of his research which he had made?
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And which might have damaging effect on the
psychology of the people, particularly the young people of the
country.
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And at the same time undertaking to give to the
country the overall impression that his findings and his comments
were based upon a scientific study which had been made, as the basis
of a grant.
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir; a scientific study of the type by implication
which you have in physics and chemistry, and, therefore, its conclu-
sions cannot be challenged.
The Chairman. Enumerating in the preface that it was made by a
grant from one of the foundations giving it further prestige, possibly,
that it was of scientific value, and so forth.
Dr. Hobbs. That would be correct. I have a statement to that effect
to show that very type of influence, which I will come to a little bit
later.
Mr. Hats. Dr. Hobbs, I would like to ask you this : Is there any-
thing in the preface of the Kinsey volumes that says that this is not
to be taken as a general pattern of behavior for the whole country,
but just merely for the 5,000 or 3,000, or whatever number of people
it was that he studied ?
Dr. Hobbs. In the first volume — that is the volume on males — Kinsey
employed a technique of projecting his sample, which in that case,
if my memory serves me correctly, involved 5,300 males — a technique
of projecting that sample of 5,300 to the entire male population of the
United States. So the impression throughout the book was conveyed,
and conveyed very strongly, that the findings — and not only the find-
ings but the interpretation of the findings— applied to all oi the males
of the United States.
In the second volume Kinsey does not use that technique, because it
was — I would guess the reason he does not use it— because it was criti-
cized by statisticians and bthers, including myself .
Mr. Hats. Then you think he has been amenable to criticism?
Dr. Hobbs. The only acknowledgment that I know of that Professor
Kinsey has made to criticism — he may have made others than this, but
this is the only oi*e I know of— where at one time he said one of the
reasons why people don't interpret me correctly is because they believe
that the title of my book is "Sexual Behavior of the Human Male,"
when actually the title is "Sexual Behavior in the Human Male." I
could never quite grasp any deep significance of that difference,
although Professor Kinsey's point apparently was made that there is
in the field of taxonomy, where he came from before he took up sex,
that type of title is generally employed.
The Chairman. So far as the reaction among the public is con-
cerned, I think there is a very wide feeling that his whole research
and his publications are just a bunch of claptrap that are not doing
>mmmft'ttW8ffix$t$- i$&
».
anybody &$ good. • Ifcriiight Be -WU-r^Sff sfe ftibsili^iors^fe^^c
study, but I think m&ri^ plb^
from them if it is kept in &4M^^ cBih-
i m& mm tit ym j &ttfot^i m&-.wvhwb f we? mm waffi^e*
that is Mactly wh&we m doilig; ■■■Z$.®teMffll&%^b<A$ty , Q& >
-r- , n • "l j. 4 _ T ___- X T j. J.I.: :„ AUJji^iliUJfc'Uj
goirif t# *# <36nf$m lb irive^&tirii
let us go out and buy his books- tirid g& 'W&ki it u ife* dH UbMt.-
-m^iM^A*. H^pe^tihtot, itMtet&jrie^Mri : f%s; that'the,
Original' study; -particularly wsi s- matfe po^iftle aftH W^|dvari£ea b^ ■;
a J ' fiftrft ! Irbrii <>z£d Of &e foundation?: ' ' HbW *^ bth^ studied Of J
colnpi&blfc riatiiite So f aj 4 as Value 1 is 5 d#ck<i?etf %6B ihad^ jsb'ssibia !
by feu^^om f O^da^bris r0maiiis ; td W#fcnv I d6 ri<$ tirictatarijl
thiit iW wi&iesfc ill gtfnftti rBel&Bdr this ^lib^fefe; 7 ; ,
Dr. BpBBS. No, sir. ^
4 M£ Hays: ! wO&fl Eke to say On tMfr sb%%ihdt there undoubtedly
hive* BeM^dMirig tO the tftiitiber 6£ foMttattdii^that we said there
were in the opening of these hearings, there ha vel beeri literally tens
of thousands of grants..
' I3k HbfiisV Yes, sir;
MrJHAYS.' 1 jiist do riot think we ought to pick but thUsex #&rit i
anfl c^ncehtf ette' on* eriefgies on that. Ijet 'tis ju&t Sort Of go' aI0rig J
arid get, Ori with 7 fedrndthiiii el$e'.
m Ho^fe. Ijani sOrry I dM hot mike- ffiat dle^r, perhaps^ But
what I aril f eterMtig to are > grants whi&i'h^ve* hadSie most Mrierice !
ori the MBliei , Tdtfefenia^ theireS were th^«riQs 6f ^ntsl Thfe gen^
^ tnfblic i^% ; neS.rs Of ifte findings* d% say- ^rtterberift- of thOsfe
tffis#ridW IWI Mditeg^QC^ which ffie 1 g'eftetal public does hear ;
ofWwM^thyA^ ^
JMEfc "BAWJ Bbcto¥, right there, are riot- the nridSrigs of all these'
grafots TiuhHshled-prebaMy?
Br'. Hd^s^Mafly' of theiri are, ;of cotir^.
Mr. Hays. And if the public decides to look titer thi& ori6r, there
is'ribtjmufeh' W&iiarido about it. We' might fe'a'yithatisa bad charketer-
istieori the^rfbf *fi^ puBJic t6 b^ so curioiS§ dBOrit it, but there is
nothirig ^^thi^ ^ con^sfttee 6to : do • about It.
Mr'. W6&&sM ;Mri Ghairiiia^ riiaj^ I Merj'e'ct orie thihg^? Maybe
I airi aritidipatiri^ Brit I think m. ^ HobBs wil^Bring Orif th&t irithe
case of the Kinsey report, which he deems, I Be1i^6, a mista'keri piec
of WOrk iri Ori« s^n§ey Was takeri u^ B^ ya*ioug elements in th& public
Basis for * toaritt f of l^gislsttiori that Ottr % dil
and even made the Basis
and social practices Be changed. I think it has ehotirious importance
aildiriipaetirithitddflne^iOto. . ,
Mr'. Ha*s. 1*.% me ^ay to ybti, Mr. WOrmser, that knowing what
little I knOw abOufc legialatiOtt, from havirig served in twO different,
legislative bodies, I would say that is a subject that most legislators
win shy far awfcf fronl and I do ntit think you need to get toO much
excited about it.
49720^-54— pt. 1 9
Mf , Go^ipin,, Jfsb &«ot a ; f $G£, r Dod*My if; $our know, that tb^ sale
of bothpf the Ipnseyvolumes i&very di§ap]3pH$^?/ ;
„ Dr T poBB^, I$p,not^
In relation to evaluation in the Kingey/ volume^ references to ^-,
cial]^ approved patterns of sexual behavior are frcqiwptly referrecl'
to as rationalization. That is, the socially approved patterns of sex-
ual behavior throughout the Kinsey works are, referred to in terms
of ridicule, as being mere rationalization, and justifications for types
of behavior which l>y implication are not the best or even the most
desirable. i
Socially condemned forms of sexual behavior and criminal forms'
of sexual behavior are usually in the Kinsey volumes referred- to as
normal, or normal inthehuman animal. | | V
The presentation of moral codes, codes .of sexual behirtf or, is suoK
that they are contrasted with t what Kinsey calls, normal mammalian
behavior, which could give the impression, 4 and it gave the impression
to a number of reviewers, that things which conform to the socially
approved codes of sexual conduct are rationalisations, not quite right,
while things which deviate from it, such a$ lipmosexuality, are; nor-?
mal, in a sense right. ' " r .v ' .,■ ' t
Mr. Hats. I would like to get that a little straighler. As I sav,I
am working at a disadvantage never having read ti^ese yplumes,, ToiX;
are saying now that Kinsey says homosexuality is normal? .'
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir. " ;, "C : i\-;\:^ ",.,..^ ^' V.
The Chairman. Possibly I should reserve tlu^-^6]^^aiipn-;w;^h'
representatives of the foundations concerned are, befpret^e. committee,
but what disturbs me, professor, is why a f oundation /^^|g;f^d§'^.,
made available by the people and the Government 4^16^^$^^^ J',',
or at least some 90 percent of the (funds are ma4$ .P^ible/i^
people foregping the taxes which tb»ey otherwfee wpul^^eceive^ which,
you and I make up, why a foundation should be ,nia^g grants f or a ,
study of this nature^ It may have sufficient "scien^fic ^alue to^ justify
it, but it certainly is a project that I, as Mr, Says i|impaies ; tliat tfre, i
Government itself would not undertake to ma^e ^e)fuRds available,,
to sponsor the project. Then why should spine ageiicy w^pse] funds
are made available by the Government f oregping r ^ie^ taxes in turn,,
sponsor a project that has at least such a gre^-t, question and aura
of mystery surrounding it ? ,^ 4 V/ ;
Dr, OSpbbs, Sir, in respect to a grant for the first yplumeyX shoiijid;
say there should ^ave, been a good deal of skeDtfcis^h> but I cai^ seej;
where the members of the foundations, cpuldfbelT-r-c^tj.ot mistake me,, *
Prof essor Kinsey is a very able man, he had a verjfigopci papkgroiaid '
in physical j science j ; in biology, specifically in taJ?P^oiny, and he F ]LSr
an extremely : hard i wprker.i . ,■.:■ , ; -.-: w :■:.;: fO'i'v'v.-:' ; '"?' ,■,,"; .",'",-.',
^ejCBEAiBMA^* I| you will permit an interjecjtio^j ^U I&ave Jiear^i
about Prof essor Kinsey is very favorable. ■ ■<-/; -;. j ; = t ".."... , , !r
X>r, Hobbs. vyes»sir. '.;' ': ■■' : ; ;; .u--.,, M; ,[ M <a , A .]: ! . i L-;Vi'':'".v j^
The Chairman. As a professor and ip ; |^s Jf ^e)^ Tj t#a^ihe ;is ff vec^ if
capable. The question is whether he roamed be^ndil^sl]jSel.4 w|ien ^ke '
project? d himself into this, study under jthe; grafts, ■; mac[e -by ''#ie* r
foundation; „.-,;,< ;. -' : .■■.•;! ' '■■■'■.''■.■.■ h^ovrl ,^iivv^ ■)• ' : : : '.-,^}
Mr, Hafs. {What you are saying, Mr. iQhair^ %&,',
expert on wasps. ; ; , r ; I : ^
Dr. Hobbs. A particular kind of wasp. „ ,
«.'-M&F.vM**fc- ; l Want to go back to this business. I f am frankly qttite
disturbed afc^t this statement. I hate always been under the im? ?
p^e^kai that holt^ekuality was a disease. Now you.say that Kiiisey
maiesth^flat*statemelst^^ • ?
Dr. Hobbs. In the context of the pmsentatidnihe refers to human*
sexual normality in terms of the human animal,^ normal in other
anthropoids. These- are all quotes. Wsiial mammalian fcehay^r, bio-
logic normality. Perfectly natural and humanly inevitable. That lasts
one, I, think— I am not positive abo^t 1 this— Specifically along. with
the others related to homosexuality^. , •'■■'•;■
•Mrl'HAtfs. As I follow you now; yottare lifting- a gfloup of words-'
and ^ust mentioikimg them off ^ and saying ^atthej wese used through
the book. What I want to know is, 'did he or did he not say homo-;
sexuality is nbrm&P? If he did; Tthiiik then we are on &af e groundt
ingoing fttrther. If hedid^o^'letU^saty'thatl ' ^
Bri Hobbs. In the context of the presentation these terms were used*
more than 100 times; I am not picking on r m otc^imhV^tm. Thtm
terms were used over and over again in the fh^t vblume. : . ; '
Mr. HUm I am asking you" a simple^ question.- Did he or ^did he
not-^you can answer by either yes'or^o^dM he or did: he noVsa^
homosexuality is normal behavio^ !>1 - ^ ;i ,* ..-•■., ;ii
Dr. Hobbs. I Would have to get the. volume and the exact referenced
Mr. HaysL I thought a moment igWthat you made the st^te^meht
that he said that. At least yo\i left pe with that impression; ;; ; / ] _ " • ■ >
Dr; Hobbs; Tf I said that it was a misinterpretation] - The implica-
tion throughout the book in the 1 context, -6f ; nbrmal. m^mma^n 1 . b#^
havjo?, and so on, the implication: which i§ likely to be left in the*
miriiis of most readers is the hpmosfex^altt^.and 1 Other ;f6rfns of sbdaliy
condemned; forms of sexual behavior aret normal, ^rinal in^'thcF
mammalian sense. -^■-■■.■\ »o ^'' ;; -'-' ; -v^ ! ^!-- ,;- !V .;\:" ( I
Mr. Ha*s. In other words, you are sayiiig he , left' that implic^tton
but he didnotsatsb flatly? V ;: "■ '^-^•■'■•■■•■s v -";>■> }b/-:;-; ^< <-n\
Dr. MHobbs. Tlie statement may be" ifttte book. I would not say
dMiiiterythatitiSjOrisnot. f ^ .* - """ ]
Mr, HAm; 1 think it is bad if he left the implication, but I think
itisalotworiseif hesald so flatly.
( Dr. Hobbs. 1 I agree with you; * ; ;1
The ChaSemanv But the quotations which you have just read, pro-
fessor, which are explanatiQns which he^ives in the book, certainly
would agree the normality of !such behavior.
Dr. Hobbs. Very definitely and repeatedly.
Mrs. Piost. Dr. Hobbs, I under st66d that the purpose of the hear-
ings of this committee was to investigate the donatibm and grants of
tax-exempt foundations to un-Amerkfaii activities ior •subversive organ-
ization. I was wouoidering wlmt bearing this Kinsey report has on this
angle of our hearings. '-■ ' ! ^-- •■■'■.:■■■■ .>..\\ ■.:<■» v> -_' ' n :,-;'' rr r >- } '' l
Dr; Hobbs; My understanding-Mit may be incoare^t-~was that there
was an interest in whether these grants^ result in studies "and. publica-
tions which in a significant way affect apolitical activity or military
activity or -moral activity. -- : '■■ -'V vMi^-'- ?M ; n: I ,v-/. </:::!/.:■
Mr. Wokmsek. May I interject, if I may, Mr; Chairman, to suggest
to Mrs; Pfost that Dr. Hobbs hardly is Sri a 'position to testify what the-
investigation covers.; I think, the * committee ! itself would < have ■ to> '■■
determine that.
! Mare. Pt!om\ I: caii realize- that^ but* we seem to have gotten *$ve,? to
the Kansey report and have stayed dn it for quite some tintes. /
Mr. HApes; Mr. Wbrniser, right there, you a»d Jhave- had humorous
conversations and we always wind up agreeing- that thi* eoimnittee
did not set out t»? investigate sex ■ - r
•t Mrj WbitMSEKi; There is no question about that. ; ,- T -.:...,
Mr. HAirdi We- are spending a lot of tinie on that So we got sex
in the back door.; That is going to be good* headlines;
Mr. Koch. Brnphasizeaby questions.
Mr. Wormser. May I make this explanation^ Prof essor Hpblja has
written a book in wMfeh he has discussed what h$ called "seiemtism."
I still would like him to explain that word. The word relates to re-
search and the type of writing in the social sciences whiehvis financed
widely by foundations and it has certain, according to Dr. Hobbs and
his book, derogatory effects on our society. It seems to me that is a
proper subject for investigation. The Kinsey report is one of the
examples of a .piece in one sense anyway, a mistaken investigation
which has had derogatory effects.
Thei Chair^a:^ My feeling would be y Mrs. Flost, that the. ۩mmit-
t^e does h^^e fuU authority to investigate, the grants which any of
the foundations may have made to determine what the effect of these;
grants may have been. However, I think your question is very appro-
priate, ii^ indicating that we ought not to let ourselves get too far on
thebyroad. ; /{<;;
Me. G-oouwin^ Xi seems to me, Mr* Chairman* we ought to let the
doctor go ahead and develop his testimony. So far as I am concerned,
I will keep in the background any interest I have in this matter. i ; ,
The Chairma^ If it is agreeable with the comanittee, I r think it
would, be in the interest of good procedure to permit JDfr. Hobbs to-
proceed with the development of his thesis until we feel abused.. ,
, ; M%, ■ Hasts. .Jnst;bef ore he goes on, I am going to insist; that we clear
up this remark of the associate counsel, which; I think -he" put it'
in there deliberately to" indicate I have an undue interest in this
matter. _ As you know, I told you in the beginning tbjtt we better
leave Kansey eleaa? out of this hearing one way otf another, because I
do not think this committee is competent to ruje an Itinse-y Or the
subject that he studied. I do not want any members of the stall to
be trying to put me in a bad light. As a mattet of faet, as far as
that js concerned, I do not think any can, even if they try, but I am
going to make it plain right here that I am not goiaatjg ft© sit idly by
and let it happen. /
While I am on the subject, the reeord migfce as- weE show that
there is no minority staff, that the minority is sitting here alone. If
we try to protect amybody that we think is b»ingfptlrjseGtit^d r weare
still alone,,; because the staff and the majority ar© all of the' same
opinion. I am trying to be openminded about the whole thing.
Mr. GOobwisf. Mr. Chairman, I think the record will probably
show that any buildup that has been given Mr. Kinsey this morning
has been done by the committee. .',. .
The Chairman. I think possibly that Professor Hobbs would have
been very restrained insofar as I am able to observe from what he
said so far, and I do not think the development by the committee
applies to my one member of the committee ; it applies to all of us.
Mr. WoRM^ilfr* £^airm*», may, I #ft.^ sometJamg to Mr, Hays.
I tried to make clear to him in perso»fat a talk weuhad that insol^r
m I personally am concerned as counsel* I mom thaa welcome; his
4eisajaaa®fe)ji of witnessed j mix delighted te tow hi*n sxamine the#i
as ffeely as be wishes. Jom mot srn the cjanjn&fcefej I m» only counsel ;
butI^a#tkwtoupde^*nd«oiwsM'spQgitio^ = i ?
The QnAmmm. You may proceed, Mr. 2G©ibb§,, : :
J>r; Hgbbs. Thank yen, sir. Per haps this is aot in context. I
don't know. But what I aw tryiuglfeo illustrate is the manner in
which studies can influence important aspects of human kehaYior. I
doo'fc meiaii to impjagn Professor Kinsiy's motives, nor the motives of
the members of the foundations or anything of that type. I am
merely saying that this can happen and this is. an illustration of
where it does happen. = \
For an illustration, in connection with _ the question of hstero-
sexuality compared with homosexuality, Kinsey inithe first v&^m©
has this statement:
It is ofiiy because society demands that there be a particular choice in tie
matter (of heterosexuality or homosexuality) and ; does clot so often dictate
qn^'^ Qhpic^ <tf f pod or ciotfctog. . : T . -
He puts it in terms of it is just a custom which society demands.
In the second volume it is stressed, for example, that we object to
adult molester of children primarily because we have become con-
ditioned against such adult molesters of children, and that the chil-
dren who are molested become emotiopaHy upset, primarily beeauae
of,.. the old-fashioned attitudes pf their parents about such practices,
and the parents (the implication is) are the ones who do the real
damage by making a fuss about it 'if a child is molested. Because
the Molester, and here I quote from Einsey, "may have contributed
favorably to their later soeiosexual development." That is a molester
of children may have actually, Kinsey contends, hot only not harmed
them, but may have contributed favorably to their later soeiosexual
development. =
Especially emphasized in the second volume, the volume on females,
is the supposed beneficial effects of premarital sexual experiences.
Such experiences, Kinsey states :
provide am oppoittjnity for the females to leant to adjust emotionally to various
■typep of males. , : ■=.•;;;-•:■■ ■■")'
That is on page ?68 of the volume ori females.
In addition, on page 327 he contends that premarital sexual expe-
rience may well contribute to the effectiveness of one's other non-
sexual social relationships, and that many f emales-^rthis is on page
115— vwill thus learn how to respond to soeiosexual .contacts, , > ;
, On page 328, that it should contribute to the development of, emo-
tional capacities in a more effective way than if sexual experiences
,are aspqired after marriage.
The avoidance of premarital sexual experience |by females, accord"
ing to Professor K ; nsey, may lead to inhibitions which damage the
f <jarj^city to respond, so much
years of marriage, ^if, indeed, they are ever dissipated." . Xhat 4 s
from page 330. <.,, r . ,., , . , <, . .,.. ..,.,,,, ..: ■.._'-:<
_ So (you get a continued emphasis on t^;desirafeil^ty of feft^ales
^ejiga^in^ in premarital sexual behavior. Th botlr df ! these vtftuines
IH30 TAX^XERIPT FOTJNDATJ£0#S
• there is a perlisfeeht emphasis, ""ft- jieiteistenfc 4^ es ^' 0I1 i% ! * t ^ ^ e * t^^"
"tibhal eodesjttiidthia^Jaws reflating 'to : se£uair%ehaviorr Processor
Kiiisey may M fcbrrfcct or heinay be incorrect^ but when he gives the
^ impression that the findings are scientific in the; same sense as the
■"ftijdings jn* physical science* then the issiae becomes not a matter of
whether he as a person is correct or incorrect/ but of the impression
which is given to the public, which can be quite iinf ortunate.
- As an illustration of this impression, there is a volume which came
out this year called Sex Life of the American Woman and the Kinsey
Report, which was edited by one Albert Ellis, and published in 1954.
In this volume an attorney— shall I give his name; it is not particu-
larly a- flattering reference?
The Chairman. Unless there is something to be accomplished by
it, I see no purpose to it.
- Dr. Hobbs. I will omit these names, but if you want them I can
supply them. An attorney writing in this volume says this:
It may sound strange to say that the most encouraging note about the new
Kinsey report is its Indication that more and more women are beginning to
.•commit more and more sex crimes.
People get to think that this is a good thing if iviomen commit more
and more sex crimes.
Then from the same volume here are a series of statements from a
prominent clergyman, and again I would prefer not to identify him,
but can if you wish. He comes very, very close to comparing the
Kinsey findings and the Kinsey study with religion.
Looking for truths, mathematical, historical, artistic, sesual, any and every
kind of truth is a form of religious devotion. This questioning of the world is
only one kind of worship, of course, but it is one to which we are enjoined. It
is a devotional life involving laboratories and libraries, interviews, and the IBM.
This is by a clergyman, and it comes to be almost a religion or
substitute for religion.
He says:
These (referring to Kinsey 's findings) results are the facts with which the
moralist will have to work and build.
Do you want the page numbers on these citations, if anybody wants
to check them? .
The CHAiRMANi It would not hurt to give the page numbers.
Mr. Hobbs. The first reference was on page 79, and the second one
on page 80. The reference by the attorney was on page 183.
Another one, also, by the clergyman :
Yet we cannot go back to the legalistic morality which has prevailed so long.
That has really outlived its usefulness if the Kinsey books are right
Here you get a man who is undoubtedly sincere^ but unfortunately
like many of us when we are in areas where we are not expert, quite
£ullible.< Assuming this is published and labeled "science," therefore
it must be right ; even clergymen have to go along with it and change
concepts of morality.
That legalistic cpnformism has outlived its usefulness by about 2,000 years,
if the New Testament is right. It is an emeritus ethic, due at least for honorable
retirement. ''-'' ''.'/, .'' ■
That is on pages 92 ai^d 93.
Just prior 4 to the publication of the first Kinsey volume, the one
oh males, there was an article in Harper's magazme presenting the
T^EXEMPT frOtMDATIONS 131
type of cpiielusion which Kinsey was going to bring out, written by
one Albert Beutsch. He described the general type of Kinsey's con-
clusions, that they were shocking, that they would change the laws,
'that they would change attitudes toward morality, and so on, and
he had this statement in there, which I think is particularly pertinent
to this inquiry:
So startling are its revelations, so contrary to what civilized man has been
taught for generations, that they .would be unbelievable but for the impressive
■ weight of the scientific agencies backing the survey. •
That is the unfortunate thing that you have involved here. I do
not mean that the foundations meant it to be that way. I do not mean
even that Professor Kinsey meant it to be that way. But unfortu-
nately the public does get that impression— that this is something that
is final and infallible, which you cannot and should not question. I
think that is extremely unfortunate.
Mr. Wormser. Dr. Hobbs, would you take the time to give quickly
1 or 2 illustrations, starting at page 99 of your book, of reactions to
the first Kinsey report? I think some of them are particularly im-
portant. There are 1 or 2 which resulted in advocacy of legislation
to change sex laws. There is one from the Scientific Monthly on page
99. There is another from Professor Mclver, and a third one from
E. L. Dickinson.
Dr. Hobbs. Yes.
The Scientific Monthly is an impressive and deserved title for a sound and
scholarly magazine. In the December 1948 issue a review of the Kinsey report
appeared in this magazine. This review was written by a respected psycholo-
gist who did state some of the limitations inherent in the Kinsey sample, but
then went on to minimize these limitations. He described the report as an out-
standing achievement, which used basically sound methods, which led to trust-
worthy results. Not content to stop with description and assessment of the
method, the reviewer did precisely what the Kinsey report seems designed to
lead people to do, stating that it recorded "tremendous implications for scien-
tists, legislators, physicians, and public officers." He contended that the report
"shows clearly that our current laws do not comply with the biologic facts of
normal sexual behavior."
In other words, the implication is that the laws should be changed
to conform with biology. If you have a biological urge, the law
should permit you to express that biological urge as it is demanding
on you.
This review described the final result as "one of the most outstanding
contributions of social and biological science to the welfare of
millions."
Then in another type of review, this was entitled, "About the Kinsey
Report," edited by Donald Porter Geddes and Enid Curie. Eleven
experts contribute observations about the Kinsey report. These ex-
perts, and some of them of great renown, included psychiatry, pro-
fessor of sociology, anthropology, law, psychology, economics, and
anatomy. They react in similar fashion. Some of them simply do
not know enough about scientific method and statistics to evaluate
Kinsey's report, and these accepted without qualifications. Others
have a suspicion that it is unscientific, but say in effect that it doesn't
matter, the important thing is that it be publicized and serve as a
basis for reform of sexual behavior and of laws which deal with
violations of sexual mores.
132 TAX-EXE]VfJJ?T FQtJNDATIQNS
Mr, Wormser. Dr. Hobbs, I dp not think you need to takq the time
to do more. There are other similar citations in your Sbook at pages
99 to, I believe, 102. I think you might here go to another subject.
Dr. Hobbs. The point I wanted to make here is that this is the type
of thing which can, and, I think you will agree, does in some measure
at least influence an important aspect of human beha.vjor. It is
something that we should be extremely careful about, careful to a
degree which was not indicated in the publicizing of books such as
the .Kinsey report. I don't mean to put' any onus on Professor Kinsey.
He certainly worked hard, and sincerely, at it, and has an impressive
collection of data. But the end result is quit£ unfortunate.
The second reference I would like to make is to a/book^ written by
Stuart Chase, called. The proper Study of Mankind published in
1948 by Harpers. Here is the publisher's blurb on it, which states
under a title, "How This Book Came To Be Written," and I quote from
the publisher's blurb :
The story of the origin and development of the proper study of mankind high-
light its importance and suggests its quality. All his life Stuart Chase ha»
been keenly interested in social problems as his many highly successful books
bear witness. His growing anxiety about the state of the world and the dilem-
mas of the atomic age was challenged some 3 years ago when he was asked by
Donald Young of the Social Science Research Council and Charles Dollard of
the Carnegie Corp. to undertake the preparation of a study which would —
and this is in quotes —
"run a kind of chain and compass line across the whole front of the sciences
devoted to human relations."
Then further on it says :
It (the book) was planned and developed in consultation with dozens of social
scientists in all parts of the country, and Messrs. Young and Dollard followed
the project step by step to its completion.
So that here is an illustration of a book which was not only the
result of a grant, but which directly involved members of the founda-
tions, and which had their specific endorsement,
Mr. Hats. Dr. Hobbs, I have a couple of questions. I do not
know how long you are going to be here, and I think it is important
that we get them in. I do not know that this is any better place than-
perhaps later on or even earlier.
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hays. In view of the fact that there must be literally thousands-
of professors all over the country, I am interested in how you came
to be here today. Did you approach the staff or did the staff ap-
proach you, or just how was the contact made ?
Dr. Hobbs. As I remember the sequence, I believe it was Mr. Norman
Dodd who wrote to me saying that he had read my book and was very
much interested in it, and that he was going to or had ordered copies-
for the research group and then later on he wrote to me saying he
would be in Philadelphia, and would I meet him and have dinner
with him. I did. I believe it was at that time he asked or gave me
a general outline of the type of thing that the committee was trying-
to do and asked me if I would care to contribute to it.
Mr. Hats. In other words, then, the staff approached you. You
did not write in asking to testify ?
Dr. Hobbs. No, no.
Mr. Hats. Have you ever worked on a foundation project ?
Dr. Hobbs: I was with the Princeton office of population research in
the early part of the war before I Went into the service. I dp j hot
know franldy whether that was a foundation. It was working under
tjie Department of State. I don't know whether grants werte in-
volved or not.
Mr. Hats. In other words, you were never directly involved in one
where you got a grant ?
Dr. Hobbs. I have received grants, yes, sir.
Mr. Hats. You have received grants?
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir. At the end of the war, the Social Science Re-
search Council had what they call demobilisation awards, which were
for the purpose of enabling people who had been in the service to
help them to get back into the swing of things, and in a sense at
least sort of make up for lost time. Donald Young approached me
and said in effect, "Why don't you try for one of these awards,"
and I did. The grant Was the demobilization award for the summer
of 1946 and the summer of 1947. It was in the amount of $1,000 for
each of those summers so I could work on a book.
Mr. Hats. What foundation was that from?
Dr. Hobbs. The Social Science Research Council.
Mr. Hats. Have you ever applied to any of these foundations for
a grant that has been turned down?
Dr. Hobbs. No.
Mr. Hats. You have never been turned down ?
Dr. Hobbs. No, sir.
Mr. Hats. I want you to get the impression, and I hope you will,
that any questions I may ask you are not unfriendly.
Dr. Hobbs. Surely.
Mr. Hats. I am just interested in some of the background here.
Of course, I am sure you realize by this time that your appearing this
morning and the testimony that you have given so far will get your
name in a lot of papers and places where it has probably never been
before.
Dr. Hobbs. I might say that my name has been in a lot of papers
already.
Mr. Hats. I am sure it has.
Dr. Hobbs. Frankly, it does not matter too much.
Mr. Hats. It is going to be in all of them from this testimony
today; let me put it that way. That fact would not have influenced
you in your choice of this particular book to discuss ?
Dr. Hobbs. No. Frankly, I am interested in the type of studies
I make in teaching. To put it frankly, this is obviously an emo-
tional strain and so on, and I am taking time off from my Work.
Mr. Hats. I do not know whether you observed it or not, but I
think this is interesting, and I think it is interesting to you. The last
book you mentioned, what was the name of that ?
Dr. Hobbs. If you want to, we will keep the title down.
Mr. Hats. No, I want the title of it.
Dr. Hobbs. It is "Social Problems in Scientism."
Mr. Hats. Not your book. Did you not just mention a book?
Dr. Hobbs. Stuart Chase, "The Proper Study of Mankind."
Mr. Hats. Did you observe that did not create much of a ripple
among the reporters. when you mentioned that book, but on the Kin-
sey book they all made notes.
134 TAX-EXEMPT. FOUNDATIONS
Dr. Hobbs. I am sorry. We have to face it, sex is interesting— I
am not sorry that it is that way ; it is a fact.
Mr. Hats. I do not think you need to commit yourself about
whether you are sorry or not. I certainly dM not npan to n^ik©: teri$
inference. I just want to point out that this is the tm&g that is going
to get the news. What I am getting at is, that did not influence you
to use that particular one for an illustration?
Dr. Hobbs. No. You see ; I had written two critical analyses of the
Kinsey books for the American Journal of Psychiatry, and they did,
when they were issued, get a lot of publicity, and so on. So that is
the context in which they are significant, I think.
Mr. Hats. If what you say about the Kinsey Report is true, and I
certainly have no reason to doubt your statements, I think it is unfor-
tunate if we have encouraged the sale of it any. But since your book
is critical of it, maybe you ought to mention the title of it again, and
maybe we might encourage the sale of it a little.
The Chairman. I have grave doubts whether what he has said
about the Kinsey Report today would promote the sale of it very much.
Mr. Hats. You would be surprised at the number of curious peo-
ple that will want to go and read it.
The Chairman. You may go ahead.
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir. One question on this Proper Study of Man-
kind would be why was a man like Stuart Chase selected. Again
I do not mean to impugn Mr. Chase, because he is an excellent writer.
He is a very good popular writer.
Mr. Hats. Right there now, I am interested. You say why was a
man like Stuart Chase selected. Who is he? Give us a little back-
ground about him.
Dr. Hobbs. He has written numerous books which are listed on this
blurb: The Tragedy of Waste; Your Money's Worth; Men and
Machines; The Economy of Abundance] Rich Land, Poor Land; Idle
Men, Idle Money; Where is the Money Coming From? I think
that would still be up to date.
Mr. Hats. If he wrote Where is the Money Coming From? he
plagiarized former Congressman Rich. He had a copyright on that.
Dr. Hobbs. There is another one more recent than this which I
reviewed for one of the journals published after the war, "For This
We Fought," and the usual line that we were fighting for economic
fains, we were fighting for better housing and things like that. I
ad just come out of the service. I had not met anyone who was
fighting for a better house or anything like that. So I wondered
why a man like Stuart Chase, who has in his work definitely indi-
cated his leanings toward collectivism and social planning and that
sort of thing, why he was chosen.
Mr. Hats. In other words, you are saying he is a sort of leftwinger ;
is that it ?
Dr. Hobbs. Sir, to answer that, may I cite from another book
written by one of your colleagues, Congressman Shafer, this is the
book called "The Turning of the Tides," written by Paul W. Shafer,
Congressman Shafer, I understand, and one John Howland Snow,
and there is a reference in there to Stuart Chase and several Stations
from his writings :
In 1921 the Intercollegiate Socialist Society was ready for the next organiza-
tional step, and this was signalized by a change of name. The 16-year-old ISS in
that year became the League for Industrial Democracy.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 136
The LID was a membership society Organized for the specific pur-
pose of "education for a new social order based on production for use
and not for profit."
Under its new name, the original Intercollegiate Socialist Society
continued under the joint direction of Harry W. Laidler and Norman
Thomas. The league's first president was Robert Morse Lovett, a
professor of literature at the University of Chicago, and an editor of
the New Republic. Charles P. Steinmetz was a vice president, and
Stuart Chase was treasurer. One of its lecturers was Paul R. Porter,
later with the ECA in Greece. The field secretary was Paul Blanshard.
In 1926 one of the directors was Louis Budenz — a man of whom you
have heard.
Mr. Hats. A sort of eminently respectable repentant Communist.
Dr. Hobbs. Yes.
Mr. Hats. A professional witness, too, isn't he?
Dr. Hobbs. He has appeared testifying before committees. I have
read some of the testimony.
Mr. Hats. I do not know whether he is one, but my good friend,
Martin Dies, was saying the other day that he had a string of Com-
munists that he could depend on any time, but television ruined all
of them.
Dr. Hobbs. This book also refers to Stuart Chase, addressing the
department of superintendents of the National Educational Asso-
ciation, at its Atlantic City meeting on February 25, 1935, and said :
If we have even a trace of liberalism in our natures, we must be prepared
to see an increasing amount of collectivism, Government interference, centraliza-
tion of economic control, social planning. Here again the relevant question
is not how to get rid of Government interference, but how to apply it for the
greatest good of the greatest number.
The citation is from the National Education Association, April 25,
pages 107, 110.
In 1934 Stuart Chase declared that an abundance economy re-
quires^ —
the scrapping of outworn political boundaries and of constitutional checks and
balances where the issues involved are technical.
That also is from the National Education Association Journal of
May 1934, page 147.
Mr. Hats. Are you a member of the National Education Asso-
ciation ?
Dr. Hobbs. No, sir. The National Education Association is for ele-
mentary and secondary school teachers primarily. College teachers
ordinarily would not belong to it. One question here is why was Stuart
Chase chosen when his leanings were definitely known and why not
pick some other person, or if you do pick Chase, and a case could be
made for picking him by virtue of his extremely good writing talent, if
you do pick him, then you would have to be very careful that he did not
slant the material too much in ways that you would know he is likely
to. You have these two members of the foundation, Donald Young and
Charles Dollard, who presumably would tend to modify or eliminate
any leaning which you might tend to find in the book. That did not
happen.
Here, sir, I will go back to the question you raised earlier about
giving the reader the impression that the physical sciences and the
1E6- TAX-EXEMPT LFOtmDJmONa'
soeral seierices ft^e Wry much fcfo& sanm • Hlera-is the type of thing you
What had. the anthropologist, psychologist, sociologist to ten us afeout ! stich
proMemg that wits in &ny way cdmparabWto what the pfey£ici»t and the medical
rtfeti'h&d to tail us ahout thermodynamics and filterable viruses, laws *nd princi-
ples and techniques which a man would rely on? So when it was suggested by
Donald Young of the Social Science Research Council and Charles Dollard of
bhp Carnegie Corp. that I run a kind of dhain-and-^ontpass lihe across the whole,
front of the sciences devoted to human delations, I wa^ immediately: iate^ested
in connection with the deep and fundamental quest for certainty Which had
troubled me for aiany years.
, My first conferences were with Young and Dollar d, who have followed the
project step by step and given me invalu&ble help. Beforte accepting the assign-
ment at all,, I consulted Raymond Fosdick, who has planned and encouraged
many studies in M© application Of seieac& to human relations, and he Urged me
to attempt it.
Mr. Hats. Professor, to keep this thing clear, would yon identify
Young and Dollard a little more?
Dr. Hobbs. As identified. in the book and advertising-—
Mr. Hats. What foundations are they with ?
Dr. Hobbs. As stated, Donald Young of the Social Science "Research
Council, and Charles Dollard of the Carnegie Corp.
Mr. Hats. As I get it so far, is this Stuart Chase accused of being
a Communist or anything?
Dr. Hobbs. No, but his leanings. As I said, according to The Turn-
ing of the Tides, he was a member of the League for Industrial Demo-
cracy, which was Socialist, or at least quasi-Socialist.
Mr. Hats. Is that on the Attorney General's list or anything? I
never heard of it.
Dr. Hobbs. I frankly do not know whether it is or not. I am not
saying this as, a matter of subversion, but a matter of definite leaning
which was indicated in the background.
Mr. Hats. We cannot criticize a man for his leanings, can We?
Dr. Hobbs. No, sir.
Mr. Hats. A fellow might lean the other way, and as far as I am
concerned, he has a perfect right to lean that way.
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir; but, if the leanings are known, the question
arises : Should'the foundations lend their prestige and works to foster
those leanings in the eyes of the public or at least the portion of the
public which reads books of this kind ?
Mr. Hats. Do you suppose that the intellectual outlook of the in-
dividual foundation member might have anything to do with that?
Dr. Hobbs. It readily could.
Mr. Hats. If you were a member of a board of directors of a founda-
tion and somebody came to you with a request for a grant to promul-
gate the ideas of William McKinley, would you think that would be
a worthy subject for a grant?
Dr. Hobbs. No, sir.
Mr. Hats. Why ? He is a fellow statesman of mine.
Dr. Hobbs. William McKinley did not have the title of a social
scientist.
Mr. Hats. He had a lot of ideas on social science.
Mr. Goodwin. He had a lot of ideas which are still pretty good, too.
; Mr. Hats. I would not want to say that he did not have any ideas
that were not pretty good. I think his philosophy of politics, and that
of his manager, shall we say, to use a kind word, Mark Hanna, have
r TlX-fiXEMPT FGtMDATTOltfS ffil
become pretty outdated. Even Ms principle of campaigning would
not stand up in 1954. The front porch was good then. I wish you
could campaign that way now. It would be better maybe for the
candidate. . „ .-,,
Mr. Goodwin, You can stop this colloquy, Doctor, if you will go
forward.
Mr. Hats. Right there, I do not want you to arrogate to yourself
any right to stop me from making a speech here, Mr; Goodwin.
Mr. Goodwin. All right, Doctor.
Dr. Hobbs. Then he goes on to say, after having these conferences
with Young and Dollard, and after they had requested that he do this;
work, tnathe went to Washington to meet a gpoup of social scientists;
who had been active in war work, who had influenced (and he cites;
examples) , Comdr. Alexander Leighton talked of his experiences withi
Japanese Americans in the Arizona desert, and his work in Japan.
Others outlined their work in selecting "cloak and dagger men," for
the OSS. In manpower analysis, economic controls for inflation, the
selection of officers for the Army. Samuel Stauffer described how
he felt the pulse of 10 million GI's. Actually I may interject Chase
said 10 million. In the volume on the American soldier which he re-
fers to here, it was a half million rather than 10 million. I repeat
the quote, "how he felt the pulse of 10 million GI's,, via the Army
studies of troop attitudes and opinion which he largely engineered."
Then he goes on to say that "I am grateful to J. Frederick Dew-
hurst^ John Dollard, John Gardner, Pendleton Herring, Ralph Lin-
ton, H. A. Murray, Talcbtt Parsons, Don K. Price, and Fatil Webbink
for a reading of the manuscript, but I am, of course, responsible f or
the final draft."
This book, Chase says, is an attempt to explore the possibilities of
applying the scientific method which has proved so successful in prob^-
lems of matter and energy to problems of human relations. The
methods in use by many statesmen today— —
Mr. Hats. Dr. Hobbs, would you mind just holding up there a
minute.
(Discussion off the record.)
Mrs. Pfost. Mr. Chairman, I was going to ask you a question. Since
we are this morning investigating authors and the effect that their pub-
lications have upon the public in general and it has been alleged that
TV and radio have also been used lor those purposes to a great extent,
especially by such foundations as Facts Forum that is backed, it is
alleged, by Mr. Hunt, down in Texas, I was wondering whether
or not if such allegations are true, that we intend in these hearings to 1
investigate those foundations also ?
The Chairman. The preliminary study has been made of a great
number of foundations to determine the general character of their
operations and a considerable number of them will be called, and'
there is no indisposition on the part of the staff, so far as I know,
for the chairman to have the representative of the Hunt Foundation
appear before the committee. As a matter of fact, I had a telegram
from the man who handles the Facts Forum programs stating that
they would like to appear.
Mr. Hats. In that connection, we discussed yesterday, Mr. Worm-
ser, about getting a series of their scripts of their radio program,
Mr. Koch. Yes, we are going to get them for you.
138 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mrs. Pfost. I had not been brought up to date on this.
Mr. Hats. That was late yesterday afternoon, and I did not know
whether the staff had done anything at all. I want to make it clear
as long as they bring in people on their television show and make it
perfectly clear this is John Doe and Richard Roe or somebody else
and that what he says is his opinion, that is one thing ; I have no ob-
jection to that.
There) are a lot of programs that do that, and a lot of people that
think they are all right, and some they think are not. That is Amer-
ica. The program I am interested in is where they purport to give
both side of the thing themselves. One man says I will give you the
pros and cons. The radio program is what I am particularly inter-
ested in, and those are the scripts I want to get hold of .
Mr. Wormser. You want to see the scripts before we bring them on.
Mr. Hays. Definitely.
The Chairman. The committee will stand in recess until 2 o'clock
this afternoon in this same room.
(Thereupon at 11 : 55 a. m.,- a recess was taken until 2 p. m., the
same day*)
AFTERNOON - SESSION
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
Professor Hobbs, you may proceed.
TESTIMONY OF DR. A. H. HOBBS, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF
SOCIOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA— Resumed
The Chairman. The oath that was administered earlier is con-
tinued.
Dr. Hobbs. I should like to go back and complete a quotation which
I started this morning. Another quotation which I am quoting to
illustrate
The Chairman. Professor, will you please keep in mind that we do
not have the amplifiers this afternoon?
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir.
This is another quotation which is designed to show the attempt to
identify social science as being identical or at least very similar to
physical science. I quote from Stuart Chase again :
This book is an attempt to explore the possibility of applying the scientific
method which has proved so successful In problems of matter and energy to the
problems of human relations. The methods in use by many leaders and states-
men today leave something to be desired. Are there any more dependable ways
to promote well-being and survival?
The implication there is that through this scientific method you can
supplant or at least add to the methods used by statesmen.
Another quotation to the same effect :
Social science might be defined on a high level as the application of the scien-
tific method to the study of human relations. What do we know about those
relations that is dependable? The "wisdom of the ages" obviously is not good
enough as the state of the postwar world bears eloquent witness.
Another one to the same effect :
The scientific method does not tell us how things ought to behave but how they
do behave. Clearly, there is no reason why the method should not be applied to
the behavior of men as well as to the behavior of electrons.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 139
. AH through this, if I may interject, giving the reader the impression
tliat these two methods are the same. The quotation continues :
; There are social experiments and physical experiments, and the scientific
method can be used most advantageously in both,
I would like to interject again, there are social experiments and
there are physical experiments, but I would like to point out in the
physical experiments you are dealing with electrons and things of
that type. With the social experiments you are dealing with human
beings and it makes quite a different situation.
On the level we are discussing, there is no difference between social science
and natural science. On this level, we define social science once more as the use
of the scientific method to solve the questions of human relations. Science—
and the word "science" is in quotes —
goes with the method, not with the subject matter.
. I wanted to establish that in Mr. Chase's book, which was sponsored
and in which he was assisted by members of the foundations, the
definite implication was made repeatedly to give the readers the
impression that there was no substantial difference between social
science and natural science. As for the ideas in this book, I would say
further that there is not a balanced presentation of ideas.
There is, for example, stress on cultural determinism. Cultural
determinism is the notion which is fostered in much of social science
that what you do, what you are, what you believe, is determined by the
culture. The implication of that is that man is essentially a puppet of
the culture. A further implication would be since he is a puppet he is
to be given neither blame nor credit for what he does.
I cite these things to indicate how these ideas can spread out and
have very significant implications.
Mr. Chase stresses the cultural concept throughout the book. I will
just cite 1 or 2 instances of this :
Finally, the culture concept gives us hope that many of our problems can be
solved. ■-■■: Jif People are bad by virtue of their "blood," or their genes or their
innate characters, there would not be much we could do about it, but if people
are basically all right, and the problem lies primarily in an adjustment of culture
patterns, or to culture patterns, perhaps a great deal can be done about it.
That is, you get the idea that by manipulating society, you can
change not only the society, but change the people within the society.
This is the concept of Cultural determinism. It has been fostered
Srimarily by a number of cultural anthropologists. The most in-
. uential book in this area is Ruth Benedict's Patterns of Culture.
Mr. Hats. Doctor, do you think there is no validity whatsoever in
that theory ?
Dr. Hobbs. Sir, it is not a matter of there being no validity what-
soever. It is a matter of a theory of this type being presented to the
public with the weight of the foundations behind it, as though it were
the scientifically proved fact. In that context, it is not correct.
Mr. Hays. But I am not so sure that anyone reading those para-
graphs that you have read would get that implication. I don't think
that I would if I were directed into it. I mean, let's use a more simple
example : Say a couple with an infant were in the jungles of Africa,
somewhere, and something happened and the father and mother were
killed, and this child was brought up by an uncivilized tribe. It
J40 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
would certainly react the same way the- uncivilized tribe would, in
general, wouldn't it? I mean, it wouldn't react as a member of our
civilization.
Dr. Hobbs. Sir, we have had those examples in social-science text-
books for many, many years. Children purportedly— and these are
offered, too, as scientific evidence — purportedly raised by wolves, pur-
portedly raised by swine, and you may remember the Gazelle Boy.
Mr. Hats. Let's not change my example.
Dr. Hobbs. Would the culture affect him 3
Mr. Hays. What was that?
Dr. Hobbs. Is the question, "Does/the culture affect you?"
The answer is obviously, "Yes." The question is nqt, "Does the:cul-
ture affect you?" however, the question is, "Does the culture* determine
without you having any control over that "determination; your behav-
ior, your attitudes, your ideals, your- sentiments, your- beliefs ?,"• It, is
the difference, sir, between the culture affecting you, which it certainly
does, that is obvious, and the question: "Does culture determine your
behavior?"
Mr. Hays. In other words, we are talking about a degree.
Dr. Hobbs. A matter of degree ; yes, sir.
Mr. Hays. Well, I don't know whether we can ever determine any-
thing much there or not. As you said earlier, you might argue until
doomsday about the degree of it.
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir. But this is cultural determinism. The con-
text of the Chase book is cultural determinism, not cultural influence.
The Chairman. However, from the list of books which you read,
which have been sponsored by foundations and some members, of the
foundation staffs had collaborated on the books, I rather gathered the
impression that possibly the preponderance of the books. Which had
been sponsored and curried by the foundations, were promulgating the
theory along the lines that you have advanced here.
Dr. Hobbs. The ones which have been most highly publicized and
pushed stronger than the others.
Now and again, you will find publications of the foundations on the
other side. B^ut they are ones that are few— hot necessarily few, but
so far as the public is concerned they do not com© in contact with those.
Mr. Hays. Going back to the chairman's statement, he said that of
all the books whose titles you have read-ras I followed you very
intently, you have, just discussed two books ; is that, correct ?
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir. I have taken up two. volumes of Kinsey and
this Chase book.
Mr. Hays. Actually 2, volumes I and II; of Kinsey, and 1 by
another author.
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hays. And all two of them do what the chairman said.
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir. These ones that I have taken up, yes, sir-.
I may have misunderstood your question.
The Chairman. I was thinking you had referred to another,, that
you made a summary statement in the very beginning and referred to
some other books.
Dr. Hobbs. I will, yes, sir, refer to another book which was actually
four volumes.
The Chairman. Very well. You may proceed. '.',,...
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 141
Di\ Hobbs; This quotation continues :
Theoretically, a society could be completely made over in something like 15
years, the time it takes to inculcate anew culture into a rising crop of youngs
sters.
If I may interject again, you see it is stronger, merely, than cuK
tural influence. It is the idea that you can take over society by chang-
ing the culture, change the entire society and the people in it.
Mr, Hays. Don't you think you can do that to a significant extents
Dr. Hobbs. George Orwell in a book called 1984 described how it,
could be done.
Mr. Hats. Let's not talk about anything theoretical that he says
could be dpne. Let's take the period from 1933 to 1945, we will say,
That is only 12 years. A fellow by the name of Hitler pretty signifU
cantly changed; the whole German concept of civilization, did he not,
or did he ?
Dr. Hobbs. It definitely was in that direction. But I would say
a more nearly apt analogy even than the Hitler one would' be the Rus-
sian one, where they have deliberately, apparently, used these tech-
niques, these same techniques to change the minds, to brainwash^
create the ideas and sentiments in their people.
Mr. Hays. I agree with you about the Russian one.
Dr.' Hobbs. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hays. The reason I used Hitler was because he did a job in a
lesser amount of time, even, than the Russians did. Prior to 1933
he was considered to be more or less a clown and a boob, and so on,
whoever you happened to be talking to you heard, "He isn't going to
amount to anything." And certainly by legal means, of course, legal
German means, he became the head of the state. And almost overnight
you had the Hitler Youth and all; of those, and you had a militant con-
cept built up there thajt Germany; was to rale the world,. 'and, you
had all of these youngsters brainwashed and believing it as the Rus-
sians are doing with theirs. -
Dr* Hobbs i It definitely was in that direction. But I would' Say
that the Russians, and now they passed it oh to the Chinese, have de-
veloped these tchniques to amuQh more effective, level. It, again,
is a matter of degree, but I think they developed themto a very highly
effective level.
Mr. Hays. Well, I wouldn't want to argue that point with you, I
don*t know whether their techniques are more effective than Hitler's
or not; To me ? as far as I am personally concerned, and this predates
this investigation by a good many years— as a matter of fact ; I was
a little bit unpopular back in the early 1940 T s, when I said that
to me there was no difference between Stalin and Hitler and their
philosophies except the difference, perhaps, in title. One of them
called it National Socialism and the other called it; communism.
But their aims and ultimate objectives and ultimate conclusions were
about identical. I mean, they did about the same things to the
people who lived under them and to the people they conquered.
Dr. Hobbs. Personally, I feel that the Communists have more,
effective techniques. The techniques are along these social science .
lines, so called.
Mr. Hays. They have had a longer time to develop them.
Dr. Hobbs. They have done within their context pretty well.
49720—54 — pt.l 10
142 TAX-BXBMBT FOUNDATIONS
The Chairman. But when you see a pattern or what appears to be
a pattern developing, to develop the people along the same lines that
gave this result in Russia, not only Russia and Germany, but a number
of other countries can be cited, also, it gives cause for concern. I
assume that is the basis of the concern which you are expressing-
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir ; exactly.
The Chairman. Of what you fear is going on as a result of your
observations that you have made.
Dr. Hobbs. It is definitely along those lines ; yes, sir,
Mr. Hats. Are you connecting this book, then, definitely with the
Communist concept of brainwashing and saying that is happening
here?
Dr. Hobbs. In some of these techniques, particularly the psycho-
analytic technique, there are disturbing similarities in the approach,
which if you read for example a book by Edward Hunter, Brain-
washing in Red China, you find a series of disturbing similarities
between the situation — not the situation as it exists now — but the
direction we seem to be going in.
Mr. Hats. Are you disturbed at all by the brainwashing that Secre-
tary Stevens got for 14 days, and do you see any similarity to this
thing?
Dr. Hobbs. I would say there is certainly a difference in the tech-
nique and the finesse.
Mr. Hats. I will go along with the finesse. But I can't say that I
see much difference in the technique.
Dr. Hobbs (reading) :
But such a theory assumes that parents, nurses, teachers, have all been reedu-
cated themselves, ready for the inculcating task which, as Euclid used to say,
is absurd. But it helps, I think, to know that the trouble does not all come
from an erring and variant human nature; it comes mostly from culture
patterns, built into the plastic human nervous system.
He goes on with the heading :
I*repare now for a surprising universal. Individual talent is too, sporadic and
unpredictable to be allowed any important part in the organization of society.
Social systems which endure are built on the average person who can be trained
to occupy any position adequately if not brilliantly.
All of this, of course, goes back to Pavlov's dog, which he condi-
tioned and then described his theory of conditioned reflexes. Then
it leads into John B. Watson's theories of behaviorism, which were
popular in the 1920's, which lead mothers to raise their children on a
stopwatch schedule, afraid to pick their babies up if they cried. This
was the science of that time.
Mr. Hats. Doctor, right there I want to agree with you about that.
I remember that era pretty well. And I suppose that had Congress
been so unoccupied at that time that it did not have anything better
to do, it could have investigated that thing in the 1920's, but we sort
of outgrew it, didn't we ? I mean, we got over it. I mean, I lived
througn it and you lived through it, I guess. I didn't mean that to
be funny. I am assuming you are old enough to have lived through it.
Dr. Hobbs. Sure.
The Chairman. May I interject?
Mr. Hats. Surely, go ahead.
The Chairman. It isn't the mere fact that this occurs, if it does
occur, that disturbs hie, but it is the fact that the foundations, and
there are some 6 to 7,000 of them in the United States, with a good many
trillions of dollars, 90 percent of the income of which is there because
the Government, tlae people who pay the taxes, have foregone taxes
•on that income. That is, in effect, Government money. And it isn't
the fact that a large percentage of the income of these foundations
might be used to promote a certain ideology or certain line of culture
•or certain line of thinking which leads to the result which you have
•discussed in your exchange with Congressman Hays, but if any con-
siderable amount of the funds of the foundations accumulated as a
result of the sacrifices of the people should be used to that end, that,
to me, is disturbing. As I understand it, that is one of the purposes
of the committee, to find out whether that is being done, and the extent
to which it is being done.
To my mind it is a very, very serious question. At the rate which
the foundations have multiplied in the last few years as a result of our
tax, not only our tax structure but the size of our tax levies, it is only
reasonable to assume, looking only a very short way into the future,
that a very substantial part of the wealth of the United States is going
to be found in these tax-exempt foundations. Therefore, the public
lias an increasingly great interest, not only in the mere establishment
of the taxation, but more importantly in its responsibility to see that
the money from the foundations is not used for a purpose that is vio-
lative of the principles of government in which we believe and in
which the Gover nment itself devotes its interests in maintaining.
That isn't a question, it is just more or less expatiating, I presume,
giving the basis for my interest and concern in this question.
Mr. Hats. Is that the end of your statement ?
The Chairman. That is the end for the time being. You may pro-
ceed if there are no other comments.
Mr. Hats. Let me say this, that of course the publie has a right
to know what is being done with this tax-exempt money, but it seems
to me^to use an old saying that isextant in my section of the country,
that maybe we should not try to make a!mountaia out,pf a moBhifi.
As loFiBcall Mr. I>bdd3s/ testimony, and I could.net find the exact
quotation in a hurry so I hesitate to use a figure, but I think he said
something like 80 percent^-or at least in excess of that — of these
foundations had done grand work and that 90 percent of them had
devoted practically all of their resources to cancer research and to
various things like that.
If you will permit me to digress here, one of the people in the world
that I have never been very fond of is Mr. Bevan, the former Health
Minister of Great Britain; but I never have forgotten a thing that he
said to a meniber of a congressional committee who. w,as querying him
in London one time. I nappened to be there not as a member of
the committee but as a guest.
They were talking about the British health scheme, or he was, and
this member from the Midwest said, "Well, Mr. Minister, are the
British people thoroughly satisfied with this health scheme?" and
Mr. Bevan very quickly replied, "Until such time as medical science
is able to confer immortality upon mankind, they will never be satis-
fled with any health plan."
That illustrates what I am driving at. Until such time as human
beings become perfect, if we accept the doctor's premise that this par-
ticular book is bad and money should never have been granted, that is
144 ; *XX366iSff* id^Mr'cftJs
his opinion, and' maybe that of nialiy otiters. If ft is'a mistake, just say
it is a mistake. You cannot expect these foundations not to make any
mistakes^ and you cannot expect them to channel all of their funds
into projects which would be approved, shall we say, by the Chicago
Tribune or somebody who believes along that line. There are liable to
be differences about it.
Mrs. Pfost. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask Dr. Hobbs what he
thinks the percentage of money coming from foundations that is going
into the type of books that you are speaking about, in comparison to
the other extreme.
Dr. Hobbs. I would not know.
Mrs. Pfost. You have no idea ?
•Dr. Hobbs. No.
Mrs. Pfost; In other words, you are simply basing your testimony
entirely upon two or three books that have been furthered, that the
research has been paid for, by the foundations, and you are centering
your testimony entirely upon that ?
Dr. Hobbs. Yes. But it is more, I think more important than that,
in that these are the books, and these types of books are the ones which
reach a much wider audience than the vast majority of works spon-
sored and published by the foundations, that these are in a sense the
crucial ones, and these^ with few, if any exceptions, these crucial
ones, are all in the same general direction.
So it is not a matter or counting the number of publications, nor is
it even a matter of finding the percentage of money spent on one or
the other. The issue, as I am trying to frame it here, is in what areas
is the public most widely and significantly influenced by foundation-
supported work in the social sciences?
Mr. Hays. I was just going to ask you in view of the last state-
ment, is there some reason why this type of books get wider circula-
tion?
Dr. Hobbs.' Well, to answer in terms of the Kinsey report, there
is an obvious reason. Sex is interesting. The proper study of man-
kind, Stuart Chase's book-^your question would be : "Why would this
get more publicity and more circulation than most other studies?"
Well, Stuart Chase is an excellent writer and it was highly publi-
cized as being backed by the foundations and so on. It was put in
the area of a trade book rather than of a specific piece of research.
Mr. Hays. What is the title of your volume %
Dr. Hobbs. Social Problems and Scientism.
Mr. Hat&. Social Problems and Scientism ?
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hays Now, suppose the average man walks into a bookstore, and'
I guess not many of them do any more since television, not as many
perhaps as we would like to have, and he sees two books on the shelves,
one of them is Social Problems and Scientism and the other is Sexual
Behavior of the Human Male, and he happens to pick up the latter-
one. Do you attach any special significance to that ?
Dr. Hobbs. I would say it would be most unusual if he would make-
the other choice.
Mr. Hays. I think that is a good answer. I think you and I are
in perfect agreement.
In other words, if what you wanted to do primarily in your book-^--
and I am not sure it wasn't, I am trying not to put you in a bad light—
TA3D-EXEMP1P .FOUNDATIONS 145
If what you primarily wanted to do was to sell your book, you would
have left that very forbidding Word "gciehtism" off the ead of it and
found some other title^ would you not?
Dr. Hobbs. If I wanted .to pbfiularize it ?
Mi*. Hats. Yes.
Dr. Hobbs. Of course I would have given it a popular title, some-
thing that sounded good. . •
Mr. Hats. And that might have more to do with reaching a wider
audieftee than any oth«r one thing, than the contents of it evfcr would ;
wouldn't it?
Dr. Hobbs. Of course, on some books the title has an appreciable
influence on the sales, I would guess.
Mr. Hay&. I wouldn't say I would approve of that, but I would
think from what little knowledge I have of the book-selling business it
is that they do deliberately set out to get eyecatching titles to sell the
books.
Dr. Hobbs. I would think so.
Mr. Hays. And if the people are influenced by that and they don't
like the book, well they have made a bad investment.
The Chairman. I won't want to take additional time, but in regard
to the mountain and the molehill, we can do something about the
molehills, but sometimes it becomes very difficult to do anything
about the mountain. The illustration that you earlier gave, in Ger-
many it was the molehill, Was disregarded.
Mr. Hays. I don't agree with that at all. I say it was a mountain.
The Chairman But it was not so recognized.
Mr. Hays. I recognized it as such. Maybe I was alone, but I
thought so.
The Chairman. But the people there did not. But where we see
defects, it Would seem to me that it Would be our responsibility to
cure them.
Mfs. Pfost, your observation was very pertinent, but down home
on the farm we make a great deal of cider. And one thing that we
are always very careful about is picking all the bad apples bef ore they
are run through the cider mill because there might be only a very
small percentage of bad apples run through that taints and has a
tendency to destroy the whole product. I think in the course of some
of these studies, it isn't the fact that the preponderance of the money
is spent along certain lines, but it is that a sufficient amount is spent,
and effectively so, so as to propagate a particular line of thinking
that might be detrimental to the interests of our Government. But
still we are just kind of discussing it among Ourselves here, and I
am willing to forego, after you make your observations.
Mr. Hays. I think it is interesting. Out home in the cider season
they pick out the wormy apples if they have time, but if they get
rushed, they throw them all in and people buy it just the same. But
I just wonder if you are insinuating that this bad book, or at least
we will call it that, that the professor is talking about, could taint his
book. It couldn't, could it?
The Chaiemakt. I don't think it could taint his book, but I could
think where it might spoil it in such a way as to reduce the interest in
a sound way.
Mr. Hays. Then we better investigate the publisher.
The Chairman. You may proceed.
146 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hays. No, I have another question. I want to go back to' the=
molehill and mountain deal. As I got your statement, you are say-
ing lof -2 things': 'Eithe)c ; ' J tliati}azism:wa»-a I hioleMirortMt1^,p#f^ue'.'
didnot^recogl&izeitfor'wliatitwas. Which is it?
The Chairman. In the very beginning they did not recognize* it f Or
what it was, I think. They waited too long.
Mr. Hats. Yes. Well, you and I are agreeing. And when they did!
recognize it for what it was, it had become a mountain then.
The Chairman. Yes. I was expressing agreement with your line-
of thinking. I was just developing it a little more.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Chairman, may I suggest to Dr. Hobbs that I
think he ought to make clear, which I believe is the fact, that he
does not intend merely to discuss 3 or 4 books as the only books in
this area which have any unpleasant connotation to him. What he is-
really doing is giving them as illustrations, perhaps particularly
sharp illustrations, of the use of what he calls scientism and its pro-
motion by foundations. Please answer this yourself, Dr. Hobbs, but
isn't your main thesis that what you call scientism widely promoted
by foundations and that in itself has a deleterious effect on society t.
Dr. Hobbs. The thesis is not in the book in relation to the founda-
tions specifically, but I would say that, speaking in general terms> the'
thing which I call scientism is promoted in an appreciable measure
by the foundations. And scientism has been described as a point of
view, an idea, that science can solve all of the problems of mankind,
that it can take the place of traditions, beliefs, religion, and it is
in the direction of that type of thing that so much of the material
in the social sciences is pointed. I am not saying that we have reached
that, or that many would come out blatantly and say that now that can?
or should be done. But it seems to me, and I may be wrong, but it does
seem to me that we are going in that direction, and it is time that
we might take a little stock of it.
Mr. Hats. How many copies of this particular book do you suppose-
have ever been sold?
Dr. Hobbs. Which book is that?
Mr. Hats. The one by Stuart Chase that you are quoting from.
Dr. Hobbs. I don't know the sales. It was widely reviewed and ad-
vertised, publicized extensively, but sales figures I don't have.
Mr. Hats. Would you be remotely acquainted at all with the works
of Mickey Spillane ?
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir ; I am.
Mr. Hats. Do you think Stuart Chase or Mickey Spillane has done
more damage to America ?
Dr. Hobbs. That is in another area.
Mr. Hats. Well, of course, any other book except this one would
probably be in a little different area.
Dr. Hobbs. No ; I am confining this to the influence of social science-
Mr. Spillane, I think, does not pretend to be a social scientist.
Mr. Hats. I don't know what he pretends to be ; but I would say
that he is having some sort of an effect on social science, at least on
social behavior r and even perhaps a more serious effect than Chase is
having, and I wouldn't be surprised that he has had as much effect
or more than Kinsey, because I expect more people have read his
books.
Dr. Hobbs. I expect they have.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 147f
Mr. Hats. And even a far more vicious effect, in my mind, would
be coming from some of these horror comic books that are widely^
distributed.
Dr. Hobbs. That may be. The contextin which I pl8K}e^i4s,**feoto#iv
is in the influence of science or social science on these things. For
example, a novel by Philip Wylie called Opus 21 came out, based
in large measure on the Kinsey findings, and the theme, briefly, was
in outline that the protagonist of the novel meets a girl who is sitting;
in a New York saloon, sitting there reading the Kinsey book. And
the protagonist
Mr. Hats. That is definitely fiction, is it not?
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir. The protagonist tries to find out what is on her
mind — —
Mr. Hats. I would say they had stupid characters in that book.
I mean, you have painted a picture there. He wouldn't have to try to»
very hard, would he?
Dr. Hobbs. Then the theme develops that what happened was that
she found out that her husband was homosexual, and she had left
him because he was homosexual. Then throughout the remainder
of the book this protagonist is explaining to her that science, in this
case Kinsey, has proved that homosexuality is normal and that she
is the abnormal one for leaving him. And finally the protagonist
convinces her of this, so whereupon she forms a homosexual alliance
herself and returns to her homosexual husband and presumably they
live happily ever after. It is in this way that what starts out as
being science or social science spreads out into popular literature;.
Mr. Hays. Would you mind telling me how you came to read that
book?
Dr. Hobbs. I forget the exact circumstances. I read pretty widely.
I read a lot of books.
Mr. Hats. I was wondering if it was in connection with the research
on Kinsey. I am not being a bit facetious when I say this — maybe I am
too conservative and too archaic and too far behind the times, but
I cannot imagine very many people wasting their time to read that
kind of stuff.
Dr. Hobbs. If I may continue, the cultural deterministic theme is
then tied in with the cultural lag, the cultural lag hypothesis, and
briefly the cultural lag hypothesis is that the technology has advanced
very greatly, but that our ideas, our beliefs, our traditions, have not
kept pace with it. Therefore, there is a lag between the technological
advance and the culture, and the implication is that the beliefs, ideas,
sentiments and so on, about the family, the church, about government,
should be brought up to date with the technology, which superficially
sounds reasonable enough, except when you begin to analyze it it really
settles down to being in the first place, a nonscientific notion, because-
two things being compared are not commensurable, that is, they have-
not been reduced to any common denominator by which you can
measure the relative rates of change in between them.
Mr. Hats. I hate to keep interrupting you here, but I can't help
wondering about one thing, and I would like to know the answer, if
there is any way of knowing it. We are spending a lot of time on the-
book of Mr. Chase, and I would like to know how widely that thing-
was printed and circulated.
148 TAX-EXEMPT ■- FOUNDATIONS
If hardly anybody rea& it, it couldn't Jrave had muohirtflueaicte.. Mr.
Worinser^ is there any way we can get the distribution of that* how;
many thousands or hundreds or millions of copies of it there were?
Mr/WoKMSEE. I can find out for you, sir. >;
Mr. Hays. People in this audience are probably all people who are
interested in this, or they would not be here. I wonder if anyone
in the room has read it besides Dr. Hobbs. I never heard of it until
^his morning.
The Chairman. In addition to the circulation, of the boob, am I
right that earlier you referred to other publications that quoted ex-
cerpts, pertinent excerpts, from the ' book, in advancing certain
thoughts?
Dr. Hobbs. I don't believe, sir, that I did relate to that, no, sir. ^
Mr. Hats. You might have mentioned book reviews, or reviews in
say the New York Times book magazine, or something. Probably
there was one, I suppose, was there not ?
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hats. But unless you were specifically interested in either Mr.
Chase or the subject, you probably wouldn't even read that.
Dr. Hobbs. Or the foundations, sir.
Mr. Hats. Yes.
Dr. Hobbs. Then this cultural lag notion has the implication that
we should keep religion up to date, and patriotic sentiments, ideas
about marriage and the family.
Well, if you do this, of course by implication to take an extreme
illustration, then you would have to modify your religion every time
there was a significant technological change with automobiles or air-
planes, things of that sort, which would give you of course a gi*eat
deal of lack of permanence.
The cultural lag theory has appeared in many if not most of the
sociology textbooks with the implication that we should abandon the
traditional forms of belief about the family and religion. Inescapa-
bly that tends to be the implication. The way Stuart Chase puts it :
The cultural concept dissolves old ideologies and eternal varities but gives us
something more solid to stand on, or so it seems to me. Prediction takes shape,
the door to the future opens, and light comes through. Not much yet, but enough
to shrivel many intellectual quacks, oververbalized seers and theorists, whose
theories cannot be verified.
At the very time he j^ talking about a theory which cannot be veri-
fied. Then I will just mention one thing that is stressed in Mr* Chafe's
book, and that is the belief is stressed that the polls, opinion polls, had
been scientifically verified and that they could and should be used bj
the general public.
Mr. Hats. Doctor, right there a lot of people have tried to sell that
idea before. I remember a magazine one time that had a wide circu-
lation predicated on the belief that its poll was exact. I think the
name of it was Literary Digest.
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hats. It died a very abrupt death after 1936.
Dr. Hobbs. The significance here, sir, is that this opinion and belief
did not die. Because it still has the prestige of science to verify it.
Mr. Hats. You mean in the validity of polls?
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir. ,
Mr. Hats. I don't agree with that. I don't take too much stock of
polls. I vividly remember the Gallup mistake in 1948.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 149
He probably will make some more. I don't consider myself to be
a superintelligent citizen. I think polls are maybe able to indicate
a trend, but you couldn't rely on them as being absolutely factual and
something you could never doubt for a minute and I don't think very
many other people will.
Dr. Hobbs. The point I am trying to make, sir, is that with the pres-
tige of science behind a thing like polling, you could get to the point
where they would be substituted for elections and things like that. Mr.
Chase cites examples of that tendency in a highly approving fashion.
This was written just prior to the election results of 1948. Just sup-
pose for a minute that we had accepted this so-called science and aban-
doned the election of 1948 and taken the word of the pollsters.
Mr. Hays. As long as you have skeptics like me, it would never do
that. I refuse to accept the validity of the Gallup poll, and that is
why I am here today. I came down here in the 1948 Dewey landslide.
Dr. Hobbs. Suppose it had been based on a poll instead of an elec-
tion. The results might be quite different.
Mr. Hays. I think you are predicating something there on a fool-
ish assumption. I don't think we will ever substitute polls for elec-
tions. At least, you will never get the politicians to agree.
Dr, Hobbs. Mr. Chase cites the desirability of this polling tech-
nique and illustrations of where it is being used by another social
scientist, who also wrote a book along the same lines, George Lun-
berg — Can Science Save Us ? — and cites Lunberg as using the polls;
in actual practice. He quotes here :
There is no limit to the future of the technique —
That is the polling technique —
on this front.
That is, measuring political attitudes and beliefs.
Mr. Hays. He apparently never heard about this fellow who ran
for sheriff. Is that in your State, Mr. Reece ? He said he shook 9,000
hands, kissed two hundred-and-some babies, traveled 9,000 miles and
got only 243 votes. His poll didn't turn out so well. He thought he
was going to win.
Dr. Hobbs. The difference in all of this is that these are presented
as being scientific and the prestige of science is that there is more of
a tendency to accept these than to accept other techniques. [Eeading :]
Then, as the elections of 1948 changed the conclusions to be drawn from the
foregoing two chapters, clearly Presidential polling is no exact science.
That is, the results have come out and conflicted with the results of
especially the Gallup and Roper polls. So Mr. Chase had to back up,
backpeddle quite a bit on this.
Mr. Hays, At least, we give him credit for admitting he was wrong.
Dr. Hobbs. He could do little else at that point. It was such a
fiasco :
Does 1948 wrong prediction mean the downfall of the present elections as the
downfall in 1936 caused the downfall of the Literary Digest? Does it meam
as some critics declare that sampling theory itself is suspect and science can
never be applied to human affairs? Certainly not—
He answers his own question— -
One error or a hundred errors cannot invalidate the scientific method.
150 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
There you have a glimpse, a glimmer, of the type of, you might
■say, arrogance that this supposed scientific method, which, I repeat
and emphasize, is not scientific, will and can, no matter what the
errors are, no matter what the mistakes are, will be foisted, pushed on
the public scene, whereas with the Literary Digest you gage it in the
terms of commercial appeal, and after the failure in 1936, it folds up
-as a magazine. But this type of thing continues. It not only con-
tinues but it expands.
Mr. Hats. There was one difference between Dr. Gallup's mistake
and the Literary Digest, wasn't there ? Dr. Gallup made a slight mis-
take of a few percentage points, but they had Landon winning
foy 36 or 40 States, whereas he actually carried only 2.
Dr. Hobbs. His percentage figures are a matter of statistical manip-
ulation. I could go into that in some detail. The actual error is
-appreciably greater than you would be led to believe by the state-
ments of Dr. Gallup. But that would be a statistical matter which
is not particularly germane. In this book, in summary, you have
throughout it, among other things, this characteristic emphasis on
►cultural determinism, cultural relativity, the idea that if you find a
primitive group which permits wife lending, then, by implication,
that is all right for us, too, and emphasis on Kinsey throughout the
'book as having now discovered the scientific facts about sex, and the
-emphasis on cultural lag that we should jettison older beliefs and
! bring all our beliefs up to the latest advances in technology.
In one section in the book, you do get a balanced presentation. This
is the section dealing with economics. Mr. Chase knows the field of
economics much more, much better, than he knows these other fields.
So when it came to economics, there he admitted that economics was
not a science ? and he cited, as I recall it, 155 erroneous, seriously errone-
ous, economic predictions to show that economics was not a science.
My feeling in reading the book was this, that if Mr. Chase knew that
about his own field, and if he were relying as he says he was, and as
the book indicates, if he were relying on these experts from the founda-
tions for the other areas, why didn't they warn him of the limitations
in these other fields, sociology, anthropology, and so on, in the same
way in which he himself knew of the limitations in economics.
It was certainly their responsibility, it would seem to me, to have
■emphasized these limitations rather than to give Mr. Chase the im-
pression, and through him many other people the impression, that
these areas are really scientific in the sense in which the term applies
in physical science. The next and final book which I want to cite is
actually in four volumes. The title is The American Soldier, a
subtitle is Studies in Social Psychology in World War Two. It was
prepared and edited under the auspices of a special committee of the
Social Science Research Council, published by the Princeton Uni-
versity Press in 1949 and 1950. I will give you some of the back-
ground of this.
In this, I want to cite it as an illustration of the influence of sup-
posed social science on military policy at a high level and, further-
more, that this influence was, according to the book itself which,
Temember, was written by persons favorable to the effects which the
•social scientist brought about. Even in this type of presentation,
there is a definite and repeated evidence that the military, with what
turned out to be excellent reasons, struggled against this thing right
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 151
down the line, and the social scientists were able to overwhelm them,
were able to incorporate their own ideas in a matter of highest military
significance against the opposition of the military of the United States.
Mr. Hays. What did they do against the will of the military?
Dr. Hobbs. Well, may I develop it? I will bring that out, what
seems to me to be the crucial point here.
The Research Branch was officially established in October 1941,
within what was known, successively, as the Morale Division, Special
.Services Division, and Information and Education Division. Here
is one of the indications of the resistance of the military in purely mili-
tary matters. Earlier efforts to set up such machinery within the
Army had been blocked by a directive from the Secretary of War,
which said :
Our Army must be a cohesive unit, with a definite purpose shared by all. Such
an Army can be built only by the responsible effort of all of its members, com-
missioned and enlisted. An anonymous opinion, or criticism, good or bad, is
•destructive in its effect on a military organization, where accepted responsibility
on the part of every individual is fundamental. It Is therefore directed that
because of their anonymous nature, polls will not be permitted among the per-
sonnel of the Army of the United States.
Mr. Hays. Does that make it right because the Secretary said that?
Dr. Hobbs. No, sir. It does not make it wrong, either.
■ Mr. Hays. One time he issued a letter that a soldier could not write
a letter to his Congressman. But the Congress sort of changed his
mind about that. I would say from my experience with the Army,
it is very difficult to inculcate them with any idea. They resist any-
thing in the way of change. They resisted the use of air power.
You will remember they made one man in this country die of a
broken heart. Of course, he was right all along. The Navy right now
is resisting the abandoning of battleships. Of course, they are nice
ships, I have been on them and all of that, but they dont have much
value any more in war. But they are still using them. The very
fact that the Army resisted them does not mean much to me. I do
not know what they resisted, but whatever it was that is their usual
procedure.
Dr. Hobbs. May I please develop this point?
The full story of how the War Department changed from a position of flat
opposition to such research to one in which it would use such research not only
:for internal planning but as justification to the American people for such a vital
program as its demobilization system should someday make instructive reading.
That is a quote from volume 1 of the American Soldier. I would
say it certainly should make interesting reading.
Many factors converge to make possible the establishment of the Research
^Branch, not the least of which was the character and personality of the new
Director of the Morale Division, directly commissioned from civilian life, Brig.
Oen. Frederick H. Osborne, later major general. He was a businessman who
was also the author of two volumes on social science. In spite of General
Osborne's personal prestige, his persuasive skill, which had served him so well
in business, and his deep sincerity, there were times when even these assets
might have availed little against occasional opposition at intermediate echelons,
had not General Marshall unequivocably, supported the strange, new program.
Mr. Hays. Doctor, I think before you start accusing General Mar-
shall or anybody else
Dr. Hobbs. I have accused General Marshall of nothing, sir, I have
quoted from the book.
152 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hays. What is your strange new program? Is it fair to ask
you that ?
Dr. Hobbs. That is what they term it, not me.
Mr. Hats. What is it?
Dr. Hobbs. It was a program of taking opinion polls to determine-
military decisions.
Mr. Hats. Do you mean the last war was run on opinion polls ?
Dr. Hobbs. It would have been run to a much greater degree^— -
Mr. Hats. I think Eisenhower ought to resign, then, because I think
he got elected on the grounds that he ran the war. He made his
reputation on that. If it was run on polls, then we have been under
a lot of misapprehension.
Dr. Hobbs. I quote again from the book :
A major purpose of the research staff was to provide a basis of factuali
knowledge.
I will interject. When they say "factual knowledge," they mean
knowledge based upon opinion polls, which are much more fallacious
than political polls, which involve merely the choice of a candidate..
Factual knowledge which would help the director of the Army Information and
Education Division in his administrative and policy decisions. This purpose'
was abundantly fulfilled. Without research, we would have too often been work-
ing in the dark. With research, we knew our course and were able to defend'
it before Congress and the press. Further, we made a remarkable discovery.
The Army gave little weight to our personal opinions, but when these opinions
were supported by factual studies —
and, again, if I may interject, these are not factual studies, they are
opinion studies —
the Army took them seriously —
and here, again, you get the influence which, in some cases, may be
good, but in other cases could be very disastrous due to the aura of
science which surrounds this type of investigation.
For the first time on such a scale, the attempt to direct human behavior was-
in part, at least, based on scientific evidence. If this method could be developed
and more widely used, it might provide further impetus for a great advance
in the social relations of man. To that hope, these volumes are dedicated.
The main thing, these polls went into many, many aspects of be-
havior in the military, but the one thing I would like to concentrate on
is the point system of discharge, the system by means of which the
military forces of the United States were demobilized at the end of
World War II, demobilized in rapid, and in the perspective of history,,
chaotic fashion.
Mr. Hays. You know something right there, there was a cause for
demobilization more than any poll, speech on the floor of this House,,
or numerous speeches, but I am thinking of one, jn which a Member
of Congress who now holds a very high position in the Armed Services
Committee, who was not satisfied with getting the men demobilized
by bringing them home on the Queen Mary, but he wanted to fly them
home. That is in the Congressional Record. I am not going to drop
his name into the hearings, I do not want to embarrass him. But most
anybody could learn who it was. I say to you advisedly, gir^ .that
speeches such as that had much more to do with demobilizing than any
opinion poljs, or private opinion polls, or Army opinion ppjls they
took. The pressure of the American people back home wag American
democracy, and perhaps I might say that some Members of the Con-
TASL+WXEMBT FOUNDATIONS 153;
gress yielded to that to the extent of doing a little "demagoging" on the
subject, thinking that was a popular viewpoint. Maybe you and I
think it is bad, but I don't think we are going to change, it. ;
Dr. Hobbs. Exactly.
Mr. Hats. One other question right there. I am trying to be very
friendly. I do Hot mean to embarrass you. You do* not mean to
infer, and I am afraid that maybe- some might have gotten the infer- ,
ence from a question that I asked, you do not mean to infer that
they took a poll ori whether they should invade through the soft
underbelly or across the channel, do you, or what day the invasion
should go across, and so on?
Dr. Hobbs. Well, they admit that they were not able to do as many
things as they wanted to do.
Mr. Hays. That you think they might have liked to do?
Dr. Hobbs, Well, I don't know.
Mr. Hats. You know that is a funny thing. In my limited expe-
rience with the Army, nobody evei? asked me anything. They just
told me. I might say, if I volunteered— I .did once ; and I got to
dig latrines, so; in all of my experience with it, they discouraged you
from offering opinions.
Dr. Hobbs. Sir, there is an old Army precept that you violated
when you volunteered.
Mr. Hats. I know. That was the fiarsfc day. They asked for people
who could operate a typewriter. I stepped forward and he said)
""Well, if you can run a typewriter* you ought to. be. able .to handle
a pick."
The Chairman. You may proceed now.
Dr. Hobbs. Here is some more background of this point system
of discharge:
In the course of a speech" to tile American people" in> 1944, PrtftftdeflM Roose-
velt justified the Army's plans for demobilization at the end of the war on
the grounds that the order of demobilisation would be determined ia terms
of what the soldier's themselves wanted. 'I'he idea of a point system for
demobilization had been conceived in the research branch and accepted by
the Wai-'UepartMe't* an#- t&g J^esidto*. Representative samples of mea
throughout the world were queried and from their responses th» variables of
length of feferyiee> overseas duty, combat duty* and parenthood, emerged as
most significant •
If I may interject, from these opinion polls, you can be very much
misled about things like this, and in a matter so big, so important,
it is extremely hazardous to use them, not that they don't have a
use, or not that efforts should not be made to develop them as far
as we can and so on, but as yet, certainly, it is very risky to use them
in matters of this kind.
The final weights assigned to these variables yielded point scores wbidh have
a elose correspondence with the wishes of the maximum number of soldiers,
even if it did not exactly reproduce these wishes.
And then they go on to say that the point system established the
order not the rate of demobilization, and that is a questionable con-
tention, because when you have given and publicized a notion of this
kind, here, again, is an illustration of where the fact that you make
the study can change the situation which you are studying. If you
give members of the armed services the notion that they are to be
and should be consulted on vital military policy, then this fact in
154 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
itself can create dissatisfaction, unrest, of the very type of thing
which the Secretary previously had anticipated.
Mr. Hats. Doctor, all of this is new to me, but did the foundations;
have anything to do with encouraging this point systemin the Arnjyl
Did they get into this act in any way ?
Dr. Hobb. The people involved were people who were previ-
ously, and most of them still are, very heavy recipients of founda-
tion funds, and the foundations, as I indicated, the Social Science-
Research Council, did get this material at the end of the war, got the
material declassified by the War Department and worked on it and
then it was published through the — the various volumes were pub-
lished through a series of authors, with the senior author being Prof..
Samuel A. Stouffer.
Mr. Hats. Are you challenging anything in there as to the validity^
of it? That is not a good way of phrasing. Are you challenging in
your statement whether or not this did happen or did not happen?:
Are you challenging the theory behind it %
Dr. Hobbs. The theory.. It did happen, as I am citing.
Mr. Hats. In other words, if the book says so and it happened,,
about the only connection the foundations have is that they made it
possible for that book to be published, is that right ?
Dr. Hobbs. Not only made it possible to be published, but the in-
fluence, what I am pointing out here — the influence of this type of"
social science, what it can have and does have in this context, in the-
military, even in a military sphere.
Mr. Hats. You do not think the point system was bad, do you ?
Dr. Hobbs. I was in the service, too, and fortunately I had enough;
points to get out so at that time I thought it was good. Incidentally,
I stayed in awhile longer but I was glad that under this I could haver
gotten out at an earlier date if I wanted to. But I made no pre-
tense — —
Mr. Hats. As I remember it, the decision was made that we were*
going to demobilize and we were going to discharge a certain number
of men. Now, what we come to is to find out which ones we keep*
and which ones we let go.
Dr. Hobbs. That was not a military decision. The military de-
cision was quite different.
Mr. Hats. Maybe the Congress made the decision, but somebody
said you are going to discharge so many, right ?
Dr. Hobbs. No, sir. The groups, the individuals, rather, who were-
discharged, and the nature of the entire demobilization program was,,
as I would like to point out, the result of this influence of social'
science rather than the result of military policy which opposed it.
Mr. Hats. Doctor, you do not mean to tell me that if it had not
been for this little group of social scientists, that we would not have-
demobilized? '-..■.-■ : i
Dr. Hobbs. In the manner in whjch we did, we would not.
Mr. Hats. NeviSr mind the manner.
Dr. Hobbs. I think that is of vital significance.
Mr. Hats; I think we are quibbling over something that is not very
important: I say to you that the American people urged on by eer^
tain demagogic speeches said, "We are going to tear this Army down; 1
bring the boys home." That , is what they wanted: The military was:
T4X-E2pa£PT F013NPATI0NS 15&
confronted with the situation, "We are going to bring them home,
and the politicians are going to say or make us say which ones we are
goi^g t^ bring first." Is that not what happened ?
Dr. Hobbs. Which ones we are going to bring home first wa&cler
termined by the point system.
Mr. Hats. I think that is all to the good.
Dr. Hobbs. You may change your opinion, sir.
The Chairman. I was around here then, as I had been awhile before.
I never felt any overwhelming demand from home- for demobiliza-
tion. I heard a lot about it since.
Mr. Hays. I will refer you to a speech, and I will not mention his
name, in which he said, "I don't want the boys sent home by sh^p ; I
think we ought to fly them home," and he is a good orator. You
know who, he is talking about.
The Chairman. I know who you are talking about.
Mr. Hays. He said that, did he not? I was not here then, but I
thought it was a good idea.
The Chairman. I never had any overwhelming demand from the
folks back home.
Mr. Hays. I do not know what you had, but my predecessor said
that most of his mail consisted — and it was very heavy in letters from
mothers, especially after V-E day — of when do we get the boys back.
Mr. Wormser. May I again ask Dr. Hobbs to clarify something for
Mr. Hays, namely, if I understand it correctly, that he is not dis-
cussing the desirability of demobilizing or not demobilizing. What he
is discussing is essentially this, that instead of the military making the
decisions to demobilize in such a way as to protect best the welfare of
the United States, the decision was made under the influence of, a
group of social scientists, the decision on how the demobijisatiori :
should take place, not the quantity but how, and that that decision
nyght well have or it did fly in the face of military necessity. Is that
correct, Dr. Hobbs ?
Dr. Hobbs, Yes, sir.
Mr. Hays. That is interesting and perhaps very true. I would like;
to hear more- about it. In what way did it fly in the face of military
necessity? Do you mean the fellows had been in for 6 years, they
should have kept them because they knew more about it and let the
boys who served only 90 days outi is that it?
Dr; Hobbs. May I describe that, please, from the book ?
Mr. Hays. Sure.
Dr. Hobbs. There were two schools of thought.
One school of thought which had particularly strong representation in Army
Ground Forces tended to see the problem as one of preserving intact at all
costs the combat fighting teams.
You see, they were thinking in military terms.
This meant discharging mainly service troops, limited servicemen, and soldiers .
not yet fully trained. Combat veterans, especially the experienced noncom's,
were obviously the core of our magnificent fighting machine. Another school
of thought, also arguing on the basis of military efficiency—
they say military efficiency here, but I don't know how they could
■ "■" it-
held that the men of longest service should be so disaffected by a policy which
regarded the men who had made the least sacrifice that the morale of the
comhat teams would be as much endangered by retaining such men as by dis-
charging some of them. Furthermore, they pointed out
1S0 TAK0feSgBi&#P> ^OtftSDATION®'
Mr. Hays. Do you Agreif with that- cbnclusio'ri t- - ■ \ ' -
Dr. Hobbs. No, sir. '^- '■■: *■-' - ;;: - ;;
Mr. Hays. You do riot think the morale would have been affected
at all?- ■ •■: '■■<■- ■■ ■:.<■■•<> -■ \ . :■'■• ■■■ ■■-•^ r ; -' v/ ■ : '' ? - : - :l -' :lt
Dr. Hobbs. It would have been affected fetdiiie, btlt in relative tfeirnis ?
of military strategy and policy, I do not think the effect would have
been so great here as it would have been oil the other side;
Mr. Hays. Let me tell yon something about that. I will give you
the benefit of my experience. I was in Greece in 1949 with General
Van Fleet for a few days. General Van Fleet went to Greece and
took a disorganized, beaten, army, and in 2 years made man for man,
I will say, one of the finest fighting forces the world ha£ ever steen.
But do you know what he told me his biggest problem was? They
knew how to fight, but his biggest problem was morale because most
of those men that he got a hold of had been in the Greek Army f Or
9 years, and their morale was shot to pieces because they had b^en
fighting and lots of people back home had riot been called upon to
do anything more than run away from the Communists. Arid he said
that that was his biggest problem. So that just is contrary to the
theory that you say, is it not, it would not have affected morale ?
Dr. Hobbs. Tdid not say, sir, that it would not have affected morale.
The question here is which would have affected the military strength
of the United States more^ and that question, I would Answer,, me
policy of the point system of discharge, in my opinion, which is cer-
tainly not a professional opinion, professional military opinion, in
my opinion would have affected it more than thfe other.
Mr. Hays. Doctor, I again want to say that yoli have a perfect
right to your opinion, and it may very well be that your opinion is
the correct one, I do not happen to agree with it. But that is 6he
of the beautiful things about the democracy we hate. Let mei May
further along that line, that it would have been probable iri Anything
but a democracy, that the military would have been able to do what-
ever they wanted to do. But unfortunately, from their point of view,
and I say this from my point of view fortunately, in a democracy,
such as we have, even sometimes the will of the people can be rilade
to have an influence on the military.
Dr. Hobbs. But, sir, this was not the will of the people.
Mr. Hays. I disagree very vitally with you.
Dr. Hobbs. It may have been the will of the people that this hap-
pened, but the influencing factor, and this is what I am trying to
stress, the influencing factor was not a balance such as it should be
democratically, not a, balance of conflicting opinions, but it was the
influence of what was called social science.
Mr. Hays. Well, I say to you that I was back in Ohio at that time,
and it was the influence of the people back home. That is what it was.
I do not think that they knew anything about social science or cared
less, in the Army.
Dr. Hobbs. That is quite irrelevant.
Mr. Hays. They just felt that the boys who had given the most or
served the longest and who had been in there for the greatest length
of time ought to come home first. Some who had not been arid
did not go, if they needed any more men, take them. That prin-
ciple still applies today. We have pretty much of a rotation under
the draft system, and I do not think you will disagree that that
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 157
is because the people want it that way. You know, the Army wanted
universal military training, but they did not get it. Why didn't they
get it ? Because the Congress did not vote to give it to them. Why
didn't the Congress vote to give it to them? Because a good many
of them felt that if they did, they would not come back to Congress.
It is just as simple as that. That is the way democracy makes itself
felt.
Dr. Hobbs. On these issues, I am not pretending that I am right or
you are wrong. That really is not involved.
Mr. Hays. I am only putting these in in order to show that there
are two sides to it. I certainly want to say right here and now that
there is a side that you are presenting, and it certainly can be a valid
one. In other words, I am saying there is plenty of room for argu-
ment, but the only reason I am interrupting you is so that the record
will not show that we sit here and concur m these views which may
or may not be yours, even.
Dr. Hobbs. That is quite proper.
The Chairman. I am assuming that my silence will not be construed
as agreeing with everything you nave to say.
Mr. Hats. I cannot be responsible for anything that anybody con-
strues about your silence. I would suggest that you just speak up.
That is the way I do. Just because you think I am wrong, I will not
get wrong.
The Chairman. Off the record.
(Discussion off the record.)
The Chairman. You may proceed.
Mr. Hobbs. Thank you. The book referred to two schools of
thought. It continues :
Proponents of the first point of view —
that is, the military —
had an additional argument which has a special plausibility. If discharges were
to be made on the basis of entire units, the Army would not be opened to charges
of favoritism to individuals. If an individual's record were taken into account,
there was too much chance of a scandal, particularly if the Army yielded to
political pressure to discharge certain individuals or certain categories of individ-
uals without respect to military needs. It was admitted that the replacement
system had operated so that a given unit was likely to contain personnel with a
very wide range of service and that a unit discharge would give new replace-
ments in demobilized outfits a head start in civilian life over the combat veterans
in outfits retained. But this was advanced as the lesser of two evils.
Then they describe the fact that they took the polls, and one poll
was taken and as a result of that first poll the criteria for discharge,
the basis for the point system, included length of time in the Army,
age, overseas service, and dependency. Combat service was not
included in the first poll. But in the first poll, they had left a place
where the soldiers could write in things which they believed should
be included in a discharge system, and one of the things which was
written in frequently was the thought that combat experience should
be weighted into the point system.
After studying the data of the type summarized in the tables 1 and 2, General
Osborne decided to put all of the influence of the Information and Education
Division behind a system which would : (a) establish priorities on an individual
not a unit basis; and (b) take into account the explicit preferences of the
soldiers themselves insofar as the latter was consistent with military necessity.
On the basis of soldier preferences, the Information and Educational Division
49720— £4— pt. 1- ^11
158 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
recommended a point system which would take into account combat, measured by
length of time in the combat zone and by number of Purple Hearts awarded,
the number of months of overseas service, the number of children, and the length
of time in the Army. After lengthy discussions, the War Department accepted
the outlines of this proposal, leaving to a future date the setting of the exact
number of points for each category and the method of determining such a factor
as combat service. This decision was announced to the public in September 1944.
And again, if I may interject, once you publicize a thing; like this,
you create a different situation than the one which existed before.
It was decided that the actual points to be assigned would not be announced
until after the surrender of Germany. Between September 1944 and the defeat
of Germany, there followed several months in which there was much argument
in the special planning division as to the assignment of points. The four factors,
longevity in the Army, overseas service, combat and parenthood, had been
publicly announced, but it was thought still possible by opponents of the plan —
and this is another instance where you see persistently the military
for reasons which they had but which they could not publicly reveal,
sensed or knew that we were going to run into a situation in Europe
with one of our then allies, that is, K-u-s-s-i-a.
Mr. Hats. Would you repeat that statement ?
Dr. Hobbs. The indications are that the military knew or at least
it sensed that there was a good likelihood of running into trouble with
Russia at the end of the German war, but, however, at that time, we
were allies with Russia. They could not publicize this. They had to
keep it quiet. Yet it turns out they were right. They could have
been wrong, but it turns out they were quite correct. Here is another
group which probably knew nothing of this very important military
matter, and, knowing nothing, they still insist and push and get this
type of thing adopted.
Mr. Hats. I am very interested in that statement, because I am just
wondering whether it is valid or not. I do not give the military the
benefit of that much foresight. I will tell you why. The military
made the agreement with the Russians about Berlin, and about all of
the matters of the ways to get in Berlin and what have you. The
military also made the agreements with the Russians about Vienna.
You probably know that we have never had any trouble about Vienna
but we have had a lot of trouble about Berlin, for the simple reason
that the group of military men who made the rules down at Vienna
made one set of rules and there was another set of rules made up at
Berlin.
The Russians have taken every advantage, as the Communists
always do, to harass, to blockade, to do everything they could within
the rules. I have been in both places a number of times since the war.
Every time I go to Berlin, I go by the sufferance of the Communists.
But if you go to Vienna, it is very clearly outlined that from the air-
field to Vienna, the road is American property. There is no such
outline about the road from the American zone to Berlin. That seems
to be Russian property.
Dr. Hobbs. That is correct.
Mr. Hats. Maybe the boys down at Vienna had some indications
thoy were going to have trouble with Russia, or maybe if they were
smart enough to have them, to do something about them, but appar-
ently the boys in Berlin, if they felt that way, didn't take any
precautions.
Dr. Hobbs. I guess the Russians considered Berlin for what it is, a
much more important
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 159
The Chairman. I do not think we ought to get into this question,
but I am not sure that the military was the sole determining factor in
the arrangements up around Berlin. I think that question might
very well be left open.
Mr. Hats. I made a statement there and I am standing on it. I
said that they made the ground rules. I don't say they made the
decision that we would pull back from here or pull back from there,
but they in conference with the Kussian high command made the
ground rules. You do not need to take my word for it, you can go
back and get the history and get the pictures of them having their
parties together.
I don't know who did the job down at Vienna, but those unsung
heroes certainly did a lot better job than was done up north.
The Chairman. You may proceed.
Professor Hobbs, before you begin, if I may, how much time do you
think would be required for you to complete your statement ?
Mr. Hays. Without any interruption.
Dr. Hobbs. Without any interruptions, this material on the Ameri-
can soldier, maybe 15 minutes, and then there is another matter, a
final matter which will come up which should take no longer than 5
or 10 minutes.
Mr. Wormser. I have a few questions I would like to ask, myself,
Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Would it be inconvenient for you to be here
tomorrow?
Dr. Hobbs. No, sir. I have made arrangements in Philadelphia
to be here on Thursday, so I could have gone back tonight but it would
be no special hardship to stay over.
The Chairman. Why do we not run until 4 o'clock?
Mr. Hats. Let him finish with this subject.
Dr. Hobbs (reading) :
It was thought still possible by opponents to the plan to obtain the benefit of
claiming soldier endorsement and still manipulate the weights so that overseas
service and combat service actually would count negligibly toward the total score.
The Information and Education Division always recognizing that military
necessity should come first —
Now, where they interject these matters of military necessity, and
so on, I question that they really comprehended them in high degree,
but that is a question —
held that either the final points must have the effect of approximating the priori-
ties desired by the majority of soldiers or else the reasons why this wasn't
possible in terms of military necessity should be frankly admitted by the Army.
In other words, they pressed the military group, and if they had
as their reason the possibility of Russian aggression and encroach-
ment into European territories, such as actually did happen, if the
military had that in mind, they could not publicly announce it because
Russia at that time was an ally. And from a standpoint of both mili-
tary policy and from a standpoint of diplomatic policy, it was just
something that they could not do. Yet tliis group pushed them into
a position where they had to do it or accept this point system of
discharge which the military consistently opposed.
To increase the combat credit, it was decided also to give five points for each
decoration received, including the Purple Heart for wounds. This decision made-
at a -time when it was thought that the Air Forces would be discharged on a.
160 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
different basis from the rest of the Army, was to lead eventually to some feelings
of injustice. When Air Forces were blanketed in under a uniform point system,
the numerous decorations of flying personnel gave these men priorities which
were particularly to be resented by veterans of ground combat.
There are two items there, one, that this is supposed to make par-
ticularly the ground combat men pleased and happy but it turns out
that it makes them disgruntled and dissatisfied. The second is that
when it is (probably in an unforeseen manner) applied to the Air
Force, which was, of course, if you were to name at that stage and
under those circumstances the one crucial unit of the military services 1 ,
you would probably name the Air Force ; when it was applied to them
then it resulted in an extremely rapid, almost chaotic disbandment
of the American Air Forces in Europe.
Among the combat veterans in the worldwide cross section there was a sharp
difference of attitude as between Air Force veterans and ground force veterans.
Among the former, whose point scores were inflated by numerous decorations,
a third —
that is, this resulted in a situation where one-third of the personnel
of the Air Force was immediately entitled to discharge under the
point system which, obviously, disrupted the military value of the
Air Force —
among the Air Force there was one-third that had 85 points or over, while among
the latter —
that is the ground forces —
only one-ninth had 85 points or over. Incredible as it seemed at the time to
many in the Information and Education Division, there was a strong sentiment
within the War Department for eliminating combat credit entirely after V-J
Day—
and again, as you learn throughout this, the military was attempting
to preserve the power, the strategical military power of the United
States, and in retrospect it certainly appears that they had good
reasons for that decision. But again you get this group pushing
them, preventing them from using military principles in a military
situation, sacrificing such principles for what is called social science.
The research report quoted above played a part in the War Department's
decision to leave the point system intact after V-J Day. It was felt that the
capitulation of Japan was so near at hand that any recalculation of point
scores should not be undertaken unless overwhelmingly sought by the men.
This was a keen disappointment to some of the revisionists in the War Depart-
ment who were working to reduce or eliminate overseas and combat credit. It
was also a disappointment, though perhaps a lesser one, to the Information and
Education Division, which would have preferred an increase in credit for over-
seas service, and an addition of the combat infantry badge to the elements
counting for combat credit.
Mr. Wobmser. I would like to be sure of the stenographer, to be
sure that you are quoting from somebody else's work.
Dr. Hobbs. I am quoting from volume II of American Soldier.
That is another indication of the almost diametrically opposed view-
points in this military situation, with the social scientist insisting
on one thing and the military, for what turns out to have been
eminently good reasons, insisting on another.
I quote again :
In the official history of ground forces the havoc played in one division in
Europe by transfer out of its 85 point men after V-J Day is described in some
detail. The facts in general were, however, that of all the men with combat
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 161
experience in ground units throughout the world, only 1 man in 9 had 85 points
or more.
Now, again, here is an application of a statistic, in a context in
which it cannot be applied safely. You say, or these people say,
only 1 in 9. But if this 1 in 9 is a keyman, that might disrupt an
entire squad. It might even disrupt an entire company. It might
disrupt the crew of a heavy bomber, and things of that sort, which
should certainly have been taken into consideration, but which could
not be taken into consideration with this approach.
It is true that many of these were keymen, but it is also true that there were
replacements with combat experience available who could have taken their
places and, indeed, many more such men than any current estimates for the
Pacific war required.
And the citation for that official history of the ground forces
describing that havoc played in one division in Europe, the citation
is "United States Army in "World War II, the Army Ground Forces,"
published in Washington 1947.
They conclude, and I will conclude this material on the American
Soldier in this way: that is, volume II, which discusses the point
system sums it up in this way :
There are "ifs" where history cannot definitively answer. In taking its cal-
culated risks, the Army won its gamble.
Now, if I may interject here, it was not the Army, it was this group.
The Army, the military insisted on quite another policy, and to say
that the Army won its gamble is misleading and, you might add, one
more such victory and we are undone. This turned out, in the retro-
spect of history, to have been an extremely costly political as well as
military procedure.
One cannot say for certain what would have happened after V-J Day as well
as before if there had not been an objective method of demobilization which the
majority men regarded as fair in principle because "military efficiency" is not
independent of "morale." There are grounds for believing that the War Depart-
ment chose collectively when it broke all precedent and went to the enlisted men
for their opinions before promulgating its redeployment and demobilization policy.
That is the opinion of the authors of this volume.
Another and quite contrary opinion, I would say, could be at least
equally justified. But the point that I wanted to stress all through
is the way in which social science can and does encroach out and
expand into areas not only of morality but of politics and in this
instance military policy which was of the very highest order. Un-
fortunately, the situation is one in which, at the present time, and in
the foreseeable future, we just — and I use "we" in the context of social
scientists — we just don't know enough to gamble with supposedly
scientific methods in these areas. If mistakes are to be made, let them
be made by people who are expert in the field, and of course they will
make mistakes.
The Chairman. Now do you want to make your concluding state-
ment, Professor ? We will meet your wishes on that.
Dr. Hobbs. A question was raised before, I think, about is there any
pressure exerted on scholars in connection with these things.
I would like to mention just this : There was another book that came
out, titled "Studies in the Scope and Method of the American Sol-
dier," and in one of the reviews — this book contained a number of
reviews about what was the greatest or seemed to be the greatest feat
162 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
of social science at the time — and in one of the reviews they referred
to someone, a scholar, who had the temerity to question these findings
and this is the type of pressure you get in this connection. I quote
from this book :
The rivalrous role is enacted by social scientists whose interest in empirical
research quantitatively reported is low. Since no reviewer has taken the view
that better research of this type is available or in sight, the rivalrous posture
involves a preference (stated or implied) for a search of a different type. When
this preference is merely implied and no alternative specified, the result is a
vigorous negativism which leads to the extreme attitude we have designated
as diabolic.
Now if you will just imagine yourself, you are in this case, a young
fellow getting started out, and you happen to tread on sacred soil,
you just do a little bit of criticism against these groups who are so
powerful. This is the type of thing that comes back at you. I continue
with the quote :
Only one reviewer has approximated this extreme view in point, Nathan Glazer,
who is —
please note these words —
who is a young man at the periphery of the profession and hence, perhaps, less
heedful of its imperatives toward discretion.
In other words, "If you want to get in with us, watch your step
and don't criticize our work."
That type of thing is certainly undesirable, unhealthy, in studies
which are supposed to be openminded, where you are supposed to
allow for these differences of opinion which, Congressman, as you
rightly, I would say, place such high value on. When you get
pressure of this type it isn't a very good situation.
Mr. Hats. It seemed to me that you were rather critical of the
foundations a little earlier for not directing this Mr. Chase, was it,
in how to write his book.
Dr. Hobbs. Advising him of the limitations particularly in the
fields in which these men were supposed to be experts and in which
he was not.
Mr. Hays. Would you consider it a salutary situation where if a
foundation granted money to someone to write a book, to just let
him go ahead and write it ? It would seem to me they ought not to
tell him one way or the other.
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, I agree with this, but the Chase incident was a
completely different situation. He was requested, and as the quota-
tion will show, two important members of the foundation requested
him to write it. By his own statement they worked with him all
through and, presumably, were for the purpose of giving him their
best knowledge and advice and still they permitted him to make a
series of very extreme, unwarranted statements, about the very mat-
ters in which these people were supposed to be experts.
Mr. Hays. I have an impression that his book did not sell very
well.
Dr. Hobbs. I think that is not too vital a point one way or the
other.
Mr. Hays. I just might feel, and I am just old-fashioned enough
to think that maybe the reason it did not is because somebody asked
him to write it. I always had the old-fashioned belief that if some-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 163
one had an urge to write a book, and it came because he had the
urge, that is when you got a good book.
Dr. Hobbs. I would agree with that principle.
Mr. Woemser. Mr. Chairman, Dr. Hobbs has some more material
and I have a few questions which are rather important. I think
we will have to carry over until tomorrow morning.
The Chairman. If it is agreeable. I think we are about to reach,
as they say down home, quitting time.
As an additional observation with reference to the observation
you made of what General Van Fleet said about morale, if you will
pardon me for referring to it, I recall on the 9th of November 1918,
when I got a message from the brigade commander, stating that it
was reported that the morale of blank division was bad, and asking
me to report on the morale of the third battalion, which I happened
to be commanding as a lieutenant. This message is on record and
my reply is on record down here in the War Department :
The morale of the men of the third battalion is good. They may not be
a hundred percent efficient because of the arduous service they have been
called upon to render during the past several days, but they are remarkably
subservient to the will of their officers and are ready to perform any duty
that may be required of them.
And that has been the experience I have had, in my limited way,
in dealing with the American soldiers when they are confronted
with an important duty, that I have always found them ready to
perform it, whether they have been in the service 1 month, 1 year,
or 2 years.
Mr. Hays. Well, I think that is a valuable addition to my argu-
ment, that you didn't have to keep the men that had been there the
longest.
The Chapman. We find it necessary to change our committee room
for tomorrow. The committee will meet in room 1334, being the
Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee Boom. That is in the
New House Office Building.
I would appreciate the members of the press advising any of the
others that you might come in contact with, who might be interested
in the location.
Mr. Hats. Do you have any plans to bring anyone else besides Dr.
Hobbs tomorrow ?
Mr. Wormser. Yes. Tom McNiece, the assistant research direc-
tor, who will read another report which we are working our heads
off to get ready for you at least by the time of the hearing.
Mr. Hays. Why do you not keep your heads and let me finish ask-
ing Mr. Dodd some questions about his report before we get another
one ? It is immaterial to me, but I am ready.
The Chairman. I think my reaction to orderly procedure would
be to let Mr. McNiece make his presentation and then any questions
that you might want to ask of Mr. Dodd or Mr. McNiece could
follow.
Mr. Hays. It is immaterial to me, Mr. Chairman. I do not see
what that has to do with orderly procedure. In the first place, we
didn't get Mr. Dodd's statement the day he made it, and I have the
notes made. I could have gone ahead yesterday except you said Dr.
Briggs wanted to get back to New Hampshire. I do not want the
thing to hang fire forever. But I don't care.
164 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Wormser. We would -just as soon have Mr. Dodd go on.
The Chairman. I am inclined to think Mr. McNiece nas a state-
ment to make and my reaction would be it would be best for him to
make the statement and then we ought to have the rest of the period
of the day for questioning. Mr. Dodd can come on first and then if
we want to question Mr. McNiece we would proceed, if that is
agreeable.
Mr. Hats. I have no objection except I understand I will be able
to interrupt Mr. McNiece.
The Chairman. That is all right.
We will recess until 10 o'clock tomorrow morning.
(Whereupon, at 3 : 55 p. m., the committee was recessed, to recon-
vene at 10 a. m. Thursday, May 20, 1954.)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
THURSDAY, MAY 20, 1954
House of Representatives,
Special Commttteee To Investigate
Tax Exempt Foundations,
Washington, D. G.
The special subcommittee met at 10 a. m., pursuant to recess, in room
1334, New House Office Building, Hon. Carroll Reece (chairman of
the special subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Reece (presiding), Hays, and Pfost.
Also present : Rene A. Wormser, general counsel ; Arnold T. Koch,
associate counsel; Norman Dodd, research director; Kathryn Casey,
legal analyst.
The Chairman. The committee will please come to order.
Who is the first witness %
Mr. Wormser. We will continue with Professor Hobbs.
TESTIMONY OF DR. A. H. HOBBS, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF
SOCIOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA— Resumed
The Chairman. Do you have an additional statement to make, Pro-
fessor Hobbs, or are you submitting yourself for questioning at this
time?
Dr. Hobbs. I believe Mr. Wormser indicated that he had some
questions to ask of me.
The Chairman. You may proceed, Mr. Wormser.
Mr. Wormser. Dr. Hobbs, you testified in some detail about a few
particular books. You don't mean to leave any inference that your
general opinions concerning what you call scientism relate only to
those few books ?
Dr. Hobbs. No, sir. This is a very widespread situation. It is con-
tained in dozens and dozens of books. I cited those which I did cite
only to illustrate the point. Many other books could be cited. But,
of course, most of those other books, in fact, would have no connection
with foundations.
Mr. Wormser. Doctor, I hand you this morning an advertisement
of Dr. Kinsey's second book. I think it is very important to illustrate
the extent to which that book has resulted in a discussion of changes of
law in the area of marriage and sex.
Would you read the material on that ad and describe it? It ap-
peared in the New York Times on May 11.
Dr. Hobbs. This is an advertisement for the second volume in the
Kinsey series, the volume on Sexual Behavior in the Human Female.
The advertisement reads :
What do you care about sex laws?
165
166 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
It goes on :
Maybe you ought to think a little bit about our laws concerning sex and sex
offenders.
These laws are supposed to protect you ; they don't always do that, and they
are sometimes turned against ordinary citizens like yourself.
The Kinsey report cites instances of how and when and where. Shouldn't you
read it?
Mr. Wormser. Have you read the entire ad?
Dr. Hobbs. Except the price of the book and the publisher.
Mr. Wormser. Would the committee like to see the ad? I would
like to offer it in evidence and you might wish to see it.
The Chairman. Without objection it is so ordered.
(The material referred to is as follows:)
What do
you care
about
sex laws ?
Maybe you ought to think a little bit about our
laws concerning sex and sex offenders.
These laws are supposed to protect you: they
don't always do that, and they are sometimes
turned against ordinary citizens like yourself.
The Kinsey Report cites instances of how,
and when, and where. Shouldn't you read it?
842 pages, $8.00. At any bookseller,
or send order with remittance to
W. B. Saunders Company
W. Washington Square, Philadelphia 5, Pa.
THE NEW YOflK TIMES BOOK REVIEW MAY It, l«S4
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 167
Mr. Wormser. Dr. Hobbs, would you express your own opinion,
please, as to whether the production of a book of this type, advertised
in this manner, is a desirable activity of a foundation?
Dr. Hobbs. I would say that they are encroaching, as in the instance
of the encroachment in the military area, in areas in, in this case,
legal areas, as well as moralistic areas, where they should be extremely
cautious.
I don't mean to imply that no investigation should be made, nor
that the findings should be suppressed, or anything of that kind. But
a great deal of caution should be used in connection with these extra-
scientific areas, if you wish to call them such, and that degree of
caution certainly has not been exercised.
Mr. Wobmser. Dr. Hobbs, do I express your opinion correctly by
this statement ? The foundations, or some of them, in the Cox hear-
ings last year, maintained that the best use of their funds would be
in experiment in reaching out for new horizons, in considering their
precious funds in what they call risk capital. You would approve of
experiment in the sense of trying to reach new horizons, but you would
caution, I assume, against experiment as such where it relates to the
relationship of human beings and basic factors in our society?
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir; a great deal of caution, I think, should be
applied in those areas. For one thing, because of the points I tried
to establish yesterday, that the mere fact that the thing is being
studied can change the situation ; and secondly, because the findings
of a study can affect human behavior and we should be extremely
cautious when we are entering into areas of that sort.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Wormser, would you go back to the question just
immediately preceding this? Could we have the question read ?
(The question referred to was read by the reporter as recorded
above.)
Mr, Wormser. Dr. Hobbs, I would like you to extend your remarks
somewhat on the subject of empiricism. The material has been used
by witnesses several times. I would like you to discuss this aspect of
empiricism; whether or not it is safe to be used in consideration of
human problems by itself, or whether it must not always be related
to any other pertinent material in the social sciences, such as basic
moral codes and so forth ?
Dr. Hobbs. I would feel very definitely that so-called empirical
findings must be fitted into a framework of the legal precepts, the tra-
ditions, the history, the moral codes, the military principles of the
area in which they are applied. That in and of themselves, by their
very nature, they exclude the intangibles which may be not only
important but may be crucial in a final decision.
Mr. Hats. Dr. Hobbs, right there, do you mean to imply that all the
studies by foundations in this field of social science are empirical
studies and that they have no relation or are not fitted in in any way,
shape, or form with the other things you mentioned ?
Dr. Hobbs. No, sir ; I don't mean to imply that at all. There are
studies fostered which are other than empirical. But it is my im-
pression, and not only mine but the impression of quite a number of
other professors with whom I correspond, that there is coming to be
an overemphasis on what is called empiricism. Empiricism itself, of
course, is a thoroughly acceptable technique of investigation. Like
168 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
other techniques it has to be included within the overall framework
of the scientific approach, but it is thoroughly respectable and desir-
able as an approach in and of itself.
Two things, however, seem to be occurring. One, that it is not
really empiricism which is being sponsored. It is more nearly statis-
tical manipulation without any real background of the numbers which
are being manipulated. Those numbers usually represent people.
Mr. Hats. Right there, I want to ask you about that before we
go any further.
The word "manipulate" usually has a connotation meaning that
you decide what the answer is going to be first and then manipulate
the figures. Do you mean to imply that ?
Dr. Hobbs. No, sir ; I didn't mean to imply that at all.
Mr. Hays. Maybe we ought to use some other term.
Dr. Hobbs. Statistical computations if you wish.
Mr. Hats. I think that means what you want to say and the other
had a different meaning.
Dr. Hobbs. I am very glad you mentioned that because I had abso-
lutely no intent to imply that.
Mr. Hats. In other words, these people decide what the answer is
to be and then set out to make it come out that way ?
Dr. Hobbs. I didn't mean that; no, sir.
Mr. Wormser. Dr. Hobbs, I would like your opinion and whatever
discussion you can give us on the general influence that foundations
have had on research in the colleges and universities.
Dr. Hobbs. I don't think I could speak as to the overall general
influence. I have made no separate study of that. But from my
own experience, and as I indicated from the experience of others,
some of whom are prominent within their respective fields, there are,
myself included, and others, who are becoming increasingly concerned
about what is or what seems to be — perhaps we are wrong in this — an
overemphasis upon this so-called empiricism. Unfortunately, as I
said before, it is a respectable and acceptable technique, but it is only
one part of a very large pattern, if you want to approach a better
understanding of human behavior.
Particularly where large grants are involved, the grants tend to be
geared into programs of "empiricism" — and I wish the word would
be kept in quotes whenever it is used here — and then graduate students
receive their training through these grants. I don't mean to imply
in any sense that the foundations have organized their grants for this
purpose, or that they are promoting intentionally and purposefully
the type of thing I am going to describe. I merely wish to point it
out as a situation which does arise and which I believe is quite unfor-
tunate.
These graduate students, who, of course, will be the researchers
and the teachers of the future, are subjected by the very nature of
the situation to enter in disproportionate numbers into this one small
area, an important area, to be sure, but just one area of their training.
They are encouraged through the situation to embark upon study
projects which are extremely narrow, and with the aid of the grant,
the persons running the research are able to employ professional
interviewers, for example. One part of graduate training should be
some acquaintance with people. The graduate student, I would feel,
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 160
would gain much more if he were to do his own interviewing, rather
than merely take the results which were collected by a professional
interviewer. In failing to do his own interviewing, he has thereby
lost an important element, I would say, of what should be his train-
ing.
Furthermore, these projects aid these students to a disproportionate
degree. Other students who, through differing interests, through a
broader viewpoint of society and behavior, who do their own work
and who don't have such assistance, are handicapped in comparison
with the ones who receive the aid through foundation grants.
So that there are cases where the graduate student in his training
has concentrated in a very small area of the statistical computations —
and I wish to add that in themselves there is nothing wrong with
that, but they are a very small part of the overall picture — but in such
training they neglect studies of the traditions of the country, the studies
of the history of the country, they neglect actual experience with
people, they neglect studies of the philosophies which have been devel-
oped in connection with human civilization, and they even neglect —
and this may sound extreme, but I can vouch that it does happen —
they even neglect studies of science.
One of my favorite questions when I am examining students for a
graduate degree is a question of this sort. Here you are, you are going;
to get a doctor of philosophy degree. What have you read in philos-
ophy ? I appreciate that this sounds extreme, but there are graduate
students who get such degrees who have never read a book in philos-
ophy.
Then another question along the same lines : What have you ever
read in the philosophy of science; and some of them have read little
or nothing in that area either.
So you get this tendency to overspecialize, overconcentrate in one
area which admittedly has its merits, but which leads to a narrowness
of mind, not the broader outlook which we need in the present unde-
veloped conditions associated with social science.
Another aspect of this same situation is that graduate students and
faculty members are discouraged from applying for grants unless
they, too, are willing to do this type of "empirical" investigation.
For example, this is a bulletin of the Social Science Research Coun-
cil, an announcement of fellowships and grants to be offered in 1953.
In this bulletin it states that fellowships and grants described in this
circular are of two distinct types. One, those designed exclusively
to further the training of research workers in social science.
If I may interject to read : "Research worker" for a layman would
have a broad general significance — research is desirable and so forth.
But in the connotation in which it is all too frequently used, in social
science, research means statistical computation. A social scientist
reading this would interpret it to mean that probably, almost certainly,,
what they are interested in is only statistical computations.
The quotation on this first point goes on to say :
These include the research training fellowships and the area research-training
fellowships. These fellowships provide full maintenance.
A second category listed :
Those designed to aid scholars of established competence in the execution of
their research, family, the travel grants for area research, grants in aid of
research, and faculty research fellowships.
170 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Then in a description of the research-training fellowships there is
the statement :
These fellowships may be granted for programs that will afford either experi-
ence in the conduct of research —
and remembering here that the reader of this material knows or be-
lieves they mean statistical computation —
and first-hand analysis of empirical data under the guidance of mature investi-
gators or further formal training or both. ,
Purposes for which grants-in-aid may be expended include wages of clerical and
technical assistants, tabulating, photostating, microfilming and similar services,
transportation, and living expenses of the grantee himself while traveling in pur-
suit of his investigation. Grants are not ordinarily available for travel to pro-
fessional society meetings or conferences or for purposes of books and manu-
scripts. Grants will not be given to subsidize the preparation of textbooks or
the publication of books or articles or to provide income in lieu of salary.
Fellowships will be selected on the basis of their actual and prospective accom-
plishments in formulating and testing hypotheses concerning social behavior by
empirical and, if possible, quantitative methods.
Now, I don't mean to imply that there is anything categorically
wrong in such a statement, but I do wish to point out that it does tend
in the direction of giving the people in the field the impression that
unless research involves statistical computation, then they don't have
much chance of getting a grant. Now, perhaps that impression is in-
correct. It may well be incorrect. I just say that the impression does
spread, so that if it does occur to you to ask for a grant to make a
broader study of the history of the development of social science or
something of that sort, then after having read such things you are
likely to be discouraged.
It may be your own fault. Perhaps if you had gone ahead and
requested you would have obtained it. I am just saying that atmos-
phere is created and I think the foundations themselves would regret
that this is the situation and would probably be willing to do whatever
they can to change that atmosphere to create one which everybody
appreciates they are interested in, broader types of research instead
of this particular empirical one.
Mr. Wormser. Isn't the term "comptometer compulsion" used ?
Dr. Hobbs. I have used it facetiously and unkindly to describe the
extremes of this empirical research where comptometers and similar
machines are substitutes for actual experience with people and actual
study of the philosophy of science and the history of peoples and
so on.
Mr. Wormser. Dr. Hobbs, in connection with one subject you dis-
cussed, that the foundations support a type of research which you call
scientism, which sometimes penetrates the political area, do you have
any opinion that any of the foundations themselves encourage going
into the political scene ?
Dr. Hobbs. Certainly, that type of thing is indicated repeatedly
throughout one of the books that I mentioned yesterday, in Stuart
Chase's The Proper Study of Mankind.
In addition here is a report of the Social Science Research Council,
tinnual report, 1928-29, in which they have what I would consider to
be quite an extreme statement, but perhaps there is some other expla-
nation of it. They have a listing; of their history and purposes of the
Social Science Research Council, and one of these purposes is that —
a sounder empirical method of research had to be achieved in political science,
if it were to assist in the development of a scientific political control.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 171
Mr. Wormser. Is that a quote ?
Dr. Hobbs. That is a direct quote from this annual report.
Mr. Hats. Is that bad %
Dr. Hobbs. It could be. The implications that you are going to
control political — -
Mr. Hats. They say "on a sounder." In other words, the inference
is there that they recognize it is not very sound.
Dr. Hobbs (reading) :
A sounder empirical method of research to assist in the development of a
scientific political control.
If you are talking in terms of scientific political control, it would
seem to me that you are going to hand over government to these
social scientists. That seems to be the implication.
Mr. Hats. Do you teach political science at all \
Dr. Hobbs. No, sir.
Mr. Hays. I assume you have taken some courses in it?
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hats. Have you ever had any practical experience in politics ?
Dr. Hobbs. No, sir.
Mr. Hays. Let me say that I have a minor in political science from
Ohio State and they have a very fine political science department
there.
But in the past few years in politics, I found out that it has very
little relation if any to either science or politics. They do teach you
a lot about government and Constitution and the government of the
various other nations and the difference between our constitutional
form of government and the British parliamentary form of govern-
ment, for instance ; but ever since I can remember it has been called
political science and that would be, I suppose, under some of the
definitions we have used here, a very bad and misleading term. Yet
it is one that is used all the time.
Dr. Hobbs. So long as there is understanding that it is different
from science as the term is used in connection with the physical
sciences.
In your training in political science you are apparently getting the
type of broad background which I referred to earlier. I think that
is desirable. Not only desirable, but essential. If, in your training,
your teachers had been trained only in this empirical method, then
your training in political science would have been predominantly,
perhaps solely, studies of how to make opinion polls and the tech-
niques of statistical computation and examination of the results and
things along those empirical lines.
Mr. Hats. Do you mean to say, then, Doctor, that there are uni-
versities that are teaching their students in political science nothing
but how to take polls, and so forth ?
Dr. Hobbs. I do not. I say political science is not my field. My
field is sociology. In sociology, there are, I am sorry to say, some
institutions where there is a definite movement in that direction, and
where this empirical type of thing has assumed a proportion which
is way out of balance considering the general things that people
should know about human behavior.
Mr. Hays. I believe you have frankly said yesterday you didn't
think that sociology was very much of a science.
172 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Dr. Hobbs. Not in the sense that the word is used with political
science. That does not mean that it is of no value or anything like
that.
Mr. Hats. I didn't mean to imply that. I think it has great value.
But it is a subject that you can't study and say, "this is it, these are
the conclusions and they don't vary."
Dr. Hobbs. That is correct, sir.
Mr. Hays. It is something that you can only approximate.
Dr. Hobbs. You get as much data as you can and you generalize
about it, but you should always avoid giving the impression that this
is the final scientific answer to any important area of human behavior.
Always leave open the possibility of alternative explanations.
Mr. Hats. Then, as I get it, your criticism broadly has been that
there is a tendency among these empiricists, if we can use that term,
to try to tie this down as a definite thing and say these are the answers
and there are no variables ?
Dr. Hobbs. There is, I would say, a definite and in my opinion an
unfortunate tendency in that direction, to the degree that it has over-
balanced and overshadowed a more nearly rounded study of human
behavior and societies.
Mr. Hats. You don't think there is anything that the Congress can
do about that except bring it to the attention of the people.
Dr. Hobbs. Of the foundations, and I would guess they would be
probably not only willing but anxious to do what they could to modify
this and avoid it.
Mr. Wormser. Dr. Hobbs, there is one other subject I wish you
would discuss, please, in your own way, and that is what is called
moral relativity — the tendency of this inaccurate or unbalanced type
of research to have perhaps an undermining effect on moral standards.
Dr. Hobbs. In this type of empirical approach, by definition you
must attempt to reduce the things you are studying to the type of
units which I indicated yesterday, to quantitative units, which are
measurable. By the very nature of the approach^ therefore, you
exclude intangibles, such as sentiments, love, romance, devotion, or
other tangibles, such as patriotism, honesty, and things of that type.
So if it is strictly empirical, then the behavior involved is reduced
to cold quantitative items which are important, perhaps, but which
if presented alone give a very distorted picture of love or sex or
patriotism or whatever else the topic may be.
Mr. Wormser. Is it analogous, perhaps, to use a syllogism without
including all the premises? The missing premises being moral codes
and basic principles of government and so forth.
Dr. Hobbs. It would be analogous to that. I would say that in the
context of the scientific method it is using just one of the elements
instead of including all of the elements which should be involved.
That is unfortunate.
Mr. Wormser. Unless the committee has further question, I would
like Dr. Hobbs to conclude in whatever way he wishes, himself, if he
has any further material to offer.
Mr. Hats. Before we go any further, how many questions I will
have depends on whether on not somebody is going to be brought in
by the staff to present the other point of view. Because I am confidant
that there must be another point of view. If we are going to be objec-
tive, I would like to hear from somebody on the other side.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 173
I might have just as many pointed questions to ask him as I have
to ask Dr. Hobbs. If we are not going to bring anybody in, then I
am going to try to develop the other side right here so we can bo
objective.
Mr. Wormser. I can answer that by saying that we will certainly
ask the Social Science Research Council to appear and I would assume-
that they would present the other side of the case.
Mr. Hats. You say you are going to ask the Social Science Research
Council ; that is a kind^of intangible body, isn't it ?
Mr. Wormser. If you wish to designate its representative, we will
call him.
Mr. Hats. I don't know anybody in the Social Science Research
Council any more than I didn't know Dr. Hobbs until now.
The Chairman. You have in mind calling someone who is a rep-
resentative of the official body of the research council ?
Mr. Wormser. Yes. I would normally call the president. If tha
committee would prefer to have someone else called, I would do it.
The Chairman. Someone from their own section?
Mr. Wormser. Yes, I told them that.
The Chairman. Likewise, in due time the representatives of the-
foundations, I assume, of various foundations, will also be called ?
Mr. Wormser. Yes.
The Chairman. So there is certainly no predisposition to have only
one viewpoint presented.
Mr. Hays. Are we planning to call in the representatives of these-
foundations or invite them in %
Mr. Koch. I would think we would ask them first whether they
would want to present their case. If none of them did, and I would
rather doubt that, then I suppose we would have to get someone to
present the other side ourselves. I would guess that the foundations
would be only too anxious to present their best spokesmen.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Hays, may I amplify that by saying that I have
had conferences with the attorneys, I think, for most of the major
foundations, and in each case have told them that while we might ask.
an individual from the foundation, including the Social Science Re-
search Council, to appear for a particular piece of testimony, that we-
had no objection whatsoever to their designating their own representa-
tive to testify.
Mr. Hats. The reason for that question is simply this : At dinner
last night with some friends of mine, one of whom spent an hour or two-
in the hearing yesterday, the subject came up about this, and this
gentleman said, "I understand that up to now the foundations think
that this has been so insignificant that they are just going to ignore
it altogether." If they take that attitude, then I suppose we will
only get one side of it.
Mr. Koch. Mr. Hays, can we leave it this way: If they elect to
ignore, we can then perhaps recall Professor Hobbs and you can cross-
examine him at that time.
Mr. Hats. That would be all right. I do have some questions to
ask him. But I don't want to go into a lengthy day or two on it.
Mr. Wormser. You don't want to ask them now ?
Mr. Hats. Yes, I sure do.
Mr. Wormser. If you want to, ask them now by all means. I am
sure Dr. Hobbs would be glad to come back on reasonable notice.
49720—54 — pt. 1 12
174 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hays. I think the time to ask questions is now.
The Chairman. That was the purpose and intention of having this
session this morning. If you will bear with me for a moment, I might
review what I said at the opening of the hearing in connection with
the method of presentation : That the committee staff was making a
presentation and then others would be called in who were representa-
tive of the other viewpoint, and also the foundations themselves would
be invited to come.
So far as my own feeling is concerned — I have discussed this with
counsel — I would say it is not altogether within the discretion of the
foundations to decide whether they should or should not come, because
we have only one thing in mind, and that is a complete, objective,
and thorough study.
Mr. Hays. I understand that anybody can be subpenaed.
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Hays. I didn't want to prevent you, Doctor, from making a
final statement.
Dr. Hobbs. No, sir. I had completed the things that I wanted to
take up.
Mr. Hays. You have completed your statement?
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hays. One of the things I would like to ask you — of course,
understand in the very begining that I don't care what your answers
are, I only want your opinion because I am interested since you have
given your opinion on a variety of things, and I would like to have
it on some that we have not touched upon so we get a well-rounded and
balanced picture — and one of the things I would like to ask you is this :
In Mr. Dodd's opening statement he said one of the things — and I
am not quoting exactly, but he left a very definite impression — that
one of the things wrong with foundations, and I will quote, is : "That
they are willing to support experiments in fields that defy control."
Do you think that is a fault ?
Dr. Hobbs. Assuming that that was the substance of his state-
ment
Mr. Hays. I am quoting exactly, "That they have been willing to
support experiments in fields that defy control."
Dr. Hobbs. It is true that in any study of the significant aspects
of human behavior, such as criminality, juvenile delinquency, political
behavior, the studies are such that they defy control, in the sense that
there are intangibles involved which, no matter how conscientious you
are in making the study, these intangibles still remain.
The word "control" in scientific investigation means that you are
able to control, to measure the significant variables, and that no other
variables can come into the investigation to significantly influence
the results.
That is not the case with studies of human behavior.
Mr. Hays. That is right. But any field, unless it is completely
comprehended — and I don't know that there is any such field — and any
research into the unknown would probably defy control, would it not?
Dr. Hobbs. But there is a difference in the usage of the term. A
physicist can make a study which is a complete controlled study. His
study may be one which involves the weight of matter. He may and
can create conditions under which he has to all intents and purposes
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 175
complete control over" the conditions of his experiment. You cannot
do that in social science, unfortunately.
Mr. Hays. It is probably unfortunate. All right, we will agree
with that. But you would not suggest that we just abandon all experi-
ment because we can't control ?
Dr. Hobbs. By no means.
Mr. Hats. I don't want to ask you any leading questions, but would
you or would you not suggest that the foundations just refuse to make
any grants in that field because it does defy control %
Dr.- Hobbs. If that were the case, then they would have to go out
of business so far as the social sciences are concerned. I think that
would be undesirable, that grants should be made and efforts should
be made in all directions, but I do think there should be more of a
balance than there is at present.
Of course, when these things are done, then the results should be
stated in very heavily qualified terms, particularly if the title "science"
is applied to the investigation.
Mr. Hays. Then to sum up the main part of your criticism — and I
am trying now only to find out if I am right in my thinking — you
object mainly to the use of the term "science" in connection with these
things that are not exact because it is a misleading term.
Dr. Hobbs. Extremely misleading. The people in general, I believe,
when they hear the word "science" think in terms of the physical
sciences which have been so tremendously successful. It is unfor-
tunate, therefore, that when they hear social science or read that this
is a scientific study of delinquency or a scientific study of sexual
behavior, they are given the impression that this is the final defini-
tive word, that there is no alternative possibility, that the condition
in short is the same as it would be with an investigation in physical
science.
Mr. Hays. Doctor, do you think it is possible to have a scientific
study of delinquency?
Dr. Hobbs. Again in the sense that you have scientific studies of
matter and energy, the answer would have to be "No." There have
been some efforts — and I would say very commendable efforts — made
to increase the degree of control involved in the study. That is by
conducting studies such as the one made by, for example, Sheldon
and Eleanor Glueck.
In their studies of delinquency they attempted to reduce the vari-
ables by going to slum areas and picking 500 boys who were delin-
quents and serious delinquents. They were not just one-time offenders
or incidental mischievous children, they were serious delinquents;
and then from the same slum area they picked out another 500 boys
who were not delinquents.
Already they have exerted some element of control over one of the
possible variables, that is, the environmental conditions, the slum
conditions. All of the boys came from slum areas.
Then, further, they matched the delinquent boys with the other
500 boys as for age, as for their school record, as for their I. Q,., as
for their nationality background, the income of their parents, and in
this manner they attempted to reduce the number of variables in-
volved in the situation to arrive at what would be called a controlled
study to the degree that you can call studies in social science con-
trolled.
176 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
I would say that type of effort is extremely desirable.
Incidentally, the findings of that study upset all. of the other beliefs
that had been held on the basis of earlier studies which were made
and which were empirical about delinquency.
Mr. Hays. Of course, that is the way down through the ages. We
have found out what little we know about things, that is, by trial
and error more or less.
Dr. Hobbs. Yes. As long as we understand that it is trial and error,
then that is, of course, perfectly acceptable. But when we are given
the impression that this is science, and final and definitive, irrefu-
table, unchallengeable, that is another situation.
Mr. Hats. Do you think there is a possibility about your fears
that this is so firmly imbedded in the minds of the public might
be exaggerated?
Dr. Hobbs. Sir, it is not a fear. It is a concern.
Mr. Hats. I won't quibble with you about adjectives or verbs or
Mr. Hats. Do you think there is a possibility that your fears
or concern, you use your own terminology, but do you think there
is a possibility that you are more concerned about it than maybe is
necessary ?
Dr. Hobbs. That is always possible.
Mr. Hats. To go back to your book that you cited yesterday, this
book by Stuart Chase.
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hats. What was the title of that again ?
Dr. Hobbs. "The Proper Study of Mankind."
Mr. Hats. It is not a very appealing title.
Dr. Hobbs. The title is taken from a poem by Alexander Pope.
Mr. Hays, You seemed to indicate to me that this book, The Proper
Study of Mankind, had exerted a rather undesirable influence. Am I
right in assuming that ?
Dr. Hobbs. As to the influence of the study, of course, there is no
way of measuring that. You cannot tell when someone reads a book
the degree to which they have been influenced by it. I cited it as an
illustration wherein foundations had encouraged and promoted the
impression that social science is identical or virtually identical with
physical science.
Mr. Hays. The thing that I am a little concerned about is that I
don't think very many people have read that book and if that is so, I
dont' think it could exert much influence one way or another. I have
been toying with this every since yesterday. I have a 15-minute tele-
vision show every Saturday night in my district and it covers parts
of three States. If there was some way. to advertise that I was going
to offer a prize and be sure the thing would not be loaded, I would
like to offer $50 to the first person who called in and told me that they
read that book in those three States. I don't know how many people
listen to it, but I am sure if we put it in the papers at $50 I would get
a good-sized audience. Maybe no one watches it, I don't know.
The Chairman. It depends on how much time you give them,
Mr. Hays. I don't want to sell the book. I would have to give them
them a time limit.
The point I am making, and I don't come from exactly an illiterate
part or the country — Pittsburgh and Wheeling and Steuben ville and
Youngstown and other cities in Ohio — is that I would be almost will-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 177
ing to gamble that I couldn't find anybody there who read that book.
Dr. Hobbs. That, of course, would be a biased sampling which was
involved.
Mr, Hats. Would that be empirical ?
Dr. Hobbs. I suggest, sir, if you are concerned and think this is an
important point that some of the staff might write to the publishers
and perhaps they would release the sales figures.
Mr. Hats. We have already made that request of the staff and they
will get that. The thing was belabored pretty extensively yesterday,
I thought, and I just wondered if it was not given an importance out
of all comparison with what it deserves.
Mr. Wokmser. Mr. Hays, may I ask in that same question : Do you
suppose, Dr. Hobbs, that it has been widely read among academic
■circles where its influence might be great ?
Dr. Hobbs. From my own experience I know that it was widely
read. I would judge that it was generally widely read in academic
circles where, of course, that would be the crucial point — how much
young and naive scholars were influenced by this point of view.
Mr. Woemser. I think Mr. Hays would agree that they were prob-
ably reading it in the libraries rather than buying copies.
Dr. Hobbs. You might check that also.
Mr. Hats. I am embarrassed to bring this up but I have been won-
dering after the last campaign whether they had much influence any-
way. You know there was ridicule, and they developed a term called
eggheads which I deplored, and an anti-intellectual thing. If vou
showed any interest you were immediately labeled with there being
something a little queer about you. In fact they almost sold the
slogan so well they had some people afraid to admit that they even
knew a college professor rather than listen to one.
The Chairman. I assume you are not familiar with the origin of
the eggheads?
Mr. Hats. I don't know which one of the hucksters came up with it,
first, but I imagine it was the same one that came up with the slogan
"dynamic foreign policy." I could mention some more.
Doctor Hobbs, you have expressed various criticisms of social sci-
ence and I am sure you are far more of an expert in that field than I am.
I find it a little hard to make a judgment on what you said. I certainly
respect your opinions in view of your academic background, but I
would like to try to tie down a little of this if I can.
Do you feel that the Congress has any business in trying to pass
judgment on the questions of scientific method and the validity of
scientific work?
Dr. Hobbs. Generally, I would say no. I can't conceive of a situa-
tion at the moment or on the spot where that would be desirable.
The Chairman. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. Hats. Sure.
The Chairman. I feel myself that Congress should not.
My general concern with this question and related questions is that
Congress or the Government through the funds which it has made
available to the foundations by relieving them of payment of taxes,
not be used to do the same thing that Congress would not do, and that
it would not be proper for Congress to do.
Mr. Hats. Doctor, in view of your last statement, I suppose this
question is almost superfluous, but to get it in the record I will ask you.
178 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Do you think that there is some action Congress should take, or some
control it should impose, to redirect the work of social scientists which
you think is not good in some cases ?
Dr. Hobbs. I don't want to give the impression that they are not
good in that sense, but I did try to emphasize in a number of instances,
and I think they have been important ones, they have encroached
and they have encouraged encroachment into areas where, in the pres-
ent state of the development of the social sciences, they should not
encroach except with many, many qualifications as to their findings.
Mr. Hays. In other words, then, the main thing is that you say go
ahead and make these experiments, but qualify your findings so no-
body can misunderstand them ?
Dr. Hobbs. That is correct.
Mr. Hats. That might be a little tough. But at least so they won't
get the wrong impression about them.
Dr. Hobbs. That is correct.
Mr. Hays. To get back to the question, Do you feel that Congress
should take some specific action about this, or that we should just let
these hearings perhaps stand as a sort of danger signal?
Dr. Hobbs. My feeling would be that ideally the foundations should,,
with the advice and with the information coming out of hearings like
this, that they themselves should take the initiative to determine if
there are excesses in one direction or another and to try, I would say
more than they have in the past, to keep things in balance and not
to go overweight in one direction, such as empiricism ; that they should
try themselves to keep a better balance than they seem to have done in
the past and at present..
Mr. Hays. In other words, you think then that any policing that is
done should be done by the foundations themselves, and not by the
Congress ?
Dr. Hobbs. If it is a matter of policing, I would say yes. Of course,
when you get excesses and if there is a definite effort to influence laws,
such as has been indicated, then I think properly Members of Con-
gress, to whom this prerogative is delegated, should be somewhat
concerned.
Mr, Hays. But you don't have any specific recommendations to
make at this moment about any laws that we should pass ?
Dr. Hobbs. I am not a legislator, sir. I would not ; no.
Mr. Hays. I realize that, and I didn't want to put you on the
spot. But the usual idea, when you have a congressional investigation,
the ultimate thing, if it comes to any conclusion at all that anything
is wrong, is that there should be some remedial action taken.
You have indicated, at least, that you think there are some things
that are wrong but you don't think that they are so badly wrong
that Congress ought to pass a law about it.
^ Dr. Hobbs. I certainly think a great deal of thought should be
given. I can't conceive, as I indicated before, how such a law could
be drawn up without restricting investigation in some area or other.
Mr. Hays. In other words, stifling further education and research ?
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hays. That is exactly what I am afraid of.
Dr. Hobbs. I think that would be undesirable.
Mrs. Pfost. I would like to ask, Dr. Hobbs, do you think it would
be proper or don't you think it would, that this committee call other
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 179
witnesses of a different point of view from yours in order to get a
fuller picture of these issues?
Dr. Hobbs. Absolutely.
Mrs. Pfost. Also, I would like to ask you, Dr. Hobbs, do you think
any of this tax-free money is being channeled into needless projects?
Dr. Hobbs. You want my opinion ?
Mrs. Pfost. Yes.
Dr. Hobbs. Absolutely.
Mrs. Pfost. If I understand you correctly, a little while ago, you
made the statement that you felt that the foundations should direct
their studies in a more diversified field. How do you feel that they
could better balance — how, can they set about better balancing their
field of study ?
Dr. Hobbs. As I indicated, there is, or at least at present there seems
to be to me and to other academic people, this atmosphere that
the foundations are primarily interested only in this empirical ap-
proach. They, on their own initiative, could make efforts to dispel
that atmosphere and to correct it, if it is erroneous, or to correct the
situation if it does exist, through their circulars and advertising and
through letters which are sent to universities, emphasizing that they
are interested in all types of approaches.
Mrs. Pfost. Thank you very much.
Mr. Hays. Dr. Hobbs, yesterday you talked at considerable length
about the influence of certain social scientists — is that the term you
used — on the Army ?
Dr. Hobbs. Social scientists.
Mr. Hats. I made the point yesterday I thought, and I don't wish
to put a mantle around my shoulders and say I am a prophet, but
I pointed out yesterday that whatever else you said. Dr. Kinsey
would get top billing. That seems to have been the case in a few press
notices I read this morning.
But to me the most important charge you made, or the most serious
one, I will put it that way, is the charge you made — that the social
scientists had more or less tampered with the workings of the Army
to the detriment of the country.
Dr. Hobbs. I did not make that in the form of a charge. I made
statements from the books themselves and did indicate in making those
statements that this apparently, from the evidence, was a definite con-
flict between military policy on the part of the Army and social-science
approach on the part of the social scientists involved.
Mr. Hays. Let me say here that I don't want to put words in your
mouth. If you didn't make a charge against the Army, I don't want
to imply that you did.
Dr. Hobbs. I did emphasize that there was a conflict ; yes, sir.
Mr. Hays. But the impression was very definitely left with me that
it was in the nature rather of a charge or indictment or whatever you
want to call it. At least it seemed to me to be rather serious. Just ex-
actly what did you mean to imply ?
Dr. Hobbs. I meant to imply that here was a situation involving an
extremely important military principle. That within this situation
there was a conflict. On the one hand you had the military, on the
other hand the social scientists. This they admit repeatedly through-
out their work.
180 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The social scientists continued to insist that their method of han-
dling this important principle be used instead of methods which were
advocated by the military. They succeeded in doing this, resulting in
the point system of discharge, a discharge which, according to the mili-
tary side, was undesirable.
Mr. Hays. Doctor, you say there that on the one side was the Army
and on the other side was social science. That is two sides.
How many sides does this thing have ? To me it must have at least
one more. Maybe it was a triangle, I don't know, but there is a side
that it seems to me on which there were millions of people in this
country and the way you define it, if there were only two sides then
they were not on the side of the Army as you speak of the word.
By the Army I assume is meant what is commonly called around
here the "high brass," or the people who run it.
Dr. Hobbs. That expression ' f there were two sides" is from the book
itself.
Mr. Hats. Wouldn't you say that in addition to the social' scien-
tists, there were about 6 million soldiers — maybe the figure is too
high — maybe only 5 million wanted to be discharged, I don't know.
But at the time it seemed to me like they all did. If there were 6
million soldiers there were probably 12 million fathers and mothers
more or less and I don't know how many million sisters and brothers
and other relatives, but I distinctly remember they were all on that
side, too.
Do you agree or not ?
Dr. Hobbs. That is probably true, but if military policy is to be
based on the wishes of the individual members of the military service,
then you are going to have a very, very interesting sort of Army, Navy,
Air Force and Marine Corps.
Mr. Hats. I agree with you. Probably more interesting than we
have ever had. But in a democracy how else would you have the Army
directed ? Are you going to set it up a little sacrosanct outfit which
does whatever it pleases without regard to the wishes of the people ? If
you do that you don't have a democracy, do you ?
Dr. Hobbs. That is correct. But within a military organization by
definition you do not have democracy. It is necessary to have ranks
within a military organization. It is necessary definitely to delegate
responsibility and authority.
Mr. Hats. As I understand it, the decision had been made that we
are going to have to demobilize some of these men. We can't keep
them all. It is not necessary to keep them all. We can't afford to
keep them all. The public won't stand for us to keep them all. All
of those factors entered in.
Do I understand you to say that it is bad to ask these men, we are
going to demobilize part of you, would you want to give us your
opinion of how you would like to have it done? Do you think that
is bad per se ?
Dr. Hobbs. I made the point, or tried to delineate the differences or
some of the differences between physical science and social science,
that one of the differences was that the very fact that you attempt
to make a study may influence the attitudes, the opinions, the behavior
of the persons who are involved in it.
In this particular situation, there is the possibility — and I would
say the likelihood — that when members of the military service are
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 181
given the impression, which they are likely to be given through
opinion surveys, and which you remember the Secretary of War
warned against, when they are given the impression that they are to
have the decision about important matters of strategy and military
?olicy, then there is always the possibility that you create disaffection,
would say that is a real possibility. It could have turned out that
the technique accepted and used was desirable. That could have
happened.
As it did turn out in the perspective oi history, it was, let us say,
at least questionable from a military point of view.
Mr. Hays. Don't say "let us say." You say it.
Dr. Hobbs. I would say it was definitely questionable.
Mr. Hats. That is your opinion?
Dr. Hobbs. It is my opinion.
Mr. Hays. Yes. That is a very interesting thing, and I am just
curious to know how would you have gone about demobilizing these
people if you didn't use the point system, if you personally had the
decision to make?
Dr. Hobbs. If I had the decision to make — you want to make me
Secretary of War for the moment?
Mr. Hays. I will want to make you anything you want. You made
yourself something in criticizing it. So take the same title and tell
us what you would have done in place of what you say was wrong.
Dr. Hobbs. In the situation which apparently existed the military
did know or feel that there was good reason for not disbanding the
combat veterans, for maintaining intact, efficient, effective combat
Units.
The social scientist on the other hand did not feel that same way. .
I suspect, without knowing, from reading it, that the military was
worried and concerned about possible Kussian encroachment in
Europe, a condition which did eventuate. The social scientist was
concerned only with his small area and did not know of that pos-
sibility. By the very nature of the study, you see, it was something
that they could not include. That is the type of hazard that you
encounter.
I don't mean to imply that these men were stupid, evil, or vicious
or anything of that kind; they are very capable men, all of them.
Technically the studies were very good. My main point which I tried
to stress is that when you enter an area and use the weight and prestige
of social science you are encountering possible hazards — in this case,
military hazards.
Mr. Hays. Doctor, they used a similar system in Korea right at
the time the fighting was going on, didn't they? They called it a
rotation system. They were constantly pulling men out of units and
putting them back and replacing them with other men.
I want to say very frankly I certainly recognize your right to your
opinion, but I don't see anything bad in bringing a man back home
who has risked his life repeatedly and let someone else assume that
gamble for a little while because if the combat veterans stay indefi-
nitely, it seems to me you have a chance of upsetting their morale,
because they will say, "Well, we have two alternatives — one of them
is that we stay here and get killed eventually and the other one is
that we stay here and get killed tomorrow."
182 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Dr. Hobbs. That, of course, was not the issue. The issue was
whether the military forces should be maintained intact or at least
in sufficient strength so that they could combat a possible military move
on the part of some potential enemy, in this case, of course, Russia.
Mr. Hays. I don't think the decision to keep them intact or not
to keep them intact — I insist — was made by any group of social
scientists. It was made right here about a block away, under the
dome.
Br. Hobbs. As I pointed out in citing from the book, there was the
point that the military did desire to keep the units intact. The social
scientists did not.
Mr. Hays. Would you agree with that statement? The military,
especially from the rank of lieutenant colonel on up, would desire to
keep them intact forevermore? I never found a colonel or lieutenant
colonel or a general who thought that the country was not in imminent
danger of destruction if you let one out. Whether or not it has
anything to do with the fact that you have to have so many thousand
men to have so many dozen colonels, I don't know. But that is the
attitude they seem to take.
Dr. Hobbs. I have had some experience with the military, also.
In my experience, I found the people — of course, military life is their
specialty and career — they are concerned with it much more than
nonprofessional military personnel. I did not find in my experience
the degree of dogmatic affirmation that we will maintain armies at
the largest size, we will maintain navies at their fullest strength,
regardless and in complete disregard of any military threat, imagi-
nary or real, and regardless of the interests of the entire country. I
do not find that in my experience.
Mr. Hays. I overemphasized the thing perhaps and exaggerated.
I am sure that you did not find that the case.
Will you agree that 99 percent of the time whenever there is a cut
suggested that you immediately ran into resistance in the high com-
mand? That is a perfectly normal human tendency. I am not
saying they are awful people.
Dr. Hobbs. On the part of all of us when it comes to things we are
interested in and seriously concerned with, of course that is very true.
Mr. Hays. I have found that with social workers.
Dr. Hobbs. Of course, sir, it was true also of the social scientists
who were so concerned with their methods and techniques that they,
too, overworked the military side of the situation.
Mr. Hays. In other words, two little empires there kind of clashed
head on ?
Dr. Hobbs. That is right.
Mr. Hays. And one wanted this and the other wanted something
else. That is an interesting thing that you brought up, and I thought
it was worthy of some development.
I again want you to repeat what I understood you to say, that you
don't think there was any bad or deliberate plot on their part to
destroy the Army.
Dr. Hobs. I have absolutely no knowledge, I read nothing to that
effect, I didn't mean to imply it.
Mr. Hays. In other words, they thought this is the way it should
be done and they were firm in their belief and they pressed forward
with it.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 183
Dr. Hobbs. That is right.
Mr. Hays. That puts a somewhat different light on the matter.
I have 1 or 2 other questions, Doctor, and then I will be through.
Someone once made the statement — and I can't quote who it was —
that the scholar who has never made a mistake has never made a
discovery or a correction. Would you be inclined to agree with that ?
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hats. Then going back to this business of having controls over
research, research that is valuable is going to occasionally stray off
into fields where it is going to make mistaken conclusions and mis-
taken decisions and so on and so forth, would you agree that is true ?
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hats. Do you have any specific suggestion as to how these
foundations might prevent more than a minimum number of mistakes?
I mean do you have any suggestion as to how they should tighten up
their grant-giving machinery ? You are more familiar with founda-
tions than L We have admitted that they are going to make some
mistakes. That is almost inevitable, is it not ?
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hats. The desirable thing would be to keep those mistakes to
a minimum.
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hays. I ask this very kindly. I am only trying to get some
light on the subject. Do you have any suggestion ?
Dr. Hobbs. One suggestion I made before would be that they em-
phasize that they do not wish to concentrate research and studies
within the empirical area to a disproportionate degree and to thereby
exclude or seriously minimize other important areas of study.
Another suggestion would be that they be much more careful than
they have been in the past in encroaching on large and significant
areas of human behavior, such as the military area where you can say
it is all right to make a mistake, but with high military policy perhaps
one mistake is the only chance you get. It may be your last mistake.
In this area any findings which are arrived at should be presented
very tentatively and with many, many reservations and qualifications
and not pushed to the degree which the findings in connection with
the point system of discharge were apparently pushed from reading
the book.
Mr. Hats. You say a mistake in a military decision might be your
last mistake. Did I understand you to say that ?
Dr. Hobbs. It could be in a military situation.
Mr. Hats. Whether it came about as a result of an empirical study
or just somebody's decision, that' could be true ?
Dr. Hobbs. That is correct.
Mr. Hats. So if we make a mistake about the ultimate decision on
what we do in Southeast Asia, while it might not necessarily be our last
mistake, it might be our next to the last ?
Dr. Hobbs. That is correct.
Mr. Hays. So we are getting right back, as I see it, to the funda-
mental conclusion that I think we are going to have to arrive at, and
that is, that human beings are susceptible to mistakes and in the situ-
ation we are now we better not make too many.
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir, but with this additional factor: That when
your decision is based on studies which are purportedly scientific, then
184 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
your results are no longer regarded as the results of an individual,
but are regarded as the results of a method which many people have
the impression is infallible. So you create quite a different situation
from the necessary and desirable difference of opinion between indi-
viduals or between members of the military and civilians, where the
differences can be weighed and ironed out on their own level of merit.
You don't have the injection of this factor which seems to be the final
and decisive ultimate factor. I think that is a significant difference.
Mr. Hays. I think you and I are in complete agreement on that
point. In other words, you don't like an attempt to wrap a cloak of
infallibility around them and say this is it.
Dr. Hobbs. Exactly.
Mr. Hays. That is a tendency not only of social science, and I am
being strictly nonpolitical when I say this, that has been the tendency
of recent Secretaries of State we have had, too. They sort of put
a mantle of infallibility on and say whatever decision I come to is right
and this is it, and I don't want you to question it. That is a short-
coming that is confined not only to social scientists.
Dr. Hobbs. No, sir. But you always have the factor of the prestige
of science involved. You can argue about a decision of a Secretary of
State on political bases, on bases of knowledge of history, on bases of
knowledge of the foreign situation, and on many grounds you can
justifiably argue a decision of that type.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Wormser, there is a question you asked there that
I thought ought to be developed a little more and I don't recall, since
I don't have the transcript here, the exact wording of it. It had to do
with the foundations going into political fields. You asked it early
in the testimony.
Mr. Wormser. You mean today ?
Mr. Hays. Yes. Do you have a list of the questions you asked
there ?
The Chairman. While he is thinking about that, may I ask one
question with reference to your suggestion?
With reference to these suggestions that the foundations might
follow to improve the situation, do you feel that any of the founda-
tions have exercised sufficient care in selecting the key personnel, or if
the boards of trustees have exercised sufficient care and responsibility
in considering the recommendations of the personnel of the staffs?
Dr. Hobbs. I am afraid that I wouldn't be qualified to give an
opinion on that. I have made no separate study of foundations and
their personnel. I just wouldn't know.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Hays, I don't recall the exact question, but I
think what you are referring to was this : I had in my mind that there
is some evidence that foundations have to some extent consciously
determined to enter the political field in this sense: That social
scientists should be assigned the job, let us say, of directing society
and of telling us what is best for us. I asked some question which
related to that, bringing out the political field itself. I think Dr.
Hobbs then quoted something from the report of the Social Science
Research Council.
Is that what you mean?
Mr. Hays. Yes, I think that had to do with it. Maybe we can
develop what I was thinking about without having the exact language.
I thought if you had it there it would be helpful.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 185
Do you think the foundations have gone into the realm of politics
to any great extent ?
Br. Hobbs. That would be difficult to determine. Political influ-
ence, as you know much, much better than I, involves many, many
intangibles as to what does influence people politically one way or
another. Have some of the findings influenced political attitudes?
I would say that is likely. But again, to measure it and to say exactly
how much and precisely in what direction, I would be at a loss to say.
Mr. Hats. Do you think they have gone into it in any significant
way or to any great extent ?
Dr. Hobbs. Certainly not directly. That is, not in any sense of a
lobby or anything of that type, to my knowledge.
Mr. Hats. If they have gone in at all, then, with the exception
of perhaps some who sponsor radio programs and political figures,
they have gone into it in a rather subtle way ?
Dr. Hobbs. That could be the case. I don't know the specific situa-
tion which you refer to. I have never heard that program. I don't
know.
Mr. Hats. I don't want to show here that I am accusing them — and
we are speaking now, of course, of Facts Forum— of anything, but
I have had a lot of complaints about them, especially even prior to the
time of these hearings, and a great volume of letters since then.
To be perfectly fair I have had a few which say they are all right.
So all I am interested in with regard to that particular organization
is finding out whether they are biased or whether they are not. I
want to make it clear here, which apparently it has not been in some
people's minds, that if they are biased, they still have a perfect right
to go on the air ; but they don't have any right to go on with tax-exempt
funds.
Dr. Hobbs. I would agree with that.
Mr. Hats. They have a right to their opinion, certainly. They
can be just as biased as they want to as long as they are using their
own money without any tax exemption.
Mr. Koch. Mr. Hays, I am glad you brought up that point. You
mentioned earlier this morning that one of the principal purposes of
a committee such as this is to find out whether legislation might be
necessary or whether present legislation should be amended.
I think after the representative of the Internal Revenue Depart-
ment testifies, I think, next week, you will find that his department has
difficulty in determining just what is propaganda and what is designed
to influence legislation. We hope to present to the committee samples
of various types of propaganda, including Facts Forum, and various
types of efforts to influence legislation, and maybe at the end of these
hearings we can define this a little bit better for the aid of the tax
department.
Mr. Hats. I would say to you, that I am sure that it must be a very
difficult proposition. I am sure it must be just as difficult as there
are points of view. When you use the word "propaganda" — and
I think we ought to make that definitive here — the word "propaganda"
itself has come to have a sort of undesirable connotation.
In the strict sense it can be good propaganda as well as bad. I
suppose whether it is good or bad depends on your point of view and
whether or not you agree with it. That would be somewhat of a
determining factor.
186 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Koch. But we shall try to define it a little more clearly because
some of the types of propaganda will shock us. If we can define it
better the tax department will have an easier time.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Hays, I can now give you your statistic that
you ask for. Roughly 50,000 copies of Stuart Chase's book have been
sold, which happens to be more than the aggregate sales of the 8 books
which I have written.
Mr. Hays. All I can say is that if he sold 50,000 copies with that
title, if he jazzed up the title a little he could have probably sold
half a million. Whoever merchandised that book did not do a
good job.
Mr. Koch. I would like to have Mr. Wormser give us the names of
bis eight books.
Mr. Hays. I think we ought to get a plug in for him and mention
one from memory, Estate Planning in a Changing World.
Mr. Wormser. That is right.
Mr. Hays. I found it a little heavy going but it is perhaps because
I don't have an estate to worry about.
The Chairman. Since I quoted it in one of my speeches I should
also mention his most recent book the Myth of Good and Bad Nations.
Mr. Hays. I hope I will have the time to read it before this hear-
ing is over.
I have just one more question which may lead into some sub-
ciuestions. I have a letter here from a man — I don't suppose he would
care if I identified him, but there is no reason to bring him in. It
is a rather kind letter with several points of view. He makes a
challenging statement here and I would like to hear your comment.
He says, "Man's greatest problem today is man himself." Would
you agree with that ?
Dr. Hobbs. Could I answer that a little indirectly ?
Mr. Hays. In any way you wish.
Dr. Hobbs. I was going to lunch some time ago with a colleague
and he asked me, "What do you think the Negro really wants?" I
asked him, "What do you really want for lunch?" He said "I am
not sure, I don't know." I said, "You don't even know what you
want for lunch and you ask me to tell you what the Negro really
wants."
I don't know what man's greatest problem is. Also, I don't know
what I want for lunch.
Mr. Hays. I will read further and he says :
Human behavior is the area in which understanding of any general validity-
is most difficult to obtain.
You would agree with that, would you not ?
Dr. Hobbs. I am sorry, sir, would you repeat that ?
Mr. Hays (reading) :
Human behavior is the area in which understanding of any general validity
is most difficult to obtain.
Dr. Hobbs. If you leave out the supernatural I would say that is
correct.
Mr. Hays. Let us leave it out by all means.
Dr. Hobbs. Frankly, we have been in a couple of areas here that
I have very little knowledge of and if we get into the supernatural
I will be completely without knowledge.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 187
Mr. Hays. The reason I ask that is that it goes right back to what
we have been saying all along. You can change the words "human
behavior" to make them read "social science" and we would come up
with about the same general conclusion, would we not?
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hays. That any experimentation with human behavior or the
social sciences or anything concerning the behavior of men is an
experiment or a research that you can't put any adequate controls on ?
Dr. Hobbs. That would be my view.
Mr. Hays. So it is more or less an excursion into the dark and any
conclusions that you come up with should be qualified by saying that
there is no way to validly set up a scientific control, so these are
merely conclusions and the best we can come to in the light of what
we have done.
Dr. Hobbs. Exactly.
Mr. Hays. If the foundations adopt that as a principle in their
grants for research into the social sciences, you would be satisfied?
Dr. Hobbs. I would say that would be a commendable forward step.
Mr. Hays. That is all.
The Chairman. Are there any other questions?
If not, we thank you very kindly, Professor Hobbs.
Dr. Hobbs. Thank you, sir.
The Chairman. Whom do you wish to call ?
Mr. Wormser. I would like to call Mr. McMece.
Mr. Hays. You say you wanted to call Mr. McNiece. It is time
for the morning bell for the House. I wonder if it would not be well
to go over to Monday ?
Mr. Koch. Mr. McNiece's presentation, which is long, we can
put on at any time, so if we don't start Monday, because we have
some other witnesses, we will put it on later.
The Chairman. As I understand, Mr. Wormser, the witness who
is to be here Monday is Mr. Sargent, of California. I might say Mr.
Sargent was the man who was first invited to become general counsel
of the Cox committee, the predecessor of this committee, and for rea-
sons at that time was unable to accept the invitation, but he is a student
of questions which we are dealing with here and, based upon my
knowledge of Mr. Sargent in other ways, I think his testimony
will contain a great deal of interest.
Mr. Hays. Let me ask this while we are on the matter of whom
we are going to call. You say Mr. Sargent was first approached
about being counsel for the Cox committee ?
The Chairman. He was invited to be counsel of the committee
by Mr. Cox.
Mr. Hays. Would it be possible at some time to bring in the counsel
of the Cox committee? There are a lot of questions I would like to
ask him.
The Chairman. I think that is something that might be considered.
Mr. Hays. I want to get a request in right now before we run out
of time.
I would like to have the counsel of the Cox committee brought in
one day. Ask him to come. I think he could give us some very valu-
able statements.
188 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The Chairman. I think your suggestion is well received.
The committee on Monday will meet in the caucus room in the Old
House Office Building, which is room 362, at 10 a. m.
(Whereupon, at 11 : 50 p. m., Thursday, May 20, the hearing was
recessed until 10 a. m., Monday, May 24, 1954.)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
MONDAY, MAY 24, 1954
House of Representatives,
Special Committee To Investigate
Tax Exempt Foundations,
WasMngto% D. C.
The special subcommittee met at 10 a. m., pursuant to recess, in
room 1334, New House Office Building, Hon. B. Carroll Reece (chair-
man of the special subcommittee) presiding.
Present : Representatives Reece, Hays, and Pfost.
Also present : Rene A. Wormser, general counsel ; Arnold T. Koch,
associate counsel; Norman Dodd, research director; Kathryn Casey,
legal analyst.
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
Who is your first witness, Mr. Wormser ?
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Aaron Sargent, of San Francisco.
The Chairman. Will you be sworn? Do you solemnly swear the
testimony you are about to give in this proceeding shall be the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God ?
TESTIMONY OF AARON M. SARGENT, ATTORNEY,
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF.
Mr. Sargent. Yes; I do. I have the original subpena Mr. Reece
served me. May I lodge it with the clerk at this time?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Wormser. Will you state your name, address, and occupation
for the record, please ?
Mr. Sargent. Yes. My name is Aaron M. Sargent. My occupa-
tion is attorney at law. I also have had experience in connection with
special investigations and research, particularly in the educational
and ahtisubversive field. My office is in the Hobart Building in San
Francisco, Calif. I maintain a research office at Palo Alto, Calif.,
which is down in the San Francisco Peninsula. My residence is 606
Santa Rita Avenue, Palo Alto, Calif.
Mr, Wormser. Mr. Sargent, you are here, I understand, to give
testimony on radicalism in education and the responsibility of the
foundations for it ?
Mr. Hays. Before we go any further, I have a few questions I would
like to ask.
Mr. Wormser. I was just going to ask him to qualify himself.
Mr. Hays. I am going to qualify him. Were you ever offered the
counselship of the Cox committee ?
Mr. Sargent. Yes, sir.
189
49720—54 — pt. 1 13
190 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hays. Do you have any documentary evidence to that effect ?
Mr. Sargent. Not in my possession. You mean the specific offer-
ing of the position or discussion of my possible employment ?
Mr. Hays. I asked you a specific question. Were you offered the
counselship of the Cox committee ?
Mr. Sargent. In substance, yes. It was indicated verbally that my
appointment would be looked upon favorably. The actual tender I
do not think was made. I discussed the matter with Judge Cox in
Washington at the time.
Mr. Hays. In other words, it was an informal discussion about the
possibility of it, but actually you were never specifically offered it?
Mr. Sargent. No. I was never specifically offered it in a formal
way. It was under discussion. I found myself unable to do it for
a number of reasons.
The Chairman. Would you permit an interjection, Mr. Hays?
Mr. Hays. Yes.
The Chairman. As a member of the Cox committee, I might say
Judge Cox brought up the question of counsel. He brought up the
name of Mr. Sargent and gave his background and his evaluation of
him, which was favorable, indicating that he thought favorably of
his selection. The committee at this informal session authorized him
to get in touch with Mr. Sargent and negotiate with him. I do not
remember the exact details but as I recall it, the inference was to con-
clude a contract with him if he desired to do so.
At a later meeting he advised the committee that he had contacted
Mr. Sargent, who at that time was in Texas attending a bar associa-
tion meeting of some kind.
Mr. Sargent. It was a meeting of the Sons of the American Revo-
lution, National Society, at Houston.
The Chairman. He advised he would be unable to accept the coun-
selship. That is the basis for my reference the other day. In view
of the fact that I made that reference, I thought I should further
explain the statement.
Mr. Hays. Did you ever offer to work for the Cox committee later
on, Mr. Sargent, after the counsel was chosen ?
Mr. Sargent. No; I never did. Mr. Harold Keele, the counsel for
the committee, contacted me when I w 7 as in Washington — I do not
recall the exact date — September or October of that year. What year
was that? That committee was acting in 1952.
Mr. Hays. Yes'. "
Mr. Sargent. It would be about October, as I recall, of 1952. I was
staying at the Statler. Mr. Keele's office contacted me and requested
me to confer with him, which I did, and he asked me what I knew
about this thing. We went over it in some detail. He asked in what
way I could be of any help. I said if you feel that my services would
be of any assistance to you, I will see 'what I can do. But I was never
requested to act, and I did not solicit the arrangement in any way.
The entire request originated from Mr. Keele. He had me meet with
the staff at lunch and we did various things.
Mr. Hays. Yoti are testifving now that Mr. Keele asked you.
Mr. Sargent, Correct. He asked me in what way I could help.
I indicated I thought that there were only two ways — as a witness,
or possibly under some special employment. It was in response to
his question how I could aid him. I did not want the association at
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 191
the time. I had a great deal of responsibility. I did not even con-
tact his office. I was m town on other business.
Mr. Hays. Did you have a conference with Mr. Keele at that time ?
Mr. Sargent. Yes, I did ; a long conference.
Mr. Hats. It lasted until 8 : 30 or so in the evening ? ' t
Mr. Sargent. I do not recall the hour. It lasted a long time. He
reviewed a great many things about his policies in the handling of the
investigation and so forth.
Mr. Hays. Do you recall saying that you would be available for
special consultation or investigative work to this Cox committee at
a fee of about $100 to $125 a day ?
Mr. Sargent. I may have stated that amount. That is about what
it is worth for an attorney to leave his business and go out of town
and attend things of this kind. It is a very expensive and heavy
responsibility. I may have said that.
Mr. Hays. And you recall that was considerably more than the
counsel was getting and that the committee probably would not pay
that, is that correct?
Mr. Sargent. I think it was indicated that it was higher than the
scale; yes. However, that is what the sacrifice was worth to me.
Mr. Hays. Did you tell Mr. Keele the reason that you had declined
the job of counsel of the Cox committee? Did you tell him that?
Mr. Sargent. I think he knew it all right. I don't specifically
recall.
Mr. Hays. Remember you are under oath. You just testified that
you were not specifically tendered the job. I am asking you, Did you
tell Mr. Keele that you declined the job ?
Mr. Sargent. I don't know whether I did or not. You are being
technical, Mr. Hays.
Mr. Hays. No ; I am not being technical at all. I am just asking
you a question. You either did or didn't.
Mr. Sargent. I may have used that expression, but in a technical
and exact sense, I was not tendered the job. I felt here in justice to
this committee I should not make that statement. There was no for-
mal notice or a letter stating that "we offer you the counselship of the
committee."
Mr, Hays. We brought that out.
Mr. Sargent. I may have used that reference in talking to Mr.
Keele in a loose general sense, in the sense I knew I probably could
be appointed and indicating to them I could not be available. I think
I would have been justified in making that statement. I said generally
something of that nature.
Mr. Hays. All right. I am not going to try to pin you down more
than that.
Mr. Sargent. In a technical sense, I was not offered the job, no.
Mr. Hays. Did you give Mr. Keele any reason why you would not
have taken the job?
Mr. Sargent. I don't remember. I may have indicated something.
I don't recall specifically at this time.
Mr. Hays. You don't remember whether you told him that you had
an estate that you were executor for in California and you could not
afford to turn down the fee involved ?
Mr. Sargent. I could have told him that. That is the fact. It is
an estate pending at the present time, as a matter of fact. I am still
working on it.
102 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hays. Did Mr. Keele question you anything about the size of
that estate?
Mr. Sargent. I don't know whether he did or not. I don't know
whether he did or not. I don't mind telling you it is a quarter-million-
dollar estate in probate. It is important business. The party died
while I was in the East.
Mr. Hats. Have you at any time in the past criticized the Cox com-
mittee on the ground that the questionnaires were not sworn to?
Mr. SargeNt. Yes.
Mr. Hats. Did you discuss with Mr. Keele at any time during your
conference the problem of having those questionnaires sworn to ?
Mr. Sargent. Yes; I asked why there was no oath on that question-
naire form. He Said he was going to bring these people in later and
cross-examine them and use these statements to get preliminary
information.
Mr. Hats. Did you happen to discuss it with him to the extent of
agreeing that had they tried in the limited time to get the question-
naires sworn to that they probably would not have gotten any back ?
Mr. Sargent. I think he said something like that. I don't recall
I ever said it.
Mr. Hats. You do not know whether you agreed with that
conclusion? .
Mr. Sargent. I don't think so. I was a little disturbed at the proce-
dure. It looked a little irregular to me. That committee had the
subpena power, including power to compel answer. I thought the
procedure w r as a little different, to say the least.
Mr. Hats. Did you discuss the mechanics of this thing ? This com-
mittee only had a life of 6 months. Wasn't the question discussed
that, if they required sworn questionnaires, that they probably
wouldn't have had time to check every answer of the foundations, and
the committee probbaly would not have gotten back anything, so under
the circumstances it was better to go ahead this way than to risk
getting nothing?
Mr. Sargent. You misunderstand the purpose and scope of that
conversation, Mr. Hays. I didn't go there to discuss any of these
things with Mr. Keele. He called me in because he wanted to talk
to me and he outlined various things and I commented upon some of
them.
Mr. Hays. He called you in ?
Mr. Sargent. I was definitely there at his request, and I remained
for a very long time, longer than I had any idea of staying. I got
there about 4 o'clock in the afternoon and I didn't get out until prob-
ably around 8 o'clock, nearly 3 or 4 hours.
Mr. Hays. I do not know who called you.
Mr. Sargent. He did. I didn't discuss these things with him at all,
except I might comment on what he said. He was apparently trying
to tell me what he was going to do. I was not guiding him.
Mr. Hays. It has been stated here by Mr. Dodd that there are certain
things missing from the files of the Cox committee. At least one set
of the answers to these questionnaires. Do you happen to have that
set?
Mr. Sargent. No, sir.
Mr. Hays. Did you ever have it?
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 193
Mr. Sargent. No, sir ; I never did. The answers to questionnaires ?
In the first place
Mr. Hays. Do you have any material that came out of the files of
the Cox committee ?
Mr. Sargent. Not a single piece of paper of any kind. I think the
suggestion is a little bit unfair, Mr. Hays.
Mr. Hats. Well, no w
Mr. Sargent. May I answer further, please?
Mr. Hats. Yes; you may answer, but we are not going to make
speeches. I have been lenient with you on making speeches so far. Do
you know a fellow by the name of "Bugeye" Barker ?
Mr. Sargent. I want to answer the other question first.
Mr. Hats, You said you didn't have any papers.
Mr. Sargent. Yes ; but I want to explain the circumstances to show
I couldn't have any in the first place. May I answer ?
Mr. Hays. No ; you cannot make a speech.
Mr. Sargent. I am not going to make a speech. May I answer that
question first, please?
Mr. Hats. You can answer whether or not you have anything out
of the files of the Cox committee.
Mr. Sargent. I want to explain.
Mr. Hays. I will give you a chance to explain why you couldn't
have later.
Mr. Sargent. I did not at any time have access to those question-
naires or the answers except under the jurisdiction of the Clerk of
the House of Representatives in his office in one of these buildings
under his custody and in his office. The questionnaires had never been
answered when I saw Mr. Keele, which was in October. They had
been sent out. I saw no answers at that time.
Mr. Hays. Do you know one George, commonly known around
here as Bugeye Barker ?
Mr. Sargent. I met him when I was in town.
Mr. Hats. Did he ever deliver anything to you from the files of
the Cox committee ?
Mr. Sargent. Not a single piece of paper of any kind.
Mr. Hats. Did you try to get from Mr. Keele any material about
the Cox committee?
Mr. Sargent. Not a single thing except a transcript I wanted to
borrow later. He handed me some kind of printed forms of question-
naires he was supposed to use. I think I took a few of those away
with me, j ust blank forms, nothing aside from that.
Mr. Hats. You didn't ask for anything and later complained that
he turned you down ?
Mr. Sargent. No, of course not. I had no right to ask anything
of him. I never did except with respect to the transcript of the Hiss
case.
Mr. Hats. Do you know a George DeHuszar?
Mr. Sargent. Yes, he is in Chicago.
Mr. Hats. Have you ever worked with him ?
Mr. Sargent. No, I never worked with him. I discussed problems
with him from time to time. But I never worked with him on any
situation. I have corresponded with him as I do with other people
interested in this kind of work. He did a small job for me years
194 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
ago, long before the Cox committee, and gave me some reports on
some matters.
Mr. Hats. Did I understand you to just say that you never asked
Mr. Keele for anything?
Mr. Sargent. Any documentary material?
Mr. Hays. Yes.
Mr. Sargent. I am pretty clear I never did.
Mr. Hays. Did you ever ask him for any information?
Mr. Sargent. I asked him at one time if he could get me access
to the printed transcript of the proceedings on the trial of Alger Hiss.
I asked him if he could give me that. I was doing research and I
wanted to go over the transcript. He told me by letter he didn't
have it. I later obtained it from another source. I did ask him for
that. I never asked him for any committee material. I think that
is the only thing I ever did ask him for.
Mr. Hays. Did you write him at least two letters demanding cer-
tain information relative to the work of the committee?
Mr. Sargent. Not demanding anything, no. I had a few letters
with him, yes. I will be glad to identify any letters of mine if you
have them there, and if I look at my file at home, I will send you
copies of what my correspondence with him was.
Mr. Hays. Did you write him any letters wanting to know why
witnesses had not been sworn ?
Mr. Sargent. After the thing was over, I did. I wanted to pin
him down and tried to find why. That was after the committee had
disbanded. Yes, I did ask for his explanation and I got no satis-
factory answer.
Mr. Hays. You didn't sort of try to run this Cox investigation
from the sidelines by any chance, did you?
Mr. Sargent. No, not under any conditions. I had nothing to do
with it. I waited until it was all over. I received the report and the
published transactions. I looked them over. I then discovered that
the witnesses had not been sworn. I was amazed about it. Mr. Keele's
explanation to me was the fact that some sworn testimony would be
taken. I was astounded at what I found. I then opened correspond-
ence with Mr. Keele to find out why he had not done so. That is when
the correspondence originated on the swearing of witnesses.
Mr. Hays. Did you at any time want to set up another committee in
this session of the Congress?
Mr. Sargent. Another committee?
Mr. Hays. A similar committee to the Cox committee — this com-
mittee ?
Mr. Sargent. You mean aside from this committee here?
Mr. Hays. No. Did you at any time either verbally or in writing
ask anyone to introduce a resolution setting up sujih a committee as we
have meeting here today?
Mr. Sargent. No. The resolution was introduced. I was back here
after the resolution was introduced, and I was in favor of the resolu-
tion carrying. I did not suggest a resolution to be offered in the
first place. I had nothing to do with that.
Mr. Hays. Did any member of this committee tender you the job
of counsel or approach you ?
Mr. Sargent. No, not under those circumstances, not even by sug-
gestion or indirection.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 195
Mr. Hats. Did you approach anyone asking to be considered?
Mr. Sargent. No.
Mr. Hays. How was the contact made that brings you here today,
Mr. Sargent?
Mr. Sargent. I received a letter from Mr. Norman Dodd. I don't
have the exact date.
Mr. Hays. That is immaterial.
Mr. Sargent. I received a letter quite recently inquiring whether I
could be in any way helpful to this committee. I wired Mr. Dodd
back and told him that if they desired to take care of the usuaL ex-
penses that I would be willing to come back and lay the entire matter
before you. I received in response to that wire a telegram from Mr.
Dodd stating that my willingness to do that was greatly appreciated;
that the expenses would be provided, and that I would be notified
shortly. I talked with him on the phone subsequently, and I told him
that I felt that if I came, I should have the protection of subpena so
as to make it clearly a well-defined legal arrangement. The subpena
was forthcoming, and I came. This originated in the first place at
the instance of your staff, and throughout was at their request, and not
my request. If that had not happened, I would never have been here
at all.
Mr. Hays. Understand I am not trying to lead you into anything on
that question. I am merely trying to find out how the contact was
made.
Mr. Sargent. The contract was made at the instance of your staff.
I am here at their request.
Mr. Hays. As I understand it from this three-page mimeographed
form that you have here, in which you say in the last paragraph that
a considerable amount of time is required for your presentation. I
assume that you have a prepared presentation there, well documented
and so on.
Mr. Sargent. I have an outline to enable me to testify. It is not
prepared in the sense that it can be mimeographed and distributed
and have any use. I have an outline and it is organized to minimize
your time and to be orderly in its handling.
Mr. Hays. In other words, you are sitting there with a prepared
script that you cannot furnish to the committee, is that it ?
Mr. Sargent. The question is not being able to furnish the com-
mittee. I understand you want to know what I know about this sub-
ject. I have arranged notes to enable me to do this with a minimum
of time and lost motion. I have such an outline for my guidance,
yes. The first part of my testimony, Mr. Hays, will be devoted to
this first statement here. For your convenience, as I get .to other
sections of this, I will try and give you some sort of agenda as best
I can. I have been in town only 5 days and working constantly to put
this material together after I got here.
(Discussion off the record.)
Mr. Hays. I will ask you one more question, Mr. Sargent. In view
of the fact that you do not have a prepared statement, and according
to the short statement you have here, you say that it is going to be
very long, you would not' have any objection if the committee inter-
rupted you at any place to try to ask you a question to clarify some-
thing?
196 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Sargent. No; subject to one request, Mr. Hays. It may de-
velop that you will ask me some question which cannot be fully
answered without reference to other testimony I propose to give.
In a case of that kind, I would like to indicate to you the nature of
the other testimony, and ask leave to respond to it later. Running
questions as we go, of course, I am happy to answer. .
Mr. Hays. The committee will not try to put a limitation on your
answer.
Mr. Sargent. No; there are several blocks of testimony and one
of these questions may anticipate something which I am going to cover
very fully.
The Chairman. Also, Mr. Sargent, I have indicated to Mr. Hays
and Mrs. Pfost that in addition to the questions they may ask as they
go along, that after reading the full transcript of your testimony, if
further questioning is desired, that you wul become available to
answer.
Mr. Sargent. Certainly, except I do hope that it is possible to mini-
mize my stay in Washington and do it promptly. I have to go to
New York from here. If I can get through this continuously to a
point where you are approximately through, I will contact the com-
mittee staff, and if you want to hold one more hearing to question
me further on my testimony in coming back from New York I can do
that, and perhaps that will accomplish your purpose.
Mrs. Pfost. Mr. Sargent, you have no carbon copies at all. You
have only one original of your lengthy testimony ?
Mr. Sargent. I have not written out my testimony. I am giving
it as I go. I have notes from which I can testify to these various
facts. I haven't it written out in full, no. I am testifying and not
just reading a piece of paper here.
Mr. Hays. Let me ask you this, and I am trying again to get some
clarification on this. Do you propose being specific? If you make
any generalizations, are you going to try to document those, and
name names ?
Mr. Sargent. I propose to be absolutely specific and to make my
statements based upon documents which I personally have examined.
In some cases I have the document right here and I will read from the
document itself.
Mr. Hays. In other words, you will read excerpts \
Mr. Sargent. Yes, and I will cite the original source. I am refer-
ring to books. I am refering to manuscript material.
Mr. Hays, All right.
The Chairman. You may proceed, then, Mr. Sargent.
Mr. Wormser. May I first ask, Mr. Sargent, to state what educa-
tional and other experience you may have had which might qualify
you to give expert testimony in this proceeding 1
Mr. Sargent. From the standpoint of educational background, I
am a graduate of Stanford University, class of 1923, receiving a de-
gree of bachelor of science in mechanical engineering, I was gradu-
ated from Hastings College of Law, which is the University of Cali-
fornia, in 1926, being granted the degree, bachelor of laws. I was
admitted to the bar of the State of California in 1926. I became
a member of the bar of the United States Supreme Court in 1930.
I am a member of the American Bar Association, the American Judi-
cature Society, State Bar of California. Twenty-seven years experi-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 197
ence in the active practice of law, and 17 of those years concerned to
some extent with antisubversive work and investigations affecting
American education, and particularly the public school system.
From the standpoint of specific proceedings, I participated in hear-
ings in 1941-42, before the San Francisco City Board of Education
in regard to Rugg social science textbooks. Between 1942 and 1945,
I studied the progressive system of education. This was done at
the request of the California Society, Sons of the American Revolu-
tion. We inquired into the textbook condition of our State schools
and our State department of education at Sacramento.
In 1946, 1 began the inquiry which led up to the proceedings which
were later brought to Congress on the so-called Building America
textbooks.
I handled proceedings for the SAR before the State Board of
Education of California, and later made a presentation before legis-
lative committees on that. I drafted certain legislative bills on educa-
tion for that session at the request of various parties involved. I
have since studied the national aspects of this subversive teaching
problem.
I am the author of the Bill of Grievances which was filed with the
Judiciary Committee of the United States Senate, and the Un-Amer-
ican Activities Committee of the House of Representatives by the
National Society, Sons of the American Revolution. I conducted the
research on which that document was based.
In 1952 for a brief period in May I was employed as a consultant
for staff work in research by the Senate Internal Security Commit-
tee. In 1952-53 1 directed some research work conducted at the Hoover
Institute Library at Stanford University on war, peace, and revolution.
That is the collection of material assembled by Mr. Herbert Hoover
and his associates.
I have studied curriculum and teaching methods in social studies,
the philosophy and practice involved in the progressive system of
education, communism in education, also propaganda, tactics and ac-
tivities of revolutionary organizations, and the history of subversive
movement. Likewise the legal and constitutional questions involved.
On the question here by Mr. Hays it was brought out the cir-
cumstances under which I came. I served for a number of years as
chairman of the Americanization committee of the National Society,
Sons of the American Revolution. I do not occupy that office at the
present time. I am merely a member in good standing of the Society.
I am here not as the representative of any group, but an individual
citizen under subpena by you.
In the interest of full disclosure, I wish to acquaint you with this
fact at the present time. I am the president and research director of
a tax-exempt foundation for educational work that was recently
organized but which has no funds at its disposal at the present time,
and which has had no business relationships of any kind with any
foundation to which I will refer in my testimony. The corporation
is entitled, "Fund for American Leadership, Inc." It was organized
under California law on August 17, 1953, for the purpose of train-
ing leaders in antisubversive work and studying revolutionary meth-
ods, their history, development and activities, which threaten the
national security, their propaganda, impact on American institutions,
198 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
to study educational problems arising out of that condition and to
determine sound and practical solutions.
I have here a certified copy of those articles which I would like
to have made a part of the committee files.
Mr. Hats. Just a minute. Let me ask you about that. Has that
foundation ever had any money ?
Mr. Sargent. No. It still has no money. We are in the process
of determining what contact can be made to get funds.
Mr. Hays. I just suggest in view of some of the statements that
have been made about the gullibility of some of these people you
ought not to have much trouble in getting money.
Mr. Sargent. The difficulty is that our side can't get the money,
but the other side can always get it. This corporation was created
to find American money to study the antisubversive
Mr. Hays. All you ought to do is say that in Texas and if you
are any kind of salesman at all, you ought to get the money.
Mr. Sargent. So I appear strictly in an individual capacity. That
corporation is not affected in this matter. I am speaking entirely on
that basis.
Now, I have a prepared statement for the committee which at this
time I would like to read.
The investigation required of this committee is one of the most
important matters which has ever come before the Congress of the
United States. It concerns the national security, the defense of the
principles set forth in the Constitution of the United States. You
will find that the situation confronting you is the result of a disre-
gard of trust responsibility — a condition amounting to abdication of
duty by the trustees of the tax-exmpt foundations which have exerted
such a great influence in the history of our country since the turn of
the century.
In discharging its responsibility and weighing the evidence, this
committee must have some standard or yardstick to apply. I believe
the following pre the legal and moral standards which apply to this
trust relationship.
This is an elaboration of the poster we have on the board here.
Standards of foundation conduct: It is the duty of tax-exempt
foundations and their trustees to observe and be. guided by the follow-
ing standards of conduct :
First : Patriotism. To bear true faith and allegiance to the philos-
ophy and principles of government set forth in the Declaration of
Independence and the Constitution of the United States.
Second: Loyalty. To be active and positive in supporting the
United States Government against revolutionary and other subversive
attacks ;
To put patriotic money at the disposal of patriotic men in this field
of education to enable them to support and defend our Constitution
and form of government.
Third : Obedience to law. To faithfully obey the laws of the United
States and the provisions of State law under which foundation
charters are granted ;
Fourth : Respect for exemption. To use the tax-exemption privi-
lege in good faith, recognizing the purpose for which that privilege
is granted;
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 199
To refrain from supporting communism, socialism, and other move-
ments which (1) increase the cost of government, (2) endanger the
national security, or (3) threaten the integrity of the Federal Govern-
ment.
Mr. Hats. Right there, I am going to stop you and ask you a ques-
tion. That is a very fine statement, but if you refrain from supporting
everything that the Republican campaign orators called socialism,
then you would be against everything that has been passed by the
Congress in the past 20 years. Is that your definition ?
Mr. Sargent. No, sir. When I talk about socialism in my testi-
mony, Mr. Hays, I mean socialism of the kind advocated by the Fa-
bians of Great Britain, which has ruined the economic system of that
country, not individual projects which may seem wise for some
purpose or other on their own merits.
Mr. Hats. I won't debate with you what has ruined the economic
system of Great Britain or even say that Time magazine, a week or
two ago, talked about the remarkable recovery and the great dollar
balance. We will leave that out. Would you consider bank-deposit
insurance to be socialism?
Mr. Sargent. No ; not within the scope of what I mean here.
Mr. Hats. We want to get this term straightened out, because it has
been too widely applied.
Mr. Sargent. I am very happy to do that.
Mr. Hats. How about old-age insurance?
Mr. Sargent. No.
Mr. Hats. Social security and unemployment insurance?
Mr. Sargent. No.
Mr. Hats. You would not consider any of those to be socialism ?
Mr. Sargent. I am talking about nationalization of business and
industry, a government-operated system which is national socialism
or Fabian socialism.
Mr. Hats. We will try to get one maybe you can get in on. How
about TVA?
Mr. Sargent. I think that is doubtful.
Mr. Hats. That is in the sort of gray area ?
Mr. Sargent. You are not asking my policy on legislative matters
now?
Mr. Hats. No ; but you are throwing these terms around, and you
are going to continue, I am pretty sure, and I want to get a delineation
of what is and what is not socialism when you use the word. You say
it is Fabian socialism. You may understand that and I may have
some smattering of what it means, but, if they put that in the news-
papers, to 99 percent of the people it is going to mean nothing. So
I am trying to get this down
The Chairman. Since TVA has been interjected, may I also make a
comment on that. I think I can do so objectively. The TVA was
started initially purely as a defense project for the purpose of manu-
facturing nitrogen which was then not available in adequate and in-
sured quantities. That is back in World War I. Then in connection
with the expansion of the development it was based upon flood con-
trol, which is a very important phase of the TVA development. Then
since the expenditures were being made for flood control and defense,
there was an incidental development, which was power. I think all
200 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
engineers recognize that if the Government was going in to develop
the river for adequate flood-control purposes, as well as defense, that
then adequate provision must be made for the development of the river
for power purposes.
The only question remaining to be decided was the manner in which
the power development should be carried out. I think there was never
any question after the Government moved in but that the Government
should construct the dams. The question arose as to the manner in
which the power should be distributed. That is the key question.
If you will pardon me, since the question has come up and it comes
up frequently, a sharp difference of opinion existed — I was chairman
of the subcommittee that drafted the original Tennessee Valley devel-
opment and was chairman of the House conference committee.
One of the very sharp differences between the Senate committee and
the House committee was with reference to the distributing of the
power. As an individual, and I was supported by the majority of
the House conferees, I opposed the Federal Government establishing a
sprawling power-distributing system, and advocated instead that the
local authorities be permitted to organize companies for the distribu-
tion of the power. When the TVA Act in its final form was adopted,
that policy was embodied in the act. So that the Federal Govern-
ment does not distribute the power. I think this is an important
thing to keep in mind. The government outside of its defense and
flood-control aspects generates the power and sells it wholesale to the
various distributing agencies, which in the main are owned by munici-
palities. If desired, those distributing facilities could be owned
privately, as I recall, but it happens that none of them is.
I think when we get to questioning the socialism aspect of TVA, it
is well to keep in mind just what the TVA is ; and that is the reason I
am taking a little while here to make this explanation with reference
to the Tennessee Valley Authority in view of my intimate relations
with it from its very inception.
Mr. Hays. Just let me say a word or two to clarify a couple of
things. In the first place, the incidental bydevelopment, which is
power, is the thing that put refrigerators in the kitchens and better
food on the table, and, in many cases, shoes on the feet of a lot of people
down in east Tennessee and other areas around there. I am using
that in a rather facetious way, but I am saying that it has created jobs
where there were no jobs, and it has been good for the whole economy.
The only way we did it differently in my district — we had the power
there, but we had no way to distribute it.
The record will show that I have been objecting strenuously as a
member of an EEA co-op to building our own power facilities when
there was plenty of power to buy. So we built the distribution plant
and we did it in reverse. I am aware of the sharp differences of
opinion. I was interested in getting power to the farmers. We do
have it. The power companies generate it and sell it to the co-ops who
sell it to their members. It is an interesting example of private busi-
ness and cooperatives working hand in hand to the mutual profit of
both.
The only reason I have brought up TVA is because it has been
called and has become associated in the minds of a great many people
with the term "socialism." I wanted to know when we are using the
term here what it does and does not cover.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 201
Mr. Sargent. When I use the term "socialism," I refer to the politi-
cal movement which is known as the Socialist movement. The move-
ment which is working for a general program of planned economy
based on nationalization of industry, business, national resources, and
credit. The political operation of a nation's economy, not fragmen-
tary things. Politics is something which these foundations are not
supposed to go into, and I think they have no right to undermine the
basis of their exemption by doing things of that type,
Mr. Hays. We will get to that in your specific accusations.
Mr. Sargent. The fifth standard here is academic responsibility.
This is a part of my concept of standards of foundation conduct.
Academic responsibility requires these foundations to limit their
activities to projects which are, in fact, educational, and are con-
ducted in an academically responsible manner in accordance with,
proper academic standards;
To refrain from using education as a device for lobbying or a means
to disseminate propaganda.
That is the end of the statement of standards.
The money administered by these foundation trustees is public
money. The beneficiaries of these trusts are the American people;
the parents of children in our public schools. Education is a sacred
trust." A high degree of integrity is expected of those connected with
it. We must consider the ethical duty of foundation trustees from
that standpoint.
Serious charges have been made against the foundations : It is your
duty to answer these questions ; to find solutions and perhaps recom-
mend legislative action. I intend to be objective and give you the
facts ; to present the truth without fear or favor. This presentation
will cover the history of the subversive movement ; it will outline the
boundaries of the problem ; discuss the most important ramifications,
and endeavor to give the data required for your consideration.
The subject is important, and also complex. Under the most favor-
able conditions, a considerable amount of time is required for my
presentation.
The Chairman. Now, reverting back to the TVA, because refer-
ence was made to wearing shoes.
Mr. Hays. I am glad to discuss that with you all afternoon.
The Chairman. I might say that some of them wore shoes down
there before TVA.
Mr. Sargent. Inasmuch as this matter touches directly on educa-
tion and involves a degree of criticism, I think it fair and proper for
me to state very briefly my position on the question of public education
and the public schools. It is as follows :
I support the public-school system and recognize its necessity to
make our system of government workable in practice. I believe it is
necessary and essential to maintain the integrity of that system and
protect it from subversives, political action and other pressure groups.
I believe in the fundamental integrity of the average teacher. I am
convinced that the best interests of the teaching profession will be
served by the investigation to be made by this committee, and that such
an inquiry will restore integrity in the educational profession and
enable the schools to regain the position of confidence and esteem thev
should have in the hearts of the American people.
202 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hats. You are saying by inference that they do not have that
position at the moment?
Mr. Sargent. I think they have lost it to a degree, Mr. Hays, because
of the tactics to which I refer.
Mr. Hays. You talk about California. But I want to put in the
record right here that the schools in Ohio have not lost the confidence
of the people, and they have not lost any integrity, and they are just
as good as they ever were ; in fact, they are a little better.
Mr. Sargent. Have you seen the magazine articles about the people
being concerned about the conditions of their schools nationally ?
Mr. Hays. Do you believe in astrology ?
Mr. Sargent. No, sir ; not I.
Mr. Hays. Could you give me any reason why there are so many
peculiar people drawn to southern Calif ornia ?
Mr. Sargent. I don't live in southern California, and I wouldn't
know.
Mr. Hays. You know, it is a funny thing, but every time we get
an extremist letter in my office — and it is either on the left or the
right — you don't have to look at the postmark. It either comes from
southern California or Houston, Tex. I just wonder if there is some
reason for it.
Mr. Sargent. I think, Mr. Hays, you will certainly want to reserve
your judgment about this question of the schools' integrity being
involved until you have heard the evidence in this case, and I would
like to present it from that point of view.
Mr. Hays. I just want to put in about the schools in Ohio. If you
have any evidence to the contrary, we will get down to specific cases.
Mr. Sargent. I know nothing about the Ohio situation specifically,
either pro or con.
Mr. Hays. I thought not. I know a good deal about it. I happened
to be a teacher there. I have a lot of friends who have positions as
superintendents and executives in the school system from the large
to the small cities. There is no question about it. Not even some
crackpots in our legislature who have wanted to investigate every-
thing else have investigated the schools, because there is no demand
or reason.
Mr. Sargent. I am giving you facts and not opinion. First of all,
in approaching this problem of the foundation influence, the sub-
versive-teaching problem is a foundation problem, and the founda-
tion problem in turn is a political problem with many ramifications.
From the American standpoint it had its beginning shortly before the
turn of the century in the 1890's. This movement is closely related
to Fabian socialism, which became established in Great Britain about
1885, and developed into the movement which has undermined and
almost destroyed the economic system of Great Britain.
When the beachhead was established in our country, we had three
bulwarks of defense: First, there was a sound tradition founded on
Americanism; secondly, a written Constitution, and finally, Federal
judicial power in the courts capable of enforcing constitutional rights.
The radical intellectuals attacking that system relied upon propa-
ganda and brainwashing. They organized an attack upon patriotism,
challenging basic American philosophy founded on the doctrine of
natural law. They sought to create a blackout of history by slanting
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 203
and distorting historical facts. They introduced a new and revolu-
tionary philosophy — one based on the teachings of John Dewey.
As early as 1892 they sought to establish the Federal income tax to
pave the way for national Federal socialism. This had the effect of
putting the people on an allowance, giving the National Government
unlimited power to spend for socialistic purposes, and reducing the
people to its will. It was proposed to carry out other parts of the so-
cialistic program by false and slanted propaganda.
Eventually the judicial power itself was to be undermined by court
packing and by attacks calculated to make the courts subject to the
Executive.
Education is one of the vital areas involved in this attack on the
American system. The field includes not only elementary and sec-
ondary schools, but also our colleges and universities. The tax-exempt
foundations are directly involved, because they have supported this
movement in the past, and are still promoting it in ways which restrict
educational activities and control public opinion.
The history of this movement is a record of the greatest betrayal
which has ever occurred in American history. Those are conclusions
based on the evidence I will present to you, and I am here for the
purpose of proving them.
To understand these condition, it is necessary to trace briefly the
history and development of the American subversive movement.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Chairman, I want to object to going further, and I
want to make a motion that the committee adjourn until we settle this
matter. This fellow can come in and read a political speech which he
has had plenty of time to prepare. He has a mimeographed news re-
lease to the newspapers to get his views across, but he can't do it for
the committee. I don't know who mimeographed this for him, but it
looks like it came from the staff. Until we get a vote of the committee
in executive session, I move right now that the committee adjourn.
The Chairman. With reference to the mimeographing, the chair-
man suggested to the staff that he thought it would be a convenience to
the press to have a release for the press in advance.
Mr. Hays. The press is here, and they can decide for themselves
about these kinds of people. They do not have to have any spoon-fed
stuff. I don't give them any of mine.
The Chairman. The extent of the mimeograph of the release I
had no responsibility for.
Mr. Hays. This kind of stuff goes in the paper. Suppose it is true ?
I do not know whether it is or not. But we will give it the benefit of
the doubt. It is in there. If it is not true, it is still in there, if the
press uses it, which I doubt.
The Chairman. But it is convenient to the press to have a release in
advance with the dateline on it.
Mr. Hays. Yes, sir, it is a convenience for them to have a dateline
at the same time the committee meets so the press has it, and the public
has it before the committee hearing.
Mr. Sargent. This statement was prepared because it was my under-
standing that it was your desire to have some statement. That state-
ment is a summary of the historical material.
Mr. Hays. I am not finding too much fault with you. I would like
to have the record show that the committee was not notified you were
204 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
subpenaed. We understood you were going to be a witness. We are
either going to have some orderly procedure here, or we are going to
adjourn and let the majority decide. If they are going to run it, then
let them get on the record.
The Chairman. It is the chairman's thought that all of the wit-
nesses should be subpenaed, and should be put under oath. That is the
procedure which we are following. I think in fairness to the witnesses
they should be subpenaed and they are all put under oath, and every-
body is on the same basis, and in the same category. That is the or-
derly procedure. We adopted that procedure at the suggestion of Mr.
Cox, which I think would serve for that matter as a standard. Every-
body that has a story is going to have an opportunity to tell his story.
None of us has any spare time that we want consumed, unless we are
accomplishing something by it.
You, as I have, sat on many committees. The witnesses do not
always have prepared, complete statements in advance. Frequently
they do have comprehensive notes prepared, which serve as a basis
Mr. Hats. Mr. Chairman, if I may interrupt you, there is a princi-
ple involved here, and that is that everything that Mr. Sargent has
read up to now since he started reading was furnished to the press
with a 10 a. m. deadline in a mimeographed form, and it was not fur-
nished to this committee. If we are going to do this business by indi-
rection by the back door, and by getting the drop on certain members
of the committee, I want to know it right now.
Mr. Wormser. Don't you have a copy of the release ?
Mr. Hays. Yes, I got one from the press just now.
Mr. Wormser. It was not on your desk ?
Mr. Hats. No, it was not. If you want to debate this now, I make
a motion now that we adjourn and go into executive session.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Hays, Miss Casey told me she herself put a copy
on your desk.
Miss Casey. I put all three things on each member's desk.
Mr. Hays. All right. There are three things ; one, a cover sheet ; two,
a special release, and this ; I do not have it. That is what Mrs. Pfost
has. I am not saying that it was intentional, but I am saying that it
happened that way. There is a principle involved here. There is an
indictment of the whole American educational system here, which was
fed out to the press in a mimeographed copy and read to the committee
at 11 o'clock. The press has had it God knows how long : "Hold for
release 10 a. m. Monday morning."
Mr. Sargent. May I proceed with my evidence ?
Mr. Hays. No, you may not proceed until we either adjourn or I am
voted down, one of the two.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Chairman, may I state that the press has asked
us specifically whenever we can to give them some sort of digest of
what the witness is going to testify.
Mr. Hays. The press has not been alone about that. I have been
pleading with you for the same thing for the members of the com-
mittee.
Mr. Wormser. May I go on. I understood it was proper procedure
for us to do that. We have done it with considerable effort. It is
not easy to get these things out. We are trying to suit the convenience
of the committee, and to the extent that the press is involved, their
convenience also.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 205
The Chairman. I might say that so far as the staff is concerned,
they have resisted doing it. It was at my insistence that they did it,
because of the great inconvenience that it occasioned them, and the
facilities of the staff. I insisted that it should be done. I am sure
that they worked overtime. It was not for the purpose of advancing
any view or the interests of any phase of this subject under investi-
gation, but purely based upon my long years of experience here in
Washington, the convenience of the press having something in ad-
vance. That is all there was to it. I am at a loss to understand
Mr. Wormsee. Mr. Chairman, may I interrupt to suggest that the
gentlemen of the press here would certainly be willing to state, I am
sure, that they pleaded with us to give them this digest.
Mr. Hays. We can put them on the stand and let them state that.
That doesn't change my mind a bit. If they are entitled to have it,
the committee is entitled to have it.
Mr. Wormser. The committee has had it.
Mr. Hats. Yes, just now, because I raised a rumpus about it.
We got it only by accident because one of the boys from the press
table brought it over.
Mr. Wormser. I beg your pardon. Miss Casey distributed them.
Mr. Hats. Miss Casey admits through some oversight we did not
get it. I don't want you to blame Miss Casey.
The Chairman. Mrs. Pfost, you had one?
Mrs. Pfost. No, this gentleman of the press handed it over to me,
and then gave me a second one.
Mr. Wormser. Miss Casey has made the definite and flat statement
that she put a full set in front of all five committee members.
Miss Casey. I put a full set before each member.
Mrs. Pfost. Here are the three articles, but not the press release.
Mr. Hays. I didn't eat it, and it is not here. I have not moved out
of this chair since I have been here.
The Chairman. Why don't we proceed ? I will call a meeting of
the committee during the afternoon to discuss any questions of pro-
cedure.
Mr. Sargent. May I continue, then, Mr. Reece ?
Mr. Hays. You can continue and I will withdraw my objection,
but now I will start asking a few questions about this press release
I just got.
You say "when the beachhead was established in our country."
You are talking about what beachhead ?
Mr. Sargent. The beachhead of the organized Socialist movement
which had its inception in Great Britain under the Fabian tactic, and
which came in here to infiltrate our educational system.
Mr. Hays. You apparently know there was a beachhead. When
and where w T as it established? When was the first landing made?
Mr. Sargent. A definite landing was made as far as becoming an
effective agency in about 1905 with the organization of the Inter-
collegiate Socialist Society. That is one of the points I am going to
cover in my testimony when I get to it.
Mr. Hays. We will get to it a little in advance. What was the name
of the organization ?
Mr. Sargent. Intercollegiate Socialist Society, organized by Jack
London and a number of others, in Peck's Restaurant in New York
City.
49720—54— pt. It 14
206 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hays. In 1905?
Mr. Sargent. About 1905.
Mr. Hats. By Jack London ?
Mr. Sargent. Yes.
Mr. Hays. Is that the Jack London that used to write some books ?
Mr. Sargent. That is right, that is the man. I have a pamphlet
explaining that which I will read to the committee when I get to that
point.
Mr. Hays. Did he import this thing from some other place?
Mr. Sargent. He was a member of a radical intellectual elite that
came in here definitely to try to twist our institutions around in favor
of the organized socialist movement.
Mr: Hays. Back in 1905.
Mr. Sargent. Yes. Some of the background extends further back
than that, but that is a definite identifiable date.
Mr. Hays. They did a lot of twisting, I assume ?
Mr. Sargent. They sure did.
Mr. Hays. We have resisted pretty well for 50 years, haven't we ?
Mr. Sargent. Have we?
Mr. Hays. I am asking you. What do you think ?
Mr. Sargent. I think we departed very materially. Among other
things, it is plainly asserted and charged today that the doctrine of
inalienable rights and natural laws as set forth in the Declaration of
Independence is obsolete. They have accomplished that false belief
in the American mind.
Mr. Hays. Now, Mr. Sargent, you would not want to take a poll
down on the street and ask the first 100 people you meet if they believe
that?
Mr. Sargent. No. I am talking about the slanting of the courts
and the governmental procedure.
Mr. Hays. All the courts have been undermined, too ?
Mr. Sargent, Somewhat, yes.
Mr. Hays. Congress, too, I suppose?
Mr. Sargent. I am not going into all that. I am here to give you
the chronology and facts, Mr. Hays, by documents, and not my per-
sonal opinions.
Mr. Hays. Let me tell you just because you say it is so doesn't make
it a chronology or a fact.
Mr. Sargent. I am giving the evidence. I state my conclusions as
set forth here. I am going to cite the books and materials which
make that position maintainable.
Mr. Hays. There may have been a fellow by the name of London
and some others who believed in socialism, but what are you going to
do about it ? Did they have a right in 1905 — I am not asking as of
today — to believe in whatever they wanted to believe ?
Mr. Sargent. I am not questioning the right. I am telling what
they did. I am here to prove the allegation by means of the evidence
and I would like to go on with it.
Mr. Hays. You were satisfied to distribute that statement of yours
to the press, and I am not going to be satisfied until I find out a bit
more about it until I find out how you picked these sentences
Mr. Sargent. I am here for the purpose of proving it.
The Chairman. Most of the sentence to which you refer was re-
peated in the statement which he has made. Mr. Sargent has a
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 207
presentation to mike. The chairman's feeling is that it would be
helpful and it would be in the interest of conservation of time and
orderly procedure, I do not mean without interruption, if he would
be permitted to proceed in a reasonably orderly manner to complete
his testimony. There are numerous questions which I am sure that
I for one will want to ask him as we go along or later. But if we
move along, I think it would be in the interest of good procedure.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Chairman, I want to say this, that the thing that
concerns me is : If such a thing has happened, that is one thing. I
would like to be specific about it, and I am going to continue object-
ing to this kind of presentation. Let me read why : "They organized
an attack on patriotism. They sought to create a blackout in history.
They introduced a new and revolutionary philosophy. As early, as
1892 they sought to establish" — this has all been handed out to the
press with an awful lot of pronouns in there. What I want to know
is who are these people. Let us start from the beginning and name
names and do it right.
The Chairman. That is what I would like to know. I would like
for him to proceed with his statement and see if we can find out.
Mr. Sargent. I will give you exactly that information chronologi-
cally on the basis of books by going through this thing. I can't answer
your questions in one sentence.
Mr. Hays. No, but your statement to the press, Mr. Sargent — and
you won't sit there and deny it — was deliberately designed to create
an impression that education all has got an odor about it.
The Chairman. Mr. Hays
Mr. Hays. You can hammer all you please, but you are not going
to shut the minority up. You have mimeographed statements but
you are not going to silence me.
The Chairman. I am not trying to silence anyone.
Mr. Hays. You are not going to, either.
The Chairman. I want to take the responsibility myself for a state-
ment being prepared for the press. I am the one who insisted on it.
Mr. Sargent knew nothing about it. The members of the staff did
not prefer to do it, and I suggested that I thought it ought to be done
even at great inconvenience to the staff.
Mr. Hays. Who wrote it ?
The Chairman. As to that, I do not know. It was mimeographed,
I am sure, at the instance of the staff.
Mr. Sargent. The statement was prepared by me by request. I did
not originate the idea of having one. I did it because I was present
at your hearing the other day
The Chairman. The responsibility for the statement being given
out to the press is the chairman's.
Mr. Hays. All right. It is the chairman's.
The Chairman. He did not know there was any or could be any
controversy on that phase of it, I might add.
Mr. Hays. You do not realize how easily you can get into a
controversy with me.
Mr. Sargent. I was here the other day, Mr. Hays, and I heard your
request that statements be furnished, and I assumed I was furthering
your wishes in the matter.
Mr. Hays. You: sure would, if I had the statement at 10 o'clock or 5
minutes until 10. ■
208 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Sargent. I prepared it, as I understood you wanted statements
furnished.
Mr. Hays. I have said repeatedly that I am not blaming you. The
point I am making, and I want to make it perfectly clear, is this : I
have tried to insist from the very first meeting we had that this thing
be conducted objectively and in the interest, to use your own terms,
Mr. Chairman, of orderly procedure. There have been a lot of people
and a lot of organizations and a lot of institutions that have had a lot
of things said about them, both by written statements and in the hear-
ings. I haven't heard any of them. I have not been able to get a com-
mitment that any specific one of these people is going to be allowed
to come in and tell his story. You know what happened in the
McCarthy hearings. They kept Stevens on the stand for 14 days until
they wore him out and wore the public out, and they got one impres-
sion across to the people's minds, and the other side is not going to
get into the papers unless it is a lot more sensational than I think it is
going to be. This is the same technique. We will put out the sensa-
tional accusations and get it in the paper on page 1, and if they are not
true, if these people come in, that will get on page 16, and who is going
to read it anyway.
The Chairman. The chairman has stated that he has not made any
plans about publicity. He has not been interested in that phase of it.
What he is interested in is developing the facts with the view of the
facts ultimately forming the basis of a report. It is the long-range
results that the chairman is interested in and he has made no efforts—
and I am sure the members of the press will bear me out in this — to
try to get over to the press any idea, preconceived or otherwise. I
am sure that some of the press have looked at the chairman somewhat
critically because of his failure to give information about the commit-
tee. I wanted to wait until the facts were developed and let the press
develop its own view. The chairman has certainly not tried to pub-
licize himself. He does not care whether his name is ever in the paper.
As far as publicity is concerned, I have reached the period in my life
where I am not looking for publicity, I am not looking for any clients,
and not looking for anything further in the way of personal advance-
ment. The chairman is interested in only one thing, and that is help-
ing this committee do a good job, which I think the country is inter-
ested in. I am not going to lose my patience. I do not have any time
to spare, but I am going to take whatever time is necessary in order
to do what I can toward helping accomplish the job.
I want to provide every opportunity for the views which occur to
you as we go along to be advanced, Mr. Hays.
Myself, I am very much interested in getting the story which Mr.
Sargent, who has now for some 15 years been intimately associated
with on this whole subject, and the proof which he might or might
not have to support what he has to say. I am not accepting what he
has to say as being factual until he has completed his statement, and
I see what he has to support it.
Mrs. Pfost. Mr. Chairman, since we have this report here before us,
this release, I wonder if I might ask Mr. Sargent a couple of questions
that are embodied in the release ?
The Chairman. Yes.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 209
Mrs. PfoSt. I notice on the bottom of page 1 and carries on to
page 2 :
As early as 1892 they sought to establish the Federal income tax in order to
pave the way for national Federal socialism.
This statement would indicate that you feel that the Federal income
tax has brought about socialism, and that it is a socialistic procedure.
Mr. Sargent. I think it has had a tremendously powerful effect in
doing exactly that in two ways. One way is placing very, very large
amounts of money at the disposal of the Federal Government to spend,
and the other way is the resultant control which it has had upon the
people. At the national level, a general socialistic program would be
impossible without that tax.
Mrs. Pfost. Do you think we should not have a Federal income tax?
Mr. Sargent. I think the power of the Federal Government to tax
income should be very strictly reduced in order to prevent the invasion
of the sovereignty of the States, and let the States do it. I think it is.
The average workingman works 1 day a week to pay this tax. It is
a soak-the-people tax as it is operating now.
Mrs. Pfost. It is what ?
Mr. Sargent. Soak, soaking the people and subjecting them to the
power of the Federal Government.
Mrs. Pfost. Then you would eliminate completely the Federal
income tax and allow the States to take care of their taxes ?
Mr. Sargent. I would not eliminate it completely. I would put
a ceiling on it, and not have the Federal Government absorb most of
the available revenues. Let the States spend their own money where
the people can control the projects at a local level and not be subjected
to Washington.
Mrs. Pfost. What would you do when these emergencies arise, such
as we have had — war emergencies ?
Mr. Sargent. I am thinking of the tax-limitation proposal ad-
vanced by others, which includes an emergency clause allowing higher
taxes to cover defense or other emergency.
Mrs. Pfost. Then you would still have to revert back to a Federal
income tax to take care of national emergencies.
Mr. Sargent. When the emergency was over, the tax would go
back to the limited rate. However, that is not germane to what I am
presenting here.
Mrs. Pfost. It will be one of those things which is going out to
the press today. To me it is an insinuation that the Federal income tax
paves the way for national Federal socialism, and certainly we have
Federal income tax today, and I wanted to clarify whether or not
you believe the Federal income tax is a socialistic measure.
Mr. Sargent. I. can add another point. If you will look at the
Federal budget in 1892, when this tax was first proposed, you will
find the Federal Government did not need any such revenue at all. It
did not need a tax of this kind for its fiscal purposes at all. The Fed-
eral budget was very low. The Federal Government always had the
power to tax inheritances. The courts sustained that. Here we have
a case where a tax capable of this great abuse was actively proposed
and put over when there was no money need for the tax.
There was some other reason. In the light of developments, there
are many, including myself, that ascribe an entirely different purpose
210 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
to it. The purpose being to pave the way for Federal control on a
very, very broad scale. It occurred at a time when this Socialist
movement was moving in. My conclusion is that it was done for
that purpose, and I think that is a correct assumption.
Mrs. Pfost. In other words, you are practically saying that you
feel that the Federal income tax is used for furthering socialistic
measures.
Mr. Sargent. It is establishing that; yes. Without the Federal
income tax, national socialism in the United States would be prac-
tically impossible to accomplish. The Government could not do it.
The abuse of the tax power is one of the most serious things we
have had here in altering our entire balance in government. It has
made the States paupers and compelled them to come to Washington
to get their money and submit to the conditions imposed on them to
get their own money back.
Mr. Hats. That is a pretty broad statement without much founda-
tion.
Mr. Sargent. You ask
Mr. Hats. I am not going to ask anybody. My State didn't have
a nickel of bonded debt until last year. It is against the State con-
stitution, so it was not a pauper. But there is a way they can go
into debt if they want to, and that is by vote of the people. So all
through the years instead of building roads by selling bonds, as
North Carolina did, the people of Ohio have chosen not to do that,
but come down to get the money from the Federal Government when
they could. They didn't come as paupers. So last year they decided
in their wisdom by an overwhelming vote— and I didn't think it was
such a good idea then and it may turn out it is not yet — but the people
voted, they bonded the State for half a billion dollars to build the
roads, but they did it by vote of the people.
Mr. Sargent. You had in Taft a great American who has repre-
sented some of the philosophy I speak of.
Mr. Hats. Taft was a great American, and you and I can agree on
that. He was one of the great Americans of all time and knowing him
as I did, if he were sitting here today, he would be just as bored with
this procedure as I am.
To get back to your statement, you are making the flat assertion
here that the income tax started out as a Socialist plot to destroy
the Government. That is what your statement says.
Mr. Sargent. It had that purpose on the part of the Socialists who
advocated it, yes ; that is my opinion.
Mr. Hats. But your statement implies, if it does not flatly say,
that the people who passed the income tax were involved in this.
Mr. Sargent. The people did hot think that. They thought they
were buying something else. They found out later they were buying
a larger package than they had any idea.
Mr. Hats. The people can stop the tax and repeal it.
Mr. Sargent. They can do it by constitutional amendment.
Mr. Hats. They can do it by changing the Members of Congress
in a democracy.
Mr. Sargent. That is right.
Mr. Hats. If this were a great Socialistplot and they thought they
were being robbed, they could change the Congress.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 211
■ ;?Mt. Sargent. I ajm nowhere to diseuss the political science problem
involved in the tax.
Mr. Hats. You are here saying this.
Mr. Sargent. I am pointing out that the circumstance can be
weighed properly in the light of the history of the time which I am
proposing to give you, dates and circumstances, so you can integrate
the relationship of this pattern.
Mr. Hays. But it is your opinion that the income tax was first
introduced as a result of a socialist plot.
Mr. Sargent. I think the radicals of that period had precisely that
in mind, yes.
Mr. Hays. Do you have any other legislation that you think cam©
about as a result of a socialist plot ?
Mr. Sargent. I don't know of anything in particular at this time
that occurs to me. I am talking about the broad pattern and not the
whole series of legislative enactments. I don't think that is pertinent
to your inquiry here.
Mr. Hays. It is pertinent in view of this statement to ask you if
you think that people should be taxed according to their ability
to pay.
Mr. Sargent. I said the Federal Government's power to do it.
The States have that power. I am talking about the Federal Govern-
ment's power to do the taxing and to control the States through this
type of thing.
Mr. Hays. You have implied here that you have a great deal of
reverence for the Constitution. The Constitution gave the Federal
Government certain powers to tax.
Mr. Sargent. I am talking about the 16th amendment power to
tax the people without limit.
Mr. Hays. But that is part of the Constitution, is it not ?
Mr. Sargent. Yes.
Mr. Hays. Put in there in a constitutional manner.
Mr. Sargent. Yes, and I am saying that constitutional proposal
as far as the radicals were concerned was deliberate to make Federal
national taxation a possibility.
Mr. Hays. They started out on the 16th amendment to make Federal
national socialism.
Mr. Sargent. I think that was part of the scheme. I am talking
about the Federal tax.
Mrs. Pfost. The reason I am asking you this, Mr. Sargent, is
because the news release has been given, and I thought it should be
explored and clarified before we adjourn today. The last para-
graph— —
Mr. Sargent. On page 2 or page 1 ?
Mrs. Pfost. On page 2. I might go back to "Eventually," the last
sentence of the first paragraph on page 2 :
Eventually, the judicial power itself was to be undermined by "court packing"
and by attacks calculated to make the courts subject to control by the Executive.
Education is one of the vital areas involved in this attack on the American
system of government. The field includes not only elementary and secondary
schools, but also our colleges and universities. The tax-exempt foundations are
directly Involved because they have supported this movement in the past, and
are still promoting it. * * *
212 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
You feel that the foundations are directly involved in supporting
this type of thing. You are making that allegation with regard to the
educational system in America.
Mr. Sargent. That is right.
Mrs. Pfost. And you say that the history of this movement is a
record of the greatest betrayal that ever occurred in American history.
Mr. Sargent. I think that is a correct statement.
Mrs. Pfost. Do you feel that these tax-exempt foundations are
knowingly placing their money in the hands of and stimulating this
type of socialistic method ?
Mr. Sargent. I think they are doing it on purpose, yes, deliberately.
There is such a record of continuous notice, failure to do anything
The Chairman. I am very anxious to get his testimony.
Mr. Sargent. I can answer this much more fully.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Chairman, if some of the spectators can't keep still
I suggest you get the sergeant at arms to clear them out. I am tired
of the whispered advice.
Mr. Sargent. May I say it is difficult to answer fully and clearly
questions like this because it includes evidence I am going to put in.
After the evidence is in, I can answer you much better.
Mrs. Pfost. I realize that, but I was thinking that with this type
of statement going out, perhaps we were enlarging on that one phase
of it and could get some direct answers.
Mr. Sargent. I will elaborate further. It is my opinion that the
Rockefeller, Ford, and Carnegie Foundations are guilty of violation
of the antitrust laws and should be prosecuted. I have evidence I
am going to present here on that subject and court decisions. I think
they are violating the prohibition against restraint of trade, and that
this is being done on purpose.
Mr. Hays. Why don't you turn that evidence over to the Attorney
General %
Mr. Sargent. You can decide what to do with it after you have the
material.
Mr. Hays. This committee is not going to decide what to do with
it. If you want my opinion, the committee ought to dispense right
now without more of this.
Mr. Sargent. I am here on subpena to give you the facts. I would
like to do it.
Mr. Hays. I am going to explore this statement of yours to try to
get some facts about it, if I can.
Mr. Sargent. My answer is that I think this was done on purpose
and knowingly.
Mr. Hays. You say, "Eventually the judicial power itself was to
be undermined by court-packing"; just how were the courts packed?
Mr. Sargent. By the Roosevelt proposal of 1937 in February, and
the attacks on the judiciary which preceded it.
Mr. Hays. It didn't pass.
Mr. Sargent. No, but there was a continuous policy of loading
judicial appointments for years with men of a specific philosophy and
discriminating against others who held counterphilosophy.
Mr. Hays. In other words, the courts were loaded all the 20 years
the Democrats were in with Democrats; that is a very unusual
situation.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 213
Mr. Sargent. I am not talking about Democrats. I am talking
about men having a philosophy similar to that which actuated the
so-called left-wing group.
Mr. Hays. The courts have been loaded a little bit along the way
by the present Chief Executive. He appointed the Chief Justice.
Perhaps the most significant social decision the courts ever handed
down has been the one they handed down last week, and with all of
this packing of these peculiar people they came up with a unanimous
decision.
Mr. Sargent. I am not talking about that decision.
The Chairman. You do not mean to say that the President is trying
to pack the courts ?
Mr. Hays. I am not accusing him of anything.
Mr. Sargent. In 1936 in October, before the Presidential election,
a group of educators sponsored and printed and put in the hands of
American schoolchildren a schoolbook advocating a plan to pack the
Supreme Court of the United States. I say that is a deliberate attack
on the judiciary, in the educational system, and I have the evidence.
Mr. Hays. You say that was a deliberate attack on the judiciary.
Do you realize that the Supreme Court has not always been composed
of nine members % There was one time when it had more. Was that
an attack on somebody ?
Mr. Sargent. I think my answer, Mr. Hays, is this -
Mr. Hays. In other words, anybody who disagrees with you and
your very peculiar beliefs, as I have seen them outlined here, is attack-
ing the system ; is that right?
Mr. -Sargent. I want to answer your question; yes. I think the
Senate Judiciary Committee finding that this court-packing bill was
dangerous and unparalleled is sufficient justification for my state-
ment. The unanimous report of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
You asked me for my authority. I have in my possession a schoolbook
advocating the court-packing plan and putting it in the elementary,
and I think it was the secondary classrooms in those days before the
presidential election, and before the Congress of the United States
got the court-packing bill.
Mr. Hays. All right, that happened.
Mr, Sargent. Yes,
Mr. Hays. I was not here when you say it happened.
Mr. Sargent. It proves educators did it, does it not ?
Mr. Hays. Mr. Chairman, I hate to do this, but I will have to ask
some person be put out if they cannot refrain from heckling. I admit
there are a lot of people who do not agree with me and that is all right.
Mr. Sargent. May I again request leave to follow my testimony?
The Chairman. I was going to ask that the spectators be careful not
to make interjections.
Mr. Hays. I do not mind it for a day or two, but this has been
going on with one person since the hearing started. I do not know
whom she represents and where she comes from, and she has a right to
her opinion, and she has a right to write me a letter, but I do not want
any hand and arm signals.
Mr. Hays. To go back to one other thing, do you agree to any
change ? It has been advocated for a long time in textbooks and other-
wise that the voting age should be lowered to 18. Do you find any-
thing significantly wrong with that ?
214 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Sargent. I have never thought much about it. It is not within
the scope of what I am presenting here. I don't really know.
Mr. Hats. Of course, it is within the scope, because you are infer-
ring that because somebody suggested that maybe 11 would be a better
number than 9 that is un-American.
Mr. Sargent. No, I am talking about the use of foundations and. the
educational system for partisan political purposes which has been
done and which I am prepared to prove. That is what I am here for.
Mr. Hays. Do you think that lowering the age limit to 18 is a
partisan political purpose ?
Mr. Sargent. I think for an educational system to advocate it is
lobbying and prohibited by statute ; yes.
Mr. Hays. You don't think a teacher in a classroom would not have
a right to bring it up in a class of American Government and get some
discussion and opinion?
Mr. Sargent. I am not talking about that. I am talking about a
foundation promoting that concept with its money. Congress said
it should not be done under section 101, and I understand you are
here to get evidence of that kind, that they have actively promoted
issues.
Mr. Hays. Do you think if a foundation gave somebody money to
advocate it in a book that that would be bad ?
Mr. Sargent. If the book was objective; no. Slanted, presentations
of issues is prohibited here. Suppression of the right of critical
analyses of scholarly findings is definitely an infringement of your
statute.
Mr. Hays. Do you believe that through any book that I happen to
hand you or I could go through any book on the subject you hand me
and delete paragraphs here and there, that would make it slanted any
way we wanted to slant it?
Mr. Sargent. I am not talking about deleting paragraphs. I am
talking about a consistent policy of always supporting one side of the
controversy and never doing anything in support of the other. That is
propaganda.
Mrs. Pfost. You feel that the foundations have used their money
to that extent ?
Mr. Sargent. I think definitely they have. I think that is the mix
of this matter.
_ Mrs. Pfost. You think they have not used their money on construc-
tive books, but they will give out great donations on the subversive
type of literature and further that type of printing entirely ?
Mr. Sargent. Yes. I am convinced of it. In fact, I have been
told that by people in the profession. Prof. John C. Almack, formerly
of the Stanford School of Education, told me one time that it is a waste
of time trying to get any money from the foundations for the conserva-
tive side of these issues. That it could not be done. He was an experi-
enced educator.
The Chairman. You may proceed.
Mr. Sargent. Thank you.
Here, then, briefly, is a chronology of the subversive movement as,
first of all, general background material. I will commence by talking
about the Fabian Socialist movement in Great Britain. I have notes
here. The data on this first sheet is taken from a source book which
I think is a recognized and able authority. It is the book entitled
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 215
"Fabianism in the [Life of Great Britain" ; the author is Sister Mar-
garet Patricia Mcdarran, the daughter of Senator McCarran. It is a
doctoral thesis resulting in the granting of her degree of doctor of
philosophy. It is a very extensive book based on original source
material.
Mr. Hays. You say she is a sister ?
Mr. Sargent. She is a member of a Catholic order.
Mr. Hays. I didn't know they used her last name.
Mr. Sargent. That is her full name. Her full name appears on
the book and that is who she is. I have read the book myself.
I am taking significant dates here to orient the British movement
with the American side of the picture. The inception of the move-
ment was the year 1883 ; an original Fabian group formed, composed
of Thomas Davidson, Edward R. Pease, and Hubert Bland. They
met in London and adopted an agreement to reconstitute society and
they adopted the name "Fabian."
The Fabian system briefly consisted of four elements. Research,
to further their specific ideas; education of a propaganda type to
carry it out ; penetration of governmental agencies generally, legisla-
tive and executive both ; and, finally, penetration carried to the point
of permeation resulting in complete control of the governmental
system.
The following year, 1884, George Bernard Shaw joined the move-
ment and became, and was active, for many, many years subsequently.
In 1885 Sydney Webb, Sydney Olivier, and Anna Besant became
members. They established a publication known as the Fabian News
in 1891.
In 1892 they began active lecturing and campaigning. They elected
a member of Parliament that year. They moved into the university
field in 1895 and established a unit at Oxford. They founded the
London School of Economics
Mr. Hays. Mr. Sargent, that is all a matter of history. We know
about those characters. They have been pretty well discredited down
through the years. Nobody is paying much attention to them. Do
you think it is fair to waste our time ?
Mr. Sargent. I think it is fair. They have not been discredited
and they have not stopped. There is substantial evidence that the
successors of that group are very intimately connected with American
affairs right now.
Mr. Hays. I have heard that charge bandied about for a good many
years, but it only results in somebody saying so. Nobody has ever
pinned it down. It finally boils down to, "well, he disagrees with me,
so therefore he is no good."
Mr. Sargent. Won't you wait until I get through before you con-
clude that ? Maybe you will change your mind.
Mr. Hays. I will tell you, the way you are going, some of the stuff
you are bringing in, I don't know whether you are ever going to get
through.
Mr. Sargent. If you will help me I will get there as fast as I can.
By 1900 the movement had entered four of the universities in Great
Britain. I have referred to the Federal income tax movement here.
That began in 1892 with a demand for Federal income tax legislation
made at a time when the fiscal needs of the Federal Government re-
quired no such taxation. Some political objective must have been
216 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
behind the move at the time because the revenue need was not there.
In 1893 the Income Tax Act was passed and then repassed over a Pres-
idential veto. In 1894, the United States Supreme Court held the
statute unconstitutional of the basis of the Constitution as it then
stood.
The agitation continued. In 1909 Congress proposed the income
tax amendment to the States and in 1913 it was adopted as the 16th
amendment to the Federal Constitution. Unlimited tax power was
conferred. The effect was as I mentioned.
Mr. Hats. You say that was proposed in 1909 ?
Mr. Sargent. The amendment was proposed in 1909.
Mr. Hays. That took a vote of the Congress ?
Mr. Sargent. That is right, it was voted.
Mr. Hats. Do you have any breakdown of how many on each poli-
tical party party voted on that ?
Mr. Sargent. I don't know. I presume it was substantial.
Mr. Hats. In other words, both parties had already been indoc-
trinated with this socialism as early as 1909 ?
Mr. Sargent. I didn't say that.
Mr. Hats. You say right here in your statement you handed out to
the press that this was a plot to establish the Federal income tax in
order to pave the way for national Federal socialism.
Mr. Sargent. I say the radical group had that in mind. The people
had a more immediate situation at hand. There were great abuses
in that period that we are all familiar with and reform of some type
was undoubtedly due and needed.
The conclusion I adopt is that a normal American movement for
reform was perverted by the introduction of various things which
were accepted and which became dangerous in practice and made our
present situation what it is. There was a political purpose behind
this amendment obviously. The money was not needed. The idea
was to give the Federal Government the power to take money. The
power to take money was given. The power to take money became a
very important part in what followed.
That is all fact. That is well known.
Mr. Hats. Some of it is fact;
Mr. Sargent. It is a fact the Government didn't need the money.
Look at the budget. It is a fact that that unlimited power was con-
ferred. It is a fact that subsequently there has been a very extensive
use of that power. It is also a fact that without this power socializing
of the United States would have been well nigh impossible.
Mr. Hays. Was the Government in debt in 1909 ?
Mr. Sargent. I don't think it had very much. The Civil War
was pretty much off the books and the budget was very low. The
Spanish- American War was more or less a picnic. It only lasted a
short time and the cost was not great.
Mr. Hays. We ought to mimeograph that and send it out to the
Spanish-American veterans.
Mr. Sargent. In the financial sense it was not costly. It lasted a
short time. Financially I am speaking of. It was not an expensive
war, and we had a period of very great prosperity and plenty of
resources.
From the educational standpoint, the story begins about 1896 with
the establishment of the Dewey Laboratory School at the University
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 217
of Chicago. That school continued until 1903. The Dewey in ques-
tion here is the professor of philosophy, John Dewey, who expounded
a principle which has become destructive of traditions and has created
the difficulties and the confusion, much of it, that we find today.
Professor Dewey denied that there was any such thing as absolute
truth, that everything was relative, everything was doubtful, perma-
nently doubtful, that there were no basic values and nothing which
was specifically true.
The concept was revolutionary in practice. I don't know what
the good professor thought of his reasons, but the effect of it was to
undermine existing props and to make possible the specific thing I
refer to here, because as soon as you say there are no basic principles
at all, that everything is debatable and uncertain, changeable from
day to day, you automatically wipe the slate clean, you throw his-
torical experience and background to the wnnd and you begin all over
again, which is just exactly what the Marxians want someone to do.
Therefore, John Dewey was a gift from the gods to the radicals.
He was just taiiormade for this sort of situation. I haven't the
faintest idea of what Dewey himself thought he was doing. I am
merely saying it happens and had this effect.
Mr. Hays. You would not think there is anything unusual in a
professor of philosophy coming up with some crackpot theory like
that.
Mr. Sargent. I would think it is somewhat significant and unusual
when a long parade of other people back up the man and make it
the guiding philosophy of an educational system.
Mr. Hays. You would not say that there ought not to be any new
ideas of research in any educational system ?
Mr. Sargent. No; I didn't say that.
Mr. Hays. You say that any time we break with tradition we are
automatically getting into something bad.
Mr. Sargent. I am saying it is generally agreed by philosophers
that this philosophy of John Dewey was extremely destructive in
practice and made it possible to accomplish the things that were later
done. It brought aboiit the policy of attacking the American tradi-
tion. They attacked patriotism.
Mr. Hays. Let me try to tie that down with an example here.
You say attack American tradition. There was a tradition around
the time of Civil War that it was perfectly all right for you to buy
your way out of the Army. I think the fee was $300.
Mr. Sargent. That is an American tradition ?
Mr. Hays. It was then. It was very reputable and nobody ques-
tioned it and everybody did it.
Mr. Sargent. That is not what I mean by the word "tradition."
Mr. Hays. It is hard to keep words in context and define them.
Mr. Sargent. Tradition as in the Declaration of Independence.
That is a statute passed by the Congress and is a basic document. The
principle of the Declaration of Independence was directly undermined
and attacked by the philosophy of John Dewey.
Mr. Hays. Another document that you keep citing, and a very
valuable document, is the Constitution. Did the Constitution have
any reference to slavery at all in the beginning?
Mr. Sargent. Of course it did. You know that. Until 1808.
Mr. Hays. That was part of the tradition ?
218 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Sargent. No. I don't use tradition in that sense. Every sec-
tion of the Constitution is not a tradition by any manner of means.
I mean the essentials.
Mr. Hats. What are you going to do, pick the traditions and the
rest is not according to your definition ?
Mr. Sargent. No, I am going to talk about the essential rights of
human beings. Most people agree on what that stuff is.
One of the most fundamental concepts of all is the doctrine of in-
alienable rights, the fact that your rights belong to you and my rights
belong to me and are not given to me by any majority in society;
that we acquire those rights at birth and we get them by natural law
or the laws of God.
Mr. Hays. I will go along with you. That is the first time today
that you and I have been able to specifically get something down in a
definition that both of us could agree on.
Mr. Sargent. All right. Dewey throws that out. He said not even
that one. That is overboard, too.
The philosophy of John Dewey is a natural for radicalism because
it makes everything uncertain and the subject of confusion. They
deny there are such things as natural rights. They say that rights
are whatever the majority say, here today and gone tomorrow. Sort
of an off -again, on- again Flannigan affair.
Mr. Hats. You believe in laissez-faire ?
Mr. Sargent. What do you mean by that term ?
Mr. Hats. It is generally used in the same term. You know the
definition of it. Let-alone theory, that the Government should not
interfere.
Mr. Sargent. No ; I don't think there should be a complete want of
governmental restraint. Anarchy would be the result of it.
Mr. Hats. There has been testimony before these hearings that
there has been a plot to do away with the laissez-faire theory.
Mr. Sargent. That word has been booted around to a great extent.
Like "democracy," it has been picked up by all the Communist fronts
and they throw it all over the place until the word is almost useless
for any practical purposes.
Mr. Hats. In other words, laissez-faire, democracy, or any other
word has certain limitations ?
Mr. Sargent. Some of those words have. Natural law means a
very specific thing. I say that John Dewey's philosophy struck a
mortal blow at natural law and that is the cement which holds this
country of ours together from the standpoint of religion, philosophy,
and governmental policy.
Mr. Hats. You and I both apparently agree that John Dewey's
philosophy is not the kind of philosophy with w T hich we would asso-
ciate ourselves.
Mr. Sargent. That is right. Definitely. I think it is a very de-
structive thing and very unfortunate.
Mr. Hats. But you would not say that John Dewey did not have a
right to believe that and to advocate it?
Mr. Sargent. No. All these people had a right to advocate these
things. But the foundations didn't have a right to step in and actively
promote one theory and throw the rest overboard.
Mr. Hats. Up to now you say the foundations did that and threw
the other one overboard ?
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 219
Mr. Sargent. I will get to that. That comes into the picture. I am
giving you the historical background first. I will be talking about
foundations very shortly.
The Chairman. You may proceed.
Mr. Sargent. On the basis of these principles John Dewey estab-
lished this laboratory school at the University of Chicago in 1896
and conducted experimental education. He continued until 1903.
Teachers College, which has become subsequently identified with
much of the conditions to which we will refer, became affiliated with
Columbia in 1898.
In 1902, John D. Rockefeller established his first foundation known
as General Education Board. From the standpoint of contemporary
affairs, that was just 1 year before the first Russian revolution, at-
tempted under Lenin, when they adopted the principles of Karl Marx.
There was violence, and in Russia at that particular time there were
threats which broke out in 1905 after Russia lost the war with Japan.
The writers of this period were discussing many conditions which
were obviously bad and should be condemned. In 1904, for example,
Robert Hunter wrote his book entitled "Poverty," Steffens wrote about
The Shame of the Cities, Tarbell wrote the book The History of the
Standard Oil Company at about the same time. In 1905, Charles
Evans Hughes made his investigation of life insurance scandals in
New York.
The point is that the country at the time was in a very active con-
dition of flux due to these many influences which I think we are
familiar with.
Jack London writes in 1905 in War of the Classes explaining how
he became a Socialist. In the same vear John Dewey became pro-
fessor of philosophy at Columbia University and brought his concept
into that university.
Now we come to the Intercollegiate Socialist Society. My authority
here is a publication of that organization itself, which relates the
facts regarding its formation. This is published by the League for
Industrial Democracy, which is the successor of the old Intercollegiate
Socialist Society. The pamphlet is entitled "Thirty-five Years of
Educational Pioneering, L. I. D. Celebrates Past Achievements and
Asks Where Do We Go From Here ?"
Mr. Hays. When was that published ?
Mr. Sargent. It relates to the original history of the movement;
copyright notice is 1941. It was a meeting they held to discuss their
own history and background and recites what happened.
The meeting which is reported on by this pamphlet, as the pamphlet
states, was held on Thursday evening, November 28, 1941, at their
35th anniversary dinner at the Hotel Edison in New York City. There
were three or four hundred members and guests present.
One of the main speakers was John Dewey, president of the League
for Industrial Democracy, who is referred to here as one of the fore-
most educators and philosophers. Harry W. Laidler, the executive'
director of the league was among those present. Harry W. Laidler's
speech gives an exact copy of the original call issued for the formation
of this prior group in 1905 and reads as follows. The heading is Call
220 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
for an Intercollegiate Socialist Society and the main body reads as
follows :
In the opinion of the undersigned, the recent remarkable increase in the
Socialist vote in America should serve as an indication to the educated men
and Women in the country that socialism is a thing concerning which it is no
longer wise to be indifferent.
Mr. Hays. When was this written ?
Mr. Sargent. This was the original notice of 1905 being reported.
At the subsequent anniversary dinner they put in their copy of the
original notice of formation which I am reading.
The undersigned, regarding its aims and fundamental principles with sym-
pathy, and believing in them will ultimately be found the remedy for many
far-reaching economic evils, proposed organizing an association to be known
as the intercollegiate Socialist Society for College Men and Women, Graduate
and Undergraduate, through the formation of study clubs in the colleges and
universities, and the encouraging of all legitimate endeavors to awaken an
interest in socialism among the educated men and women of the country.
Signers of the call for the meeting are : Oscar Lovell Triggs, Thomas
Wentworth Higginson, Charlotte Perkins Oilman, Clarence Dar-
row, William English Walling, G. Phelps Stokes, B. O. Flower,
Leonard D. Abbott, Jack London, Upton Sinclair.
The article goes on to state that the meeting was organized as a
result of this call and held on the top floor of Peck's Restaurant, 140
Fulton Street, New York City, on the afternoon, September 12, 1905.
Further on in the article it relates that in the year 1906 in pur-
suance of this plan. Jack London took a spectacular trip among col-
leges. That was in early 1906. It says that in scores of colleges
the speakers of this organization presented to students the challenge
of a new social order. It refers to present day leaders of thought in
the movement, including Paul Douglas, Isadore Lubin, and a number
of others here.
Mr. Hays. Let us have them all.
Mr. Sargent. All right. Bruce Bliven, Freda Kirchwey, Paul
Douglas, Kenneth Macgowan, Isador Lubin, Evans Clark, Devere
Allen, John Temple Graves, Jr., Mary Fox, Carl Llewllyn, Broadus
Mitchell, Abraham Epstein, Otto S. Beyer, Theresa Wolfson. and a
host of others at Stanford, Barnard, Columbia, Harvard, Clark, Am-
herst, Oberlin, Princeton, Vassar, Yale, Johns Hopkins, Pittsburgh,
Illinois, Wisconsin, and other colleges. I read that without para-
phrasing.
Mr. Hays. What were they doing ?
Mr. Sargent. It says here that many of these people were among
the active members of Intercollegiate Socialist Society college chap-
ters during those days. In other words, these names relate to the
early activities of the group.
Mr. Hays. That was 1906?
Mr. Sargent. You can't say exactly, Mr. Hays, because they are
referring to the early days. He does not peg this particular thing as
a date. It was during the early period as this pamphlet would indi-
cate, in any event.
Mr. Hays. It seems to me you might have missed the most signficant
thing in that whole thing. You have not emphasized it. You said
when you started out somewhere along in there that the significant
size of the Socialist vote must convince of one thing or another. That
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 221
was back around 1905. I don't know what the Socialist vote was in
1905, but I will wager in proportion to the population it was lower
than now.
Mr. Sargent. I have no idea. That statement appeared in the
call of the notice.
Mr. Hays. Don't you think you are right ?
Mr. Sargent. I would not want to hazard a guess.
Mr. Hays. In other words, you are getting pretty excited about
something here that has proved over the years 1905 to 1954 that it
didn't have enough drive of its own to survive.
The Chairman. May I interject? You are making reference of
that in connection with the 1941 meeting of the LID as I understand.
Is that correct ?
Mr. Sargent. Yes. The Intercollegiate Socialist Society, the pred-
ecessor for the Industrial League for Democracy.
Mr. Hays. What I am referring to is the original call for the
meeting.
Mr. Sargent. That is right.
The Chairman. May t ask, is the League for Industrial Democracy
a tax exempt institution ?
Mr. Sargent. It is my understanding that it is. This was clearly
a propaganda organization, Mr. Hays. It was formed, as its notice
shows in the first place, to actively promote a political movement,
namely, socialism.
Mr. Hays. I am not arguing with you, sir, that it was not a propa-
ganda Organization or anything of the kind. It probably was.
The thing that I am trying to find out is how much significance
did it have and whether it ever had any effect or not.
Mr. Sargent. I think it had a great deal of significance. Not in
the Socialist Party vote, but in making its policies effective in other
ways as the Fabians in Great Britain did. They infiltrated o£her
parties and worked their will in this fashion.
They didn't go out and run for election. They used the attack
system by masquerading under other groups. That is exactly what
we find in this educational picture.
This pamphlet I have before me shows that Kobert Morss Lovett
became the first president of the Intercollegiate Socialist Society
and you will find from its proceedings that he was identified with
it for many years. Mr. Lovett has one of the most outstanding
records of Communist-front affiliation of anyone I have ever seen.
He belonged to a total of 56 Communist- front organization, this man,
the president of this particular group here.
I have the list before me. He belonged at some date or dates
between this time and the year 1949, to one or more of these various
organizations, not necessarily, of course, simultaneously.
Mr. Hays. He is a bad actor, I take it, this fellow Lovett. Are you
going to read all 56 of those ?
Mr. Sargent. He is an egghead. He is an educated fool who joins
anything and is a knockout for propaganda and used this organiza-
tion obviously for the purpose to which I refer. I think the record
can properly state something about the character of the people that
got in here because we are studying propaganda.
Mr. Hays. If you are going to use the word "egghead," and I have
no objection to it — it has become a generally accepted term — maybe
49720 — 54 — pt. 1 15
222 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
we ought to have a definition of it. You use it in a connotation that
is ridiculous or something of that kind ?
Mr. Sargent. You want a definition of egghead; all right, I have
it. It is in an article in a recent magazine. I think I would go for this.
It is the American Mercury issue of June 1954.
Mr. Hats. I think you probably would go for anything that the
Mercury writes.
Mr. Sargent. The article is by Howard Lord Varney, who has a
lot of experience, and is called The Egghead Clutch on the Founda-
tions. You might want to bring that man down here. He seems to
have a great deal on the ball.
Mr. Hats. I will tell you if we bring any more down here like some
we have now I am in favor of the committee hiring a staff psychiatrist.
Mr. Sargent. I think somebody ought to put a psychiatrist on Bob-
ert Morss Lovett.
Mr. Hats. I don't care whether he belonged to all of them. The
only thing I was interested in was if he belonged to 56, why don't
you put them in the record %
Mr. Sargent. I am glad to do that provided it is understood that
it will be part of my testimony.
Mr. Hats. Yes. We are trying to save time. If you read 56 Com-
munist front organizations
The Chairman. They may go in as part of the record.
Mr. Sargent. I thought as part of the rule I had to read it or the
equivalent to get them in.
Mr. Hats. By agreement we will put them in.
Mr. Sargent. I have a list in my binder, and give it to the reporter
to insert.
( The material referred to is as follows : )
References to Robert Morss Lovett, compiled from material furnished by con-
gressional committees, publications, public records, and other sources
Appendix IX
Organisation page Wo.
National committee, All America Anti-Imperialist League 311
Signatory, American Committee for Democracy and Intellectual Freedom. S3T
American Committee of Liberals for the Freedom of Mooney and Billings — 339
Sponsor of American Committee for Protection of the Foreign Born_ 349, 354
Member, American Council on Soviet Relations „ 36J>
National advisory Board, American Friends of the Chinese People 371, 378
Sponsor of American Friends of Spanish Democracy — 380-383
Director, American Fund for Public Service 384
National vice chairman, American League for Peace and Democracy 390-394,
397, 401, 404, 409
Vice chairman, American League Against War and Facism 416, 424, 428
Signatory, Golden Book of American Friendship with the Soviet Union — 467, 771
Advisory board, Russian Reconstruction Farms, Inc — _ 472
Russian War Relief, Inc 476
Sponsor and advisory board, American Student Union 520, 523
National advisory board, American Youth Congress 535, 537
Advisory council, Book Union 589
Citizens Committee for Harry Bridges 599
Chicago Ail-American Anti-Imperialist League 606
Signatory, Committee For a Boycott Against Japanese Aggression 635
Sponsor of Committee to Defend America by Keeping Out of War 638
Committee to Save Spain and China 643
Sponsor of Conference on Constitutional Liberties . 653
Advisory board, Film Audiences For Democracy . 730
Friday , 745
Endorser, Friends of the Soviet Union , 758-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 223
References to Robert Morss Lovett, compiled from material furnished by con-
gressional committees, publications, public records, and other sources— Con.
Appendix IX
Organisation page No.
Official, Garland Fund 764
National committee, International Labor Defense 830
Speaker, International Workers Order ; 892
League of American Writers 968, 973
Advisory committee, League for Mutual Aid 982
Endorser, American Committee for International Student Congress Against
War and Fascism 1083
Chairman, August Peace Parade and Jane Addams Memorial 1103
National Mooney Council of Action , H42
Sponsor of Mother Ella Reeve Bloor Banquet.: ; 1164
USA supporter, National Committee to Aid the Victims of German Fas-
cism ■■ 1170
National Committee for the Defense of Political Prisoners 1177
National Committee for People's Rights ._ 1179
Signatory, National Emergency Conference 1205, 1207
National Emergency Conference for Democratic Rights 1209, 1214
Sponsor of National Federation For Constitutional Liberties 1229, 1233
National People's Committee Against Hearst — 1300*
Sponsor of National Right-to-Work Congress— — 1308
Signatory, National Writers Congress _ 1340
Signatory, New Masses Letter to the President — _ . 1356
Committee member, Non-Partisan Committee for the Reelection of Con-
gressman Vito Marcantonio . 1375
Signer, Open Letter to American Liberals . 1379
Signer, Open Letter For Closer Cooperation with the Soviet Union — 1384
Signer, Open Letter Protesting the Ban on Communists in the American
Civil Liberties Union 1386, 1388
Advisory editor, Champion of Youth . 1447
Contributing editor, Science and Society _ 1456
Arrangements committee, People's Front For Peace 1462
Contributor, Soviet Russia Today 1603
Chairman, Chicago Committee For the Struggle Against War 1618
National committee, Student Congress Against War_ __ 1620
Signatory, Veterans of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade— . — 1651
Sponsor of the American Pushkin Committee— __, ! J .,_..._.,._. — ___ 1772
Speaker, Greater Boston Peace Strike Committee . 1780
Robert Morse Lovett is given as a sponsor of various activities of the American
Peace Crusade, which was described (statement on the March of Treason,
February 19, 1951, H. Rept. No. 378, on the Communist "Peace" Offensive, re-
leased April 1, 1951) as an organization which "the Communists established" as
"a new instrument for their 'peace' offensive in the United States" ; heralded by
the Daily Worker "the usual bold headlines reserved for projects in line with
the Communist objectives."
The Daily People's World of March 3, 1952, gave him as one of the sponsors
of the delegation of the National Delegates Assembly for Peace (identified by
the Daily People's World as a meeting of the American Crusade) who marched
on Washington, D. C, April 1, 1952.
According to the Daily Worker of August 20, 1947, Mr. Lovett was cochairman
of the Call for the Conference of the Committee for Protection of the Foreign
Born. He signed the organization's letter in behalf of Communist deportation
cases (Daily Worker, March 4, 1948) ; its statement in behalf of Gerhart Eisler
(Daily Worker, December 21, 1948) ; and its statement against denaturalization
(Daily Worker, August 10, 1950). ,
The American Committee for Protection of the Foreign Born was cited as
subversive and Communist by the Attorney General, June 1 and September 21,
1948, and the special committee cited it as "one of the oldest auxiliaries of the
Communist Party in the United States (reports March 29, 1944, and June 25,
1942).
Professor Lovett was one of the sponsors of the Cultural and Scientific Con-
ference for World Peace (National Council of the Arts, Sciences, and Profes-
sions).
224 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The Scientific and Cultural Conference for World Peace was cited as a Com-
munist front which "was actually a supermobilization of the inveterate wheel-
horses, and supports of the Communist Party and its auxiliary organizations."
The National Council of the Arts, Sciences, and Professions was cited as a Com-
munist-front organization ; and the World Peace Congress was cited as a Com-
munist front among the "peace" conferences.
He signed a statement in behalf of the so-called Hollywood Ten (who were
shown to have affiliation with Communist organizations and to have had Com-
munist Party registration cards) who refused to affirm or deny membership in
the Communist Party.
The Daily Worker (December 31, 1951, August 11, 1952, December 10,
1952) named him as a speaker at a rally in New York City to "smash the Smith
Act" ; as signer of a telegram prepared and dispatched by the National Commit-
tee To Win Amnesty for Smith Act Victims ; and as signatory to an appeal to the
President requesting amnesty for leaders of the Communist Party who were con-
victed under the Smith Act.
According to the Daily Worker of March 2, 1953, after addressing the ninth
annual dinner at the Jefferson School of Social Science, Professor Lovett asked
all present to "stand in tribute to two famous Marxist leaders of the United
States working class—Elizabeth Gurly Flynn and the late Mother Bloor."
The Jefferson School was cited by the Attorney General as "an adjunct of the
Communist Party (press release of December 4, 1947) ; special committee report
No. 1311 of March 29, 1944, states "at the beginning of the present year (1944)
the old Communist Party Workers School and the School for Democracy were
merged into the Jefferson School of Social Science."
Elizabeth Gurley Flynn was convicted under the Smith Act on charges of
conspiring to overthrow the United States Government by force and violence
(Daily Worker, January 22, 1953).
Mr. Sargent. Is this your hour of recess ?
The Ch airman. No ; you may proceed.
Mr. Sargent. Following this movement here, Socialist groups
sprang up at Columbia, Wesleyan, Harvard, and many other colleges.
There was a Princeton chapter set up in the year 1907. We find mat
the changes that began to prevail in the educational policies of some
of our leading groups became quite prominent around the year 1930.
Mr. Hays. When you read the list of colleges you got down to one
in Ohio. What do you mean to imply by reading those names, any-
thing more than that they had a chapter of Socialists on the campus?
Mr. Sargent. I am just citing the fact that it organized an active
chapter on the campus. It is an illustration of the spread of the
movement very promptly among what are presumably leading univer-
sities^ I imply nothing beyond that statement.
Mr. Hats. That college happens to be considered in my State as
being one of the best colleges' and not only in Ohio, but in the United
States. It is very expensive. The only reason more people don't
go to it is because probably they can't afford it. But I never heard
anything subversive and abnormal about it. I just want to be sure
that the record does not imply that.
The Chairman. From what was said, I drew no adverse interest.
Mr. Sargent. I make no statement one way or another. It is not
my intention to do so. I was discussing the rather early spread of
the movement.
In 1913 — this is interesting because it indicates the way this destruc-
tive Dewey philosophy began to take hold — in 1913 the National
Education Association issued a document known as bulletin 41, which
contained recommendations of the National Education Association
regarding the teaching of history. I think this is pertinent because
one of the things involved here has been distortion of history and
its use for propaganda purposes.
Mr. Hats. What year was this ?
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 225
Mr. Sargent. 1913. This statement of point of view in that bul-
letin as printed in our United States Bureau of Education says :
High school teachers of social studies have the test opportunity ever offered
to any social group to improve the citizenship of the land. This sweeping
claim is based upon the fact that the 1% million high school pupils is probably
the largest group of persons in the world who can be directed to a serious and
systematic effort, both through study and practice to acquire the social spirit.
It is not so important that the pupil know how the President is elected or
that he shall understand the duties of the health officer in his community. The
time formerly spent in the effort to understand the process of passing a law
under the President's veto is now to be more preferably used in the observation
of vocational resources of the community.
The committee recommends that social studies in the high schol shall include
community health, housing, homes, human rights versus property rights, im-
pulsive action of mobs, the selfish conservatism of traditions and public utilities.
Here you have the inception of the move which became definite later,
to use the schools for a political objective to modify the social order,
and therefore to become instruments of propaganda.
It began as early as 1913.
Mr. Hays. Let us discuss that a little bit. What is wrong with
that paragraph you read ?
Mr. Sargent. It is promoting a particular thing which would obvi-
ously result in legislative action.
Mr. Hats. Name it. You see, you have the advantage there. You
have in front of you everything that you read. I don't. I thought
I heard some things in there that I didn't think too much wrong if
they taught a little bit about in schools. For instance, the subject of
housing might well be something that could be profitably discussed.
Mr. Sargent. Isn't it propaganda to shift the emphasis from the
Constitution of the United States to a housing project as a substitute?
Mr. Hays. We are not talking about housing projects. We are
talking generally about housing.
For instance, whether or not bad housing and slum housing has a
deleterious effect on community life. Do you think that should not
be mentioned in school at all ?
Mr. Sargent. At the proper grade level I see no objection if the
discussion is balanced. I am talking about the shift from the Con-
stitution to the social things in substitution.
Mr. Hays. Did you ever teach school, Mr. Sargent?
Mr. Sargent. No, sir, but I have good friends who did and do. .
Mr. Hays. Do you think it would be possible to j^et an intelligent
group of high school people together and teach the Constitution with-
out getting into something besides the context of the subject matter
in front of them? You are talking about a balanced presentation.
I have had a good deal of experience with high school students and
it is pretty difficult not to get both sides of the thing presented in
the average high school class.
Mr. Sakgent. It is very hard to get both sides presented as things
operate now. I am a parent and I have children in the public schools
and I have had very serious discussions with many people on this.
Mr. Hays. I disagree with that.
Mr. Sargent. You were a teacher yourself at one time.
Mr. Hays. I have a call that we are wanted on the floor, the
minority, so could we adjourn now?
The Chairman. We will recess now and resume at 2 : 30.
(Whereupon, at 12 : 10 p. m., the hearing was recessed to reconvene
at 2 : 30 p. m. the same day.)
226 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
AFTERNOON SESSION
(The committee reconvened at 2: 30 p. m., upon the expiration of
the recess.)
TESTIMONY OF AAEON M. SAEGENT— Resumed
The Chairman. You may proceed.
Mr. Sargent. At the time of adjournment, we were at the year
1913. That is the approximate date of the organization of the Rocke-
feller Foundation which is the second of the great foundations created
by John D. Rockefeller, Sr.
The first one, as you will recall, was General Education Board,
the organization date of which was 1902.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Chairman, I have a point of order. I hesitate to
use that word, but I feel I have to.
I would like to read from the rules of procedure adopted on page
7 of the first day's hearings :
(6) Executive hearings: That is the majority of the committee believes that
the interrogation of the witness in a public hearing might unjustly injure his
reputation or the reputation of other individuals, the committee shall interro-
gate such witness in closed or executive session.
Now, I do not know what the other two members of the committee
think, but the minority is of the unanimous opinion that this witness
is going to injure the reputation of other individuals and we feel
that he should be interrogated first in executive session before all of
this is spread upon the record and has in the eyes of the public a cer-
tain validity which it might not be entitled to.
In support of this point of order, Mr. Chairman, I should like to
cite to you the principle about which I argued this morning, namely,
that by preparing a sort of blanket indictment and releasing it to the
press, that that got on the ticker and in the papers to the exclusion
of anything else about the hearings this morning.
I feel as ranking minority, and if Mrs. Pfost disagrees with me, she
can indicate it, that a witness who is making as many general and spe-
cific accusations as this witness seems to indicate he is going to make,
should be heard in executive session so that the members of the com-
mittee will have some knowledge of what is coming out and some
chance to intelligently prepare a set of questions to ask him.
Now, I will give you one example. I do not want to unduly drag
this out.
But going back to the socialistic plot about the income tax, I had not
realized until I did a little checking during the lunch hour that the
income tax was first introduced by the Honorable Cordell Hull, of
the State of Tennessee.
I do not think that you would want the inference here to remain
that he was a socialistic individual and involved in any plot to foist
socialism on the United States.
I do not think you would unless we went into it a little more fully.
Mr. Sargent. Nobody has mentioned Mr. Hull, Mr. Hays.
Mr. Hats. I have mentioned Mr. Hull. I point out to you that this
is in direct relation to your statement that this is part of the plot.
Mr. Sargent. I charged Mr. Hull with nothing. I said underlying
this thing is a radical intellectual elite having a purpose of their own
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 227
and no other people in any way connected with it came along and made
its enactment possible.
Mr. Hats. In other words, he was a tool.
Mr. Sargent. He was led by the influence of the time, as many peo-
ple were, to do a thing which turned out to be a rather effective device
tor the radical clique.
Mr. Hays. Now, just a minute, until we dispose of this motion and
then you can make all the statements you want to make.
Mr. Sargent. I would like to speak on this Executive order, because
this suggestion is unfair to me and the manner in which this thing is
being protested.
Mr. Hays. You are not a member of this committee and if a member
of this committee makes a point of order you in nowise enter into it
one way or the other.
Mr. Sargent. I am an American citizen, and I have a right to
express my views, if I wish to do so.
Mr. Hays. You are an American citizen, but if you would act a little
bit more on the principle of fair play and Americanism, we would
get along a little better.
The Chairman. So far as the Chair has been able to observe, the
witness bag not up to now said anything derogatory about anyone, or
indicated that he had in mind doing so.
If that should be the case, then I think the suggestion that you have
made would be well taken.
My interest as chairman of the committee is to permit the wh>
nesses who know that the foundations have not been conducted as
they should have been in all instances, to present their views. If they
have something, the committee staff, and the committee itself, feels
justified in taking the time of the committee.
Then I am equally interested in the foundations, or those who wish
to speak in behalf of the foundations, having the same opportunity.
As I said originally, my only purpose, so far as I am concerned, is
to get an objective study made of this subject.
Mr. Hays. If this is an objective study, to drop the name of Senator
Douglas in as a Socialist, and then let Senator Douglas come in and
deny later on that he is one, then I do not understand the meaning
of the word "objectivity."
But this has happened and it happened this morning, I do not like
it and I notice all the significant dates that this gentleman has pre-
sented have always been dates when the Democrats seem to have been
in power.
It might have started back under the Eepublicans, but we did not
get to it until 1913, then something else, and we get to that in 1933,
something like that.
I am not going to sit here and let it happen. There is more than
one way to get this. I do not want to be put in a position of walking
out of this committee, but I can. ~* *
The Chairman. He named a group that had met as a committee.
So far as I am personally concerned, not having been as observant as
other people, I did not identify Senator Douglas as being on the list.
Anyway, the list itself was not read in a relationship that cast any
reflection upon the members of the committee. At least I did not so
understand.
228 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
I do not see any reason why Mr. Sargent should not be permitted
to go ahead and make his statement. Then if there are any questions
that need to be raised at the time, or if he brings in anybody in a
derogatory way, then I think that is something that the committee
should consider at the time because we do not expect that kind of thing
in the committee.
Mr. Hays. I am willing to be just as cooperative and tolerant as the
chairman can possibly be, but I think the committee certainly has
carefully tried to live within the rules that were adopted.
Mr. Sargent. Mr. Reece, all I am proposing to do here is to read
material from books, pamphlets, and documents and to make normal
comment on the material I read.
It is just a question of written material. My basic evidence is en-
tirely written.
The Chairman. You have reached that point ?
Mr. Sargent. Yes, sir ; I am going to do that exclusively.
Furthermore, the suggestion that this has a political twist is not
correct. This is nonpartisan. I am reading a considerable amount
of material during the 1920's. In fact, I am covering in regular
fashion the significant events which occurred, when they took place
based on their apparent relevance to the matter before you here.
I will stick to that in entire good faith.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Chairman, perhaps it will be impossible for me to
match your patience, but I am going to try.
Again I am going to try to explain to you what I think is the basic
difference in opinion. That is this : that I have felt it was deliberate.
If I am wrong, I am very sorry, but up to now I have seen no reason
to change my opinion.
We have people coming in here with these prepared statements,
typewritten out, this scattergun technique, in which certain names are
dropped in, certain statements are made.
The members of the committee have no advance opportunity to
inform themselves, to find anything out about it, to find out even the
basic research to see whether it is true, and then the inference is left.
I do not think it is any inference in the case of the income tax, and
I keep referring to that, but it is such a glaring example that this is
part of an un-American subversive socialistic collectiveness, to use a
lot of terms that have been flung around with great abandon, plot;
and the newspapers or anyone listening can get that impression.
In addition, it is spread on the record of a committee of Congress,
and the inference is that it is true and then later when the people who
may have been maligned or who may have been testified about in a
way that put them in a. bad light, come in and deny it, then it is not
news anymore.
I think we ought to have some insight in what these people are
going to say before we let them come in here with a shotgun and shoot
off in all directions.
Mrs. Pfost. May I ask a question?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mrs. Pfost. Is the staff of the committee so busy that they cannot
type up for us the excerpts of the material that he is going to give us
this afternoon, or the forthcoming witnesses ?
Now, the majority of the witnesses who appear before the commit-
tee I am on, the Interior and Insular Affairs Committee, supply each
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 229
member of the committee with a mimeographed copy. And in the
instances when I have testified before another committee, I have
always furnished them with typewritten copies, or, if the committee is
large, mimeographed copies.
The Chairman. So far as typing statements, that could be done,
and copies made available, if the statement itself is available. But in
some instances, as I understood to be the case with Mr. Sargent, so
much of his material is going to be what you might call documentary,
that the statement itself that might be typed up was very sketchy and
in order to make a complete statement, the documentation had to ac-
company the statement.
So that outside of his introductory references which were typed,
the rest of it was simply what might be called notations to guide him
in the presentation of his documentary evidence, which he has now
reached and is ready to give.
Mrs. Pfost. I observed, however, after he had started in with his
particular binder from which he is working now, that he was reading
whole paragraphs out of it.
Mr. Sargent. In some cases I have read paragraphs merely for the>
reason it would place a great burden on the Library of Congress to
physically haul each one of those books over here. I have simply
given in some cases reference to the fact that such a book was written
at that particular time to build what you might call climate.
I think this is a matter of great importance to the American people
and I do not like the inference. There have been some very deroga-
tory remarks made about me, and to suggest an executive hearing is a
very unfair thing to me.
Also I should think they should be put in the open.
As long as I stick to books I think I am entitled to stick to these
facts.
I am willing to submit myself to cross-examination. I think this is
a public matter to be transacted publicly. I will adhere to your rule
in good faith.
1 am not throwing slugs at individuals. I am reading books, pam-
phlets, documents, and I am commenting on books, documents, and
pamphlets ; that is all.
Mrs. Pfost. Of course, this morning you did refer to people by
name.
Mr. Sargent. I read them out of a pamphlet.
Suppose I write some of these things out, suppose I had the time
to do all that and I presented that to someone here, does that mean
that there is to be a suppression of certain parts of the evidence which
I have here which appeared to be pertinent to this inquiry?
Mrs. Pfost. No; but certainly we would have an opportunity to go
over the material and see what type of thing you were going to testify
on if we had it in advance and it would give us an opportunity, too,
to determine whether or not it would require an executive session, in-
stead of just a scattering of shot, as Mr. Hays has said.
Mr. Sargent. I will not go into executive session except under pro-
test and under process. I am not prepared to testify in any executive
session in this matter, unless compelled to by the processes of this
committee.
I think it is improper and unfair to me, and I want to protest against
any such suggestion.
230 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hats. In what way would it be unfair to you ? It is done in
every other committee in the House where accusations are made against
individuals.
Mr. Sargent. I interpret the remarks you have made as intending to
cast reflection on me, and if such a hearing were held and the record
not put out later, it would be used against, me as having brought
improper matters before this committee.
Mr. Hats. I am not trying to be unfair to you because I do not
want to be doing what you are doing to other people. All I suggest
is that if you are so afraid of an executive session, and I believe you
have spent 5 hectic days getting this material ready, let the staff spend
another hectic day or two getting it typed up so that we can at. least
look at it before you come in here and start reading it.
Do you think that is an unfair request ?
Mr. Sargent. I think it is proper to let me proceed with this case
as it is. * ■
Mr. Hats. What you think is not going to have very much influ-
ence on the vote of the committee, I suppose.
Mr. Sargent. I am unable to do that effectively. Furthermore, I
would prefer to give testimony on this matter just as a witness does
in court. A witness does not have a cold statement with him in court.
He testifies in a normal fashion. He subjects himself to being ques-
tioned as he goes.
I am prepared to do that.
Mr. Hats. As you have probably observed already, these congres-
sional committees do not run very much like a court of law. You can
comes in, by somebody. In many cases it is a lengthy, long-drawn-out
not get away with saying in a court of law. I will submit to you that
in most courts of law there is some preexamination before a witness
comes in, by somebody. In many cases it is a lengthy, long-drawn-out
process by deposition and what-have-you.
The Chairman. I. think we should all refrain from characteriza-
tions when we are referring to other people. With my experience
it is that we all have a hard enough time.
You take the statement that was made earlier, that if we are going
to have the type of witnesses we have had, we ought to have a psychia-
trist examine them. That casts a reflection on these two witnesses.
Mr. Hats. I did not mean to cast any reflection on the other 2
witnesses as much as I did on the 1 here, to be frank about it.
I do not know whether I am awake or dreaming, to tell you the
truth. Sometimes, to use the expression of one of the reporters this
morning, this could not be happening; we must have all been asleep.
I have had a lot of nightmares, but never one like this.
The Chairman. As I recall the way the statement was made, refer-
ring to the ones that had been called, it was two very eminent scholars
who were widely recognized in the field of education.
Mr. Hats. The first witness turned out to be a witness for the
other side on cross-examination, about the NEA. He certainly dam-
aged that argument terrifically.
The second one, I think, is a kind of nice mixed-up fellow that
needs straightening out somewhat. At the moment I think he is a
little confused.
I do not mean to imply anything is badly wrong with him.
Mr. Sargent. This reading this morning was at your request.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 231
Mr. Hats. You dropped in the name of Senator Douglas and
one other name I do not remember. I merely said if you are going
to start dropping names of political people, let us put them all in
the record. The record will show that.
Mr. Sargent. You asked for all the names, however, and I gave
them.
Mr. Hats. That is right, because you put in the name of Senator
Douglas and I personally believe you did it deliberately with malice
aforethought.
Another thing you did, you brought in the name of Sister Mary
Margaret, and then you pause for emphasis and put in the name of
McCarran.
I submit to you that ordinarily people in the orders do not use
the last name and I wonder if it is in the flyleaf of the book.
Mr. Sargent. It is. I gave you the information about the author
and the book.
Previously you had been questioning authority for the statements I
was making. I want to make it clear that I was relying on a high-
type of research book in the statement I made.
Mr. Hats. Maybe we ought to subpena the officials of the Catholic
University and find out how high-type this is.
I happen to know something about the background of the author
of that book, how long it took her to get a degree, and so forth, and
even that there was a little pressure used or she would not have it yet. 1
Mr. Sargent. May I go on? ""* —
The Chairman. I question seriously whether references of that
type ought to be thrown out in the committee.
Mr. Hays. If we are going to throw them out we ought to throw
them all out.
I made a point of order. The rules are here. Are we going to
abide by them?
The Chairman. I am interested in the decorum of the committee as
a whole. I do not know this Sister.
Mr. Hats. I do not know her, either, but I have done a little check-
ing. You see, that is where you are at a disadvantage. You have
to use your lunch hour to try to find out what kind of documents
these are.
Mr. Sargent. I will bring the book for you tomorrow morning.
Mr. Hays. The book itself does not mean anything. It is but one
person's opinion. You are buttressing your opinion with somebody
else's opinion.
Mr. Sargent. It is based on original documentary material. I
checked some material at the Hoover Institute on War, Peace, and
Kevolution at Stanford University.
It is considered to be the best document of its kind in existence.
I think any well-grounded scholar will tell you the same thing. The
book is eminently reliable.
Mr. Hays. I want to vote right now whether we abide by rule 1, or
whether we do not. I am going to insist we have a vote. We have a
right to have one.
1 Statement of rector of the Catholic University of America, regarding this comment
appears at p. 1179, pt. 2.
1
232 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
It says here :
If a majority of the committee believes —
and I do not know how we are going to find out how the rest of
them will believe unless we put the question.
The Chairman. There have been no names brought in here in a
derogatory way so far as the chairman can see. It happens that 1
of the other 2 majority members has been engaged in drafting the
Social Security Act at this time — the amendments to it.
The other is a chairman of another important committee.
Mr. Hats. That is interesting. They gave their proxies to you to
do their thinking for them. It says:
If the majority of the committee believes.
I do not see how we are going to get the basis for that unless you
are going to do their thinking for them or have them here to say
what they think ; 1 of the 2.
I would not even object to this unusual procedure, Mr. Chairman,
but we have had it before, and when we want to cross-examine these
people we cannot cross-examine them because tomorrow we have
subo**naed so and so and the next day we have so and so.
I know what is going to happen. When the great crusade bogs'
down completely, we will all go home and that will be the end of the
hearings and the other side will not be heard.
The Chairman. Mr. Sargent says that he will make himself sub-
ject to cross-examination after his whole testimony is completed.
Mr. Sargent. I can come back here next Monday or Tuesday for
that purpose and the transcript can be written and it can be studied
fully.
Mr. Hats. How long have you been here now under subpena?
Mr. Sargent. I arrived in town Wednesday morning, last Wednes-
day.
Mr. Hats. The committee has been responsible for your expenses,
I suppose, ever since then?
Mr. Sargent. I don't know what the rule is on that. I felt a need
for an adequate preparation.
Mr. Hats. In other words, the taxpayers of the United States are
paying for you to come from California to Washington and getting
these documents together.
Did you have any help from our staff?
Mr. Sargent. Yes, I did.
Mr. Hats. Now, the truth begins to come out. The staff helped you
out, too?
Mr. Sargent. Yes, that is right.
Mr. Hats. You know, that is a kind of funny thing. I cannot
even get one staff member to help me because there is not any minority
staff, but they help the witnesses that they go out and dig up and bring
in who present the same peculiar type of thinking apparently that
they do.
Mr. Sargent. May I testify, please?
Mr. Hats. I do not know. We have not decided yet.
Mr. Sargent. I am here to testify. I would like to do it, Mr. Hays,
and to give you the truth based upon documents, books, and pam-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 233
phlets, and to read from them accurately and comment normally on
the material I read. That is why I am here.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Chairman, there is a principle involved. I would
like to go along with you. I like you and all that.
The Chairman. The Chair overrules the point of order.
Mr. Hays. All right. I move that under the rules the witness be
dispensed with until such time as the committee can decide whether
or not they want to subpena him in executive session.
Mrs. Pfost. I second the motion.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Chairman, may I bring out one material fact?
Mr. Sargent, to what extent has the staff of the committee assisted
you ? Personally I have had about 10 minutes conversation with you.
I have seen none of your material.
Mr. Sargent. Simply in getting various things for me which I de-
sired, and just in the way of general help, not a great deal of specific
help. I brought quite a quantity of stuff with me and I had various
requirements. I, of course, had to familiarize myself with your prior
proceedings to see what was desired.
Mr. Wormser. I supplied you with no material except what you
requested specifically for us to get ?
Mr. Sargent. That is right, I went to the Library of Congress and
I ran down material on things which I lacked. I did my own research
here. It has been entirely for your benefit.
I have come here at personal financial sacrifice, as far as that goes.
Mr. Wormser. The implication that the staff has in any way pre-
pared your testimony is not correct ?
Mr. Sargent. On the contrary, I prepared it myself and it is my
own views.
Mr. Hays. I was trying to find out the answer to that question,
whether they did, or not.
The Chairman. The answer is that they did not.
Mr. Hays. All right, that is what I wanted to know, but they did
give him clerical help. Up to now I have asked for a transcript of
the facts from them and I have not been able to get them.
The Chairman. I vote "no," and I also vote the proxy's "no."
Mr. Hays. I have one more question to ask.
Are you going to abide by the rules ?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Hays. If the minority is not here, you cannot have a hearing ?
The Chairman. That is right, without any majority of the com-
mittee.
Mr. Hays. We will be back when we get a majority of the commit-
tee, but I want to hear the other two vote, themselves.
The Chairman. Under the circumstances the committee stands ad-
journed until the morning at 10 o'clock.
The committee tomorrow will meet in the caucus room in the Old
House Office Building.
(Thereupon, at 3 : 20 p. m., the subcommittee recessed, to reconvene
at 10 a. m. Tuesday, May 25, 1954, in the caucus room, Old House
Office Building.)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
TUESDAY, MAY 25, 1954
House of Representatives,
Special Committee To Investigate
Tax-Exempt Foundations,
Washington, D. 0.
The special committee met at 10:28 a. m., pursuant to recess, in
room 1301, New House Office Building, Hon. Carroll Reece (chairman
of the special committee) presiding.
Present: Eepresentatives Reece, Wolcott, Hays, Goodwin, and
Pfost.
Also present : Rene A. Wormser, general counsel ; Arnold T. Koch,
associate counsel ; Norman Dodd, research director ; Kathryn Casey,
legal analyst.
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
The Chairman would like to make a statement. In view of the fact
that one of the members of the committee referred to the other side,
and in other expressions inferred that the majority of the committee
or its counsel or staff had taken a side, I was trying to prove a case,
neither the majority members of the committee nor its counsel or staff
have a side in this inquiry, as the chairman has heretofore said. As
a convenience to the foundations, an initial report was submitted out-
lining the main lines of major criticisms of foundations which a pre-
liminary study by the staff had shown were sufficiently supported by
evidence to warrant considering carefully.
We are now in the first stage of assessing these criticisms by hearing
some of the supporting evidence. We shall later hear evidence sup-
plied bythe foundations themselves, defending against these critic-
isms. We shall not prejudge. We shall not try to prove a case.
We are here to learn what the truth may be.
Needless to say, criticism cannot be expected to come from the
foundations themselves. It must come, if at all, chiefly from persons
not directly connected with foundation matters. We shall give
foundation representatives respectful attention. We do not see why
persons who have criticism to offer are not entitled to the same cour-
teous treatment. Failure to give them such courtesy and inclination
to condemn them for daring to criticize frankly and even seyerly
would seem to me to deny such witnesses the privileges of citizens
and to fail to give them the consideration to which we believe they
are entitled from members of the committee.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Chairman, in reply to your prepared statement, I
will say off the cuff that I did not infer that there was another side.
I stated frankly that there was another side. Anybody who wants
to read your statement in the Congressional Record or in volume 1
235
236 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
of this transcript will very definitely get the impression that you were
on that side. Then if they will read Mr. Dodd's statement, they will
see that after 6 months of research, that he got on your side, too.
If anybody has the stomach to read that statement of yours clear
through, and then get up here and say there is not a side, and there
has not been a very definite and, damaging attack made on foundations,
they better reread it.
The Chairman. Mr. Sargent had not completed his statement when
we adjourned
Mr. Hays. I have a point of order before he starts.
The Chairman. At the time of our recess yesterday. The question,
I think, arises whether he should be permitted, as he has expressed
a desire, to complete his statement and then make himself available
for criticism or for questioning when he has concluded — he agreeing;
to make himself available for that purpose.
The chairman's interest is in orderly procedure and in moving
forward. We spent the better part of the day yesterday and the wit-
ness was able to make very slight progress on his statement, and I
am wondering what the wishes of the committee with reference to
. procedure might be.
Mr. Hats. I have a point of order right now.
The Chairman. May I hear it ?
Mr. Hays. You sure may. I am quoting clause 25, rule 11, para-
graph (f ) of the Rules of the House of Representatives, very briefly :
Each committee shall so far as practicable require all witnesses appearing
before it to file in advance written statements of their proposed testimony, and
to limit their oral presentation to brief summaries of their argument. The staff
of each committee shall prepare digests of such statements for the use of com-
mittee members.
I make a point of order that the witness has not complied with this
rule, that it has been practicable for him to do so inasmuch as the staff
typed up his statement for him, or at least assisted him in it, and
there is no reason why this rule should not be complied with.
The Chairman. A preliminary statement was prepared yesterday
for the members of the committee, and likewise for the press. It was-
not comprehensive. The Chair had understood that the witness ex-
pected to confine, after his opening analysis of his testimony, largely
to documentation, and in view of that fact, the Chair indicated to the
witness that method of procedure would be satisfactory, if he made
himself available for questioning after the transcript was available
to the members of the committee.
Mr. Wolcott. Mr. Chairman, the situation seems to turn on whether
it is practicable or not. Those of us who have any responsibility in
presenting this testimony realize that it might not be practicable under
the circumstances for the witness to prepare a statement, nor for the
staff to digest it. The question turns on whether it is practical or
not. I think we would get more information that we are seeking with-
out a prepared statement than we would in a prepared statement.
I am very much interested in the subject this witness is discussing.
I might say I have my own views on Fabian socialism, or whatever
you might call it. I think the real danger to the American system of
government is not communism. The real danger to the American sys-
tem of government is Fabian socialism. If any of these foundations-
are engaging in practices paralleling the growth of Fabian socialism
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 237
in the British Empire, which resulted in the socialization of the British
Empire to the prejudice of their type of democracy, then I think it
is the duty of Congress, surely the members of this committee, to find
out what is happening.
I understand that this witness has qualified himself as more or less
expert on this matter. That is the thing that we are seeking, informa-
tion which he has.
As far as anything else is concerned, I would let the chips fall
where they may. We have to make a record here and find out what is;
going on. The Fabian Socialists work quietly through infiltration.
The Communists are out waving their red flags and yelling and
whooping and hollering and picketing. We can see that. We can-
not see Fabian socialism. We have to dig for .it. We are in the
process now, as I understand it, of digging for it,
Mr. Hays. Yes, sir; we were digging back in 1892.
Mr. Wolcott. That does not make any difference. The Fabiai>
Socialist movement in Great Britain went back to the turn of the
century. Great names were mentioned. George Bernard Shaw was;
one of the greatest of Fabians in Great Britain. He has the respect
of millions of people. I am sure that the founders of these founda-
tions would turn over several times in their graves if they felt that
their money was being used for the destruction of the American sys-
tem of government. Whether it is destroyed by socialism or com-
munism is not the point. I think we owe them an obligation, as well
as ourselves and the people whom we represent, to find out whether
there is any danger to the American system, and where it lies. That
is the reason I am on this committee. I would not be on the com-
mittee if I was not interested in that subject.
I have several other committees that take up most of my time. I
cannot stand here — I have not the time — to bicker about the way in
which we develop the matter. We have got to do a job and it has got
to be done. It has got to be done pretty quickly. Otherwise, we are
running the same course, a parallel course, to Fabian socialism which
destroyed Great Britain. I do not like it, frankly. I do not like
what I see on the horizon. The sun is not coming up. It is a very
cloudy day in America because of Fabian socialism.
Let us bring it out here and find out what is going on.
Mr. Hays. There are a lot of differences of opinion.
Mr. Wolcott. I know it. I have been charged repeatedly before
the Banking and Currency Committee of years gone by of seeing-
ghosts under the table. Sometimes those ghosts come out and kick
you in the shins. We want to avoid that if we can.
Mr. Goodwin. Mr. Chairman, I am temporarily on leave from
another committee, and a most important executive session. I am not
interested at the moment in colloquy between members of the com-
mittee. I understand you have a witness ready to go forward. I
understand you have a point of order before you. Is there any reason,
why that cannot be concluded.
The Chairman. The point of order is over. The Chair sees no
practical justification for upholding the point of order, and he over-
rules the point of order.
Mr. Hays. The Chair would not uphold any point of order that
he did not agree with, no matter what the rule said. That has become;
pretty obvious in these hearings.
49720— 54 — pt. 1 16
238 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The Chairman. Now-
Mr. Hays. Don't start interrupting me, or you better bring in the
sergeant at arms, because I am going to be heard just the same as; you
are. You may be afraid of Fabian socialism, but I am afraid of Ke-
publican dictatorship. Let us get it out in the open. You brought
m the shock troops here, so let us fight it out.
Mr. Goodwin. I understood we were going to hear the witness.
Mr. Hats. We are going to have more points of order.
The second point of order is that the committee is in violation of the
rules of the House and the Keorganization Act, inasmuch as the minor-
ity of the committee has been deprived of one single staff member.
The Chairman. The Chair overrules the point of order.
Mr. Hats. I will, say the Chair did not keep his word. When I
helped the Chair get his $65,000, so you would not look stupid when
they were going to shut you off, you promised me a staff member.
Did you or did you not?
The Chairman. No one has individually a member of the staff.
Mr. Hays. You have the whole staff.
The Chairman. There is a member of the staff that was employed
on the recommendation of the gentleman from Ohio.
Mr. Hays. As a stenographer.
The Chairman. No ; not as a stenographer.
Mr. Hats. That is what she does.
The Chairman. As an analyst or researcher, I am not sure what
her title is. That is what our understanding is.
Mr. Hats. I have a motion to make. I move that we hear this
witness in executive session in order to prevent further name dropping
and any further hurting of people who have no place in this hearing.
Mrs. Pfost. I second it.
Mr. Wqwjott. As a substitute for that, Mr. Chairman, I move that
the witness be allowed to proceed with his statement without inter-
ruption.
Mr. Hats. You can pass all those motions you want, but I will
interrupt whenever I feel like it. How do you like that? So you
might as well save your breath, Jesse.
Mr. Wolcott. I should like to.
Mr. Hays. You run the Banking and Currency Committee without
proxies, but in this committee you run it with proxies. You make the
rules as you go along for the majority, and I will make the rules for
myself as I go along, and if this fellow does not want to bring in a
statement, I will interrupt him whenever I feel like it. He better get
a bigger mouth than that.
Mr. Wolcott. As I understand it, this committee made the rules,
and we are proceeding under the rules adopted by this committee.
Mr. Hats. You know there is no such rule on this committee. When
did we make this rule?
Mr. Wolcott. I understand we can vote by proxy. If we do not,
I shall make a motion that we do vote by proxy. I understood that
I had given the chairman a proxy and there had been no objection to it.
Mr. Hays. I just want the record to show that you rule one way in
the committee of which you are chairman and another way here.
Mr. Wolcott. You can make that record if you want to. The Bank-
ing and Currency Committee of 29 members have asserted themselves
on a good many occasions, and we get along very nicely in that com-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 239
mittee and with the rules of the House. Until the Banking and Cur-
rency Committee changes the rules, we will abide by the rules which
have been adopted, if any have been adopted. I do not remember.that
any have been adopted. We operate under the rules of the House.
Does anybody want to support a substitute motion ? I move a sub-
stitute motion to the motion made by the gentleman from Ohio that
the witness be allowed to proceed with his statement without interrup-
tion, and at the conclusion of his statement that he subject himself to
questioning.
Mr. Goodwin. Second.
Mr. Hays. I have something to say on that motion. It might take
quite a little while. In the first place, what this motion entails is
ttiat this fellow can come in here and do what he did yesterday.
Mr. Goodwin. Who is "the fellow," may I inquire?
Mr. Hays. Eight down here.
Mr. Goodwin. You mean the witness?
Mr. Hays. I will call him anything I like. We understand each
other.
Mr. Goodwin. Mr. Chairman, I have something else to do
besides
Mr. Hays. Go ahead. Whenever you go, the minority will go, and
that will be the end of the hearing. If you can just stay here and
be patient, I have a right to be heard on the substitute and I am
going to be heard on the substitute.
The Chairman. Reasonably.
Mr. Hays. I will decide what is reasonable. In other words, you
know the trouble around here—and this is pertinent, too — that there
have been too many committees in which the minority has allowed
itself to be gaffled into submission and silence. I am going to be the
kind of minority that does not go so easy for that gaffle stuff.
Mr. Wolcott. You have been in the minority for 20 years.
Mr. Hays. You know the funny part of it is that most of you fel-
lows are still in the minority, because you don't seem to have the
responsibility to run this Congress. That is why the great crusade
is in reverse.
Mr. Wolcott. If the minority will allow us to assume our responsi-
bility, we will get along.
Mr. Hays. The minority on this committee is not going to sit here
silent and have peoples' characters assassinated at will by dropping
their names in as Senator Douglas' name was dropped in yesterday,
deliberately, because it was 1 of only 2 names the witness mentioned
out of a whole series of names. He had his name underscored in the
pamphlet that he was reading from. He had the name "Paul Doug-
las" underscored.
The Chairman. But the others were being put in the record.
' Mr. Hays. At my insistence, let the record show.
The Chairman. No, they were being put in the record.
Mr. Hays. No, they were not being put in the record. The only
thing that was going into the record was what this gentleman was
going to say. I said if you are going to read — the record is here, and
if you want to start reading from the record, I will read from the
record.
Mr. Wolcott. I ask for the question.
Mr. Hays. I am still talking.
240 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Wolcott. I ask for the question.
Mr. Hats. Go ahead and ask. I say the gentleman is coming in
with a shotgun and shooting in all directions, and the committee does
not want to give protection to the people whose characters he is going
to assassinate. That is what the substitute motion does. I think it
is bad and in violation of the rules of the House. It is in violation
of the rules of orderly committee procedure which you seem to be so*
concerned with. I just want the record to show that if the majority
wants to let people like this come in and do that, that is up to them.
The Chairman. All in favor say "Aye."
Mr. Wolcott. Aye.
Mr. Goodwin. Aye.
The Chairman. Opposed, "No."
Mr. Hays. No.
Mrs. Pfost. No.
The Chairman. Aye. Three have voted in the affirmative and
two in the negative. The substitute motion is carried.
Mrs. Pfost. Mr. Chairman, I have a motion. I move that the-
committee subpena Dean Rusk, president of the Carnegie Foundation,,
and hear him just as soon as possible.
Mr. Hats. Would you like to make that more specific and say "as
soon as we finish with this witness" ?
Mrs. Pfost. Yes. I will add that, "as soon as we finish with this;
witness."
Mr. Hats. I will second that motion.
The Chairman. The committee has had in mind hearing Dean
Rusk. I think the chairman's own view is that there ought to be an
orderliness about the procedure. No doubt Dean Rusk
Mr. Hays. What is disorderly about subpenaing him next ?
The Chairman. So far as the chairman is concerned, he certainly
has no personal objection to his appearing at any time.
Mr. Hays. I am anxious to ask him 1 question, just 1, I promise
you, and if he answers it as I think he will, I may ask a second to-
just complete an identity.
The Chairman. Who is that?
Mr. Hays. Mr. Rusk. I will give you a promise that is all I want
to ask him. But if he answers the ouestion as I believe he will, it
may change the whole course of these hearings, and we may find that
we have to back up and make a fresh start.
Mr. Wolcott. May I ask the chairman if it is the intention of the-
staff to have Dean Rusk before the committee ?
The Chairman. That is the intention ; yes.
Mrs. Pfost. How much later on, Mr. Chairman ?
Mr. Koch. As soon as all of the so-called criticisms are before the
committee so that Dean Rusk and anybody else can answer all of thenu
Mr. Hats. Is there any reason why he can't come in and answer
one question that will take perhaps 5 minutes ?
Mr. Koch. I would suggest that maybe we could stipulate that
you send him the question and let it be read into the record.
Mr. Hats. No; I want him to appear under oath. He has to be:
under oath or else the answer is no good.
Mr. Koch. Couldn't he put it in an affidavit?
Mr. Hays. No.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 241
Mr. Koch. The point is that if he has to come back later to answer
^ lot of other questions as a matter of convenience for him— -maybe I
should not be arguing his convenience— but later on he may want
to be on for a whole day.
Mr. Hats. It only takes an hour for him to come down — where is
Le, in New York?
The Chairman. The plan of the procedure, may I say for the mem-
bers of the committee who have not all had an opportunity to be here
all the time, was to present what was generally termed a line of criti-
cism against the foundations. Then the foundations and those who
might be interested in speaking on their behalf would have full knowl-
edge of everything that was said and be able to make a complete
■coverage, or as complete as they desire to do so. That was the pro-
cedure as I indicated in my statement a little earlier, that we in-
tended to follow. The Chair has no deep feeling about it one way or
another. I shall consult the attitude of the other members of the
■committee.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Chairman, let me say that you have expressed a great
deal of concern both here in public and in private about the expediting
■of these hearings. I told you that if the minority could have a feeling
that any slight wish that it might have might be respected that you
might find it easier to get along with the minority.
Now, we are only asking in the form of a motion that Mr. Rusk be
brought in here for 5 minutes. We will even give you a time limit on
him.
The Chairman. I would hardly be inclined to feel that we bring
him in under limited time.
Mr. Wolcott. I have a good many questions to ask all of these
foundations when they come in.
Mr. Hats. I have no objection to bringing him back later, Mr. Wol-
cott, but there is a very pertinent thing that ought to be brought out at
this point, and I want him here to ask him. It has a great deal of
bearing, as you will see. I can' say what it is at the moment.
Mr. Wolcott. How can we vote intelligently
The Chairman. If the witness is to be called, it would not be the
chairman's thinking that he ought to be called subject to limitations.
Mr. Hats. I don't care whether you do or not. I merely offered
that to your convenience to show you that we were not trying to dilly-
dally or delay by having him here.
Mr. Wolcott. Question.
The Chairman. The Chair will either put the question or he will
say that Dean Husk will be summoned to appear after we have con-
cluded with Mr. Sargent's testimony.
Mr. Hats. That is satisfactory.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Chairman, may I respectfully suggest that while
•counsel has not the slightest objection to calling Dean Rusk for this
purpose, we hope it will not be a precedent so that the procedure we
planned will be disturbed.
The Chairman. It is not so intended. It is an exception.
Mr. Hats. Let me say to you this, Mr. Wormser, that we are using
the name Dean Rusk. I am not acquainted with the gentleman at all.
I never met him that I know of. But I believe he is the president of
the Carnegie Foundation.
Mr. Wormser. Rockefeller.
242 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hats. That is the man I want
Mr. Wormser. We intended to call him. I have had conversations
with Dean Rusk.
The Chairman. That was so understood, and the chairman will issue
a subpena to that effect.
Mr. Wormser. Excuse me, Mr. Chairman, one more thing. There
was some difficulty in arranging for two professors to appear next
Tuesday, Professor Rau of Yale, and Professor Colgrove, formerly
of Northwestern. It is rather difficult to get these men who are on
active duty. Could I put them on Tuesday ?
The Chairman. Dean Rusk will not consume all day Tuesday, and
I would suggest that they be available when Dean Rusk completes his
testimony.
Mr. Wormser. All right.
(Discussion off the record.)
The Chairman. This is a friendly discussion here.
You may proceed, Mr. Sargent.
TESTIMONY OF AAEON M. SARGENT, ATTORNEY,
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF.— Resumed
Mr. Sargent. During the course of our discussions yesterday, there
was reference to an original source book upon which I relied in giving
certain testimony regarding the early history of the British' Fabian
movement.
Mr. Hays. I have a question right there, and that is this : On these
source books and these various things you are going to read into the
record, will there be many more names read into the record ?
Mr. Sargent. I will read the title of the book, I will read the author
of the book, I will read literally and exactly the order in which ma-
terial appears, any panel of names starting with the first name and
going to the last name, and making no selection of my own in between
the first and the last. I do not intend to create the inference you sug-
gested yesterday, I assure you, sir. That will not happen again.
Mr. Hats. All right.
Mr. Sargent. I am referring to this book now because there was
some comment
Mr. Hats. I have another question right there.
Mr. Sargent. I understood I was not going to be interrupted.
Mr. Hats. You misunderstood then. You did not hear what I said.
You said you didn't intend to create the inference that was created
yesterday. As I read the press this morning, I read in one of the
papers, a New York paper, that some reporter asked you if Paul
Douglas which you mentioned, and you mentioned only one other
name at that point in the testimony
Mr. Sargent. Isadore Lubin was the other name.
Mr. Hats. If that were the Senator from Illinois, and the paper
quoted you as saying that you presumed that it was; is that correct?
Mr. Sargent. I thought it was, yes, because of Paul Douglas' subse-
Juent appearances at various meetings of the League for Industrial
>emocracy, as shown by its publications.
Mr. Hats. Then you did intend deliberately to put Paul Douglas'
name in the record.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 243
Mr. Sargent. I had no particular intend to ascribe anything to him
aside from showing the fact that he was there. I underscored those
two names because
Mr. Hays. That is exactly what
Mr. Sargent. May I finish my answer, please ? I underscored those
two names because those names were known to me.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Sargent, apparently the minority is going to be
overruled quite a bit, but the minority is going to insist that we try
to conduct this as nearly as possible in conformity with other con-
gressional hearings. When any member of this committee — majority
or minority — asks you a question, that doesn't give you an automatic
license to make a speech. You could have either answered that ques-
tion "yes" or "no." That is all I want. If you are so anxious to
conserve time, perhaps if you would just be a little more succinct in
your answers to the questions I ask you, we could conserve some time
that way.
I ask you, did you deliberately intend to put the name of Paul
Douglas in the record ?
Mr. Sargent. No, not in the sense in which you ask the question.
Mr. Hays. You are interpreting the sense I ask the question?
Mr. Sargent. No. I would like to explain my answer. May I do
so?
Mr. Hays. Did you have his name underscored in the pamphlet?
Mr. Sargent. Yes, along with other names.
Mr. Hays. All right, that is enough.
The Chairman. You may proceed.
Mr. Sargent. I did not read the remaining names because they were
not particularly known to me especially, and I was trying to conserve
the time of the committee. There was reference to this book on Fabian-
ism. I have it before me. It was part of my luggage I brought from
California with me. The exact title of the book — I am reading on the
cover itself now — is, Fabianism in the Political Life of Britain, 1919-
81. The author's name given below is McCarran. At the bottom
the publisher's name, Heritage Foundation.
The next item on the flyleaf reads as follows :
Fabianism in the Political Life of Britain — —
Mr, Hays. Just to get the record straight, would you be able to
mention the names of any other books published by this Heritage
Foundation?
Mr. Sargent. Clarence Manion's book, The Key to Peace, has been
Eublished by them and distributed widely through the American
egion.
Mr. Hays. He is the fellow that Eisenhower fired?
Mr. Sargent. He did not fire him. Are you attacking Manion along
with the rest of them ?
Mr. Hays. No, I wanted to know if it is the same company that
published his book.
Mr. Sargent. They do, and I think the American Legion and many
Members of Congress endorse that as a very valuable contribution to
the subject.
The flyleaf is entitled, "Fabianism in the Political Life of Britain,
1919-31."
244 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
On the next page I find the following :
This dissertation was conducted under the direction of Prof. John T. Parrell,
as major professor, and was approved by Prof. Friedrich Engle-Janosi, and Rev.
Wilfred Parsons, S. J., as readers.
The title page itself, and I am reading in full, is the following :
Fabianism in the Political Life of Britain, 191&-31.
A Dissertation.
Submitted to the
Mr. Hays. Mr. Sargent, may I interrupt you again %
Mr. Sargent. Yes.
Mr. Hats. I would like to be a little patient with you and let you
read as much as you like. This committee also has some problems and
one of them is the lack of time to do everything that we would like
to get done. If you are going to spend your time reading flyleaves
•and title pages, is there any objection — and I will assure you there
will be none — if we include the title page and flyleaf in the record ?
You have been 5 minutes reading that and what does it mean after
you have read it ?
Mr. Sargent. I am very anxious to save time. There was reference
to the thing. I want to say this, that this shows on its face it is a dis-
sertation submitted to the faculty of the Graduate School of Arts and
Sciences of the Catholic University of America in partial fulfillment
of the requirements of the degree of doctor of philosophy, and the
author's name appearing in the book is Sister M. Margaret Patricia
McCarran, Ph. I)., of the Sisters of the Holy Names, second edition.
As some evidence of the thoroughness of the work, I would refer to
the bibliography in the back. It cites 85 authors and material, and
in addition it refers to Fabian treatises and pamphlets, tracts, arti-
cles, a wealth of source material.
It is my opinion and of many others who study these subjects that
it is the outstanding book of its kind. I have the book and would
like to leave it with the clerk for the convenience of any member of
the committee to examine.
The Chairman. Filed with the committee, but not for printing.
Mr. Sargent. Not for printing, hardly, no.
Mr. Hays. Because we don't have a copy of what you are going to
say, it is very difficult to keep all these straight. Would you repeat
the title of that once more, please ?
Mr. Sargent. You mean the title page ? Fabianism in the Politi-
cal Life of Britain, 1919-31. The first chapter is the introduction
Mr. Hays. Would you want to give us a little digest of what this is
all about?
Mr. Sargent. What, the book?
Mr. Hays. Can you give us a thumbnail sketch of what its con-
clusions ai^, or anything?
Mr. Sargent. The book itself
Mr. Hays. Or is it just a running history of the movement?
Mr. Sargent. First of all the introduction, the valuable part for
present purposes, the introduction itself, which gives the early history
of the development of the movement there in Great Britain commenc-
ing in the 1880's and running down to the 1900's. It is necessary for
the author to give that as background before the commencement of
her study. She picks up the period from 1919 to 1931, explaining the
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 245
way in which the Fabian Party made its infiltration of Great Britain
effective, and dominated Government policy and put over its system.
That is what the book is about.
Mrs. Pfost. In Great Britain?
Mr. Sargent. Great Britain; yes. It is significant because it is my
judgment a parallel of certain efforts that are being made in this
country. I will read you the various titles if you want the scope of it.
Mr. Hays. No ; I was trying to get a general idea of what is in it.
Mr. Sargent. The period under critical study is 1919 to 1931, but
the background material is the one to which I referred, namely, the
inception of the Fabian Party and the persons identified with it.
Mr. Hays. I understood you to say that in your opinion there is
a parallel between that movement in England and some similar move-
ment here.
Mr. Sargent. Yes, there is a tie — there is apparently a tie-in.
Mr. Hays. Do you think there is any movement in the United
States, even a small one, which might be roughly compared to the
Nazi- Socialist movement in Germany?
Mr. Sargent. I wouldn't compare them as such. No, I think there
is a radical intellectual elite that is attempting to subvert and guide
the policies in our country and the foundations are aiding them
financially.
Mr. Hays. "We sort of got off the trail there, didn't we? I am
asking if there is any group which would be diametrically opposite to
that, who would like to put the country in some sort of dictatorship
of wealth, we will say, and sort of orient all thinking into their way
of thinking, such as the fact that big wealth should be allowed to
be predatory, it should not have any income tax, and that the oil deple-
tion allowance ought to go up from 27y 2 percent, I have heard the
figure to 75 percent, and things like that. Do you think there is any
concerted group that is pushing that kind of philosophy ?
Mr. Sargent. It is not that kind of picture. It is a different picture,
but it is subversive. I will answer that fully when I complete my
evidence here. The evidence I have here bears on that question.
Mr. Hays. When you get through your testimony, I will be glad
to ask you again.
Mr. Sargent. I will be glad to have you make a note of it and
remind me.
My position in this matter, first of all, I think I should state clearly
as an aid to free consideration of my evidence. The position I take is
that we have here involved a right of freedom of inquiry. That in-
cludes the right to make an academically free inquiry into the success
and failures of the past 50 years, to determine our future course of
action wdth due regard to the results of such an analysis competently
made. We have the right to consider and to give proper weight to
such views as expressed along that line by a scholar such as Clarence
Manion in his book, and others. In short, that particular point of
view is entitled to equal consideration and equal publicity with the
views of those who may happen to disagree with this particular wing,
if you want to call it that.
Mr. Hays. Let me ask you a question right there. I am inclined to
agree with that as I understood you reading it. You say that you
believe that everyone should have a right to freedom of academic in-
quiry — is that the way you stated it — and that the views of both
246 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
sides should have an equality of presentation, or is that generally
what you said ?
Mr. Sargent. Yes, I am standing here particularly for the right
of what I call critical study and analysis and the publication of the
results of that critical study and analysis, and the right to have
foundation support in making it.
Mr. Hays. That leads me right up to what I want to ask you. You
say, or you are implying — I think you are saying, and I don't want to
put words in your mouth — that the foundations have not been sup-
porting your point of view.
Mr. Sargent. Definitely.
Mr. Hays. You think the Congress ought to make a law and say,
"Look, you foundations have to support Mr. Sargent's point of view,"
is that right?
Mr. Sargent. No, I don't say anything like that. I say if they
don't do that, they become propagandists for one side and cease to
be educational, and should forfeit their exemption privilege.
Mr. Hays. You don't think all foundations are on this side ?
Mr. Sargent. I think you will find an amazing picture if you in-
quire into it.
Mr. Hays. I have done a little inquiring into it. I am not a self-
appointed expert on the subject. But there are some foundations
which do give the other side. What about the Heritage Foundation?
Mr. Sargent. Do you know the Heritage Foundation applied to
the Ford Foundation for a grant to distribute Manion's The Key to
Peace, and could not get the money ? Do you know that ?
Mr. Hays. I don't know that, but I would say that a lot of people
would say that is using intelligent judgment on the part of the Ford
Foundation.
Mr. Sargent. That is a fact.
The Chairman. For the record the chairman might state that the
Heritage Foundation is not a foundation in the tax-exempt sense
of the word.
Mr. Sargent. That is correct.
Mr. Hays. I am glad to have that in the record. I didn't know
that
Mr. Sargent. No ; it is a business corporation.
Mr. Hays. As I say, I am not an expert.
Mr. Sargent. But the Ford Foundation was unwilling to appro-
priate money to aid the distribution of a work of academic merit,
Clarence Manion's book, here.
Mr. Hays. You know it is a funny thing, but I have a copy of that
book on my desk and I have read it. And there are certain things in
it which I think are an interesting point of view. I don't agree with
it 100 percent. I certainly would not criticize any foundation be-
cause they didn't see fit to distribute it, by and large. As a matter of
fact, I think they would have wasted a lot of money if they had,
because I don't think too many people would have read it if you made
a present of it. It is pretty heavy going. You send 1,000 copies to
the first 1,000 names you pick at random out of the telephone book in
Washington and you won't find many people reading it.
Mr. Sargent. I have some tangible evidence to submit on that point
regarding the impact of this thing on the publishing business which
I will give you in due course.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 247
Mr. Hats. Let me get back to one more question we have not
cleared up. You said you were some official in the foundation; is
that right?
Mr. Sargent. I am an officer in a foundation which has been incor-
porated by myself. I left the articles here, yes. It was organized
last August 1953. I am the president of it. It is merely a corpora-
tion with no funds and no activities yet.
Mr. Hays. What is the foundation supposed to do? What is
its purpose ?
Mr. Sargent. Its purpose is to study revolutionary movements,
propaganda, and techniques, and to endeavor to prepare educational
materials for the more effective combating of the advance of socialism
and communism.
, Mr. Hays. What has prevented you from going ahead and doing
that?
Mr. Sargent. One thing that has prevented it is that I have been
surveying the ground to find sources of money which are acceptable.
We do not want to accept money under conditions involving financial
censorship or control of our operations. We want to be in a position
to proceed objectively without being required to stop following some-
thing significant because somebody's toes are being stepped on. Under
those conditions we cannot use large foundation money, because we
believe the result of this study will be critical to their operations.
Therefore, we must find other patriotic money.
Mr. Hays. In other words, you know what you are going to find
out before you start ?
Mr. Sargent. No, we don't. We have some idea from what we
found. The evidence I am going to give you, if permitted, will show
precisely why I think that is the exercise of good judgment.
Mr. Hays. You are going to be permitted. I can stay here all
summer if necessary.
Mr. Sargent. May I go on, please?
Mr. Hays. No ; I have another question I want to ask. I have to
insist that you answer the questions, and you can go on when I am
through asking the questions.
Mr. Wolcott. I thought the motion was that he be allowed to con-
clude his statement. I am very much interested in his statement. I
am not so interested in your questions frankly.
Mr. Hays. I know you wouldn't be. That is one reason I am ask-
ing them. We can either go ahead or under the rules the minority can
leave and stop the hearing. Which way do you want to do it?
The Chairman. The other member stepped out momentarily.
Mr. Hays. He is not here.
The Chairman. He is available and will come back.
Mr. Hays. We may have to leave, and I am going to insist. You
said yesterday you would obey that rule.
Mr. Wolcott. It is a prerogative of any Member of Congress to
leave any committee any time he sees fit. It is also the prerogative
of the committee to meet and adopt such rules as are necessary for
orderly procedure.
Mr. Hays. Let me say, Mr. Wolcott, that you are not going to gag
the minority here.
248 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Wolcott. I am not trying to gag anybody. I exercise my pre-
rogative as a Member of Congress to make any motion that is ger-
mane to any subject before any committee of which I am a member.
Mr. Hays. And also you have to call on the right of the chairman
to overrule any point of order even if it is a rule of the House. In
other words, we will make the rules as we go along. I will play that
way, too. I have one more question.
In other words, you are not operating, because you do not have any
money.
Mr. Sargent. Because we have not found acceptable money as yet.
Mr. Hats. Don't you think if the motives of your foundation —
and I am not questioning you on that — are what you say they are, you'
could find some money if you look for it?
Mr. Sargent. I have presented some applications. We are also
studying the practical problems involved in how to carry on such
an operation efficiently. The organization of an operation of this
type as a new venture to fill a need which did not exist before involves
taking steps carefully and with full consideration. I want to do a
responsible job. There has been only a little over 6 months in the
organization period, and we tried to do our study work first, prelim-
inary study work, and go into the out-and-out financing element later.
Mr. Hays. The main question, and this can be answered very briefly,
is this : If you can get the money from the sources that you consider
satisfactory, there won't be anybody trying to keep you from doing a
job ; will there ?
Mr. Sargent. I don't know.
Mr. Hays. Nobody could, could they, if you have the funds?
Mr. Sargent. I think the grip of some of these large foundations
on the American people at the present time is something that will
astound you. I tnink that we have a great lack of true freedom.
There are men today who are afraid for various reasons to support
things which they would otherwise approve of. I think you have a
very serious condition and my evidence will reveal it.
Mr. Hays. I don't think there is any doubt that people are afraid
to support things they might otherwise approve of. In fact, there
is a great noticeable lack of courage here about exploring into the
hidden crevasses of these people who are trying to promote a Nazi
philosophy in this country. As a matter of fact, if you ask any critical
questions when you have certain types of people in the audience, you
are liable to get called names, as I did yesterday. I think that cer-
tainly is a significant commentary on the jittery state of mind of
America at this point.
I am not going to call you Hitler, because I disagree with you,
and I don't mean to imply that you resemble him. But as mad as
I would get with you, I would never call you that, because I would
not stoop to that kind of dirty, nasty business.
Mr. Sargent. My purpose, Mr. Chairman-
The Chairman. Mr. Hays had completed his questioning awhile
ago, he indicated. If so, why not proceed with your testimony, Mr.
Sargent ?
Mr. Sargent. Very well. Our position here also is that there should
be and has been certainly up to now a want of access to foundation
grants for the type of research to which I am referring, that the acid
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 249
test here will be to determine the willingness or unwillingness of
these large foundations, let us say, now and in the future to do this.
If they are carrying on propaganda or trying to build or create some
order or form of social organization of their own, they will con-
sistently continue this policy. On the other hand, if they axe pre-
pared now to assume their academic responsibility, these applications
will receive consideration.
There are a few preliminary observations
Mr. Hats. Mr. Sargent, right there is a question. There has been
a lot of noise around Washington and Congress that this inquiry was
set up for one reason, to blackjack foundations into giving money for
what they did not want to. Do you feel there is an attempt to do that ?
Mr. Sakgent. No feeling on my part.
Mr. Hays. None of your testimony would be inclined that way ?
Mr. Sargent. No. I am going to give you the facts here as they
turn up. I want to turn out to you some things that I believe are sig-
nificant in the law. Let us consider now this tax-exemption question.
The immediate one, of course, is that an exempt foundation pays no
tax on its own income, which is, of course, a substantial thing. But
that is only a fraction of the impact of these conditions. An even
greater factor of importance is the deduction rights of the people who
give the money to the foundations. The exemption privilege that we
are referring to generally here is title 26, United States Code, section
101, subsection (6), the familiar one about educational and scien-
tific organizations not conducted for profit and not carrying on propa-
ganda or otherwise attempting to influence legislation. Section 23
(O) (2) permits individual taxpayers to deduct their contributions to
groups of this type. Section 812 (d) recognizes the deductibility on
estate-tax returns. In that case the deduction right is without limit.
Therefore, if you have a foundation which is engaging in propa-
ganda or political activity, you have in effect a front through which
people as donors can pour money, and through that thing power, into
this political action framework and themselves take on their estate-
tax returns a total deduction for the whole thing, depriving the United
States Government of all of the taxation rights on that money so given.
Henry Ford has done it. In the case of the income tax to the extent
of the deduction allowed, the same things prevails.
Mr. Hats. Are you saying they put money in political campaigns ?
Mr. Sargent. No ; I say if a foundation acts in such a slanted or dis-
criminatory fashion as to always ignore one side and advocate the
other side, it is a propaganda group by the mere facts in the case. If
you are advocating only one thing, or side, you are promoting that
side. You are not educational at all. If you are objective, you give
critical analysis facilities to the other side. The test
Mr. Hats. You used the term "political" in some concept.
Mr. Sargent. I say the purpose of some of the foundation programs,
as you will see from the evidence, is of a political nature and not in the
sense of supporting a particular candidate, but promoting a philosophy
and theory of government.
Mr. Hays. Promoting any political party?
Mr. Sargent. Using the school to build a new social order is politi-
cal propaganda.
Mr. Hays. Do you mean to imply they are favoring one political
party or the other %
"^V
250 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Sargent. I think they are favoring the New Deal party.
Mr. Hats. I would have gladly accepted a contribution from any
one of the Fords. They seemed like nice people. They could con-
tribute $5,000 in Ohio in my campaign, but they didn't. They gave it
to the Republican Party, $25,000, as I recall.
Mr. Sargent. I am just talking here about this foundation.
Mr. Hays. They are a foundation.
Mr. Sargent. Another factor here also is the leverage factor foun-
dations exercise on the agencies they support. In the case of a uni-
versity, they are always nip and tuck on a budget. A grant by a
foundation of a few hundred thousand dollars can influence and guide
the entire curriculum in the institution. The leverage factor could be
as much as 10 to 1 on the basis of money contributed.
Mr. Hays. I would like to ask you, Mr. Wolcott, in all friendliness,
how is the budget of the University of Michigan derived %
Mr. Wolcott. I don't know.
Mr. Hays. Is it State supported ?
Mr. Wolcott. Yes.
Mr. Hays. They get some outside money.
Mr. Wolcott. It is an endowed university, as I understand, and
they get some money from outside.
Mr. Hays. Let us not blanket them all. I know the universities in
Ohio which are State supported come into the State legislature, Ohio
State, Miami, Kent State, Bowling Green, and they submit their
request in front of the proper committees, and if they can justify it,
they get it. As a matter of fact, the criticism out there has been — I
don't say it is justified, but you hear it a lot of times — that the uni-
versities can get any amount of money they want from the legislature.
Mr. Sargent. There is a leverage factor capable of being exercised,
and it may appear in some cases that it nas been. That is my
statement.
' We are going into the history of this movement. I referred to 1913
as the date of the creation of the Rockefeller Foundation which was
the second of the large funds established by the late John D. Rocke-
feller. That had power to benefit — to promote the welfare of man-
kind throughout the world, as I recall. His preceding foundation
of 1903, I think it was — 1902, General Education Board — had to do
with the promotion of education in the United States. In 1916, the
Rockefeller fund, known as General Education Board, published a
pamphlet by Abraham Flexner. The pamphlet was entitled, "Occa-
sional Papers, No. 3, A Modern School." It recommended changes
needed in American secondary education.
Mr. Hays. Right there, you said you were not going to use names,
and I am not criticizing you for it.
Mr. Sargent. As the author.
Mr. Hays. Would you mind telling us something about this Flexner
fellow?
Mr, Sargent. He wrote a book. He was identified with various
Rockefeller benefactions, as I understand. I have not checked him
in detail. It was not my intention to discuss Mr. Flexner, but merely
the fact that this pamphlet was written at the time and sponsored by
this board. That is the limit of my interest.
Mr. Hays. What is the title?
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 251
Mr. Sargent. Occasional Papers, No. 3, A Modern School. It was
published by the General Education Board. A copy is in the Library
of Congress, which I have personally examined. The recommenda-
tions and substance made in that pamphlet are that tradition is too
largely controlling education, that there is too much formal work and
subjects are too remote from experience. That what is needed is a
modern concept, what is termed a modern curriculum, where there
should be less reliance on textbooks and an activity program ought to
be substituted.
Mr. Flexner advocated the experiment. The pamphlet in question
contains the following statement of the foundation and I am quoting
that here as I take it from my notes :
The general education board does not endorse or promulgate any educational
theory, but is interested in facilitating the trial of promising educational experi-
ments under proper conditions.
The board authorizes the publication of these papers with a request for
criticisms and suggestions and an expression of opinion as to the desirability
and feasibility of an experiment of this type.
That is the end of the quotation.
In the same year, namely 1916
Mr. HArs. Right up to there, are you expressing a criticism of what
you read ?
Mr. Sargent. No ; I simply am stating it happened. I am giving
you things that happened when they happened factually as 1 find
them to be. I am placing no interpretations except what the material
itself gives. If I have any other interpretations to make, I will state
it positively. If I do not state any interpretation, none in particular
is intended except what normally flows from what I am reading.
Mr. Hats. As I heard you read the thing, it sounded fairly logical
to me.
Mr. Sargent. I am giving the history of how the thing started.
This was the inception of the movement.
Mr. Hays. Would you mind refraining for a minute until I can
see if we have some agreement on a matter of procedure. If we can
maybe we can hurry this up.
(Discussion off the record.)
The Chairman. The Chair might say we have just had another
friendly conference, and we have reached an understanding which
was previously announced but which the Chairman wishes to state
will be the procedure. That is for the witness to complete his testi-
mony without interruption, and then will be available for full question-
ing at the conclusion of his testimony at whatever length the com-
mittee members might feel justified in questioning.
Mr. Hats. Let me say, Mr. Chairman, at that point that was my
suggestion and I make it for a number of reasons, the main one of
which is, Mr. Sargent, that I hope you won't feel that I have belabored
this point too much, but it is very difficult to sit up here and get the
full implication of everything that you may read without having
anything to follow to check back and forth on. Maybe we are spoiled,
but we have become accustomed to that at committee hearings. The
only reason I have been interrupting you is to try to clear up in my
own mind and perhaps in the record some of the things that seemed
to be inferences that maybe you did not mean to be inferences as you
now say in the last one you didn't mean to infer. You are putting
252 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
it in, and you can read it and judge it. I will try not to interrupt
you unless I think there is something I have lost the context and any
interruption I make, please understand it, although I may disagree
with you, I am not antagonistic to you. You have a right to your
point of view. We will try to let you finish and then when we get the
record that will be the same as if you prepared one in advance and
submitted to us, which might have expedited. Then we will come
back and examine you on the record.
Mr. Sargent. I think that is perfectly all right. I think that is
the perfect way to do it.
Mr. Hays. The chairman and the ranking minority member agreed
that the minority may have as much time as the conscience dictates,
and I may make clear that the minority has no conscience, and there
will be no limitation on time.
The Chairman. There is no disagreement on that procedure. The
chairman recalls that was the procedure which he announced yester-
day when the witness first appeared, and there has been no_ other dis-
position. But I am very glad to have a clarification of it, and we
will proceed accordingly.
You may proceed.
Mr. Sargent. In regard to the subject of names, I will say this
again, and I will adhere to this strictly. Naturally, I will give the
name of the author of the publication, because that is one of the facts
surrounding it. It is not my intention in mentioning any names to
infer anything else than the context itself may indicate. I am giving
the content of certain things, and that will be read by excerpts in cer-
tain places, and I will summarize the general result in others, but they
represent my attempt to fairly indicate what is in the book, if I don't
read it in full.
Mr. Hats. I have a question right there. Yesterday you indicated
very definitely that you thought somebody or another, I forget who it
was now, was subversive because he said he belonged to 56 Commu-
nist-front organizations or designated organizations. Would it be
asking too much to say that we can assume that unless you otherwise
designate that anybody you mention is not subversive just beeause
you mention it, and if you think they are you will say so ?
Mr. Sargent. I think that is quite a burden. I haven't taken the
trouble, Mr. Hays, to go through the names and affiliations of all the
people I mentioned. The committee staff may find a tie-in or connec-
tion
Mr. Hays. What I am trying to say is that just because you mention
them, nobody should assume that they are left wingers or subversives,
Mr. Sargent. You should not assume that they are all right because
I mention them, or you should not assume that they are all wrong.
I make no statement one way or another. If I find something perti-
nent, I will mention it.
Mr. Hays. If you find someone that belonged to a lot of front organ-
izations, you will be sure to get that in.
Mr. Sargent. I have not had the time to do that detail on all these
people. I will give you a few from time to time that I think are perti-
nent: I have read the pamphlet here published by general education
board by Flexner. The same year, 1916, the department of educa-
tional research was established at Teachers College, at Columbia
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 253
University. In 1917 the Lincoln Experimental School was established
iii New York City. The details on that experimental school which was
under the guidance or auspices of, as I understand, the Teachers Col-
lege, Columbia, is set forth in a pamphlet which is entitled "Intro-
ducing Teachers College." That is also a Library of Congress
publication.
I have taken some quotations in that pamphlet, pages 32 and 33,
which I am reading, as follows :
A few years later (meaning after the opening of the Teachers College)
Teachers College by opening the Lincoln School kindled the fire which helped
to spread progressive education. The school opened in September 1917, at 646
Park Avenue, with Dr. Otis W. Caldwell as director. It was established as one
phase of the large-scale Teachers College program to intensify scientific educa-
tional research. A department of educational research had been organized at the
college during the preceding year. About the same time I>r. Abraham Flexner
of the general education board published a profound paper on the need for a
modern. school to test the possibility of a secondary school better adapted to
American needs in which mathematics, modern languages, natural and social
sciences, rather than the discipline of ancient languages and formal studies,
would form the basis of a cultural education. It was introduced by Dr. Flexner's
thinking and supported by the general education board. The college developed
plans for this experimental school. In 1922 the 123d Street Building was
opened. Dr. Caldwell relinquished the directorship in 1917 to head the newly
established Lincoln Institution School of Experimentation and was succeeded
by Dr. Jesse Newlon, former superintendent of the Denver, Colo., Public Schools.
To this rapidly expanding center of learning students began to come from
abroad as well as from all parts of this country. It was Mr. John D. Rockefeller,
Jr., who made it possible for Teachers College to attack this problem squarely.
Again he showed his interest in the work of the' college by making available "
through the International Education Board a subsidy of $100,000 a year for 10
years to be used to establish and maintain the International Institute of Teachers
College.
In February 1923, Dr. Paul Monroe, who had been with the college since 1897,
was appointed director of the institute. Dr. George S. Counts was made
associate director a few years later.
That is the end of that item.
The year 1917, as you will recall, was the year in which the Bolshevik
Revolution succeeded and took over the Government of Soviet Eussia,
and the Kerensky government was established.
Mr. Hays. What is the significance of that?
Mr. Sargent. The significance of that is that in 1920 the New York
Legislature prepared the Lusk committee report concerning revolu-
tionary activity, pointing out the danger of such conditions in our
country, and that the condition they found was part of the atmosphere
surrounding the period in which this development occurred, and may
have had some influence upon it, as I think it did, from the subsequent
actions in that school.
Mr. Hats. Did I understand you to say that this committee report
said that there was revolution in the air here in 1917 %
Mr. Sargent. I can't hear you.
Mr. Hays. Do I understand you to say that this Lusk committee
report indicated that there was revolution in the air here in 1917 ?
Mr. Sargent. Yes, sir. That the conditions around New York City
in particular was considered to be quite serious, and there were a great
many intellectuals of that period who had very strong sympathies
toward the revolutionary movement in Russia at that time. It is a
Jong detailed report, Mr. Hays, and a very important document. It
was published in 1920 by a committee of the New York Legislature.
4&720— 54— pt. 1 17
254 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hats. That is funny. I was around in 1917, and I have been
around since, and I don't remember anybody thought there was much
danger of a revolution then.
Mr. Sargent. Among the intellectual elite there was very definitely
such a condition during this period which is part of the history of it.
Mr. Hays. You keep using the term "among the intellectuals" and
"among the intellectual elite" and maybe I am reading something into
it that is not there, but I seem to get a sort of nasty connotation. You
are not an intellectual ?
Mr. Sargent. I am talking about the type of intellectual that pro-
motes this thing. They are not true intellectuals at all. They are
bigotists. They stand for a certain thing and do not tolerate or listen
to the views of anybody else. They are the people historically who
have promoted revolutions. The literature is voluminous on that.
Prof. Ludwig von Mises of New York University points out specifi-
cally that socialism is not a revolt of the people. It is a program insti-
gated by a special type of intellectuals that form themselves into a
clique and bore from within and operate that way. That is the way
these things happen. It is not a people's movement at all. It is a
capitalizing on the people's emotions and sympathies and skillfully
directing those sympathies toward a point these people wish to reach.
Mr. Hays. Do all intellectuals gravitate toward that ?
Mr. Sargent. Of course not.
Mr. Hays. There are some good ones ?
Mr. Sargent. I think Clarence Manion is an excellent one.
Mr. Hays. Is he an intellectual ?
Mr. Sargent. I think he is a true intellectual.
Mr. Hays. There is also that connotation. There are all. shades of
opinion.
Mr. Sargent. I put it in quotes.
Mr. Hays. That is when you begin to get people reading meanings
into it, because they think you mean them to read a meaning into it,
because it is in quotes, or it would not be in quotes. I want you to
define "egg head" before we finish this. You denned that yesterday.
Mr. Sargent. I think we will get down to that. If you want a quick
picture of this revolt of the so-called intellectual group during this
period, you will find that in Frederick Lewis Allen's book, Only Yes-
terday, discussion at page 228. He describes the atmosphere of the
period in very clear terms.
In 1920, Prof. Harold Rugg began introducing pamphlets of hi$ in
this Lincoln Experimental School operated under the auspices of
Columbia University.
Mr. Hays. By Rockefeller money, is that right ?
Mr. Sargent. I don't know whether he physically printed these
pamphlets with Rockefeller money or not.
Mr. Hays. You say they gave him $100,000 a year to run the school.
Mr. Sargent. Yes ; but I didn't say that Rockefeller paid for the
specific printing of the pamphlets. I think what I did say was that
Rockefeller money supported the school and a substantial amount of
money went into it.
Mr. Hays. Did I understand you to say Rockefeller himself gave
that money ?
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 255
Mr. Sargent. No; General Education Board, it says here. My
authority on that is Columbia's own pamphlet entitled, "Introducing
Teachers College."
It says here, as I was reading, it was Mr. John D. Rockefeller, Jr.,
who made it possible for Teachers College to attack the problem. The
money, it says here, was a subsidy of $100,000 a year for 10 years
through International — wait a minute — through International Edu-
cation Board. That is one of the Rockefeller funds.
Mr. Hats. Apparently from the way you read it, Mr. John D.
Rockefeller, Jr., had something personal to do with it.
Mr. Sargent, That is what Teachers College says. I didn't say it,
I am reading what Teachers College said about their own operation.
That is their own statement which I am reading to you literally. The-
second sentence would seem to indicate that their International Edu-
cation Board did. In any event, it had the support through some
Rockefeller operation of some type. These pamphlets which Prof.
Harold Rugg developed at the Lincoln Experimental School subse-
quently became — were developed into the so-called Rugg social science
textbook series.
One of the original pamphlets was called, Building a Science of
Society for the Schools. \
At this point it is a little bit out of the chronology but in the interest
of tying things together all at one point, perhaps I better give you
something about what these Rugg social science textbooks turned out
to be.
The period during the 1920's until about 1930 was the development
period, and then they finally came out in a series of books for the
high-school level as I recall. Those books became very controversial
nationally, and Professor Rugg, in one of his own statements in a
magazine article, claimed as I recall that about 5 million of them had
been distributed and put in the American public schools. There was
a controversy in the San Francisco City Board of Education regard-
ing these texts arising out of some citizens protest against the material,
and the superintendent's recommendation that the books be taken out.
Mr. Hays. Were you one of the citizens who protested?
Mr. Sargent. No, sir, I was not.
Mr. Hays. Weren't you mixed up in that fight ?
Mr. Sargent. I was requested to come in and give evidence which
I had, but I did not initiate the proceeding. I did come in and I
spoke in opposition to the books, having read them, and I protested the
treatment given the Constitution of the United States in particular,
and constitutional history.
This is a copy of an official, report of the San Francisco Board of
Education. The controversy began, as I remember, about May or
June of 1952, when there were public hearings. The board decided
to appoint a panel of experts, nearly all men of education, to read the
books themselves and render a report.
The members of that committte to study the books and report back
were Monroe Deutsch, who was then at the University of California,
provost, I think, at the university ; Glenn E. Hoover, of Mills College,
a college for women in the San Francisco area ; John L. Horn, I don't
recall his academic contact at the time; Lloyd Luckmann, I think he
256 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
was at the University of San Francisco ; Edgar E. Robinson was pro-
fessor of history at Stanford University ; and Harold R. McKinnon
was a member of the San Francisco bar.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Sargent, did you prepare a bill of grievances rela-
tive to these textbooks you are talking about %
Mr. Sargent. Not with relation to the Rugg books, no. I prepared
that very much later. I did prepare it, yes, and it was filed with
Congress. I have a copy here. It was filed with Congress about 1949,
as I remember. Yes, April 1949 is the notary date on the document.
Mr. Hats. It was filed with the Senate Labor and Welfare Com-
mittee.
Mr. Sargent. It was originally delivered to the Senate Judiciary
Committee and the House Un-American Activities Committee. I
think Senator McCarran offered a resolution to take up the investiga-
tion and the parliamentarian referred it to the House Committee
on Labor and Welfare. It is the Thomas committee. The Thomas
committee did nothing about it.
Mr. Hats. Let me say this to keep the record straight. If Sena-
tor McCarran offered a resolution, it could not possibly be referred
to a House committee.
Mr. Sargent. I didn't mean to say the House committee. I meant
the Senate committee.
Mr. Hats. You said the House committee.
Mr. Sargent. It was inadvertence on my part. The parliamen-
tarian of the Senate ruled that it concerned education, more strictly,
than constitutional government and so on, and therefore it belonged
in the Thomas committee. Senator Thomas of Utah was in the Sen-
ate at the time.
Mr. Hats. It has laid there rather dusty ever since.
Mr. Sargent. He sat on it and did nothing about it.
Mr. Hats. It could not get dusty if he sat on it.
Mr. Sargent. AH right. In any event that document was pre-
pared years later than this matter to which I refer. I was reading
from the San Francisco report. I gave the names of the signers.
Mr. Hats. Let me ask you another question while we are talking
about this before we get too far away from it. Did you try to get
the House Un-American Activities to go into this ?
Mr. Sargent. I discussed it with them.
Mr. Hats. They did not want to do it?
Mr. Sargent. They wanted to stick with the Communist side of
the case, yes. They said they wanted to place emphasis on that first.
Mr. Hats. You say you suggested that they take it up but they
didn't do anything about it. I couldn't hear your answer.
Mr. Sargent. As a matter of fact, they did do something. They
started with it. Mr. Wood of Georgia was chairman of the commit-
tee at the time and he did — I think they did send out some question-
naires to a few colleges, but they went no further than that.
Mr. Hays. Did you offer to testify before them ?
Mr. Sargent. I don't recall I was ever asked. It never came to
that point, because there was no resolution offered. The House
Un-American Activities Committee needs no resolution, I believe.
Mr. Hats. What I am driving at, and I will be very frank about
it, is this: It seems to me you have sort of been itching to get this
stuff in print for a long time, and you were not able to get anybody
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 257
to let you go ahead with it until you came here. Is that right or
wrong? You gave it to this and that committee. You say one sat
on it, and the other never took it up, and we are going to let you say
it here.
Mr. Sargent. I have not been running around in any such fashion.
It is a matter of public importance and I think I am entitled to pre-
sent it.
Mr. Hays. I don't mean to imply that you were running around,
but the record shows by your testimony that you tried to get two dif-
ferent committees to take it up, and they didn't.
Mr. Sargent. The committees considered the matter and there was
some preliminary discussion. For policy reasons they decided not to
go forward with it at that time.
Mr. Hays. Okay.
Mr. Sargent. At that time, period.
Mr. Hays. Or any subsequent time since.
Mr. Sargent. I am not in a position to state what various com-
mittees may or may not want to do. I am here for the purpose of
presenting this matter now. This report, and I will read it in full, is
dated March 30, 1943. It is the unanimous report bearing the signa-
tures of all the gentlemen I have named. The chairman of the com-
mittee was Dr. Monroe E. Deutsch of the University of California.
It is addressed to Mr. Harry I. Christie, president of the San Francisco
Board of Education at the city hall, San Francisco.
Deae Mb. Chbistie : The committee set up by action of the San Francisco Board
of Education to submit a report as to whether or not the Rugg books should be
continued as basic textbooks in the junior high schools of the San Francisco
Unified School District, begs leave to submit the following report. It would
preface its statement of findings with certain preliminary remarks.
The report herewith presented is unanimously approved by all members of
the committee; certain members, however, are submitting statements giving
supplementary reasons for joining in the recommendations.
Moreover, before submitting its statements the committee wishes to make
this declaration ; it is most unfortunate that the controversy over these books
has become so bitter that an evaluation of the content and contribution of the
books has been frequently confused with an evaluation of the character and
motives of the persons involved. We have confined our attention to the books.
The committee desires to make clear its own conception of the function it
has been asked to perform. Obviously we are not acting as an administrative
board; nor are we acting as a group of teachers choosing a textbook or con-
structing a curriculum. We have been asked to function as a committee in the
field of education, and although we have been nominated by six institutions
of higher learning, we sign as individuals, as we have conferred as a group of
individuals and were asked to give our considered opinion after careful study.
One question has concerned us — and upon this we give our answer. Do the books
under our examination provide, in accord with a sound and satisfactory concep-
tion of education, a fair and balanced presentation of the facts of our past and
our present in such a way as to be desirable as required textbooks for students
of the junior high school age in the San Francisco schools? The committee finds
that in form and style the books are attractive and interesting, and we believe
that this is ample explanation of their popularity with students and teachers
and many others who have read them. The contemporary world is seen as
having no boundaries of interest and the unity of the world is emphasized. We
agree with these objectives so effectively stated.
But we question the concept of education on which these textbooks are founded.
Of course we agree as to the vital importance of our democracy — in the present
as in the past, and in the future, but it does not follow that belief in democracy
means acceptance of a method of education which directs the main attention of
young students, usually between 12 and 15 years of age, to a discussion of ques-
tions and seeing all sides rather than the study of geography and history and
258 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
literature. We do not believe in the study of problems as a satisfactory method
of education for children of that age.
The unsound basis in teaching is revealed in the overemphasis upon the future
and upon change rather than the fact of growth and development as a continuous
process in all times. The weight of instruction is placed not upon achieve-
ments and accomplishments but upon aspirations and hopes. This concept of
teaching is revealed in repeated assertions of the need of rebuilding and recre-
ating. Such an approach is not in accord with the guiding purpose of general
education which is to furnish information as a reservoir of fact and to provide
basis for growth and development. The pedagogical principles upon which these
books are built disregard the fundamental fact that foundations of basic knowl-
edge and skills must be laid before pupils are given the impression they are
ready to deal with contemporary problems.
Believing as we do that one of the great objectives of education of young
people is the development of a desire to participate in a democracy, we find that
these books are unsatisfactory in not providing a conviction of the need of long
study and careful thought before arriving at decisions and presuming to take
action. These books are built upon the assumption that it is one of the functions
of the school, indeed it appears at times to be the chief function, to plan in the
classroom, yes, even in the junior high schools, the future of society. From
this view we emphatically dissent. Moreover, the books contain a constant em-
phasis on our national defects. Certainly we should think it a great mistake to
picture our Nation as perfect or flawless either in its past or its present, but it is
our conviction that these books give a decidedly distorted impression through
overstressing weaknesses and injustices. They therefore tend to weaken the
student's love for his country, respect for its past, and confidence in its future.
Accordingly, to answer the question submitted to us by the board of education, we
unanimously recommend that the Rugg books should not be continued as basic
textbooks in the San Francisco junior high schools. We likewise recommend that
the books to be substituted for them be chosen by the established procedure ac-
cording to which a committee of teachers submits recommendations as to text-
books. We approve of this procedure in the San Francisco schools and favor its
continuance. We feel, however, that the teachers in the schools should call upon
scholarly experts in the particular field of study in which textbooks are to be
selected for an appraisal of the books from the standpoint of accuracy and per-
spective.
It is our earnest hope that the choice of textbooks may always be made here-
after through the proper educational procedure. Their selection is certainly a
matter to be determined by those who are devoting their lives to education.
There was a supplemental statement here by Glenn E. Hoover as
follows :
The controversy over the Rugg books arose primarily because they were de-
nounced as subversive. This charge was made, not by the scholars and teachers
who use them, but by individuals and organizations whose normal activities are
quite outside of the field of public education ; that charge is a serious one for it
reflects not only on Professor Rugg, but also on the great university with which
he is connected, and the teachers and administrators in the public schools where
these books have been used for so many years.
The Chairman. Mr. Sargent, if you have reached the point, some
of the members wish to be on the floor for the convening of the House
in connection with the preliminary proceedings of the House, so it
would be necessary for us to recess at this time.
Mr. Sargent. May I read one paragraph and finish this statement
and then stop ? It will take a moment.
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Sargent (reading) :
I feel it my duty to report the charge that the Rugg books are subversive, in
the accepted sense of the word, is, in my opinion, completely without foundation.
Although I found what seems to me to be serious defects in them, I am glad
to bear witness to the high patriotism of their author and the teachers who
without complaint have used them for so long. The patrons of the schools which
have adopted these books have the right to be assured on that point.
Respectfully,
Glenn E. Hooveb.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 259
There is another statement I will refer to this afternoon.
Mr. Hays. I would like the record to show right at this point that
despite the fact that you say you could not prepare a statement for the
committee, that you have been reading for about 25 minutes from a
prepared statement.
Mr. Sargent. From a document, sir.
The Chairman. The committee will reconvene at 2 o'clock, if that
is agreeable, and then we will run as the business on the floor per-
mits us to run.
(Thereupon, at 11: 55 a. m., a recess was taken until 2 p. m. the
same day.)
AFTERNOON SESSION
(The hearing was resumed at 2 p. m.)
The Chairman. The committee will come to order, and you may
proceed, Mr. Sargent.
Mr. Sargent. I understand the mikes are not on. I will try to talk
a little louder, so that you can hear me.
The Chairman. You may go ahead.
Mr. Sargent. At the hour of adjournment, I was discussing the San
Francisco report on the Rugg social science text books. I read the
majority report. I also read a separate statement by Mr. Glenn E.
Hoover. There is a concurring statement by Harold R. McKinnon,
of San Francisco. I will not read it at length. It is long. I will read
certain excerpts which I think indicate the nature of his thinking
and his additional reasons for disapproving the books, because I
think those reasons are pertinent to matters contained in your staff
report;
These are some of the things which Mr. McKinnon said in con-
curring in this finding :
What Professor Rugg is trying to do is to achieve a social reconstruction
through education. The end in view is a new social order in which all the
aspects of human relationships, including the political and economic, are to
be refashioned and rebuilt. The means by which this end is to be accomplished
is education.
In presenting these problems, the author is far from neutral.
He discusses natural law and says :
The lack of an underlying assumption of moral law which is inherent in
human nature and which is the norm of good conduct, of happiness, and of
socially desirable traits, is evident throughout the texts. Professor Rugg, of
course, rejects such an idea of law.
Another comment :
Nothing is more insistent in the books than the idea of change. From the
habit of denying facts and fixed realities, Professor Rugg proceeds to the notion
of trial and error in all human affairs. One is never sure one is right. Since
everything changes, there is nothing upon which one can build with perma-
nence. Experiment is the rule in social affairs as well as in physical science —
experiment in government, in education, in economics, and in family life.
Mr. McKinnon refers to the antireligious bias in the books and says :
Throughout the books runs an antireligious bias. In some instances, this
takes the form of caricaturing religion; for example, by saying "medieval
Europeans found life so hard and so unhappy that most of them eagerly turned
their thoughts to a dream of heaven."
260 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
In his concluding statement, Mr. McKinnon says :
In the light of the foregoing, should the textbooks of Professor Rugg be con-
tinued in the junior high schools of San Francisco? I think clearly they
should not. I say this with the realization that such a conclusion must not be
jasserted except for reasons that are grave and fundamental. No mere inci-
dental error and no characteristic which does not sink deeply into the funda-
mentals of human nature would suffice for such an adverse recommendation.
He goes on to say :
America, in spite of all its faults, has achieved something in the history of
social and political life which has borne rich fruit and which may bear richer
jprovided we do not lose the thread. But this is the condition : provided we
do not lose the thread.
What is that thread? It is the concept upon which our country was founded,
that man is a rational being who possesses rights and duties.
Mr. McKinnon quotes the Declaration of Independence, particu-
larly the clause about the fact that men are endowed by their Creator
with unalienable rights and it is the Government's duty to sustain
them.
He then says:
The conflicts between Professor Rugg's philosophy and these principles of
the Declaration are irreconcilable. Men are created equal only if they are
spiritual beings. It is in their spiritual, moral nature that their equality alone
can be found.
Finally, he says :
It is true that social conditions and circumstances change. The point is that
the principles themselves do not change, for they are inherent in the nature of
man, a nature which does not change. Because Professor Rugg's teachings are
contrary to this notion * * * I am compelled to join in the recommendation that
his books be discontinued. In placing my recommendation on this ground, I do
not imply that I am at variance with my colleagues on the other grounds which
they assert. On the contrary, I am in general agreement with them as to those
grounds. But I wish to stress the points I have made, because I consider them
ultimate and fundamental.
Now, various charges were made before the San Francisco City
Board of Education before the rendition of that report. The board
adopted the findings of its committee of experts, and the books were
eliminated.
I have here a pamphlet used in the presentation before the board r
which summarizes the nature of the objections lodged before the board
by those protesting. I do not intend to read this at length, but I will
merely give you some of the major contentions made by those whose
position was sustained in this proceeding.
Complaint was made of the undermining process involved here by
implanting a continual expectancy of change in the minds of students
of immature age in schools ; of the fact that the American way of life
has been portrayed as a failure; of the disparaging of the United
States Constitution and the motives of the men who framed it.
Mr. Hats. What are you reading from now ?
Mr. Sargent. From a pamphlet here entitled "Undermining Our
Republic," prepared by the Guardians of American Education, Inc.*
51 East 42d Street, New York City.
These pamphlets were delivered to the members of the board of
education and considered by them in connection with their decision to-
appoint a committee and later to rule upon the books.
Mr. Hatb. Well, now, if you are going to cite this organization as
an authority, I think it would be only fair that we know a little bit
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 261
about who they are. I never heard of them before. It is a self-
appointed organization, I take it, from the title.
Mr. Sargent. Yes. I am merely using it, Mr. Hays, for the purpose
•of enumerating the specific grounds made at that hearing to the boardj
the kind of protests that were made. I am not offering the pamphlet
in detail.
Mr. Hats. Of course, not being an attorney, I am at somewhat of a
•disadvantage here, but I have always understood that when you offered
anything in evidence, in order for it to have much weight it had to have
■some standing.
I do not know anything about that pamphlet, but it seems to me up
to now it would not have very much weight, unless you can give it some
weight.
Mr. Sargent. I can tell you what the organization is. It is founded
: by Colonel Rudd of New York City, who, as a citizen, discovered the
propaganda in these social science textbooks. One is "Rugg" and the
other is "Rudd." The man who protested the books is Mr. Rudd, and
the other is like rug on the floor.
This pamphlet contains a detailed study of the material. I am
merely using it for my convenience in enumerating the kinds of objec-
tions that were made here to the books.
Mr. Hats. When we get around to some of these things, this may
not seem to have very much weight, but on the other hand it is an
•example of what I mean. Maybe you did not attend, but there was a
meeting, and you perhaps know about it, of the Sons of the American
Revolution, in Cincinnati in 1953. Right?
Mr. Sargent. You mean the national congress? I was not there.
Mr. Hats. Did they have a congress in 1953 ?
. Mr. Sargent. Yes, they have one every year. That year, I think
it was in Cincinnati. I was not present.
Mr. Hats. Is your foundation Patriotic Education, Inc. ?
Mr. Sargent. No, sir, no connection with it.
Mr. Hats. Do you know anything about that organization ?
Mr. Sargent. I know some members of the organization created
-such a corporation. I am not a member of it and have nothing to do
-with its work.
Mr. Hats. Does it have any standing at all ?
Mr. Sargent. What do you mean ?
Mr. Hats. I mean is it a reliable organization?
Mr. Sargent. As far as I know. I know very little about it, except
i;hat such an organization was established.
Mr. Hats. What we are trying to get at : Would it be the kind of
an organization you bring in here and cite as saying so and so and
•expect the committee to give it weight?
Mr. Sargent. They have no publications which the committee could
receive here, so far as I know. It is in no way involved in this present
matter.
Mr. Hats. They had a publication in Cincinnati in which they had
a picture of Bishop Oxnam and a hammer and sickle, denouncing him
and calling him Communist. I just wonder if that is the kind of or-
ganization cited. I am a little concerned.
Mr. Sargent. We are just talking about the organization known as
Guardians of American Education, Inc., here, and it has done nothing
262 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
like that. I don't know very much about the work of the other
organization.
Mr. Hays. What qualifications does Mr. Rudd have?
Mr. Sargent. He has made a very intensive study of the propa-
ganda and history of this movement. He was requested by the Senate
Internal Security Committee to testify before them as an expert on
some educational matters.
Mr. Hats. That is interesting. How do you get to be an expert on
these things?
Mr. Sargent. I wouldn't know. The gentlemen here presumed I
had something to tell them, and I presume I am an expert.
Mr. Hays. I was thinking of Mr. Rudd. What about him ?
Mr. Sargent. He has studied this subject for years and knows the
literature and was of great assistance to me in becoming acquainted
with it. I think if you read this book you will discover that he has
a great deal of basic knowledge. This pamphlet shows that he studied
the history of the subversive movement as it applies particularly to
these books. But I am using this only in an enumeration of the
grounds made there, and this pamphlet was delivered to the San Fran-
cisco Board of Education in connection with its deliberations. I gave
them these pamphlets. I happened to have them at the time.
I know of no derogatory fact about the Guardians of American
Education, Inc., at any time since I have been acquainted with their
work, commencing about 1942, and running down to the present time.
In my opinion they are entirely reliable.
Mr. Hays. I was not meaning to imply that there was anything
derogatory. I am trying to get the idea across that I don't know any-
thing about them, and I just wonder how they get in here.
Mr. Sargent. They have been an active organization. Their main
project is opposing the use of these books in the schools which the
San Francisco Board of Education found unfit and condemned.
That has been their major activity, so far as I know.
Mr. Hays. Did any other school board anywhere condemn these
books ?
Mr. Sargent. I think they have been condemned in many places .;
yes.
Mr. Hays. Do you know of any specifically ?
Mr. Sargent. I am not acquainted with all the record. I can find
out. I know they have been protested all over the country. I don't
have a documentation on where and how many. They were elimi-
nated throughout the State of California, as a result of this finding of
the San Francisco board. There is a long record of protest on ;thoae
books.
Another exception taken to these books was the technique of em-
ploying a school system as an agency to build a new social order in
a classroom. They cited Professor Rugg's intent to use the schools
for his particular type of propaganda.
There are many other comments here, but that was the substance
of it, and the decision I have given you.
Now, one of the next significant documents in tracing this matter
is a pamphlet known as Dare the School Build a New Social Order?
I have here a typewritten copy of that document. It is a book which
is out of print. The Library of Congress has an original. My type-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 263
written copy is a prepared copy, however, and I am working from
that. The author of the pamphlet is George S. Counts, who was at
this time and may still be a professor of education at Teachers College
in Columbia University, New York City.
The pamphlet was published — the copyright notice is 1932 — by
John Day Co., New York.
The foreword to the pamphlet, signed by George S. Counts, bears
the date April 15, 1932, and says that the pamphlet is based upon
three papers read at national educational meetings in February of
that year, namely, the year 1932 ; that one was read before the Pro-
gressive Education Association in Baltimore, a second before a
Division of the Department of Superintendents in Washington, and
a third before the National Council of Education, also in Washington.
It says the titles of these pamphlets were as follows : "Dare Pro-
gressive Education be Progressive?"; "Education Through Indoctri-
nation" ; and "Freedom, Culture, Social Planning, and Leadership."
It states that because of the many requests received for these papers,
they have now been combined, and issued in pamphlet form. And
this pamphlet I have here is the composite of those particular papers,
apparently.
Mr. Hays. They have a great deal of interest, you said?
Mr. Sargent. Profound interest ; yes.
Mr. Hats. So much of an influence that it is now in print?
Mr. Sargent. No, it had an influence at the time it was picked up.
And you look through the writings of the various educational associa-
tions and you find this philosophy planted at that time has taken hold.
Mr. Hats. Is there anything else wrong with Dr. Counts' philos-
ophy ? He wrote a lot of books. Is that the only one you find fault
with?
Mr. Sargent. I think there are a good many that you can question,
and I am going to refer to some of those in his activities as I go
along. I am giving you considerable detail on Professor Counts. He
is the man responsible probably more than any other for subverting
the public school system, his philosophy, his political activities. That
is directly sustained by his writings, which I will give to you.
Now, this pamphlet here includes the following statements :
We are convinced that education is the one unfailing remedy for every ill
to which man is subject, whether it be vice, crime, war, poverty, riches, injustice,
racketeering, political corruption, race hatred, class conflict, or just plain ordi-
nary sin. We even speak glibly and often about the general reconstruction of
society through the school. We cling to this faith in spite of the fact that the
very period in which our troubles have multiplied so rapidly has witnessed
an unprecedented expansion in organized education.
He says:
If an educational movement or any other movement calls itself progressive,
it must have orientation. It must possess direction. The word itself implies
moving forward, and moving forward can have little meaning in the absence
of clearly denned purposes.
He says :
The weakness of progressive education thus lies in the fact that it has
elaborated no theory of social welfare unless it be that of anarchy or extreme
individualism.
264 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
He says :
If progressive education is to be genuinely progressive, it must emancipate
itsejf from the influence of this class —
namely, the conservative class^ —
facing squarely every social issue, coming to grips with life in all of its stark
reality, establish an organic relation with the community * * * fashion a com-
pelling and challenging vision of human destiny, and become less frightened
than it is today of the bogies of imposition and indoctrination. This brings us
to the most crucial question in education, the question of the nature and extent
of the influence which the school should exercise over the development of the
child.
He says among other things:
It is a fallacy that the school shall be impartial in its emphasis and that no
bias should be given to instruction.
He says:
My thesis is that complete impartiality is utterly impossible.
Mr. Hats. Do you disagree with that?
Mr. Sargent. With that ?
Mr. Hays. Yes.
Mr. Sargent. No, I think at the proper grade level it is not impos-
sible at all. I think at the lower grade level it is your duty to teach
positive emphasis in support of established principles in our Con-
stitution.
Mr. Hats. The only difference between this fellow and you is that
you want to teach your principle and he wants to teach his.
Mr. Sargent. No, I want to teach the law of the United States.
The law of the United States is the Declaration of Independence,
the statute of July 4, 1776, and the Constitution, and the fundamentals
upon which our country is based.
Mr. Hays. Now, I can make a better demagogic speech about the
Declaration of Independence than you can, and I will bet you on it.
Mr. Sargent. That is not a demagogic speech. That is in the
Declaration.
Mr. Hays. And we all revere the Declaration of Independence, and
let's just admit that and admit that we do. But you know something?
When you teach the Declaration of Independence, it is a limited docu-
ment, and you can't spend a 12-year curriculum on it. You have to
teach a little arithmetic and some reading. I gather that you want
to dismiss social science from the curriculum, and maybe we could
agree to do that. But you cannot subvert historical facts.
I am not expert, and I want that in the record, but I will bet you
that I know more about teaching than you do. And you sit here and
tell us what has happened and what hasn't happened and what you
want to happen, and you disagree with this fellow and that fellow.
Well, you have got that privilege, but that does not make them bad
people just because you disagree with them.
Mr. Sargent. Harold Rugg has distorted his historical facts.
Mr. Hays. We are talking about George Counts.
Mr. Sargent. I would like to talk about George Counts, and I
would like to go on with it.
Mr. Hays. Is he still living?
Mr. Sargent. I don't know. I presume so. I think he is. He may
still be at Columbia. I don't know.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 265
Mr. Hats. If he is living, we ought to bring him in.
Mr. Sargent. I think it would be an excellent idea. I want to be
present when you do.
He goes on to state in his pamphlet that —
Professor Dewey, in the book referred to, Democracy and Education, says,
"The school should provide a purified environment for the child," with this view
I would certainly agree. Probably no person reared in our society would favor
the study of pornography in the schools.
Then he says:
I am sure, however, this means stacking the cards in favor of the particular
system of value which we may happen to possess.
Then he goes on here further. He says :
Progressive education wishes to build a new world but refuses to be held
accountable for the kind of world it builds.
He says :
In my judgment the school should know what it is doing insofar as it is
humanly possible and accept responsibility for its acts.
There was further agitation by Professor Counts at about this
period, resulting in the issuance of a pamphlet known as A Call to
the Teachers of the Nation that was issued in 1933 by a committee of
the Progressive Education Association, of which George S. Counts
was the chairman. It was published by John Day Co. of New York.
The committee consisted of George S. Counts, chairman, Merle E.
Curt, John S. Gambs, Sidney Hook, Jesse H. Newlan, Willard W.
Beatty, Charles L. S. Easton, Goodwin Watson, and Frederick
Redefer.
I have here a quotation from that pamphlet— it is in the Library of
Congress — which contains the net conclusion in this particular report.
It says — and I quote :
The progressive-minded teachers of the country must unite in a powerful
organization militantly devoted to the building of a better social order *"* *.
In the defense of its members against the ignorance of the masses and the malev-
olence of the privileged, such an organization would have to be equipped with the
material resources, the talent, the legal talent, and the trained intelligence to
wage successful war in the press, the courts, and the legislative chambers of
the Nation. To serve the teaching profession in this way should be one of the
major purposes of the Progressive Education Association.
Gentlemen, if that is not lobbying, I do not understand the meaning
of that term.
Mrs. Ppost. Mr. Sargent, are these books and accounts that you are
giving us material that has been paid for by the foundations through
donations ?
Mr. Sargent. I have no idea. They represent the philosophy of
these people, and I am connecting this up by showing that the people
who did it had contact with institutions enjoying foundation support.
Mr. Hays. You are not connecting anything up. Let me say to
you that this investigation has to do with foundations.
Now, you can disagree with Mr. Counts' philosophy or you can not
disagree with it. I do not care whether you do or do not. I do not
know enough about it to take a position. So it is lobbying. If I accept
your assertion there at face value, is there anything wrong with this
fellow lobbying? What are you doing? What have you been doing %
You have been doing a lot of lobbying over the years.
£66 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Sargent. I am not lobbying. I am here at your request under
subpena.
Mr. Hays. You are not here at my request.
Mr. Sargent. I am sorry if I am unwelcome.
Mr. Hays. You are not unwelcome. Eight here would be a good
place for this, Mr. Chairman. I had a phone call last night, just to
show you what this hearing is attracting, from somebody, some
woman. She said, "I am doing a sequel to the Kinsey report, and I
was wondering if I couldn't come before your committee."
I said, "You are doing a sequel to the Kinsey report?"
She said, "Well, it wouldn't be named as that, but that is what it
would really be. And had I been able to have gotten out mine in
the beginning, the Kinsey report would have been practically useless."
Now, I could go ahead and read this, but that gives you an indica-
tion of the kind of people, I guess she wants to come in and testify.
She went on to say, I read in your hearing that Carnegie gave Kinsey
some money. Do you think I could get some?" She said Mr. Dodd
said that, and I said, "Mr. Dodd is closer to Carnegie than I am. Why
don't you call him. I will be glad to give you his phone number."
That is how I had to get rid of her. I just offer that as an indication
■of what we can get into here and maybe what are are already into.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Chairman, I think for Mrs. Pfost's benefit I
might note that the Progressive Education Association is a tax-free
organization, and it in turn has received very substantial grants from
other foundations. That will come out later.
Mr. Hays. But, Mr. Wormser, as I get the connection here, all I
see in connection with that here is that Dr. Counts said something fav-
orable about it. But the witness himself says that he has no evidence
that the foundations gave any money to publish this pamphlet. And
certainly Dr. Counts or Dr. Anybody else can publish anything they
want to, I guess, up to now.
Mr. Sargent. But they did give money to support the ideas set
forth in that pamphlet. That is a fact, and it will be connected up.
Mr. Hays. You might be getting some concrete evidence. But you
have been one who has been very solicitous here about wasting time.
You have got all this stuff written out.
Apparently by vote of the committee we can not do anything about
it and they are going to let you sit there until kingdom come or
doomsdays and read it. So why don't we just put the whole shebang
in the record, print it up, and then call you in when we have time to look
it over and ask you a few questions about it.
Mr. Sargent. I would like to go on, sir.
Mr. Hays. I know you would like to go on. You have been trying
to get before a congressional committee for years, and apparently you
are enjoying it.
But I think it is a waste of time.
Mr. Sargent. I think this is quite pertinent. I have here an impor-
tant document. This is a photostat of the announcement of the sum-
mer sessions at Moscow University to be held in the year 1935. The
American Advisory Organization on that consisted of George S.
Counts and Heber Harper. The total number of names mentioned
here is 25. I will read them in the order in which they appear in
the pamphlet.
The first two are the ones I have named.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 267
Mr. Hays. Just a minute. What is that to prove?
Mr. Sargent. It shows the indoctrination course scheduled for
American educators at Moscow University in the summer of 1935
and bears an intimate relation to the propagandizing of the American
school system and will tie in with the foundation grants your com-
mittee is inquiring into.
Mr. Hays. That isn't the university at Moscow, Idaho, is it ?
Mr. Sargent. This is printed in English, probably in New York
City. The National Education Association issued an advertisement
sponsoring this project in March 1935 in their journal.
The Chairman. Since Mrs. Pfost comes from Idaho, she is particu-
larly interested in this.
Mr. Sargent. Moscow, not United States of America, let us say.
The National Advisory Council on this summer session of 1935 con-
sisted of :
W. W. Charters, director, Bureau of Educational Kesearch, Ohio
State University ; Harry Woodburn Chase —
Mr. Hays. Would you mind going back ? I was called out.
Mr. Sargent. I thought you had left us for the time being.
Mr. Hays. Oh, no. I would never leave this interesting speech.
Would you start over, there, until we make some sequence about
Ohio State University ?
Mr. Sargent. Well, I read the first two names in the first place,
Counts and Harper. Then, the National Advisory Council, on the
opening page of this thing, consists of the following people :
W. W. Charters, director, Bureau of Educational Research, Ohio
State University
Mr. Hays. Now, then, right there. This is an advertisement you
are reading?
Mr. Sargent. No; there is a formal official announcement of the
course of study listing the actual courses to be given over there, the
hours, the credit, and the entire arrangement.
Mr. Hays. Now, was that ever held?
Mr. Sargent. Yes; definitely.
Mr. Hays. That is the same outfit that Joe McCarthy accused Mur-
row of sponsoring, isn't it?
Mr. Sargent. I don't know whether he did or not.
Mr. Hays. You know good and well it is.
Mr. Sargent. Murrow is on the list, and I have always understood
that it was held all right. I have been told that it was held. I think
everybody admits it was held.
Mr. Hays. Ed Murrow says it wasn't. Can you name anybody that
says it was? I mean, I am just interested in finding out. If it was
held, that is one thing. But if it is a phony you are dragging in here,
that is another thing.
Mr. Sargent. This is no phony. This has been referred to many
times, and I have never heard anybody deny the fact that such a
session was held. This is an official announcement for the holding of
a meeting.
It has a study tour, and the whole thing.
Mr. Hays. I assume that that is what it is. But the question I am
asking is that you say it had a terrific effect in indoctrinating these
people. The mere fact that the ad appeared didn't indoctrinate any-
body.
268 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Sargent. That is an announcement of the meeting.
Mr. Hats. If they went there and. studied, I will go along with you ;
they probably got indoctrinated. But I am trying to find out from
you if it was ever held.
Mr. Sargent. It is my understanding that definitely it was held in
accordance with this announcement here.
Mr. Hats. That is your understanding. Can you offer any
evidence?
Mr. Sargent. I have discussed the matter with various people in
this field, and that is the information given to me, that it was held.
Until this moment, I have never heard anybody say it wasn't.
The Chairman. You might check a little further on that and advise
us more definitely.
Mr. Hats. Now just a minute. If we are going to have more check-
ing, let's leave the whole business until we get it checked. What I
would like to know right now : Can we have an agreement to bring in
Dr. Counts and let him tell us his story about it? Is he still living,,
Mr. Wormser?
Mr. Wormser. I wouldn't know.
Mr. Hats. He must be getting pretty old now.
Mr. Dodd. No ; he is in his middle sixties.
Mr. Hays. I thought he was older than that. I heard his name
when I was in the university many years ago.
Mr. Sargent. This is an official announcement.
Mr. Hays: Just a minute.
Let us let the committee decide what we are going to do. Don't be
too eager.
Can we get an agreement at this time that at an appropriate time,
to be decided when the appropriate time is — I will be glad to leave that
to the Chair — this can be done.
The Chairman. I see no objection. Then it will be agreed.
Mr. Hats. I have more than one motive. I had to read one of his
books when I was in college, and I always did want to ask him some-
thing.
Mr. Sargent. The second name was Harry Woodburn Chase,
chancellor of New York University ; and then
George S. Counts, National Advisory Council, also professor of
education, Teachers College, Columbia University ; ■
John Dewey, professor emeritus of philosophy, Columbia Uni-
versity ;
Stephen Duggan, director, Institute of International Education ;
Hallie F. Flanagan, professor of English, Vassar College;
Frank P. Graham, president, University of North Carolina;
Robert M. Hutchins, president, University of Chicago ;
Charles H. Judd, dean, School of Education, University of Chicago;
I. L. Kandel, professor of education, Teachers College, Columbia
University ;
Robert L. Kelly, secretary, Association of American Colleges ;
John A. Kingsbury, secretary, Milbank Memorial Fund;
Susan M. Kingsbury, professor of social economy and social
research, Bryn Mawr College ;
Paul Klapper, dean, School of Education, College of the City of
New York ;
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 269
Charles R. Mann, director, American Council on Education ;
Edward E. Murrow, assistant director, Institute of International
Education ;
William Allan Neilson
Mr. Hats. May I interrupt you right there?
That is the one we are talking about. And Mr. Murrow says it
wasn't held.
Mr. Sargent. It may or may not be what he is talking about. I
don't know. This particular thing is an official announcement and a,
detailed course listing. There may be something else about Murrow.
I don't know.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Chairman, I must object to this kind of stuff. I
mean, even Joe McCarthy had that thing repudiated, and I don't
see why we should let someone come in here and rehash that kind!
of stuff. «
I mean, this is exactly the kind of thing that Joe accused Murrow^
of, and it has very definitely been established that the thing was never
held. Now, if it were held, that is material, and if those men went
there and became indoctrinated, I would like you to know that I
would be one of the first- to want to bring them m and cross-examine
them, but to let an obscure person who has no standing in the educa-
tional field come in here and malign people like this — I have to object
to this.
Mr. Sargent. It was not established that this was not held, and
I think it will be completely established that it was. And I do not
know whether this is the document about Murrow
Mr. .Hays. You are under oath, but you keep saying you think it
was held, and it hasn't been clearly established.
Now, do you know whether it was or whether it was not ?
Mr. Sargent. I was told positively by Mr. Hunter, a Hearst cor-
respondent in Washington, D. C, that this meeting was held, and
the photostat I have in my hand was given to me by him.
Mr. Hays. Well, now, then, in other words, he knows more about
it than you ?
. Mr. Sargent. He is in the newspaper business, and he has contacts,
and he gave me this particular thing. I have also discussed this else-
where. I have never heard it suggested by anybody that this waa
not held.
Mr. Hays. You apparently don't read the papers much or look at
television, because it is pretty generally understood. It has been more
than suggested. It has been definitely said.
Mr. Sargent. Murrow has done a lot of things. I am not talking
about Murrow here. He is one of the names on the list, and my reason
for bringing it up has nothing whatever to do with Mr. Murrow. It.
has to do with the educational picture your committee is considering.
Mr. Hays. Then why are you reading all these names ?
Mr. Sargent. To show that a very large group connected with
American educational affairs at the time participated in the course
of study offered by this document here, enumerating what kind of a
course of study it was, and the arrangement.
Mr. Hays. Now, Mr. Chairman, he is again saying they partici-
pated. They say they didn't. Can we again get an agreement, to
subpena Mr. Murrow and ask him about it ?
49720 — 54— pt. 1 IS
270 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The Chairman. Well, we would be glad to subpena someone, I
think we ought to have a judgment on which ones of the names
mentioned.
Mr. Hays. I nominate Mr. Murrow, because I think if it is a lie he
is probably the fellow that can nail it to the cross about as quickly as
anyone that has been mentioned.
The Chairman. But it would seem to me this would have some
bearing, regardless' of whether the summer school was actually held;
that the announcement, the program, 'the course of study, that was
agreed upon in anticipation of the school being held, has an important
relationship regardless of whether the actual course of study was held.
Whether it was held or was not, I have no information.
Mr. Hats. I am inclined to agree with you, Mr. Chairman, that it
would have a great deal of importance, even the fact that such a
course was considered and ytie ad was published. But this witness
keeps inferring, and bringing in names, and saying, "I know that it
was held," or "I have every reason to believe it was held." And the
most prominent name perhaps that he has mentioned has been Edward
R. Murrow. And I don't think I am being unreasonable if I ask that
the committee agree at this moment to subpena Mr. Murrow and
merely ask him, "Was or was not this held" and then if you have any
other questions you want to ask him, that is good enough. That is all
I want to do.
Mr. Sargent. There is some other information, Mr. Hays.
This pamphlet states on its face that sessions of this type were held
in Moscow in 1933 and 1934, and it describes both of those sessions and
indicates that the present meeting I mention here had its origin put of
those meetings.
So there is a direct statement here that two other sessions have been
held previously,
Mr. Hats. I don't know what you are reading from.
Mr. Sargent. Well, I will come to that. I am trying to read this
chronologically, in order to have no question about my making selec-
tions or editing. I am beginning at the start, and I am going
through it.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Chairman, may I make a suggestion? I would
be glad to have the staff ascertain whether it was held or not. If it
was not, of course, we would be perfectly delighted to concede it,
Mr. Hays.
Mr. Hays. I would like to have somebody under oath testify whether
it was held or not.
Mr. Wormser. Is that necessary ?
Mr. Hays. I think it is.
The Chairman. At the same time, I think it would be well for the
staff to ascertain the periods at which the schools were held.
The committee will stand in recess.
(Short recess.)
The Chairman. The committee will be in order.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Chairman, I would like to state right now that I
have just been in touch with New York and have hurriedly checked
the Ed Murrow statement, and he states positively and definitely — he
did on television — that this thing was never held; that the Soviet
Government canceled it ; that he personally did not go to Europe that
summer, or to Russia ; that several members of this group didn't go
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 271
to Europe. Some of them did go on a tour of Western Europe, but
none of them attended any such course.
Now, as I say, that was a hurried checking, and I would like to be
able to call somebody in who can do more than give hearsay. You
cannot admit hearsay evidence in a court, and that is all that this is.
The Chairman. It has been agreed upon that some person connected
with the organization will be called, that can give definite testimony.
But if you will bear with the Chair a moment, what seems to be very
important to my mind is the reference to the session having been held
in 1933 and 1934, which has the same implication as the one that was
proposed for 1935. And I, myself, am prepared to believe that there
is a question about whether that was actually held. But I think there
is significance so far as this hearing is concerned to the fact that it was
announced, that the course of study was made up, and certain educa-
tors and other interested persons here participated in the preliminary
activities to the holding of the summer school. Whether it was actu-
ally held, I agree is pertinent, but I think we can definitely establish
that fact, and some appropriate official will be summoned to give that
information.
Mr. Hats. The whole point of my objection is that again we have
evidence of this business of name dropping which, if left unchallenged,
would give the general impression to the public at large that Ed Mur-
row and all these other names mentioned were a bunch of Communist
sympathizers who were trying to actively promote communism in the
United States.
Now, maybe some of the names mentioned are. I don't know. But I
did want the record to show that this is the same old tripe that we had
a big hassle over on television a few weeks ago, and I thought then it
was pretty definitely disposed of.
If we have anything here this gentleman can present that has some
bearing on the matter, that is one thing, but to continue this character
assassination and so on and so forth by inference and by saying, "Well,
somebody told me so," — that is something else again.
I think we will have to give these people, if there is any awareness
about this a chance to come in.
The Chairman. Everybody who wants to come in will be given an
opportunity at the right time. But, again, it is my own feeling that
regardless of whether the summer school of 1935 was held, the pro-
gram from which Mr. Sargent is reading has an important bearing on
the subject. But I agree with you with reference to what you have
said.
Mr. Hays. Now, Mr. Sargent, right there, would you mind if I took
a look at that list ? Not because I doubt what you are reading, but I
cannot keep all those names in my mind, and I would like to look at it
to see if there are any other names I recognize besides Ed. Murrow's.
I do not know any of them personally, not one of them.
Mr. Sargent. Certainly.
Mr. Hats. Here is an example of what we are dealing with. It says :
The summer session originated as a result of an experiment conducted during
the summer of 1933 by a group of American educators. The American summer
school in Russia was organized to offer due courses dealing with "experimental
educational programs of the Soviet Union" and "institutional changes in the
Soviet Union."
272 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Now, I can understand why the Russian Government canceled this-
thing. Of course, they didn't want anybody to find out what was going:
on. That would be one viewpoint of it, wouldn't it? They didn't
want any one from America going back there after finding out what
they were doing? And I am not surprised that they did cancel it.
The Chairman. I was going to ask Mr. Sargent if he would leave
that with the committee, again not to be printed but as part of the
record ?
Mr. Sargent. Yes, I will. There is a copy which was intended for
your use.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Mr. Sargent. Two things are apparent on the face of this document.
One is that the group of persons I named here did apparently allow
their names to be used in the publication of a pamphlet containing an
offering of the program set forth in the document.
Secondly, the March 1935 issue contains the same panel of names;
here, a picture of Red Square in Moscow, and some detail bringing
the meeting to the attention of people in the educational profession.
Those things we know.
The exact fact, whether it was held later or canceled, is not within
my personal knowledge, and I, therefore, offer no testimony.
Mr. Hays. Well, Mr. Sargent, would you say anyone who had ever
been behind the Iron Curtain was automatically suspect?
Mr. Sargent. I didn't say that. What has that to do with this?
Am I calling these people Reds ? I didn't say that, either.
Mr. Hays. Not in so many words, but you are certainly trying to
infer that they are.
Mr. Sargent. I am saying that was the educational thinking at
the time, sir, and that is important background material in review-
ing what this committee is supposed to determine, that the thinking
has gone to a point where it was seriously considered to be a worth-
while project to do the things which I am referring to here, reading
out of this pamphlet. That is an entirely different thing.
Mr. Hays. Did you read the part of the pamphlet I read ?
Mr. Sargent. Yes, and I also read something at the end that you did
not read.
Mr. Hays. You have had, I don't know how long, to look at this
pamphlet. I had perhaps 2 minutes. But it seemed to me I picked up
a pretty significant statement there in the 2 minutes.
Mr. Sargent. There are some other very significant statements.
Mr. Hays. I would like to have time to study the whole thing.
Maybe I will agree with you.
Mr. Sargent. I was reading the names here. The remaining list
of names is William Allan Neilson, president, Smith College.
Howard W. Odum, professor of sociology and director, school of
public welfare, University of North Carolina.
William F. Russell, dean, .Teachers College, Columbia University.
H. W. Tyler, general secretary, American Association of University
Professors.
Ernest H. Wilkins, president, Oberlin College.
John W. Withers, dean, School of Education. New York University.
Thomas Woody, professor of history of education, University of
Pennsylvania.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 273
Harry W. Zorbaugh, director, clinic for the social adjustment of
igifted children, New York University.
The next page says :
The tremendous progress of the Soviet Union in the cultural field creates for
Americans an unequal observation ground for education, sociology, and the
social sciences. The Soviet Union presents a unique opportunity for the study
•of the processes of cultural change. The first and second 5-year plans, by creating
the foundations of a planned economy, have brought about a complete recon-
struction in the social attitudes and behavior of the Russian people.
It says :
The Soviet Union possesses the most progressive system of public education,
extensively making use of the best achievements of international pedagogy.
The Chairman. This is all in the announcement ?
Mr. Sargent. Yes. All in the announcement. I am getting repre-
sentative samples out of the document, and I am giving you the docu-
ment.
Under "Purpose," on page 4, it says that this summer session is open
to all academically qualified foreigners who are interested in the cul-
tural and educational aspects of life in the Soviet Union; that the
•director of the Moscow University summer session is a Soviet educator.
The summer session is officially an organizational part of the Moscow State
University.
In order to insure close cooperation with American educational institutions,
and with students and educatorst in the United States, an advisory relationship
was established in 1933 with the Institute of International Education.
I might comment again here, as I showed before : As to the Rocke-
feller Foundation, Rockefeller in some form was a contributor to that
international educational institute. The Teachers College pamphlet,
Introducing Teachers College, so states.
Mr. Hays. Is that Rockefeller, junior, or the foundation?
Mr. Sargent. I don't know. I read you the excerpt before. It
read, the Rockefellers in some form contributed, at least, to that inter-
national educational institute. The writings of George Counts show
that he was a director of the Institute of International Education.
That appears in a number of his writings, including one entitled
"Driving a Ford Across Soviet Russia," or some similar title, published
about 1929.
Now, going on with this document here :
At the same time, a national advisory council of prominent American edu-
cators was formed by Prof. Stephen Duggan to assist the Institute of Inter-
national Education in its advisory capacity. To facilitate still closer rap-
proachement, each year several American educators are invited to Moscow as
resident advisers to the summer session. Dr. George S. Counts and Dr. Heber
Harper, professors of education, Teachers College, Columbia University, will
act as advisers during the summer session of 1935.
The Moscow University summer session is sponsored in the Soviet Union by
the Peoples' Commissariat of Education of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet
Republic ; by VOKS, the All-Union Society for Cultural Relations with Foreign
Countries ; and by Intourist, the state travel company of the U. S. S. R. Intourist,
through its educational department will supply information to persons interested.
The cover I have here shows that this is a document of, it says,
World Tourists, Inc. The Intourist label, I think, appears here later.
No, I guess I am mistaken on that point.
274 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
In the statement under "Origin," on page 5, it says :
The summer session originated as the result of an experiment conducted
during the summer of 1933 by a group of American educators. The American
summer school in Russia was organized in 1933 to offer two courses.
Mr. Hays. Are you going to read that whole document?
Mr. Sargent. No, just excerpts.
Mr. Hays. Why don't we just, by unanimous consent, put the
whole thing in the record, Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Sargent. Well, I would like to excerpt briefly here.
Mr. Hays. You seem to like to read. But I would rather read it
directly, if it is all right. It would save a litle time;
Mr. Sargent. I want to review the course of study here, the dif-
ferent courses studied. There is one in art and literature, 32 hours ;
2 semester units.
Mr. Hays. Now, wait a minute. Just a minute.
The Chairman. Is there any objection to inserting it; instead of
filing it as a document, having it printed in the record at the appro-
priate point in connection with your testimony ?
Mr. Sargent. You. mean printing it in full ?
The Chairman. Printing it in full.
Mr. Sargent. Well, perhaps not.
I would just like to say a few words about the nature of the courses.
Mr. Hays. You can say whatever you like. The only thing I am
interested in: If you are going to read the whole thing, lefts just
put it. in and we can have your comment.
The Chairman. Without objection, it will be printed as part of
the record, Mr. Reporter.
(The document referred to follows :)
[Flyleaf]
For Travel Information Apply to
World Tourists, Inc.
175 Fifth Avenue, New York City
(Printed in U. S. A.)
MOSCOW UNIVERSITY
SUMMEE SESSION
(Anglo-American Section)
American Advisory Organisation
INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION, INC.
Advisors : George S. Counts and Heber Harper.
NATIONAL ADVISORY COUNCIL
W. W. Charters, director, Bureau of Educational Research, Ohio State Uni-
versity.
Harry Woodburn Chase, chancellor of New York University.
George S. Counts, professor of education, Teachers College, Columbia Uni-
versity.
John Dewey, professor emeritus of philosophy, Columbia University.
Stephen Duggan, director, Institute of International Education.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 275
Hallie F. Flanagan, professor of English, Vassar College.
Frank P. Graham, president, University of North Carolina.
Robert M. Hutchins, president, University of Chicago.
Charles H. Judd, dean, School of Education, University of Chicago.
I. L. Kandel, professor of education, Teachers College, Columbia University.
Robert L. Kelly, secretary, Association of American Colleges.
John A. Kingsbury, secretary, Milbank Memorial Fund.
Susan M. Kingbury, professor of social economy and social research, Bryn
Mawr College. ^
Paul Klapper, dean, School of Education, College of the City of New York.
Charles R. Mann, director, American Council on Education.
Edward R. Murrow, assistant director, Institute of International Education.
William Allan Neilson, president, Smith College.
Howard W. Odum, professor of sociology and director, School of Public Wel-
fare, University of North Carolina.
William F. Russell, dean, Teachers College, Columbia University.
H. W. Tyler, general secretary, American Association of University Professors.
Ernest H. Wilkins, president, Oberlin College.
John W. Withers, dean, School of Education, New York University.
Thomas Woody, professor of history of education, University of Pennsylvania.
Harvey W. Zorbaugh, director, Clinic for the Social Adjustment of Gifted
Children, New York University.
The tremendous progress of the Soviet Union in the cultural field
creates for Americans an unequalled observation ground for education,
psychology, and the social sciences. The Soviet Union presents a unique
opportunity for the study of the processes of cultural change. The first
and second Five Year Plans, by creating the foundations of a planned
national economy, have brought about a complete reconstruction in the
social attitudes and behavior of the Russion people.
Froniifi backward and illiterate country, the U. 8. S. R. has been trans-
formed into a modern industrial nation. Illiteracy has been almost
abolished. The Soviet Union possesses the most progressive system of
public education, extensively making use of the best achievements of
international pedagogy. Soviet policy in social welfare, the care of
mothers and children, the re-education and re-direction of lawless ele-
ments, and in other fields, presents a provocative challenge to students
on all levels.
Purpose
Moscow University summer session conducts an Anglo-American section, open
to all academically qualified foreigners who are interested in the cultural and
educational aspects of life in the Soviet Union. Instruction is in the English
language, by an all-Soviet faculty of professors and specialists. The State Uni-
versity of Moscow certifies academic credit to those foreign students meeting
the requirements of the university and completing a course of study in its Anglo-
American section. The director of the Moscow University summer session is a
Soviet educator. The summer session is officially an organizational part of the
Moscow State University.
In order to insure close cooperation with American educational institutions,
and with students and educators in the United States, an advisory relationship
was established in 1933 with the Institute of International Education. At the
same time, a National Advisory Council of prominent American educators was
formed by Prof. Stephen Duggan to assist the Institute of International Educa-
tion in its advisory capacity. To facilitate still closer rapprochment, each year
several American educators are invited to Moscow as resident advisers to the
summer session. Dr. George S. Counts and Dr. Heber Harper, professors of edu-
cation, Teachers' College, Columbia University, will act as advisers during the
summer session of 1935.
The Moscow University summer session is sponsored in the Soviet Union by
the Peoples' Commissariat of Education of the Russian Socialist Federated
Soviet Republic; by VOKS, the AU-Union Society for Cultural Relations with
Foreign Countries ; and by Intoueist, the State Travel Company of the U. S. R. R.
Intourist, through its Educational Department, will supply information to per-
sons interested.
Moscow University will offer, in its Anglo-American section, during the summer
of 1935, a variety of courses to serve as a means of furthering cultural contacts
between American and Russian teachers and students. The summer session
276 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
functions with the purpose of providing foreign visitors to the Soviet Union
with the academic facilities and programs necessary for serious study and re-
search. However, the purpose of the summer session is primarily that of assist-
ing foreigners in a survey and understanding of the various phases of contempo-
rary life in the Soviet Union.
Origin
The summer session originated as the result of an experiment conducted dur-
ing the summer of 1933 by a group of American educators. The "American
Summer School in Russia" was organized in 1933 to offer two courses dealing
•with "Experimental Educational Programs of the Soviet Union" and "Insti-
tutional Changes in the Soviet Union." These two courses were conducted in
Moscow in an experimental fashion with a group of twenty-five teachers and
students of education.
At the second summer session in 1934, thirteen courses were offered in five
major fields of art and literature, sociology, psychology, education and research.
The staff was composed of twenty-two professors and academic assistants. Two
hundred and twelve students attended the 1934 session. Among them were
undergraduates, teachers, principals, professors, psychologists, social workers,
"physicians, nurses and artists.
Basing their judgment upon the undeniable success of these ventures, the
Soviet educational authorities organized at the University of Moscow, an Anglo-
American section offering full and regular summer instruction in English. The
students and professors of the 1933 and 1934 sessions approved the academic ad-
vantages of the plan, which enabled the student to travel during his vacation
period and at the same time to further his own professional experience. It is a
plan that has the full support of the foremost educators and scientists of the
Soviet Union.
The directors of the summer school discovered that while American educators
displayed great interest in Soviet education, it was evident that outside of the
Soviet Union there existed no profound knowledge of actual conditions in the
Soviet school world. These considerations, coupled with the ever present Rus-
sian eagerness for close cultural contact with Americans, are the primary reasons
for the continuation of the plan.
The Plan of the Summer Session
Moscow University summer session offers the student an opportunity to com-
bine summer vacation with study and European travel at very economical rates.
Special rates for maintenance in the Soviet Union are available only to students,
teachers or social workers who attend the summer session.
Academic Program
The Anglo-American section of the Moscow University summer session offers
a wide choice of subjects and courses. The courses offered during the 1935 ses-
sion, which begins on July 19th in Moscow, are listed below under special group
headings.
ART AND LITERATURE
Arts in the U. 8. 8. R. — SO hours, 2 semester units
(Requires minimum of thirty additional hours observation and field work.
Open to all students.)
A discussion of contemporary painting, sculpture, architecture, music, theater,
and the dance in the Soviet Union. The course will offer the student a concept
of the relation of art to the building of the new Soviet society. Topics to be
discussed will include the features of socialist realism in art ; the social status
of artists ; the economic organization enabling creative work ; and the role of
the arts in the program of popular education.
Observation and field work will be scheduled in gallaries, studios, theatres for
children and adults, research institutes, club houses for artists and other insti-
tutions for the development of art activities.
Literature of Russia and the Soviet Union — SO hours, 2 semester units
(Requires a minimum of thirty adidtional hours of library work. Open to all
students. )
The course will present a prief survey of pre-revolutionary Russia literature
and the effects of the old writers upon the new. There will be included a descrip-
tion of the historical stages of Soviet literature; the present school of socialist
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 277
realism; the work and influence of such writers as Gorski and others; the
themes of contemporary Soviet literature ; and the social role of the Soivet writer
in the program for the building of socialism.
INSTITUTIONAL CHANGES AND SOCIAL BACKGBOTTNDS OF SOVIET SOCIETY
Principles of the Collective and Socialist Society— SO hours, 2 semester units
(The course, or is equivalent, prerequesite for all students. Students may re-
quest exemption when registering.)
An elementary course, presenting and describing the basic ideas and institu-
tions of Soviet society. Beginning with a brief historical account, the course will
present in simple terms the theory and practice of socialist construction. Among
the topics included in the course are : the theories underlying the Soviet State ;
the organization of the government and the Soviet economy; the program of
educational and cultural advance; the relation of the individual to the family
and to other social groups ; the question of the village and the collectivization
of agriculture ; and the solution of the problems of national minorities. The
course is intended as a general survey of Soviet life.
Justice and the Correctional Policy of the S. U. — 30 hours, 2 semester units
(Requires 15 additional hours of observation. Open to all students.)
The course will describe the Soviet system of jurisprudence and the adminis-
tration of justice. There will be a review of the major theories of criminology
as well as the Marxian point of view towards the problem of crime. It will then
specifically deal with crime and its eradication in the Soviet Union. Programs
for the education of delinquents (children and adolescents) and for the reclama-
tion of criminals will be presented. In connection with this course, there will be
visits of observation to the various institutions concerned with this problem.
Organization of Public Health and Socialized Medicine — SO hours, 2 semester units
(Requires a minimum of fifteen additional hours of observation and field work.
Open to all students. Recommended to social workers, physicians and health
education specialists.)
The course presents a study of the organization of health and medical services
in the U. S. S. R. There will be a description of the organization and programs
of hospitals, clinics, rest homes, sanataria and dispensaries in their relationships
to factories and farms ; medical research and the work of experimental institutes ;
training of medical workers; care of women and children in factories, schools
and on farms; social psychiatry and mental hygiene; physical education and
programs for disease prevention ; and the organization of professional medicine
as a state function.
Education and Science
Survey of Education in the U. S. S. R. — 80 hours, 4 semester units
(Requires a minimum of thirty additional hours of library, observation and
field work. Open to teachers and students of education. )
This course will describe the philosophy, curricula, and methods of the follow-
ing divisions of Soviet education :
A. — The Unified Polytechnical School and Its Preschool Foundations : The
polytechnical school includes elementary and secondary education. The course
will begin with an examination of Soviet pre-school institutions.
B — Vocational and Higher Education : The course will present the Soviet pro-
gram for the training of workers of all grades and in all fields ; it will include
a description of such institutions as factory and mill schools, workers' schools
(rabfacs), technicums, higher technical schools, pedagogical institutes, medical
schools, institutes of Soviet law, art universities, Communist universities and
universities proper. Subjects of special interest will be the composition of the
student body, the system of maintenance stipends for students, the problems of
control and administration, and the relation of vocational and professional
education to the planned economy.
C — Extra School and Adult Education Agencies : The course will deal with those
educational agencies which reach children as well as adults — libraries, reading
rooms, evening and correspondence courses, the press, book stores, clubs,
museums, galleries, travel and excursions, radio, post and telegraph, cinema and
theatre, the activities of popular societies, etc.
278 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Science and Technic in the U. 8. 8. R. — 60 hours, 4 semester units
( Requires 15 additional hours of library work. Open to all students.)
The course will study the relation of social planning to scientific research in
the Soviet Union. The course will include a description of the early types of
planning under military Communism; the plan formulated by Lenin for the
electrification of the country ; the development of the State Planning Commis-
sion from its founding in 1921; the structure and function of the system of
planning organizations, and the actual methods utilized in the preparation and
execution of the first and second five-year plans. The student will be given an
outline of the Marxian view of the role of science in socialistic society, and an
account of the coordinated development of the Soviet network of scientific
research institutes. Soviet development in the fields of social and physical
sciences will be studied. The course will conclude with a summary of the present
status of planning and science in the Soviet Union.
Survey of Psychological Research — 80 hours, 2 semester units
(Requires minimum of fifteen additional hours of library, laboratory or obser-
vation work. Registration open only to advanced students of psychology.)
This course presents an advanced discussion of the technical and specialized
phases of experimental psychology in the Soviet Union. Such topics as the fol-
lowing will be considered : the status of psychology in Russia prior to the Revolu-
tion of 1917; the theories of reflexology and conditioning (Pavlov and Bech-
terov) ; trends in contemporary psychological research in the U. S. S. R. ; Soviet
advance in applied psychology and psychotechnics ; psychology and industrial
rationalization ; and the relation of Marxism-Leninism to psychology.
HISTOKT, ECONOMICS AND PHILOSOPHY
History of the Soviet Union — 60 hours, 4 semester units
(Requires a minimum of thirty additional hours of library work. Open to all
students. )
This course opens with a study of prerevolutionary Russian history. The
course will continue with a study of the forces underlying the Czarist policy at
home and abroad ; the social and economic life of the people under the old regime ;
the early mass uprisings, strikes and revolutions ; the development of capitalism
and industry ; the distribution of land and property ; the revolutionary movement
prior to 1905 : the 1905 revolution ; the World War and the collapse of the old
order ; the February and October revolutions ; the period of military Communism,
civil war and NEP ; the reconstruction era ; the first and second five-year plans.
Economic Policy and Geography of the V. S. 8. R. — 60 hours, 4 semester units
(Requires thirty additional hours of library, observation and field work. Open
to all students. )
The course will discuss the general economic development of the U. S. S. R. by
presenting an historical account of the building of socialism in relation to the
geographic factors. Topics included in the course are : The period of a military
Communism in the first years of the revolution ; the new economic policy inaugu-
rated in 1921, and the program of planned construction launched by the first
five-year plan in 1928. The course will also touch upon the problems of foreign
and domestic trade, wages, housing, social benefits, taxation, Soviet monetary
system, etc.
Philosophy of Dialectical Materialism — 80 hours, 2 semester units
(Requires a minimum of fifteen hours library work. Open only to advanced
students having necessary background in history of philosophy.)
This course will present an introduction to the philosophy of dialectical ma-
terialism. The works of Marx, Lenin, and Stalin will be utilized for the presenta-
tion of the basic positions, postulates and doctrines of dialectical materialism.
The course will also point out the important applications of the philosophy of
dialectical materialism to scientific research both in social and natural sciences.
LANGUAGE
Advanced Russian for Foreigners — 30 hours, 2 semester units
(Open to students with elementary knowledge of Russian.)
The course will build a more thorough reading knowledge and a better collo-
quial use of Russian. The emphasis will be entirely upon the practice of Russian
for conversational and research purposes. Oral and written composition will be
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 279
required. At least one work of contemporary Russian literature will be read and
discussed in class.
Caleindae
July 16-18 incl. : Preliminary sessions in Leningrad.
July 19: Official opening session in Moscow.
Aug. 13 : Examinations and final session in Moscow.
Aug. 14-25 incl. : Travel field work period.
Note. — Students may arrive in Leningrad between July 16th and 18th. Those
students arriving in Leningrad after July 16, but not later than July 18th, will
be granted the privilege of remaining in Kiev for an additional number of days,
bringing the total to forty days from date of arrival. Students arriving in
Leningrad or Moscow earlier than July 16th will be charged the regular Intourist
rate of $5 per day in supplement to the basic summer session rate.
The basic rate for travel and maintenance in the Soviet Union during the
period of the summer session is $176.00. No refunds will be granted students
leaving the Soviet Union before the end of the summer session, unless with-
drawal is caused by illness or force majeure.
These regulations are stated in order to permit the necessary adjustment
caused by varying dates of arrival in the Soviet Union.
Daily Class Schedule
Bour Course
9-10 Philosophy of Dialectical Materialism.
Survey of Psychological Research.
Principles of the Collective and Socialist Society.
10-12 Science and Technic in the U. S. S. R.
Survey of Education in the U. S. S. R.
History of the Soviet Union.
Economic Policy and Geography of the U. S. S. R.
12-1 Arts in the U. S. S. R.
Organization of Public Health and Socialized Medicine.
Justice and the Correctional Policy of the Soviet Union.
2-3 Literatures of Russia and the Soviet Union.
Advanced Russian for Foreigners.
Academic Regulations
1. Enrollments are accepted for one or more courses, but the total number of
class room hours may not exceed ninety (six semester units).
2. The course "Principles of the Collective and Socialist Society" is prerequisite
for admission to all other courses; however, the student may enroll simultane-
ously in this and other courses. Students may be exempted from this requirement
by presenting evidence of having completed :
a — An equivalent course during the Moscow University summer sessions
of 1933 or 1934.
b — An equivalent course in an American school or university.
c — The reading of at least three approved references on the subject.
3. Students enrolling in "Survey of Psychological Research" must list at least
three previous courses in psychology when filling out the application form.
4. Changes in program may not be made later than one week after the opening
of the summer session in Moscow.
5. Moscow University reserves the right to dismiss students for unsatisfactory
work or conduct.
6. Students may not attend courses other than those in which they are enrolled ;
auditors will not be permitted.
7. Students may not enroll in "Philosophy of Dialectical Materialism" without
necessary recommendations or prerequisite courses.
8. AM registrations are subject to the approval of the director of Moscow Uni-
versity summer session or the American representative of Moscow University.
9. Academic credit will not be granted to students absent during more than
three class sessions.
Tkavel Plan
The unique feature of the summer school plan, offered by the Anglo-American
section of Moscow University, is the combination of class room and laboratory
study with travel in the Soviet Union. The educational directors of the uni-
versity are of the opinion that an adequate understanding of the policies and
280
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
programs of Soviet institutions is to be found not only through academic investi-
gation but also through direct observation of institutions at work. To this end,
and in order to permit the visitor to become acquainted with the many aspects
of social conditions not only in one locale but throughout the country, each
course listed is offered in conjunction with field work tours. These will include
the major cities of the Soviet Union, and permit close observation of institutional
life.
Academic work at the University of Moscow includes approximately four
weeks of resident study and two weeks of supervised travel. The itineraries for
the travel period have been set up to meet professional and academic interest"
All students enrolled are offered the choice of the following itineraries.
Itinerary No. 1
Aug. 14 — Leave Moscow — late after-
noon
15 — En route
16 — Arrive Sevastopol — morning
17 — To Yalta
18— Yalta
19— Yalta
20— Yalta
21 — Yalta ; leave Yalta — morning
22 — Arrive Odessa— morning ;
leave evening
23 — Arrive Kiev
24— Kiev
25 — Leave Kiev — noon, for Shepe-
tovka
Itinerary No. g
Aug. 14— Leave Moscow — noon
15 — Arrive Rostov — evening
16— Rostov
17 — Rostov
18 — Leave Rostov — afternoon
19 — Arrive Sochi — morning
20— Sochi
21 — Leave Sochi — evening
22-23— En route
24 — Arrive Odessa
25 — Leave Odessa — evening, for
Shepetovka
Itinerary No. S
Aug. 14— Leave Moscow — late after-
noon
15 — Arrive Kharkov — noon
16 — Kharkov
17 — Leave Kharkov — noon; ar-
rive Dnieproges — evening
18 — Dnieproges — Leave evening
19 — Arrive Sevastopol — morn-
ing ; to Yalta
20— Yalta
21 — Leave Yalta — morning
22 — Arrive Odessa — morning ;
leave evening
23 — Arrive Kiev
24— Kiev
25 — Leave Kiev — noon, for Shep-
etovka
Itinerary No. 4
Aug. 14 — Leave Moscow — evening
15— Old Rostov
16 — Yaroslavl
17— Yaroslavl — leave for Mos-
cow
18 — Moscow
19 — Leave Moscow — evening
20 — Arrive Leningrad — morning ;
leave afternoon
21— Pskov
22 — From Pskov to Staraya
Russia and by boat to Old
Novgorod
23 — Old Novgorod — Leave for
Leningrad
24 — Arrive Leningrad— morning
25 — Leave Leningrad, for Belo
Ostrov (or by steamer)
Itinerary No. 5
(15 Day Itinerary — Supplementary
Cost $20.00)
Aug. 14 — Leave Moscow — evening
15 — Arrive Gorki — morning
16 — Leave Gorki — noon
17— On the Volga
18— On the Volga
19— On the Volga
20 — Arrive Stalingrad — morn-
ing ; leave evening
21 — Arrive Rostov — evening
22— Rostov
23— Rostov
24 — Rostov
25 — Leave Rostov — morning ; ar-
rive Kharkov — evening
26— Kharkov
27 — Kharkov — leave evening
28— Kiev
29 — Leave Kiev, for Shepetovka
Itinerary No. 6
(15 Day Itinerary — Supplementary
Cost $20.00)
Aug. 14 — Leave Moscow — late after-
noon
15 — Arrive Kharkov — noon
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 281
Itinerary No. 6 — Continued Itinerary No. 6 — .Continued
(15 Day Itineary — Supplementary (15 Day Itinerary — Supplementary
Cost $20.00)— Continued Cost $20.00)— Continued
Aug. 16 — Leave Kharkov — evening Aug. 23 — En route
17^-En route 24 — En route
18 — Arrive Kislovodsk 25 — Arrive Yalta — morning
19 — Kislovodsk to OrdzhoniMdze 26 — Yalta
20 — Georgian Highway 2T — Leave Yalta— morning
21 — Tiflis — leave for Batum 28 — Arrive Odessa — morning ;
22 — Batum — leave evening for leave afternoon
Yalta 29— Kiev
Students are urged to select their itinerary, and indicate their choice upon
the attached registration form, before sailing from New York. Although it is
permissible to choose the itinerary while in residence in Moscow, in order to
avoid congestion in office routine it is advisable that the choice of itinerary be
indicated as soon as possible.
Accommodations and Social Life
Accommodations offered to visitors attending the summer session of the Mos-
cow University are of the dormitory type. These quarters are designed for stu-
dents who wish to approximate in the living conditions the life of the typical
Soviet students.
Persons desiring individual rooms, or rooms for two, may be accommodated
in the dormitories ; but since the number of such rooms is limited, requests for
other than regular dormitary quarters will be considered in order of their receipt.
Supplementary rates for individual or double rooms will be supplied upon request.
Accommodations include three full meals daily and lodging. In addition, the
summer session provides guide and interpreter service, rail and motor travel,
through Intourist, the Soviet State of Travel Company.
The -spirit of the summer session is that of the true Soviet school. In its unique
student organization and control of all physical and academic problems, the vis-
itor to the Moscow University begins to understand, through a feeling of partici-
pation, the functioning of a Soviet university.
Athletic, cultural and social activities after school hours are provided for the
visitor through the cooperation of Soviet student groups. Sightseeing, the the-
atre, the cinema, boating and bathing, the publishing of a "wall newspaper," are
but a few of the extra curricular activities available. Soviet life is rich in cul-
tural opportunities for all. The tourist is usually unable to fully avail himself of
these opportunities. But the student of the summer session will have ample op-
portunity to participate in any activity he chooses.
Students accepting dormitory accommodations must be fully aware that these
accommodations are not luxurious. They are plain but clean. They do not
provide the privacy or comforts offered by hotels. Dormitory accommodations
are available mainly because many students cannot afford the higher cost of hotel
residence. There are separate dormitories for men and women, with a limited
number of rooms for married couples.
Academic Credit
The Moscow University summer session certifies foreign students for full
academic credit at the University of Moscow.. The student may offer the certifi-
cate of attendance and credit, issued by the University of Moscow, to the faculty
of the American college or university at which he is regularly enrolled, for evalu-
ation and recognition in accordance with the policies and procedures of the insti-
tution. In order to assist in the evaluation of credit, the director of the Moscow
University summer session will provide the dean, faculty advisor or other admin-
istrative official with a full academic description of courses and of the progress in
work of each student. The minimum university credit possible is two points
and the maxmum is six points (semester units) .
New York City school teachers may offer the certificates issued by the Uni-
versity of Moscow to meet the requirements for annual salary increment (alert-
ness credit).
282 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Credit will be granted only to those students in regular attendance, who have
satisfactorily met all the requirements of Moscow University. Final examina-
tions will be given in all courses.
Registration and Fees
Courses are open to all persons interested in the cultural and social progress
of the Soviet Union.
Registrants desiring academic credit must be bona-fide undergraduate or grad-
uate university students ; teachers on elementary, secondary or university level ;
or social workers.
Before registering, students must examine the daily class schedule in order
not to enroll in courses conflicting with each other. After the student's applica-
tion has been received and accepted, the Educational Department of Intourist
will issue to each student a class admission card as well as a student identifica-
tion card. All student applications must be approved by the office of the Institute
of International Education.
Tuition fees are payable at time of registration. All checks for tuition and
registration fees must be made payable to the order of Intourist, Inc., which is
empowered to collect fees for the Moscow University. The total registration fee
is $2.50, regardless of the number of courses in which the student may enroll.
The tuition fee for each thirty-hour course is $20.00 ; the tuition fee for each
sixty-hour course is $40.00.
Tuition fees will be refunded in case of changed plans, at any time prior to
July 3, 1935. Registration fees will not be refunded.
Maintenance Cost
The cost of maintenance for the entire summer session, from July 16 to August
25th, inclusive is $176.00.
This amount includes the cost of maintenance in Leningrad or Moscow from
July 16th to July 18th; maintenance in dormitories from July 19th to August
13th ; maintenance and third-class travel costs from August 14th to August 25th,
inclusive.
Students may purchase all travel and maintenance service through local travel
agents. Intourist, Inc., provides all travel agents with complete information
concerning maintenance, travel, and other services in the Soviet Union. After
the student has purchased the necessary service through the travel agent," he will
be supplied with covering service-documents to be presented upon his arrival in
the Soviet Union to Intourist.
At the earliest possible date, each student will receive a dormitory room-assign-
ment card, a student identification card, and the necessary class admission cards.
REGISTRATION FORM
Moscow University (Summer Session)
(ANGLO-AMERICAN SECTION)
Directions :
1. Please print legibly in ink. Answer all questions.
2. Consult Daily Class Schedule before listing courses.
3. If you desire academic credit, consult the dean or advisor of your school.
4. Checks or money orders must be drawn to order of Intourist, Inc.
5. Mail application form, together with tuition and registration fees, to
the Educational Department, Intourist, Inc., 545 Fifth Ave., New York City.
6. For travel information and purchase of maintenance services in the
Soviet Union, consult your local travel agent.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 283
(USE FORM ON KEVBBSK)
APPLICATION FORM
Name Address
Birth date Occupation Place of work
Degrees Present academic status School or college
Do you Have you consulted His
desire credit? Dean or Advisor ? Name
Give one University reference (Name) (Address)
List courses in which you are enrolling : (1) (2)
(Maximum of three) (3)
If enrolling in advanced course, list previous courses or work in field
If applying for exemption from prerequisite course, state reasons
List Soviet Union Itinerary No Total amount of fees enclosed
(Date) (Signature)
The Chairman. Now you may make your comments.
Mr. Sargent. There are a number of variety courses here, one
on art and literature including Socialist realism in art, discussing the
role of the Socialist writer in the program of building for socialism.
The principles of the collective and Socialist society, a prerequisite for
all students ; the course of justice and correctional policy, discussing
the Russian system ; one on organization of public health and social-
ized medicine, including social psychiatry and mental hygiene ; one on
survey of education in the U. S. S. R. ; another on science and teeh-
nio in the U. S. S. R. ; one on a study of psychological research;
theories of reflexology and conditioning.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Sargent, you are not commenting. You are just
reading.
Mr. Sargent. It refers to the works of Pavlov here.
Mr. Hats. We have that all in the record. It is in by unanimous
consent.
What are your comments ? That is what I want to know.
Mr. Sargent. My comments are that this document shows a frame-
work of a complete system of indoctrination of American educators
which could only be put together on the theory of their receiving such
indoctrination and coming back here and introducing it into our
school system. It even includes the reflexology item I just referred
to, including material on Pavlov, who was the author of the princi-
ples of brain washing.
It includes a travel program for these educators to go to the Soviet
Union and travel around various parts of the country. One of these
travel schedules included 5 days at Yalta, among other things.
There are five different itineraries. It says a unique feature was that
they would live under conditions approximating that of the average
Soviet student, and the educators attending could even receive aca-
demic credit, and the New York City teachers would get a salary incre-
ment in the New York City school system by attending the meeting.
284 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATION'S
I cannot conceive how the panel of people named here would allow
their names to be used in sponsorship of a project of this type unless
they were profoundly in sympathy with the doing of that kind of
thing at the period that is mentioned here. This is offered in full for
the transcript of my testimony.
Mr. Hats. What the committee is concerned about, Mr. Sargent:
Could you give us any estimate of how many more pages of your state-
ment there are to read there ?
Mr. Sargent. I am not going to read the entire binder, if that
is what you mean. It contains blank paper and various things to
which I might want to refer.
The Chairman. The statement of Mr. Hays was that we had
anticipated that you would have required 2 days.
Now, the way the situation has developed, I told him we had
anticipated you would be able to finish tomorrow.
We are to have two sessions. Of course, that is not binding on
anybody, but that is our goal insofar as your direct testimony is con-
cerned. That is the frame of time that we had in mind.
As you state, I did not have in mind that you were going to read
all that is in the notes there.
Mr. Wormser. Do you think you could finish in two sessions
tomorrow ?
Mr. Sargent. I will make every effort to. I think probably.
The Chairman. We want all pertinent information included. At
the same time, we do want to conserve the time of the committee as
much as we can.
Mr. Sargent. Would it be possible, just in case, if I had one session
on the following day?
The Chairman. We don't want to commit ourselves definitely at
this time.
Mr. Sargent. I will make every effort to do that.
Mr. Hats. As I understand it, now, you are going to take at least
two more sessions and probably a third just to get through reading
your statement?
Mr. Sargent. Oh, no. I have an outline of various points to cover
here. I am getting pretty well through this historical material. I am
getting down to specific topics.
Mr. Hats. The thing that I am driving at is that it is going to
take you this long to get through your presentation before we start
crossing; is that right?
Mr. Sargent. Presumably. Regardless of the reason one way or
the other, I have had only a fraction of the time so far, and it has
put me off my stride here, and I have to get back on.
Mr. Hats. There we are getting into the realm of something that
is not within the realm of hearsay. We can measure the pages and
find out what fraction you have had, and I think you will find out it is
a big fraction.
Frankly, I might say that your diatribe has a tendency to afflict me
with ennui.
The purpose of this is to try to find out when the committee is going
to adjourn for the weekend and when we are going to reconvene next
week, because Sunday is Memorial Day, and Mr. Reece and I at least
have commitments for Memorial Day.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 285
Mr. Sargent. I think, having your point in mind here, I can bring
in an outline tomorrow morning for my guidance which will enable
me to refer to certain things, leave the document with you relating to
it, and state its general scope.
Mr. Hats. We are not going to try to cut you off.
Mr. Sargent. I understand that.
Mr. Hays. But we are just trying to find out how long we can run
this week and when we can come back next week.
Mr. Sargent. I think I can do quite well on a full run tomorrow.
The Chairman. The committee, when it recesses at noon Thursday,
will recess to convene the following Wednesday morning at 10 o'clock
at a place to be announced.
You may proceed, Mr. Sargent. We will go along as far as we can
this afternoon.
Mr. Sargent. Now, Professor George S. Counts, one of those spon-
soring this session, became a professor of education at Teachers Col-
lege, Columbia University, in the year 1927, and an associate director
of the Teachers College International Institute at the same time.
In 1929 he edited a translation of a book by a Soviet educator, Albert
P. Pinkevitch, who was president of the Second State University of
Moscow. The book states that it was translated under the auspices of
the International Institute of Columbia.
In 1931 he published a translation of the New Russian Primer,
which was the story of the 5-year plan. The same year he wrote
a book entitled "The Soviet Challenge to America." He was still
associate director of this International Institute at that particular
time.
In February of 1933, the Progressive Education Journal, which is
the official publication of the Progressive Education Society, published
an article in which Johannson I. Zilberfarb, a member of the State
Scientific Council and Commissariat of Education of the Russian
Republic, wrote an article commenting on this pamphlet, Dare the
School Build a New Social Order ?
The editors and publishers of the magazine published an excerpt
from a letter that Zilberfarb had written to Counts showing the close
sympathy existing between the two men at the time, and here is an
excerpt from the letter in the magazine. It says :
I read with a great deal of interest your recent publication, Dare the School
Build a New Social Order? The remarkable progress you have made in challeng-
ing capitalism gave me much pleasure and fired me with confidence in a yet
greater friendship between us. This feeling, however, in no way moderated my
criticisms of the pamphlet, as you will observe from the enclosed view. May I
be so bold as to hope that your profound and consistent attack on the social order
in your country will eventually lead you to a complete emancipation from Ameri-
can exclusiveness and intellectual messiahship so aptly exposed in your pamphlet,
thus enabling you to consider all social progress from a universal proletarian
point of view.
Now, going back on another phase of the same subject, we find that
generally in the educational profession, commencing around 1926,
there was forming a movement which resulted in a report frankly
recommending the slanting of history textbooks for a propaganda pat-
tern to further a collective-type of state.
The document to which I refer is known as Conclusions and Rec-
ommendations.
49720—54 — pt. 1- 19
286 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
It started as a project in 1926 by a committee of nine,- appointed
by the American Historical Society. There was a $300,000 grant from
Carnegie Corp. for that particular work, a 5-year survey. The in-
formation I have bearing on that is contained in the report itself. I
don't want to take your time in reading all these names. Would you
like me to give an excerpt to the reporter containing the list of names
without reading them here all now ? Counts is one on the committee.
Mr. Hays. What is the volume ?
Mr. Sargent. Conclusions and Recommendations, Report of the
Committee on Social Studies of the American Historical Association.
They recommend changing the curriculum to promote a collective-
type of state and playing down of traditional American values in
schoolbooks.
The Chairman. What year is that published ?
Mr. Sargent. The publication of that was in 1934. The study began
back in 1926 or 1927. It is a $300,000 Carnegie grant. I am reading
certain excerpts from the report to show the nature of the conclusions.
I. wanted to save time by not reading all the list of names.
Mr. Hays. You say it is pertinent material and it is part of the
record without being printed?
Mr. Sargent. I thought I could have typed off the list of names and
give them to the reporter to insert, instead of reading them now.
Mr. Hays. That is all right with me.
The Chairman. That will be done.
(The list of names is as follows :)
Frank W. Ballou, Superintendent of Schools, Washington, D. C.
Charles A. Beard, formerly professor of politics, Columbia -University; author
of many books in the fields of history and politics
Isaiah Bowman, director, American Geographical Society of New York; presi-
dent of the International Geographical Union
Ada Comstock, president of Radcliffe College
George S. Counts, professor of education, Teachers College, Columbia University
Avery O. Craven, professor of history, University of Chicago
Edmund E. Day, formerly dean of School of Business Administration, University
of Michigan ; now director of Social Sciences, Rockefeller Foundation
Guy Stanton Ford, professor of history, dean of Graduate School; University
of Minnesota
Carlton J. H. Hayes, professor of history, Columbia University
Ernest Horn, professor of education, University of Iowa
Henry Johnson, professor of history, Teachers College, Columbia University
A. C. Krey, professor of history, University of Minnesota
Leon C. Marshall, Institute for the Study of Law, John Hopkins University
Charles D. Merriam, professor of political science, University of Chicago
Jesse H. Newlin, professor of education, Teachers College, Columbia University ;
director of Lincoln Experimental School
Jesse F. Steiner, professor of sociology, University of Washington
Mr. Hays. Let me ask you this. I want to look at one of these books
myself. What was the name of that book you mentioned this morning
that you said did something about creating an air of revolution around
1917? Do you recall offhand what book you were talking about?
Mr. Sargent. I referred to the New York investigation of radical-
ism movement, the Lusk Report. It is a work of several volumes, I
think 4 or 5 or even 6 volumes, perhaps. It is a very intensive study.
Mr. Hays. There is another book you mentioned and I can't recall
the title. I suppose I can get it out of the transcript of this morning.
Mr. Sargent. I referred to revolutionary intellectual elites, von
Mises' book.
Mr. Hays. No.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 287
Mr. Sargent. I referred to the Occasional Papers, No. 3, of Flex-
ner, advocating a change in the educational system, that was 1916,
General Education Board publication. I don't recall anything else
offhand.
Mr. Hats. As a matter of fact, what occasioned the inquiry is that
someone came to my office who had been in the audience and asked
me if I had ever seen this volume and they mentioned the name of it.
I had not, and I cannot even recall the name of it. I thought perhaps
I was giving enough of a clue. I may be hazy myself. It will show
up in the transcript and we will get hold of it then.
Mr. Sargent. That is right. This report discusses, among other
things, educational philosophy for the United States. It says that
American society during the past 100 years has been moving from an
individual and frontier economy to a collective and social economy.
That whatever may be the character of life in the society now emer-
ging, it will certainly be different, and whether it will be better or
worse will depend on large measure on the standards of appraisal
which are applied. It says that continued emphasis in education on
traditional ideas and values of academic individualism will intensify
conflict and maladjustments during the period of transition. It says
that if education continues to emphasize philosophy of individualism
in economy, it will increase accompanying social tensions, and so
forth. That the educators' stand today between two great philoso-
phies. An individualism in economic theory which has become hos-
tile in practice to the development of individuality; the other rep-
resenting and anticipating the future.
What these gentlemen propose to do is set forth in their chapter
at the end talking about next steps. It says that it is first to awaken
and consolidate leadership around the philosophy and purpose of
education expounded in the report. That the American Historical
Association in cooperation with the National Council on the Social
Studies has arranged to take over the magazine, the Outlook, as a
social science journal for teachers. That writers of textbooks are to
be expected to revamp and rewrite their old works in accordance with
this frame of reference. That makers of programs in social sciences
in cities and towns may be expected to evaluate the findings. That it
is not too much to expect in the near future a decided shift in emphasis
from mechanics and methodology to the content and function of
courses in the social studies. That is the gist of it.
This report became the basis for a definite slanting in the curriculum
by selecting certain historical facts and by no longer presenting others,
and brought us to the condition we find ourselves in at the present time.
I am at a little disadvantage here. I had some Building of America
books which contained some very pertinent material. How much
more time have you to meet this afternoon?
The Chairman. About 25 minutes.
Mr. Sargent. That is unfortunate. I thought I would be on all
afternon.
The Chairman. However, we can quit any time.
Mr. Sargent. Logically that particular section belongs at this point.
I have a few other things I can use. Here another book of
Professor Counts showing the Russian influence on educational lead-
ers at the time. It is called Character Education in the Soviet Union.
It is edited by William Clark Trow, foreword by George S. Counts,
288 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
and is published in 1934. It reviews the Soviet method of dealing
with the question of youth and reproduces various posters used for
propaganda purposes in the Soviet Union. Here is the first one here,
reproduction of an actual Russian poster. The heading, of course, is
written in the Eussian language. The translation is on the opposite
page, and deals with the subject of international education. The
poster says :
Without educating internationalists, we will not build socialism. Animosity
between nations is the support of counter-revolutions and of capital. It is there-
fore profitable and so is maintained. War is needed by capitalists for still
greater enslavement of oppressed people. International education is the way
toward socialism and toward the union of the toilers of the whole world.
Mr. Hays. Is that book sponsored by a foundation ?
Mr. Sargent. It doesn't show on its face. It is printed by Ann
Arbor Press. The foreword is by Counts, however.
Mr. Hats. I know. You may be making a case that Dr. Counts is
a Socialist or Communist or something. I don't know about that.
But I want to know where the foundations get this book.
Mr. Sargent. The foundation tie-in for one is the International
Institute in which Counts was in a leadership position and the prefer-
ment given to Columbia University and Teachers College by the
Rockefeller interests. They have been the main financial stay of that
institution in spite of all of their policies.
Mr. Hays. The Rockefeller Foundation has been the mainstay of
Teachers College ?
Mr. Sargent. I understand it is one of the principal supporting
groups.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Sargent, you are pretty evasive. I can see that you
have had a good deal of legal training. I ask you a specific question
and then you say "I understand." That is one of the nice ways to
libel people, isn't it ?
Mr. Sargent. That is not lying.
Mr. Hays. I didn't say lying; I said libel. You can say I under-
stand so and so is a such and such, and you did not say it ; you just
heard it around some place. That is not evidence. Is that evidence %
You ean't use hearsay as evidence in any court. Apparently you can
bring darn near anything into a congressional hearing.
Mr. Sargent. If you want to get down to that, I saw the official
treasurer's report of Columbia University, and ran my finger down
the various grants, and I found in my own examination of those re-
ports that very considerable sums of money have been granted to
Columbia University by that foundation.
Mr. Hays. That is one thing.
Mr. Sargent. I saw that.
Mr. Hays. You say it is the mainstay. Then you change it and say
very considerable amounts. There is a little difference there, isn't
there ?
Mr. Sargent. Your committee report says there has been a great
deal of preferment by these foundations in favor of certain universi-
ties. That is stated in your own staff report.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Reece said that last year when he made his speech
on the floor, too, but that doesn't necessarily make it true. _ He believes
that and he has a right to. Understand, I am sure he is sincere on
that. Just because somebody says so, that doesn't make it so. As a
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 289
matter of fact, there is a lot of stuff in the Congressional Eecord that
might not have too much bearing of fact. The fact that it is in the
Eecord gives it a certain air. There have been cases where someone
put a slant in the Eecord and made reprints and said, "In the Con-
gressional Record it says."
The Chairman. You keep referring to my speech. Have you gone
back and read any speeches that our late good friend, Gene Cox, made
on the advocacy of the passage of his resolution ?
Mr. Hats. That is before he got religion.
Mr. Sargent. The Eockef eller Foundation is of
Mr. Hays. Just a moment. I don't want to interrupt your conti-
nuity. Let us go back to this book. I have done a little searching
here, and I still don't know the name. Didn't you mention a book
by Frederick Lewis Allen ?
Mr. Sargent. Only Yesterday. It is a book recounting the times
some years ago. He begins, I think, around the turn of the century.
It is a very readable book. He discusses what was going on.
Mr. Hays. Could I have some member of the staff call the Library
of Congress right away and ask if I can get a copy tonight ?
Mr. Sargent. I am not citing it as authority, but a general dis-
cussion of the time. I think it is pretty accurate. It was general
atmosphere, was the only purpose of referring to it.
Mr. Hays. I just want to look at it.
Mr. Sargent. It is a newsy type of book about discussing the very
things that were going on and talked of at the time.
Another poster in this book here about character education in the
Soviet has a pamphlet with two children, a boy and a girl, a Eussian
caption, of course, and a translation "Nursery Schools." It says:
Enter the preschool campaign. Build a new life and organize the children's
parks and playgrounds. Educate the Communist shift.
That is the beginning of chapter 3. There is one on the 5-year plan
here. There is one about liquidating the kulak, a man standing with
his hand raised:
Let us eject the kulak from the Kolkhoz.
It talks about self-activity and what the children can do. No, this
is not the children but the grownups.
We cannot consider the question of the development of children's self -activity
and work with the pioneer activity apart from their connection with the new
environment in which we find ourselves and work with the children.
The point of this is that apparently the obsession at this time had
gone to such a point that it was considered worthwhile for an edu-
cator to bring that material over here, that propaganda, a man con-
nected with a leading school of education, and to write a foreword to
it, and thereby endorse it. The foreword by Counts includes the
statement that a child can be formed, a youth can be bent, but only
the grave can straighten the back of an old man. Also, that the char-
acteristic which distinguishes the Eussian Ee volution from the revolu-
tion of the past is the attention given to children and youth. They
realized that if the revolution was to be successful in the long run, if
their ideas were really to triumph, if a new society was to displace the
old, then the very character of the people inhabiting the Soviet Union
would have to be profoundly changed.
290 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Consequently, as soon as they had made the conquest of political
power, they turned their attention to the stupendous task of educat-
ing the coming generation to the theory and practice of communism.
Their achievements to date are without human precedent in human
history.
Mr. Hats. In other words, what he said there is that if the revolu-
tion is to be a success, we have to indoctrinate these kids, because if we
don't indoctrinate them, they might overthrow us some day.
Mr. Sargent. That is right. To have a successful revolution, you
must indoctrinate the children against the formerly existing order.
That was his philosophy.
Mr. Hays. Bo you agree that in order to have a successful revolu-
tion you would have to do that ? Understand, I am not asking you to
endorse a revolution, but I think that
Mr. Sargent. I think he has hit it on the head. Of course, that
is one way you run a revolution.
Mr. Hays. You and I agree about that.
Mr. Sargent. On a revolution you do, yes.
Mr. Hays. But now what I am trying to find out, and I am very
serious about it, was he advocating that we have some kind of revolu-
tion and do the same thing here, or was he pointing out that this is
the way the Communists are going to do it if they are successful. I
do not know this man at all. Maybe he is terrible. But it seems to
me from just that one statement he might have been holding up a red
flag. On the other hand — I am asking you — was he advocating some-
thing or was he warning ?
The Chairman. Would you mind reading again one of the last
sentences there from the foreword about the accomplishment is un-
paralleled ?
Mr. Hays. Read the whole thing.
Mr. Sargent. It was in the foreword ?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Hays. The last two paragraphs you read.
Mr. Sargent. The exact sentence is:
They realized fully that if the revolution was to be successful in the long run,
if their ideas were really to triumph, if a new society was to displace the old,
then the very character of the people inhabiting the Soviet Union would have
to be profoundly changed. Consequently, as soon as they had made the con-
quest of political power, they turned their attention to the stupendous task of
educating the coming generation in the theory and practice of communism.
Their achievements to date are without precedent in human history.
Mr. Hays. In other words, they did succeed in indoctrinating these
children and knew no better than communism.
Mr. Sargent. I think there is no question about it. I think that is
the system that was established. That is the system which by this
announcement American educators were going to look at in 1935, the
next year.
Mr. Hays. I don't think that would be too bad an idea because if
we are going to combat this communism, we are going to have to do
it with ideas and if we are going to be able to educate our people that
it is bad, I always thought in order to have a successful fight against
an opponent, you had to know something about him. I never stay
away from political meetings of the opposite party unless they bar
me, and in that case I try to send somebody else who can report on
it. I want to know what they are doing.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 291
Mr. Sargent. Understanding what they are doing is an excellent
idea, and I go all for it. But subjecting a teaching staff to a slanted
course on one side, and bringing them home, is no counterbalance
against something else. It automatically produces a slant in the mind.
Mr. Hats. Let me say this to you, Mr. Sargent. Along with sev-
eral other Members of Congress of both political parties, I spent some
weeks behind the Iron Curtain and the most effective job I have been
able to do in my life — and I can cite you some people who can testify
to that, I think — in telling them about what a horrible thing it is,
about how it degrades the human, about how there is no freedom of
thought, no liberty of any kind, no human decency, has been because
I was there and saw it. I was in Prague the night they had the big
purge, and they arrested 5,000 people between sundown and sunup,
and I will never forget it as long as I live. I think by knowing that
I can more effectively tell people when I have the opportunity and
occasion about what a horrible thing communism really is.
Are you saying that no one should find that out? I was there and
they certainly probably as much as they could subjected us to what-
ever propaganda they were able to, but it didn't twist my brain any.
Mr. Sargent. If you were there, you saw something which these
people in charge of our educational system with foundation grants
didn't get — the people that joined all these fronts and did all these
other things. The people who don't know and will not listen and not
pay attention to the results of an investigation. That is one of the
cruxes of our problem. Here, for instance
Mr. Hays. Now, just a minute.
Mr. Sargent. People who have been there have an entirely dif-
ferent slant from people who have not been there who have read cer-
tain literature which they think is all right, and that is all. That is
one of our serious problems here. I know what you mean. I have
talked to people who have been there recently. I talked to Lt. Paul
O'Dowd, Jr., who has received a very distinguished decoration by
the United States Government for his resistance to indoctrination in
one of these indoctrination camps in Korea, and it is his opinion
that there are very serious indoctrination policies in education as
presently conducted, and the matter deserves very serious study from
that standpoint.
Mr. Hats. Of course, Mr. Sargent, we will all admit that you can
indoctrinate people to about anything through education. I hate
to dwell on this. I have been one who has never made a very big issue
since I have been in Congress either at home or on the floor because
it so happens that my mother was from the South and my father from
the North, but it seems to me the children in the South have been in-
doctrinated one way about the racial problem whereas in the North,
they have been indoctrinated another. You say it and I admit it
that you certainly can indoctrinate children by education. There is
no question about it.
Mr. Sargent. Therefore, we must maintain the integrity of this
system at all hazards, or at least as best we can. The advice of this
thing is that there has been such a heavy slanting on the one side, and
almost a total—here is an illustration what I mean by the extent to
which a certain element in education has gone completely over-
board. This is an article in the May 1946 issue of an educational maga-
zine, an article on communications. It is the Progressive Education
292 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
magazine, page 266. The author is Norman Woelfel. He says, "It
might be necessary paradoxically for us to control our press as the
Russian press is controlled and as the Nazi press is controlled."
He said that in a discussion of how we could accomplish more social
good through the media of communication.
Now, something is wrong with educational judgment when things
like that are seriously said.
Mr. Hays. Of course we are all against that. On the other hand,
it seems to me that you have given quite a serious consideration that
you want to control textbooks to your way of thinking.
Mr. Sargeaintt. Nothing of the kind. I say these books are propa-
ganda, and Congress prohibited foundation money for propaganda
activity.
The Chairman. That quotation which you just read is from a
magazine sponsored by an organization supported, or at least in part
by foundation funds?
Mr. Sargent. Yes, it is the Progressive Education Association.
The Chairman. Have you read Norman Woelf el's book %
Mr. Sargent. Molders of the Mind.
The Chairman. Yes; I have. Gentlemen, the literature on this
thing is voluminous. I could take all of this week and next week
giving you these things. I am simply giving what I think are
representative samples.
Mr. Hats. Literature, of course, is voluminous on both sides of
this. I think we are agreed on that. You are from California. Did
you ever head of a foundation called the American Progress
Foundation ?
Mr. Sargent. I don't recall that I have ; no.
Mr. Hays. It says here it is in California — and they are bragging
about it — nonprofit corporation, federally tax-exempt, and they give
their address. Then they have sent a letter out.
Mr. Sargent. Can you give the address?
Mr. Hays. Yes. Suite 101-B, Highland Arcade, 1540 North High-
land Avenue, Los Angeles 28, Calif. ' They have sent out a letter, and
it is all right to me, and apparently to everybody in Congress, and
they say that we are pushing, or we are backing the House Joint
Resolution No. 123, copy enclosed, by Representative Ralph W.
Gwinn. Congressman Gwinn had a perfect right to introduce this
resolution. It is proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the
United States relative to prohibiting the United States Government
from engaging in business in competition with its citizens. This
copy of it says, "Printed for" — this is a copy of the bill.
Mr. Sargent. What is the bill about?
Mr. Hays. I just read the title to it. You know as much about it
as I do from that.
Printed for —
I will read it again if you didn't get it. I don't want to cut you
off.
Printed for and at the expense of the American Progress Foundation, Los
Angeles, Calif. —
and they go on to say a nonprofit California corporation federally
tax exempt. That is propaganda, isn't it ?
Mr. Sargent. I would certainly say it was ; yes. It is influencing
legislation.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 293
Mr. Hays. That is a pretty specific example of it.
Mr. Sargent. It is influencing legislation, certainly.
Mr. Hats. I must refer that to the staff.
Mr. Sargent. Unless they have some specific interest. I think,
Mr. Hays, a foundation which happens to have a specific interest in
specific legislation may properly present and defend that interest.
For example, you had all the foundations in the business coming in
voluntarily before the Cox committee and testifying, and they had a
stake in the controversy. If they didn't have a right to come in on
that matter, they would be deprived of their exemption rights by now,
for having been there.
Mr. Hats. You may have a point. I don't say this foundation
shouldn't do that. I don't know. This was just handed to me by
another Member on the floor today, and he said "here is one for your
committee." I am just asking you. As far as I am concerned, let
them push that bill. If it is a good bill, and if they can convince
enough people that is the way we do it under the Constitution, it is
not easy.
Mr. Sargent. As a legal matter the distinction is that something
directly within the corporate purpose of an organization they may
do. There is some organization promoting forestry and conservation
and they lobby continuously on that. On general matters, of course,
that is another thing.
Mr. Koch. Under the statute it says if a substantial part of their
income is used, and we have to worry during these hearings just
whether we can make a better definition than substantial. If nor-
mally they do perfectly innocuous things and then get off the
beam once, we have a question as to is this right or is it wrong. That
is where the statute has to be interpreted.
Mr. Hats. That is an interesting thing to bring up because we have
had a lot of arguments about Rockefeller and this $100,000 a year he
has made available, and the inference has been that it has not been
good. Maybe it has not. I don't know. On the other hand, he gave
a lot of money to a place down here in Virginia called Colonial Wil-
liamsburg, and I expect spent more than he did on this project which
I have been to numerous times, and I think is very good.
Mr. Koch. They say that is not foundation.
Mr. Hats. No ; he did that. I can't get Mr. Sargent to say, perhaps
he doesn't know, whether this $100,000 a year he keeps talking about
was from Rockefeller himself or the foundation. It is all vague.
Mr. Koch. Miss Casey says it was foundation money.
The Chairman. Have you reached a stopping place ?
Mr. Sargent. I think I have, yes.
The Chairman. The hour of 4 o'clock has arrived, and the com-
mittee stands in recess until 10 o'clock tomorrow morning.
(Thereupon, at 4 p. m., a recess was taken until Wednesday, May 26,
1954, at 10 a. m.)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
WEDNESDAY, MAY 36, 1954
House of Representatives,
Special Committee To Investigate
Tax-Exempt Foundations,
Washington, D. G.
The special committee met at 10 : 15 a. m., pursuant to recess, in
room 304, House Office Building, Hon. Carroll Reece (chairman of
the special committee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Reece (presiding), Goodwin, Hays, and
Pfost.
Also present : Rene A. Wormser, general counsel ; Arnold T. Koch,
associate counsel; Norman Dodd, research director; Kathryn Casey,
legal analyst.
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
You may proceed, Mr. Sargent.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Chairman, I was asking Mr. Sargent informally be-
fore the hearing started if he can find in his notes — I have not been
able to find it, I just got this transcript handed to me as I was coming
over here — I am interested in this book, Only Yesterday, which he
mentioned. I would like to find out exactly what he said about it,
if we could at this point.
TESTIMONY OF AARON M. SAEGENT, ATTOENEY,
SAN FEANCISCO, CALIF.— Resumed
Mr. Sargent. I can't do that without having the transcript or
getting my notes out of the hotel room. I am coming back in any event
for cross-examination after this hearing is completed. I will supply
you with the exact reference.
I might say at this time my only interest in mentioning the book at
all was that it was talking about what people on the street currently
were talking about at the time.
Mr. Hats. Would you hand me the book, sir?
Mr. Sargent. Yes. It is a newsy book about the state of public dis-
cussion at the time, and what the people were doing and acting. That
is all ; local color. It is not an authoritative work in the sense of prov-
ing revolution. It said that people were trying out all sort of things.
That is said in that book.
Mr. Hats. I think you cited this book to support your contention
that there was imminent danger of revolution around that period.
Mr. Sargent. No, sir, I did not. I said it was being talked about
at the time.
295
296 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hats. You didn't say that the country was in imminent danger,
that there was a serious danger in 1917 and 1918?
Mr. Sargent. I said there was on the basis of the findings of the
report of the Lusk committee.
The Chairman. Will you permit an interruption ? As I recall the
statement, the Lust committee reported there was a revolution.
Mr. Sargent. Yes, they made very extensive findings. They found
there was at that time a serious danger for our form of government.
I did not in any sense use the Allen book as an authority. I don't
think Mr. Allen is an authority on the subject.
Mr. Hats. You see, Mr. Chairman, that is exactly what I am trying
to prove. The witness brings in a book and the committee is at a
complete disadvantage, because we don't know beforehand what book
he is going to cite, and we don't get the transcript until the next day.
I think the transcript will show he is saying two entirely different
things about it. He brought the book in. He cited the book. I have
never heard of the book. I have had a half hour to glance at this
book, and I want to read a few paragraphs cut of it. I will read
from page 76 :
The big red scare was slowly, very slowly dying. What killed it? The reali-
zation for one thing that there had never been any sufficient cause for such a
panic as had convulsed the country.
I don't know whether this is an authoritative work or not, but the
witness cited it so I thought I would look at it.
Then on page 52, he talks about the Boston police riots :
The Boston police had a grievance. Their pay was based on a minimum of
$1,100, out of which uniforms had to be bought, and $1,100 would buy mighty
little at 1919 prices.
Then on page 56, in talking about the then Attorney General, he
says:
Mr. Palmer decided to give the American public more of the same and there-
upon he carried through a new series of raids which set a new record in Ameri-
can history for executive transgression on individual constitutional rights.
Then he goes on and is talking about the fanaticism and fervor,
and he says on page 58 ;
Nor did it quickly subside for the professional superpatriots and assorted spe-
cial propagandists disguised as superpatriots had only begun to fight. Innumer-
able patriotic societies had sprung up, each with its executive secretary, and
executive secretaries must live, and therefore, must conjure up new and ever-
greater menaces.
You know that has a faintly familiar ring, doesn't it?
Innumerable other gentlemen now discovered that they could defeat whatever
they wanted to defeat by tarring it conspicuously with the Bolshevist brush.
Big Navy men, believers in compulsory military service, drys, anticigarette cam-
paigners, antievolution fundamentalists, defenders of the moral order, book
censors, Jew-haters, Negro-haters, landlords, manufacturers, utility executives,
upholders of every sort of cause, good, bad and indifferent, all wrapped them-
selves in Old Glory, and the mantle of the Founding Fathers and allied them-
selves with Lenin.
Of course, he goes on to point out that they tried to ally their
opponents, as is being done today, with something nasty and dirty.
He goes on and I am quoting :
For years a pestilence of speakers and writers continued to afflict the country
with tales of sinister and subversive agitators.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 297
He speaks further :
Elderly ladies in gilt chairs in ornate drawing rooms heard from executive
secretaries that the agents of the Government had unearthed new radical con-
spiracies too fiendish to he divulged before the proper time. A cloud of suspicion
hung in the air and intolerance became an American virtue.
This is the author that you brought in. .
Mr. Sargent. I brought in a specific statement at a specific time.
Mr. Hays. I am bringing in some specific statements so we will get
a well-rounded picture.
The Chairman. May I be permitted to
Mr. Hats. Just a minute. I want to get the whole picture of this
man. He made all sorts of statements, and I am not subscribing
to any. .
Mr. Sargent. I only said that the discussion at the time publicly
was about this condition. My authority cited was the Lusk Report
of the New York Legislature. That book was not cited as an author-
ity. I do not consider it to be authoritative on whether this con-
spiracy in fact existed. Mr. Allen did not know.
Mr. Hays. The point I am making, and I think you made it for me,
Mr. Sargent, is that you can bring in any book, and you can do it
with great regularity, and you can pick out a sentence or paragraph
out of it and make it prove whatever you want it to prove. After I
read a few paragraphs out of the book, you want to disavow any rela-
tionship to it.
Mr. Sargent. No.
Mr. Hays. It is something that you are not going to vouch for at
all now after we have looked it over.
Mr. Sargent. No; I vouch for the part of that book which states
that the intellectuals were doing all sorts of wild things and discussing
it publicly, and that was the air surrounding the period. That is all
I wanted to say.
Mr. Hays. You are going to vouch for part of the book and leave
the rest out?
Mr. Sargent. No. I don't have to buy the whole book because he
tells the truth on one thing. You think it is a pretty good book ?
Mr. Hays. No ■; I don't. I think you brought out an authority that
may have been a little wild in some of the statements he makes. To
further prove that, let me read his subtitles for paragraph 6 :
Fair and Warmer Washington. The Helpfulness of Warren G. Harding, Wash-
ington Conference. Harding's Death. The Truth Begins To Come Out. Teapot
Dome and Elk Hill. Who Loaned Fall the Money? Six or Eight Cows. The
Silence of Colonel Stewart and Others. The Testimony of Mr. Hays — ■
and will the record please show that is Will Hays —
The Reticence of Mr. Mellon. The Veterans' Bureau Scandals. Dougherty.
Who Cares? The Undedicated Tomorrow.
That is the kind of book it is.
The Chairman. If Mr. Hays would be condescending enough to
permit one interjection, I would like to say that I would not like to
associate myself with what has been read, and I would sum it all up
as meaning that anybody who is against Fabian socialism, and all it
implies, is classified as a superpatriot with white cloth around him.
Mr. Hays. You know something ? You didn't disassociate yourself
with this book yesterday when he was reading paragraphs out of it
298 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
that seemed to prove what you wanted him to prove. Furthermore,
Mr. Chairman, Fabian socialism is not mentioned in this book as far
as I can find out.
The Chairman - . No ; I was disassociating myself with the interpre-
tation of what you put on what you read.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Reece, I put no interpretation whatever. I merely
read some paragraphs out of the book because I wanted to acquaint
you with the kind of books that your witness is bringing in here and
citing. I am just trying to wake you up.
Mr. Goodwin. You had one paragraph there on the Boston police
strike. Can you find that readily ? I am not quite sure I caught it
exactly.
Mr. Hays. I just have some pages marked here. I can find it very
quickly. Page 52. I might say I only read, as I said at the beginning,
the first sentence out of that. He goes on. I might in justice to this
fellow say that the Boston police strike fizzled out, and it was bad for
the public welfare and so on. The man says a lot of things. I am
only trying to prove, Mr. Goodwin, that you can't take a Dook and
read a sentence or two out of it and say it proves much of anything.
Mr. Goodwin. Of course, the police strike did not fizzle out. It
was ended by the Governor of Massachusetts when he sent a telegram
to the country to the effect that there was no right to strike against
the public safety by anybody, anywhere, any time, and made Gov.
Calvin Coolidge President of the United States probably.
Mr. Hays. No doubt about it. I remember only two statements
that he made. That one and the one, "I do not choose to run." That
was about his total contribution to history.
The Chairman. We will not try to enter into the evaluation of the
services of Calvin Coolidge. I think the services of that great Ameri-
can speak for themselves.
Mr. Hays. I have just one other question, and then you can pro-
ceed, Mr. Sargent.
Do you know Bob Humphrey of the Republican National Com-
mittee ?
Mr. Sargent. No. H-u-m-p-h-r-e-y ?
Mr. Hays. Yes.
Mr. Sargent. No; I don't recall the name.
Mr. Hays. He has not helped you at all ?
Mr. Sargent. Not a particle. In fact, no person connected with
any political organization or group has done so as far as I recall.
Mr. Hays. I do have one more thing, Mr. Chairman. I want to
state at this time that I talked personally last night to Mr. Edward
R. Murrow, and he categorically denies that he has ever in his life
been in Russia, regardless of anything you may say to the contrary.
Mr. Sargent. I didn't say he was. • I said he signed the prospectus.
Mr. Hays. You told us yesterday that you heard from good au-
thority that the school was held and these people attended.
Mr. Sargent. I didn't say all these people attended. I said I be-
lieved the school was held.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Murrow is sending down a statement; it should be
here today, and when it comes, I expect to read it into the record.
Mr. Sargent. I think, Mr. Chairman, in justice to me and the Amer-
ican people, unsworn statements and information regarding telephone
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 299
calls should be considered as having no evidentiary value whatever
before this committee.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Sargent, don't ally yourself with the American
people. In the first place, you are not running this committee, and
what you think has nothing to do with it.
In the second place, I am of the opinion after your testimony is
made, most of the American people will not ally themselves with you.
I don't want any more inferences or insinuations out of you. You act
like you are running this thing here, and you are not.
Mr. Sargent. No ; I am trying to present a case.
The Chairman. That is a question that will be determined when
matters or information are presented as to what the form of presenta-
tion shall be. I think it would be best not to get into it now.
Mr. Hats. I think so, too, Mr. Chairman, and I think it would be
well to have an understanding that the witnesses are not to give any
advice on how to conduct the hearings. Just because it is happening
around the Capitol and other places, we don't have to take it as a
precedent.
The Chairman. The witness will proceed in order, and the chair-
man hopes that the members of the committee will do likewise.
Mr. Sargent. When there was first discussion about the rule for
my making a presentation in full and having questioning afterward,
I volunteered and offered to appear before you for the purpose of
answering questions fully. I want to renew at this time my expres-
sion of my willingness to do so, and say I expect to do that. At such
time and place as you may designate after my testimony is completed,
I will so appear and I will do it voluntarily.
Inasmuch as this question has been arised about this Frederic Lewis
Allen book, I think something of considerable importance has emerged
from it, and I think this is what it is.
There is an important difference between what people are currently
thinking or talking or writing about at a given period, as to actual
conditions, and what exists at the time. I want to give you what I
think is a graphic illustration of exactly that.
I doubt if you can search the literature of the period 1933-36 and
find very much support for the idea that a revolutionary movement
Wa,s going on. There was an investigation by a select committee of
this House at the time. The facts on that are contained in the inquiry
regarding the charges of the late Dr. William Wirt, of Gary, Ind. Mr.
Wirt made some very serious charges. I have a copy of them before
me. He asserted
Mr. Hats. Now, then, Mr. Chairman, the witness just got through
objecting about me making a statement or reading anything from
Mr. Murrow. Now he is reading an unsworn statement from some
character that I never heard of before.
Mr. Sargent. This is an official record of the House of Representa-
tives, sir, on the case of William A. Wirt.
Mr. Hats. Just because it is in the official records of the House of
Representatives doesn't necessarily make it so, and was it sworn to.
That is your point, not mine.
Mr. Sargent. It was introduced on the testimony of Dr. William A.
Wirt, and it is a document upon which the House of Representatives
appointed a committee to go into the charges. I have read that record.
Mr. Hats. What pertinency does it have to this %
300 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Sargent. Because it shows a revolutionary condition seriously
charged at the time and active attempts being made to suppress the in-
vestigation, a minority report filed stating that it had been suppressed,
and those charges were not inquired into.
Mr. Hays. Does it have anything to do with the foundation?
Mr. Sargent. It has a great deal to do with the conspiracy situation
I referred to, and I think it should be in the record this morning.
Mr. Hays. The New York Times said something to the effect that
you made a lot of talk about the 1920's and 1930's, and you had not
related it to anything pertinent to this investigation — I believe those
were the words — or you had not related it to the foundations. That
is what I think.
Mr. Sargent. I am intending to do that, Mr. Hays. Your staff
here has other information. It is not expected of me to prove the
entire case. I am proving certain phases of the case which are within
my knowledge.
Mr. Hays. Let us use the words "you are attempting to prove."
Mr. Sargent. Very well. This report contained some very serious
charges having a vital bearing on the safety of the American people.
It included the statement here — this is a conversation in the presence
of Dr. William A. Wirt, an eminent educator of his time — he states
in this document here that he was advised that lie was underestimating
the power of propaganda which since the First World War had
developed into a science, that they could m'aKS ffie newspapers and
magazines beg for mercy by taking away advertising, by laws to
compel only the unvarnished truth in advertising; that schools and
colleges could be kept in line by the hope of Federal afd im^ll'the nl$ay
New Dealers in the schools and colleges had control ,oi them.
1 The document in question is a part of the official records' of this
House in the inquiry into the charges of Dr. William A. Wirt. Of
the committee appointed there, the minority was unable to get any
subpena power to bring in the people referred to by Dr. Wirt. They
protested and filed a minority report which is also a document of
record in this House. Those members said they could not join in the
report, and that the committee had not met its responsibility. That
the resolution was a coverup, a cowardly effort to smother the issues
presented by the Dr. Wirt letter, that the letter does not present a
personal matter, but a broad issue of whether or not there are those
connected with the administration who are committed to philosophies
of government contrary to the Republic under the Constitution.
The minority protested that they were denied the right to call a
single witness designed by them. They appealed for subpena power
to Arthur Morgan ; H. A. Morgan ; David Lilienthal, Director of the
Tennessee Valley Authority; Harold Ickes, Public Administrator;
and Harry Hopkins, Federal Emergency Relief Administrator. I
have read all of the names referred to in that paragraph. By their
votes the three members refused to permit these five public officials
to be brought before the committee.
The minority members informed the majority members that if
they were permitted to bring the witnesses before the committee, they
would show the following, and they list a series of charges here which
are long, and which I won't read. One was that the Tennessee Valley
Directors had organized a subsidiary corporation with the stock in
those corporations to be owned by the United States Government, and
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 301
corporations chartered by it to engage in the business of processing,
and so on.
Mr. Hays. What does that have to do with foundations, even assum-
ing that it were true, and as I recall it now, I heard of this fellow,
and he was more or less discredited by many witnesses who testified
directly opposite.
Mr. Sargent. One thing is that it w T ould have exposed the Ware
Communist cell in the United States Government which was formed in
the Agriculture Department in 1933 in May. Alger Hiss was in that
cell. Alger Hiss later became the president of the Carnegie Endow-
ment for Peace.
Mr. Hays. Put in by the present Secretary of State, Foster Dulles.
Mr. Sargent. And defended in a Federal court in the United States
in the city of New York in a trial handled on those charges of espion-
age — rather perjury.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Sargent, Alger Hiss is in jail. We know that.
That is where he belongs. The evidence pointed out that and the
Democrats put him there. You have made a lot of inferences which
you admitted yourself against the so-called New Deal Party. The
New Deal Party, as you call it, put Alger Hiss in the penitentiary.
You are basking in the limelight reflected from a convict.
Mr. Sargent. No ; I am not basking in any limelight. I will give
you later the story of the character witnesses of Alger Hiss.
Mr. Hays. We don't want the story because there is no pertinency
to this.
Mr. Sargent. I think there is. I am citing this mainly for the
purpose of proving that there is a vast difference between what is being
currently gossiped and talked about and what actually exists cur-
rently. There was a very active revolutionary cell in the United
States Government in the 1930's. The Wirt charges were true, and
they were suppressed. These educational conditions we mentioned
occurred at the very time that Wirt was luring ^these * charges within
the Government. There was a conspiracy and it was revolutionary
in its nature. There was a conspiracy forming in 1920 as found by
the Lusk committee report. Mr. Allen didn't know it.
Mr. Hays. Even if that is true, you are getting pretty hard up for
publicity if you have to rehash that stuff, because all of that has been
investigated, the facts have been brought out, and you sitting there
saying so and so was true does not make it true. The fact of the matter
is that there is a great deal of doubt about the credibility of you at all,
because you started this hearing off by saying, when I asked you the
question were you offered the counselship of the Cox committee, "Yes,
sir." It is right here in the record. When I pinned you down, you
weasled considerably.
Mr. Sargent. I didn't say "Yes, sir."
Mr. Hays. Yes, you did say "Yes, sir." Don't call me a liar, because
the record says so.
Mr. Sargent. Assuming it was offered makes no difference in the
present connection.
Mr. Hays. It makes a difference as to whether we are going to be-
lieve what you say or not.
Mr. Sargent. May I go on with my testimony ?
Mr. Goodwin. Why should we not let the witness go ahead with the
testimony. We are to be the judges of the evidentiary value. In the
49720— 54— pt. 1 20
302 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
meantime, if he believes it is pertinent to the inquiry, it seems to me
he should proceed.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Goodwin, let me say this. I am only trying to keep
the witness talking about something that has a remote relationship
to the subject at hand.
Mr. Goodwin. I understand that.
Mr. Hays. I am sorry that you have not been here. I have a great
deal of confidence in your fairmindedness, and I realize that you
could not be here because of the importance of the Ways and Means
Committee considering the bill. This witness has a tendency to go off
on all sorts of tangents that have nothing pertinent to do with the
facts. He says right here that he didn't say what the record says
he said. If he is going to do that, where are we going to stop ?
Mr. Sargent. You requested me to finish today.
Mr. Hays. I am more interested in the principle of truth than sav-
ing time.
Mr. Sargent. You will have the truth from me, and you will be
getting it.
Mr. Hays. I didn't get it at the beginning.
Mr. Sargent. At the close of the session yesterday, I was asked a
question regarding the foundation known as the American Progress
Foundation, a California nonprofit foundation. Reference was made
to House Joint Resolution 123, a proposal for the amending of the
Federal Constitution to prohibit the Federal Government from engag-
ing in business in competition with its citizens. I subsequently con-
tacted the office of Mr. Gwinn to determine what the organization
was. He has some of their letters from there. I am informed that
this is a membership corporation. In other words, it is not the kind
of a foundation I am talking about. The kind of foundation we have
been discussing here is the section 101 (6) foundation, which has
merely a board of directors, administers money, and has no general
membership. Corporations of this type fall under subdivision (8)
and subdivision (8) is the same basis as the American Civil Liberties
Union, for example. The Revenue Bureau holds them exempt as to
their own income, but does not permit deductions by donors on their
own income-tax returns of money given to them. This is, I think,
quite clearly a sub (8) corporation, and would have the same status as
ACLU. I think that is the correct status of it.
I have a letter here furnished to me which confirms the fact that
the Civil Liberties Union is a subdivision (8) corporation (26 U. S.
C. A. 101, sub (8), and the Treasury regulation on that is sec. 39.101
(8) (1) of regulation 118).
We were referring yesterday to this book about character education
in the Soviet Union. One of the committee members, I think it was
Mr. Reece, asked me to read over a paragraph in the foreword by Dr.
George S. Counts. I think Mr. Hays asked a question as well. The
statement was that as soon as the Soviets had made the conquest of
political power, they turned their attention to the stupendous task of
educating the coming generation in the theory and practice of com-
munism. There is a very important fact in there which seems to
appear wherever these revolutionary movements with education take
shape. In Russia, for example, it appears to be the case that they
did use the progressive system to start with. They used it to destroy
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 303
the old tradition- Having destroyed the old tradition, they moved
in with positive indoctrination to protect revolutionary gains.
That is the technique. First you destroy what is. You move in
with force and put in what you want to do, and then you positively
put the mind in a straightjacket and defend that status. It may be
of interest to note that in the February-March issue, 1934, of Pro-
gressive Education magazine, Nucia P. Lodge, who is one of the
translators of some of George Counts' books, and worked on the Rus-
sian books with Counts, wrote an article in which she propounds the
question, Has Soviet Russia repudiated progressive methods?
Mr. Hays. When was this written ?
Mr. Sargent. In January and February 1934.
Mr. Hays. Do you know anything about Dr. Counts at all except
what you read from his books ?
Mr. Sargent. I have read his writings somewhat extensively. I
know him from books.
Mr. Hays. Do you know anything about Elizabeth Bentley?
Mr. Sargent. I have heard of her from the newspapers. She testi-
fied on the Alger Hiss hearing.
Mr. Hays. She was a Communist at one time.
Mr. Sargent. Yes.
Mr. Hays. She is now repentant.
Mr. Sargent. Yes.
Mr. Hays. You have read some things from Dr. Counts' writings
to indicate at least that if he was not a Communist, that he was an
extreme leftwing thinker.
Mr. Sargent. He had very extreme views, and he had a profound
influence on the educational system.
Mr. Hays. Along about the same time that Elizabeth Bentley was
an active Communist ?
Mr. Sargent. Yes.
Mr. Hays. Do you know anything about his present views ?
Mr. Sargent. He has written that he has purportedly changed.
The book does not show that he repudiates the right to use the school
system as a political instrument to modify the social order. I have
seen that book.
Mr. Hays. If we had him in here and he swears that he changed
his mind and could bring something to prove that he is an active anti-
Communist, which he now is, then he would become as sacred as Eliza-
beth Bentley. You cannot accept one repentance without accepting
others.
Mr. Sargent. This is not a personal attack on Counts at all. This
is a comment on the damage done on the educational system by con-
ditions of this sort. It is directed squarely to the point that Congress
wishes to do something to make this damage unlikely in the future.
This is not a personal vendetta at Counts or anybody else.
Mr. Hays. Thanks to Mrs. Pfost, I found your remarks about the
book. You said :
If you want a quick picture of this revolt of the so-called intellectual group
during the period, you will find that in Frederick Lewis Allen's book, Only
Yesterday, discussion at page 228. He describes the atmosphere of the period
in very clear terms.
Mr. Sargent. I said atmosphere, yes.
304 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hats. In other words, you were recommending a certain por-
tion of the book. Do you want to repudiate everything but that one
page ?
Mr. Sargent. No, I am not required to buy the whole of a book be-
cause it has one paragraph which seems to be accurate. Quite often
in the trial of a case you use testimony as an admission from the
defendant. It fits the case perfectly. You don't have to buy the rest
of his testimony because you cite a portion of it.
Mr. Hats. It has always been among people who knew what they
were doing in research that you had to establish the credibility of the-
sources you cite. You seem to want to establish that by picking a
paragraph here and there that suits your purpose, and any other con-
tradictory paragraph, that guy was wrong about that — He is only
right when he agrees with me."
Mr. Sargent. I said atmosphere, Mr. 'Says.
Mr. Hats. I know what you said.
Mr. Sargent. Atmosphere is what was being publicly discussed at
the time, and that statement of the atmosphere I think is a correct
statement. That is all I had to say on the point.
Mr. Hat. Just a minute. I have this here to read.
Mr. Sargent. I understood I was to go through with this and to
be cross-examined later.
Mr. Hats. You get a lot of misunderstandings.
Mr. Sargent. Wasn't that the agreement ?
Mr. Hats. We are getting a lot of agreements here that we bring
these people back later, but I have a sneaking suspicion that this com-
mittee is going to run out of money and you are going to get to spread
your diatribe on the record and go home.
Mr. Sargent. That is unfair. I offered at the opening of the hear-
ing, and I will be back next Wednesday.
The Chairman. Just a minute. The understanding is that at the
conclusion of Mr. Sargent's testimony, and at the next session, he will
be available for questioning at length.
Mr. Hats. Now, Mr. Chairman, there is an issue made here about
whether or not I am telling the truth.
The Chairman. Don't — —
Mr. Hats. Yes, there has. The man said he didn't say what he said
and I said he did. I am going to read the record.
Mr. Hays. Were you ever offered the counselship of the Cox committee?
Mr. Saegent. Yes, sir.
That is your answer, that is all.
Mr. Hats. Do you have any documentary evidence to that effect?
Mr. Sargent. Not in my possession. You mean a specific offering of the posi-
tion or discussion of my possible employment ?
Mr. Hats. I asked you a specific question. Were you offered the counselship
of the Cox committee?
And then you said :
In substance, yes.
That "Yes, sir," got sort of wishywashy there.
It was indicated verbally that my appointment would be looked upon favorably.
The actual tender I do not think was made.
I know the actual tender was not made. I am preparing to bring in
a witness, if the chairman will sign a supena, who will testify flatly
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 305
that after investigation they threw up their hands in horror and didn't
want anything to do with you.
Mr. Sargent. Oh, so ?
Mr. Hats. Yes.
Mr. Sargent. All right. Anything of that kind I will answer, and
I will answer fully — —
The Chairman". The chairman will just state that last statement is
at variance with my information as a member of the committee.
Mr. Hays. I would like the record to show that may be true, and I
would not question you at all. But I think the record should also show
that you only attended tw T o committee meetings the whole time so
you probably didn't have very much information about what went on.
The Chairman. I hardly think the record will show that.
Mr. Hays. I believe it will. You know, we had a debate about that
on the floor, and in the interchange, I got a little enthusiastic and I
said you had only been there once. You asked me to correct that. And
I said, "Well, we will say twice", and you accepted. That is in the
Congressional Record.
The Chairman. I didn't accept that.
Mr. Sargent. The foundations were opposed to my employment.
That is a fact.
Mr. Hays. Judge Cox in his statement to the Congress was pretty
worked up about the foundations and it hardly seems likely to me
that he would have taken their advice about whom to employ.
Mr. Sargent. I say the foundations were opposed to my employ-
ment. However, I would like to go on with this, if I may. I am here
to conclude today, if I can arrange to do so.
There was reference in prior testimony to the League for Industrial
Democracy, which is a tax-exempt corporation. I have some addi-
tional information to submit regarding its activities. Here is a letter
bearing the signature of Harry W. Laidler, September 9, 1935. It is
a photostat. It is addressed, "Dear Friend," and evidently it is one
of his letters sent out circular fashion to a group of people, and not
one addressed to an individual. It says:
If you could come into the LID office today you would receive reports of great
productive educational activity in the summer, of an unusually full program for
the fall, but of an empty treasury which threatens to seriously affect our work.
I am not going to read it, but leave it for the record. There is ref er-
•ence to the launching of their plans in high school, building up lecture
circuits and in general carrying on propaganda within the educational
system. It shows still as president of the organization Robert Morss
liovett, to whom I have referred.
(The letter is as follows :)
If you could come into the LID office today you would receive reports of great
productive educational activity in the summer, of an unusually full program
■for the fall, but of an empty treasury which threatens seriously to affect our
Tvork.
The summer report would tell of an exceptionally good June conference on
white collar and professional workers under capitalism. It would bring you
the story of a group of 21 picked college students brought together in the L. I. D.
summer school for 6 weeks of intensive training in field work with union and
unemployed groups, of morning seminars in theory and tactic, of every-day dis-
cussions of problems common to students from California to the Carolinas. The
schools built a comradeship which is basic for enduring work in the movement
-on the campus or in the field.
306 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
During the summer also the pamphlet Strikes Under the New Deal was;
completed and Is now ready to mail. Research on two new pamphlets was vig-
orously pursued. Participation in the Young Congress helped greatly in formu-
lating a militant program for the nation's youth.
As to plans for the immediate future— we must launch student organization
everywhere and at once, early in the college and high school year. We must
build up the lecture circuits in new centers. We must arrange various radio-
programs. We must complete the pamphlets .begun in the summer. These are
preliminary to establishing a new research service which we believe will double
the amount of research produced and reach a much larger audience than we-
have had in the past. The Chicago office, with a plan for extended work in
the metropolitan area, is ready to reopen. The emergency committee for strikers
relief will be called upon to renew its efforts on behalf of the sharecroppers who
are about to undertake a cotton pickers strike.
In addition to our major program, the L. I. D. continues its work of active-
cooperation with other groups. By arrangement with the New Beginning group,
which carries on underground work in Germany, one of its leaders is to come to*
America under our auspices. With several defense organizations we are under-
taking a campaign to widen the support for Angelo Herndon ; we are active on
the Sacramento defense committee to fight the criminal syndicalism laws in
California. Other joint efforts find the L. I. D. actively participating.
The disastrous effects of an empty treasury are obvious. Won't you make
the conltinuation of U. I. D. work possible by sending in a contribution or pledge-
now? $9,000 is necessary if we are to meet the minimum requirements of the
program for 1935, which in the face of social needs is at best adequate. Upon
your immediate response depends the future of the L. I. D.
Sincerely yours, Norman Thomas, Harry W. Laidler.
Mr. Sargent, I have some publications of this organization, show-
ing their educational work. One is entitled, "Socialism in the United
States, a Brief History, by Dr, Harry W. Laidler," The copyright
date is 1952.
I have one entitled "A Housing Program for America." I don't see
a copyright date on this.
Mrs. Pfost. Mr. Sargent, is the printing paid by the foundation?
Mr. Sargent. This organization itself is tax-exempt. I don't know
whether or not a foundation paid for either the printing or the
pamphlet. Your committee will have to find out what has been the-
source of revenue of this organization.
The Chairman. Will you give the name of it again ?
Mr. Sargent. The League for Industrial Democracy. This one-
I don't see a copyright date. I can't peg the date for you.
Mr. Hays. If they are under section 8 you are talking about whether
they are tax-exempt or not, they can engage in propaganda,
Mr. Sargent. But Congress has a right to consider whether it is
wise to continue such a privilege when it has been used in effect to*
continue a lobby.
Mr. Koch. This is the one that is under 8. It was Civil Liberties-
that you used before. This is under 6.
Mr. Sargent. Here is one, Toward a Farmer-Labor Party, again,
by Harry W. Laidler. The copyright date is 1938.
Mr. Koch. Mr. Chairman, are these just submitted for the record,,
but not to be printed ?
Mr. Sargent. No, I just am referring to the fact that such a publi-
cation was made at the time.
The Chairman. They are submitted for the record but not for
printing.
Mr. Sargent. No. In fact, these are my personal copies. I want to
take them away. The Library of Congress has them all. They are
copyrighted publications. Here is a pamphlet called, Russia — De-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 307
mocracy or Dictatorship, by Norman Thomas and Joel Seidman. The
copyright is December 1939.
Mrs. Pfost. How widely circulated were these?
Mr. Sargent. I think rather extensively. I don't known too much
about that. They have an office in New York City out of which they
disseminate various things. The address given here is 112 East 19th
Street, New York City. I personally went to that office within the
last year or two, I don't recall the exact date, and I purchased some
publications of the British Fabian Society of Great Britain. I have
three right here. One is called, National Coal Board, by G. D. H.
Cole, revised edition.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Sargent, have you made any investigation into the
Ku Klux Klan along about this period ? You are back in that period,
and I wonder if you think it was good or bad ?
Mr. Sargent. Is that a tax-exempt organization?
Mr. Hats. Depending which State it was in, it was something.
Mr. Sargent. I know nothing about it, and I would like to proceed
with my testimony.
Mr. Hats. Do you think it was bad ?
Mr. Sargent I would like to proceed with my testimony.
Mr. Hats. What you would like has no bearing.
Mr. Sargent. I think it is a bad organization. May I proceed with
my testimony?
Mr. Hats. You have been more than arrogant, and you can keep
on going that way, but if I have some questions to ask, get it straight
I am going to ask them.
The Chairman. Mr. Hays, we must have some decorum here, and
bringing up the Ku Klux Klan is evidently done for — —
Mr. Hats. No, it is not. It is right in the book that the witness
submitted. I will read it for you.
Mr. Sargent. I didn't cite any such thing.
Mr. Hats. It is in your book. You brought the book in.
Mr. Sargent. Must we talk about the whole book ?
Mr. Hats. It might be more interesting than a lot of stuff you
are talking about.
The Chairman. The Ku Klux Klan has nothing to do with this in-
vestigation by any stretch of the imagination. As Members of Con-
gress, let us accept our responsibility and proceed with this study
in as orderly fashion as possible. Let us not make inferences on
anybody.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Reece, I am not making any inferences, but if you
want any arguments about accepting our responsibilities as Members
of Congress, I am willing to argue with you. I think we have a respon-
sibility as Members of Congress not to bring in any obscure character
assassins and dignify them by letting them use this as a forum to as-
sassinate right and left, such people as Senator Douglas, and Mr.
Edward R. Murrow. Even this witness will never remotely get the
prominence they have by even trying to assassinate their character,
although he may get cheap publicity out of it. There is no inference
there. I said it straight.
Mr, Sargent. I read the entire list of names. Mr. Murrow's name
about the middle. I gave it no special reference.
Mr. Hats. And you mentioned a former Member of the United
States Senate from North Carolina. If the chairman was so inter-
308 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
ested in observing decorum and rules, he would not let you drop names
because it suits your purpose.
Mr. Sargent. I am glad I have not cited the Encyclopedia Brit-
tanica because then we would have to discuss all the articles.
Mr. Hays. I have no doubt from your attitude you are an authority
on all the subjects.
Mr. Sargent. I purchased these pamphlets in the League of Indus-
trial Democracy in New York City. I gave the title. It is about the
national coal board. The copyright date on that is September 1948,
and a revised edition January 1949. It was purchased by me sub-
sequent to that at that office.
I have another Fabian tract here, this is No. 288, entitled, "Rearma-
ment — How Far?" It says that it contains speeches at a Fabian con-
ference in the summer of 1951. The address given is Fabian Publi-
cations, Ltd., 11 Dartmouth Street, S. W. 1. I presume that means
London.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Chairman, I would like to make an observation that
he keeps talking about the Fabian Society and you said the Ku Klux
Klan had no relevance to this hearing. I will tell you what it is. Both
are dead as the dodo bird, so you can compare them on one basis. T)ne
was an extreme left-wing outfit and the other extreme right-wing
Fascist outfit. If we are going to have a course in ancient history,
we ought to have all phases of it.
Mr. Sargent. Here is a 1950 pamphlet, a very recent document of
the League for Industrial Democracy. It reveals the political part of
the organization by the panel of speakers. The program listed is
Freedom and the Welfare State Today, a Symposium, by Oscar R.
Ewing, Herbert H. Lehman, George Meany, Walter P. Reuther and
it says "and others" "Harry W. Laidler, editor." Would you like
me to read the names of the others ?
Mr. Hays. I think you have enough prominent names in there to at
least convince the committee that you heard of a few prominent people.
Mr. Sargent. I would like to know whether you wish the other
names read.
Mr. Hays, It is immaterial to me.
Mr. Sargent. If you don't want them read, I am not desiring to,
particularly.
I have another one from the League for Industrial Democracy. This
is 1949. It is entitled "Education and the Social Order," by John
Dewey, showing the organization sponsorship of the John Dewey
philosophy.
Here is a pamphlet which is copyrighted 1945, entitled "Forty
Years of Education, a Symposium." It says on the cover "By Upton
Sinclair and many others." The participants here on the inside of the
title page are, and I am reading them m order, column 1, and then
column 2, Upton Sinclair, Eleanor Roosevelt, Arthur Creech Jones,
Frank Scott, Charles G. Bolte, Wallace J. Campbell, John L. Childs,
Julius Hochman, Harry W. Laidler, Algernon Lee, Newbold Morris,
Harry A. Overstreet, Mark Starr, Norman Thomas, Theresa Wolf son,
and it says, "and many others." *
Mr. Hays. Let me ask you right there, Could you give me any
semblance of a reason why you read those names? What is the
pertinence ?
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 309
Mr. Sargent. To show that this organization is political in charac-
ter. It brings in political people and supports political issues of a
certain type. .
Mr. Hays. Do you mean to infer that it brings in the wrong kind
of political people ?
Mr. Sargent. The statute makes no difference between good or bad
propaganda. It says organizations under this exemption shall not
carry on propaganda.
Mr. Hays. This foundation you are the head of, if you ever get any
money, what kind of propaganda are you going to carry -on?
Mr. Sargent. We are not going to carry on any propaganda at all.
We are going to support the Constitution of the United States. We
are going to study factually the conspiracy threatening the United
States Government, and give full publicity to it by educational mate-
rials to get the truth to the people.
Mr. Hays. You say you are going to get the truth to the people ?
Do you think anybody might think at all that what you have to say
might be propaganda ?
Mr. Sargent. I think you will undoubtedly disagree with me, Mr.
Hays. I am expecting that.
Mr. Hays. Let me ask you this. Do you think because Eleanor
Eoosevelt and Norman Thomas and Newbold Morris all attended the
same meeting, that is some sort of discredit, we will say, to Mrs.
Eoosevelt ?
Mr. Sargent. I am not talking about discredit. I am saying the
activity is political in nature and the prominence of all these political
people establishes the fact.
Mr. Hays. You are not inferring that there is any left wing stuff
about it ?
Mr. Sargent. This is an organization having a so-called liberal
flavor to it.
Mr. Hays. So the very association gives a bad connotation.
Mr. Sargent. I am not talking about anything they do which is not
political. I am not attacking any individuals. I am saying they
were there. You are not authorized to infer such a statement from me.
Finally, there was a meeting of the John Dewey Society — not the
John Dewey Society, the League for Industrial Democracy ; this bears
the copyright date 1950. It is a meeting held -as a tribute to John
Dewey. The people present at that meeting, according to the state-
ment here, were John Dewey, David Dubinsky, Irwin Edman, Frank
D. Fackenthal, Felix Frankfurter, Alice Hoffman, John Haynes
Holmes, Hu Shih, William H. Kilpatrick, Harry W. Laidler, William
Pepperell Montague, Joy Elmer Morgan, Jawaharlal Nehru
Mr. Hays, You have heard of him ?
Mr. Sargent. I didn't see the last name first. Ralph Barton Perry,
Walter Reuther, Rebecca Simonson.
Now, my next item has to do with a project financed by the Rocke-
feller Foundation. I have a photostat of the announcement here,
"Building America. The general education board of the Rockefeller
Foundation provided over $50,000 to assist in the development of
'Building America,' now endorsed by outstanding educators in every
State, distributed by the Grolier Society, Inc." That is a publishing-
concern in New York.
310 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
That photostat came into my possession in approximately around
1946 or so. The Grolier Society was handling the books at the time.
I am now proposing to show you what the people of the United
States got for this $50,000 gift from the Rockefeller Foundation. I
have here a book out of the Library of Congress, it is Volume II,
Building America.
Mr. Hats. Are you just going to read a paragraph or two out of it ?
Mr. Sargent. I will read as much as you want. I am discussing
one article here.
Mr. Hays. .Nobody seems to care about the taxpayers and all the
stuff that they let you put in the record that we will have to pay for
printing. You might as well read it all to get a true picture.
Mr. Sargent. I don't have time. I will show you the samples.
Mr. Hats. You don't work; do you? You have no job; do you?
You have lots of time ; don't you ?
Mr. Sargent. I am here at $6 a day at a sacrifice. I think that is
immaterial.
Mr. Hats. That is not quite as much as $125 a day that you offered
your services.
Mr. Sargent. Mr. Hays, I would like to go on without being
insulted.
This is a sample of the material as it was issued. This book here,
volume II, contains a series of units discussing various topics. The
topics are articles, Our Constitution, Safety, Clothing, Social Secu-
rity, Steel, We Consumers, Conservation, and Movies.
The original publications in pamphlet form one unit at a time, such
as I have here, the one on Eussia — China, rather — I have one on
Russia. They were published serially and when the stack was com-
pleted, they would combine them in order in the shape of a book.
The publication in question originated with the Society for Cur-
riculum Study, an organization established at Ohio State University.
Mr. Hats. That is really a leftwing institution. Senator Bricker
is one of the trustees out there.
Mr. Sargent. I said Ohio State University originated it.
Mr. Hays. They don't even allow
Mr. Sargent. It has an interesting history which I would like to
trace.
Mr. Hays. Don't talk while I am going. You brought in Ohio
State in a nasty way, as you have a cute habit of doing. It happens
that is the principal university in my State, and it so happens that it
is generally considered to be a very conservative institution with men
of the general political thinking of Senator John W. Bricker, of Ohio,
on the board of trustees. Some of the members of the board of trus-
tees were appointed by Senator Bricker. I don't want any inference
there— and I will use this term very generously— no neophyte who
knows nothing about education and has obviously proved it in 3 days,
is going to slander Ohio State University. You may slander some
people and some institutions, but let us keep the record straight on
that.
The Chairman. The Chair wishes to state on his own account that
he doesn't consider that there is any slur attached to Ohio State Uni-
versity. I share the same high regard for Ohio State University as
does the gentleman from Ohio. I think that the record standing of
Mr. Sargent, who is before the committee, speaks for itself.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 311
Mr. Hats. Mr. Chairman, that is a good statement. Just what is
the record standing of Mr. Sargent? He is a self-appointed expert.
He says that himself.
The Chairman. It is all in the record at the beginning of Ms testi-
mony in order to qualify him. If you looked at yesterday's statement
you will find it.
Mr. Hays. I looked it over when I qualified him, and I qualified him
at the go that he weaseled out of the truth at the beginning. If that
is the qualification we want to have, let us have it understood.
The Chairman. The courts are available if he has weaseled on the
truth.
Mr. Hays. Don't worry, I will submit it to Mr. Brownell, and if
he ever gets done with the McCarthy hearings on perjury, maybe he
will have time to look at this one. I think he is going to be a busy
man for a long time.
Mr. Sargent. If you will make a statement off the floor of Congress,
I will take care of it.
Mr. Hays. I will make a speech in my district on Sunday, and I
will have a lot to say about you, and it will all be off the floor of Con-
gress, and I will submit you a copy.
Mr. Sargent. This article to which I refer is entitled "Our Con-
stitution." It contains the elements of the plan to pack the United
States Supreme Court. I personally examined the copyright docu-
ments in the Federal Copyright Office here in Washington, and dis-
covered that the publication of this document was Octcber 1936. In
short, this material got into the hands of teachers, and presumably
pupils in public schools, before the November 1936 Presidential elec-
tion, and several months before the bill was introduced in February
1937 to pack the Federal judiciary.
Here are some of the statements contained in this article. This
is for classroom use and discussion. The publication originally was
for the secondary school level. It has since been graded down to
be used in elementary schools when the children do not have an
understanding sufficient to deal with the issues propounded here. It
propounds a question whether the Constitution as drawn up serves
the needs of the American people and what changes have been made
in the Constitution, and the Supreme Court decisions on it. Whether
further changes should be made in the Constitution to serve the needs
of the American people.
With your permission I have a copy of the same thing which is
•marked. I would like to read from my copy, because it will save
time. I have the same article.
Mr. Hays. If it is all the same with the committee, I would like
you to read from the Library of Congress copy.
Mr. Sargent. Then I will use my copy to identify the passages and
rthen turn over and read it.
The Chairman. It doesn't make any difference which copy you
a*ead from.
Mr. Hays. It may not to you, but it does to me.
Mr. Sargent. I am very glad to do that. There is a discussion
here about Shea's Rebellion, and the weakness of Congress before
the adoption of the Federal Constitution. It says that the States
appointed delegates to a convention. That Samuel Adams, a friend
of liberty, was absent from the convention. That Patrick Henry
312 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
declined "because he said he smelled a rat." I am reading exact quotes;
here —
That nearly all the men who gave their great talent to the job were capable,
well-to-do lawyers, planters, merchants, bankers, or businessmen. Some of them
had lent money to carry on the Revolution. Many held continental bonds and
paper money which were almost worthless, but which they wanted the new
government to make good. None of the delegation was a city mechanic or a
small farmer who owned little or no property.
It says on page 7 that the convention held together by the strength
of a hair only because the delegates were agreed on one main point —
They wanted a strong government to protect property against the common
man who owned little more than the strength and skill of his hands.
There is a cartoon on two pages here, 8 and 9, portraying the func-
tion of the Supreme Court as the killing of legislation. The instance
given here is the 16th amendment, the income-tax amendment. With
the people demanding an income-tax law, the veto. Here in the
cartoon is a scroll of paper portrayed as a man standing before the
Supreme Court and pleading, and on the other side he lies on the
floor dead, and it says here :
Killed in test case before Supreme Court by a 5-to-4 decision.
Mr. Hays. Could you identify the cartoon, where it first appeared,
and so on ?
Mr. Sargent. It doesn't contain any name here. It is just in the
book.
Mr. Hays. It must have been in some newspaper or somewhere.
Mr. Sargent. I don't know where it was. It may have been drawn
for the purposes of the book. I have no knowledge one way or
the other.
On pages 10 and 11 there are more scenes. Here is a picture of
the Black Legion with two men dressed in the robes of the Black
Legion.
Mr. Hays. You think kids should not know that?
Mr. Sargent. They should have an honest presentation of both sides;
and at an age when they can understand it.
Mr. Hays. Probably the only way we could get an honest presenta-
tion would be for you to write one. Why don't you write one and
see if you can get it printed.
Mr. Sargent. On page 24, there is what is called the New Deal score,
listing the various prominent cases at the time, the TVA case, the
Gold Clause case, Hot Oil, and various other decisions. Then we
have here on page 26, the statements of what the liberals propose,
and I will read them all :
1. Have Congress pass an act requiring at least a 6 to 3 vote in the Supreme
Court to declare any Federal law unconstitutional.
2. Have Congress propose a sweeping amendment which would make it con-
stitutional to pass any law, providing for the general welfare for poor people,
3. Compel all justices to retire on pensions when reaching the age 70. (A bill
which allows Supreme Court Justices over 70 years of age to retire on full pay
if they so desire has been recently passed by Congress.)
4. Add justices to the Supreme Court, in this way making it more responsive
to the will of the people.
In short, the propaganda of these agencies with foundation aid
had reached the point where they were advocating court packing
and were putting it in the American public-school system.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 313
I am talking now about the National Education Association, which
is also a tax-exempt organization, an organization whose charter
the Congress has a right to examine if it is considered wise to do so.
I will refer to the NE A.
Mr. Hays. Would you mind if I asked you a question about the
membership of the NEA ?
Mr. Sargent. If you wish.
Mr. Hays. Am I right in saying that the membership of the NEA
comprises about every primary and secondary schoolteacher in the
United States?
Mr. Sargent. A very large membership, yes. They have little or
no control over the actions of the people at the top.
Mr. Hays. They probably know more about that than you do.
Mr. Sargent. I would be reluctant to believe they did in view of
some of the activities we find. The National Education Association
later took over this publication, Building America, and sponsored it
actively and sold it. They sponsored it for use in California in a
proceeding in which I participated, and where charges made by the
Sons of the American Revolution and represented by me were sus-
tained and held to be completely with foundation. The charges had
to do with a special edition of Building America, three books. There
was 1 book for the seventh grade, and 2 books for the eighth grade.
These books were compiled by taking certain of these Building Amer-
ica pamphlets, and publishing them in a predetermined order. When
you see the order in these books, you find what you have here is a
stacked deck.
The first book in the seventh grade, before children have anything
in the way of teaching, or did have in our school system at the time,
in American history, is devoted to China. This article is written in
effect according to the Owen Lattimore line, involving the betrayal
of American interests in China. A committee of the California Leg-
islature was appointed to investigate that matter, and they found just
exactly that.
I will read you what they said about this Building America unit
on China, or a portion of it. I will leave the pamphlet with you for
further study:
This book is peculiarly useful to the Communists as a medium to further dis-
seminate the current party line concerning conditions in China.
That was the finding of a California legislative committee on this
article.
The next article had to do with Soviet Russia, indoctrination on
that score. It is an obvious piece of propaganda. It begins on the
first page with a question propounded to Stalin :
Are you going to try to eommunize the United States ?
Mrs. Pfost. Is that in the large book ? You are quoting now from a
pamphlet.
Mr. Sargent. This is in the book, yes. I will read from the book
itself. It is the same thing. This is' the California edition I have
here of the book on Russia. The second unit is Russia.
Mr. Hays, Is the California edition different ?
Mr. Sargent. No, it is identical. This is merely the California
stacked deck of the original. It was arranged in a propaganda man-
ner to make it more effective.
314 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hats. Was the deck stacked by somebody in California or the-
NEA?
Mr. Sargent. The NEA I understand sponsored the publication in
its present form for California use.
Mr. Hays. You understand that?
Mr. Sargent. They did.
Mr. Hats. All right.
Mr. Sargent. I was present in the legislative hall in Sacramento,.
Calif., when a letter was read from the National Education Associa-
tion in Washington urging the legislative committee to sustain the
books which were these books I have before me now, and I am testi-
fying from. This is for seventh graders at a highly impressionable
age, and propounds this question supposed to have been answered by
Stalin whether he is trying to communize the United States. The-
answer :
Of course not —
was followed by the question :
Are you going to try to turn the Soviet Union into a democracy?
Mr. Hays. What was the answer to that question ?
Mr. Sargent. It is not answered. The next sentence said:
The truth of this story is far less important than the point it makes.
The article traces the course of the Russian Revolution. Here on
page 78. is a discussion of one-party government. The first paragraph :
The 1936 constitution begins by stating that the U. S. S. R. is a Socialist state
of workers and peasants. The land is the common property of the people who
also own the means of production, distribution, and transportation. It contains
all the famous fredeoms, freedom of speech, press, assembly, and conscience.
Mrs. Pfost. Mr. Sargent, what years were these textbooks used in,
the California schools?
Mr. Sargent. They were actively proposed in 1946.
Mrs. Pfost. Are they still being used in California ?
Mr. Sargent. No, they were never used because the legislature re-
fused to appropriate the money. The Superintendent of Public In-
struction denounced the legislature for refusing to furnish the money
to buy these books and continued to carry on an agitation to attempt
to force them in our schools. They had been literally compelled by
legislative process to refrain from putting these books in the schools
of California.
Mr. Hays. Let me ask you this. You read what the Soviet consti-
tution purports to say and probably it does say that. I don't know, I
never read it, but does it anywhere in that volume say that they have
not lived up to what the constitution says ?
Mr. Sargent. It contains a few statements which are claimed to take
the curse off the thing, but the net weight is propaganda in that di-
rection.
Mr. Hays. But you are not reading any of the statements in which
they might point out that although the Soviet Government says so and
so, it does such and so else ?
Mr. Sargent. It contains some weasel words on the other side, yes.
I. have not time to read the entire publication. It is here for you to
look at.
Mr. Hays. You ought to be an expert on that.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 315
Mr. Sargent. I think the legislative committee of California is an
expert. I have right here before me the legislative committee report.
So you don't have to take my word.
Mr. Hats. It that the Tenney report ?
Mr. Sargent. No, the Dilwortn committee, a committee of high
standing operating since 1946, and has rendered to date 12 reports, in-
cluding the situation at Pasadena, which has been grossly misrep-
resented by the National Education Association.
The Chairman. I would be interested in its evaluation.
Mr. Sargent. The evaluation on this Russian article in the third re-
port of the Senate Investigating Committee on Education of the
California Legislature, this is known to us as the Dilworth committee.
Senator Nelson Dilworth of Riverside County, Calif., is its chairman.
The discussion on the Russian article commences at page 78 and it
says :
If any book in the Building America series were examined for Communist
propaganda, this would be the most natural target. Assuming that some of the
writers who had to do with the drafting of the material for this particular
volume wanted to say nice things about the Soviet Union and subtlely play up
the good points of Marxism and play down the worst features, and assuming fur-
ther that they were quite aware of the probability that this book would be the
first to go through a critical examination : How would they proceed ?
In the first place, there is always propaganda through the omission from
text material of objectionable topics. An example of this has already been seen
in the volume of China, in the omission of mentioning the very solid ties be-
tween the Chinese Communist Party and the Kremlin. Then there is the use
of the illustration. This is a particularly effective technique in books of this sort,
designed for use by grammar-school children who are prone to pay more atten-
tion to the many photographic pictures than to the comparatively dry text.
Thus all the Russian women are robust, sturdy, well-fed, well-dressed, and ap-
pear to have been freshly scrubbed.
Every field is lush with grain or corn ; every barn is bursting with hay ; the
people are smiling and happy. None of these Soviet citizens appear to be afraid
of the secret police, the purges, exile to the salt mines or party discipline. The
scarcity of necessary materials bothers them but little; stores are shown dis-
playing flowered yardage materials, there are pictures of gay ballerinas in the
theaters, traveling shops serving the collective farmers in the fields, church
services to dispel the silly notion that there is anything athiestic about these
carefree Marxists.
Among other things this analysis of the legislative report lists the
front organizations of some of the authors of reference material in
these books, among them Anna Louise Strong, Albert Rhys, Allen
Roberts. The analysis of this particular unit showed among other
things that the reference materials were practically study lists to
indoctrinate teachers in communism.
The Chairman. Earlier you quoted from a California book a state-
ment to the effect that the Russian constitution guaranteed the four
freedoms, freedom of thought, freedom of speech, and so forth. Was
that quoting from the Russian constitution, or was that a statement
contained in that book on the author's responsibility, in which case it
would be purely propaganda ?
Mr. Sargent. The particular statement there in the text here is
not in quotes. The part in quotes in that paragraph is simply this :
"Socialist state of workers and peasants." The rest purports to be a
statement of what the Russian constitution contains.
Mr. Hats. May I see it?
Mr. Sargent. Yes.
316 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The Chairman. Some of that material has been authoritatively
circulated, and urged to be used in the public schools, and it is dis-
turbing to me unless there is some satisfactory explanation of it.
Mr. Hays. There are some things. The constitution recognized the
Communist Party and forbids the formation of any other political
organization. It defines the party as "the leading core" and those
are quotes, and the direct nucleus of all organizations. It goes on
to say that many minor positions in the Government are held by non-
party members. However, since the party is the leading core in the
organization it is doubted whether a candidate of whom the party
disapproves could be elected to the office.
Mr. Sargent. And you are expecting a seventh grade school child
to evaluate material like that without studying history. I said it was
propaganda, because of the grade level.
Mr. Hats. Understand, I am not saying that the Building America
books are all right. I don't know anything about them. I know they
have been the subject of a great deal of controversy. The point I am
making is — and I have never seen one until this minute — there are 2
or 3 statements that might be a little derogatory about the Commu-
nists.
Mr. Sargent. There are some statements as a clever attempt to
take the curse off the propaganda load in the books, yes. The Cali-
fornia committee also found that the photographs in here came from
SCFOTO, which is the Soviet propaganda agency. They also noted
in here— —
Mr. Hats. Seriously, let me ask you a question, and I am very
serious about this. Presuming, and I assume you think we should
teach our children something about Communist Eussia — I mean we
can't say it does not exist— how would you go about it? I am very
serious, and I want to tell you why. I got a letter the other day from
a teacher in my district, and he said :
I am writing to you because I have to teach something about Russia and the
Communist system —
and he said —
I have heard you speak about being behind the Iron Curtain and what it does
to people. I would like to have some material on that, but —
he said, and this is the significant thing —
I am afraid to write to the Russian Embassy or to any place else to get even their
side of it to show what kind of propaganda they put out, because in the little
town I live in, if I got a letter from them, I would be immediately suspect.
In other words, the poor guy wanted to get hold of some of this
propaganda so he can show the children how they indoctrinate people,
and there is no freedom and he is afraid. How would you do it ?
Mr. Sargent. I would obey the statutes of California which provide
that it is unlawful for a teacher to advocate communism, that it is
allowable to teach truthfully and factually the subject at a grade level
where the pupil has a proper foundation and is able to understand it.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Sargent, that is no answer.
Mr. Sargent. It is. I would do exactly that. I would not put it
in an elementary school.
Mr. Hats. Forget that. How are you going to teach them about it.
The teachers now are afraid to mention the word. You can't fight an
evil like communisim by saying it does not exist.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 317
The Chairman. If you will permit an observation on my part, a
teacher that has presumably qualified himself to teach school and
doesn't know enough about communism in Soviet Russia to ade-
quately teach the students, I think ought to be given another exami-
nation.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Reece, that is a nice statement. I don't mind you
engaging in a little pleasant demogoguery. I am sure that will read
good down in Tennessee. How is the average American teacher
going to know much about Russia or anything else unless he reads
some books. He is not going to stand before the class and say, "I
am an authority on Soviet Russia ; it stinks. We will go on to
England."
The Chairmak. The average American teacher today is a college
graduate and a large percentage of the teachers today are graduate
students in some phase, and they have had a wide opportunity to study
every reasonable facet of education and American history, or at least
even in the distant era when I was teaching school that was to a very
large degree the case. I don't minimize the problem that you raise
there, however. The teacher does have an important responsibility.
Mr. Sargent. We have a great educational need there, Mr. Hays,
which should be met. It is the opinion of many that the place to
start is to form a good course of study and to start aiding the educators
who are of the same turn of mind to understand what this is, to devise
the teaching material and do a positive job. I am all in favor of that
being done.
Mr. Hays. Is that supposed to be a geography book you are reading
from ?
Mr. Sargent. This is social studies. You have been talking about
social studies and foundations' support for them. This is social
studies as received by the people of California by the gift of the Rock-
efeller Foundation and others.
Mr. Hats. Do you have any textbooks in the social studies that
you would recommend as being all right?
Mr. Sargent. I am not familiar with all the books they are using.
Of course, we have. As social studies, I think the social studies con-
cept has proved to be a vehicle for propaganda, and is erroneous.
Many believe that history should be taught factually as a subject, and
the other subjects should be taught factually, and not mixed in this
form.
Mr. Hats. In other words, you think you ought to teach history by
teaching them that in 1492 Columbus discovered America, and in 1776
there was a revolution, and in 1860 Lincoln was elected President of the
United States, and in 1861 some nasty southerners started a rebellion
against the country. Pardon me, Mr. Chairman. That is factual,
but do you think that will be valuable ?
Mr. Sargent. Did I say that ?
Mr. Hats. I am trying to find out what you mean.
Mr. Sargent. I didn't say that. I said history should be taught
as a factual subject.
Mr. Hats. Is that what you mean by factual ?
Mr. Sargent. No ; I do not mean that. I mean the teaching of sig-
nificant movements which have occurred throughout American his-
tory, the movement which resulted in the Declaration of Independ-
ence, and so on.
49720— 54— pt. 1 21
318 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hats, I think all teachers teach that. What about the Know^
Nothing Party? How would you handle that? Do you remember
that movement?
Mr. Sargent. Yes. It was a very discriminatory and disreputable
organization.
Mr. Hats. What about the Whig Party? What would you say
about it?
Mr. Sargent. I think a discussion of the Whig Party would be a
very profitable thing, particularly now. The history of the Whig
Party is very significant.
Mr. Hays. Wliat about the background and what caused the break-
up of the Whig Party ? Would you let them find out anything about
that, or just say it was not there any more?
Mr. Sargent. At the proper grade level I definitely would.
Mr. Hats. Somebody somewhere along the line is going to dis-
agree with something that is said. No teacher in a classroom can keep
track of everything that every student says, and somebody will dis-
agree, and some organization will say, "My goodness, look what they
are letting them say in school."
Mr. Sargent. I am talking about the blackout in history in Cali-
fornia and no history books furnished in the department of education
from 1928 until almost 1940. They were following the line advocated
by the progressive education group at Columbia University. A legis-
lative investigation started before they began to furnish history books
as required by law. There was no history.
Mr. Hats. I don't know anything about the blackout in California,
and I don't know whether this is the proper place to go into that. I
don't think there was any blackout in my State.
Mr. Sargent. Ohio may be perfect. Other places are not quite so
good.
Mr. Hats. No; but Ohio does not have as many radicals on both
sides as California does. I think that is a generally accepted fact.
Mr. Sargent. May I go on, please. I would like to finish my pres-
entation.
Mr. Hats. It is all right with me.
Mr. Sargent. As further evidence of the propaganda purpose and
that these books are a stacked deck, I call your attention to the
fact that the last articles at the end of the eighth grade, after all
that material goes in, the last articles are "Our Constitution," "Civil
Liberties," ana "Civic Responsibility." But all the other material
comes first. The Constitution article is the one I referred you to
here. The Dilworth committee report points out something else.
This Russian article contained many cartoons of Stalin. There were
no pictures at all of Lincoln or Jefferson, but there were two very
derogatory cartoons put in. These cartoons were put in a revised
edition after the legislative investigation had started, showing a
deliberate attempt to throw propaganda into the schoolbooks. Here
is one showing Lincoln burying the Constitution. The cartoon is
reproduced in this report. The text quoted by the Dilworth report
says :
"In violation of the Bill of Rights, President Lincoln threw people suspected
of disloyalty into prison without trial. Military courts heard civilian cases.
Chief Justice Taney was alarmed at these illegal measures, but Lincoln
defended his action as a necessity of war. 'It is better to save the Union with-
out a Constitution,' he said, 'than to save the Constitution without a Union.' "
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 319
The committee is profoundly shocked at this one-sided and derogatory presen-
tation of President Lincoln. It leaves out all that is noble and inspiring to all
peoples in the world in the character and acts of President Lincoln who freed a
great race from slavery and is today the outstanding exponent in history of the
rights of the common man.
"Before the advent of communistic philosophy into this country after the
Russian Revolution, the teachers of the schools all over the United States
encouraged the children to bring pennies to school to build the great memorial
monument to Lincoln on the banks of the Potomac at our National Capital.
"Nothing so vividly illustrates the change in attitude of some of our national
educational leaders in some policy-forming positions of the National Education
Association of professional educators and teachers as this about-face toward
the memory of Abraham Lincoln who lived and labored 'That government of
the people, by the people, and for the people shall not perish from the earth.' "
Here is one on Thomas Jefferson attempting to tear down the Con-
stitution — this is for the elementary grades.
The Dilworth report says :
There are two great Americans that the devotees of foreign isms and
ideologies consistently smear. They are Abraham Lincoln because he sup-
pressed a revolution and Thomas Jefferson because he is the great advocate
of rights of the State and individual as opposed to centralized government con-
trol.
The Dilworth committee also says :
If cartoons are so vital for a textbook, why were none used for Russia or
Stalin?
The conclusion of this report, and it is a unanimous report of the
California Legislature, is that they consider it their duty to publish
a complete evaluation of the propaganda and they find the books to
be unfit for use in our schools. They did make that evalution. They
found among other things that 113 Communit-front organizations
had to do with some of the material in these books and that 50 Com-
munist-front authors were connected with it. Among the authors
are Sidney and Beatrice Webb, identified with the Fabian Socialist
Movement in Great Britain.
The Chairman. I failed to catch those numbers.
Mr. Sargent. 113 front organizations. This reference is at page 47
of the report, and 50 front authors. The reference is at page 48. I
will be glad to leave my report for the convenience of the committee.
Mr. Hats. Do I understand that these books are not in use any-
where in Calif ornia ?
Mr. Sargent. No. We succeeded in defending ourselves against
them.
Mr. Hats. Do you think they are in use anywhere ?
Mr. Sargent. They were for some time. Texas rejected them by
action of their State board of education, as I am informed. There
have been questions about them elsewhere.
There was a program to put these in the schools everywhere and
it is my understanding that the California proceeding broke it up.
To illustrate the extent to which building a new social order is a
program in these books, let me read the titles serially to show that it
is a very unusual curriculum. This is commencing with the 7th
grade, and running through the 8th :
China, Russia, Blast Indies, Our Neighbors in North Africa, America's Out-
posts, Italian Americans, Seeing America, Foreign Trade, Lend-Lease, Oil, Rub-
ber, Seeing America, Our Federal Government, Congress, Politics, Machinery for
Foreign Relations, Social Security, Community Planning, Our Land Resources,
Our Water Resources, Conservation, We Americans, the American Indians,
320 TAX-EXEMPT FOTOTDATIONS
Spanish Speaking People, Family Life, Arts and the American Craftsmen,
America Discovers Its Songs, The American Theater, Our Constitution, Civil
Liberties, For the Right to Liberty, and Civil Responsibilities.
Someone has passed me a note stating that the Building America
books are being used in Arlington right now. I do not know that
for a fact. Your committee may want to inquire.
One more illustration on propaganda, and I will turn to another
subject. This article on social security, which is not part of the cur-
riculum to begin with, no place in an elementary grade, is not a pre-
scribed course of study, here is a full page picture the size of a Satur-
day Evening Post cover, with a destitute woman with a child in her
arms. That is your propaganda you will find throughout these books,
the seamy side of American life, the unfortunate ; sympathetic Russia
is sweetness and light. The United States is a place of destitution,
failure, unsound conditions. The propaganda impact of that kind on
a child of tender years is obvious. The California Legislature barred
them.
The Chairman. That is one of the same series ?
Mr. Sargent. Yes, that is the same series. That was barred in Cali-
fornia, too. These lead me to another topic.
I was talking about the propaganda activities of the National Edu-
cation Association.
Another one was carried on by the National Education Association
which interjected itself into a controversy involving the superintend-
ent of schools at Pasadena, Calif., Mr. Willard L. Goslin. Mr. Gos-
lin's conduct was unsatisfactory to the Pasadena people. They op-
posed a bond issue which he wanted passed, they were opposed to his
policies of bringing people from Columbia to workshops, for example,
William H. Kilpatrick.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Chairman, I don't know what we have to do with
Pasadena's problems about the superintendent of schools.
Mr. Sargent. You will find out in a minute. The National Edu-
cation Association injected themselves into the case and chastised
the people of Pasadena for firing the superintendent of schools. They
have no right to invade the local jurisdiction of schools; that is a
political activity.
Mr. Hays. Were you engaged in that fight at all ?
Mr. Sargent. No, sir; I had no part in it. I did go down and find
out what happened afterwards. I had no connection with it. That
was not my case.
The Chairman. I want to state here since so many references have
been made to the witness, and I have no responsibility for him, that all
my checking indicates that he is an eminent lawyer in California with
a very high standing.
Mr. Sargent. This is another report of the Dilworth committee of
the California Legislature. It is the eighth report of that committee.
It contains at page 93 a reprinting of a document which purports to
be made by Harold Benjamin, chairman of the National Commission
for the Defense of Democracy Through Education, NEA. It is en-
titled, "Report on the Enemy." It was delivered at an NEA meeting,
88th delegate assembly, at St. Louis, Mo., July 3, 1946. In this article
he. portrays the people as enemies of their schools and says in sub-
stance that the educational profession should organize to combat them.
He says some of these people are traveling under alias. Some of them
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 321
are taxpayers. Some of them are antitax groups, heated patriots and
opponents of Columbia Ked pragmatism and so on. This document I
"will likewise leave with you.
Incidentally, on my own investigation— Mr. Benjamin in this article
ascribes all of the responsibility — not all but a substantial part of it
to one Allen A. Zoll of New York, who wrote a statement about pro-
gressive education which is printed in this report, and which is cer-
tainly an entirely proper statement for any person to make — Benjamin
says that statement by Allen Zoll took over the entire controversy and
had a decisive influence. Mr. Benjamin sent an investigator to Pasa-
dena to inquire into this case, a Mr. Skaife, of the National Education
Association. Mr. Skaife inquired into this case and found the charge
about Allen Zoll was unsubstantiated and nonf ounded and rendered
such a report to the National Education Association before Mr. Ben-
jamin delivered this false attack on the people. I think that is an
important example of propaganda activity By a tax-exempt organi-
zation, namely, the National Education Association.
There is more to this story of the smearing of American people
by tax-exempt groups. I have one here which is a true copy of a
letter sent by this Commission for the Defense of Democracy Through
Education of the NEA. It is called Inquiry Into Unjustified Attacks
on Public Education, A Questionnaire. I wish to have this put in
full in the transcript. In the interest of saving time I will not read
it all. This document was sent to approximately 15,000 school
teachers and administrators throughout the country to gather evi-
dence against the people who were protesting conditions in the
schools. It asks for information about the forms of attack being made,
such as failure to teach the three R's, too many frills, and fads, the
high cost of schools, improper textbooks, insufficient emphasis on
United States history and the Constitution.
Mr. Hats. Who sent this out %
Mr. Sargent. The National Education Association officially.
Mr. Hays. Could I see it?
Mr. Sargent. Yes. That is a true copy of the original. They are
gathering evidence on people opposed to school conditions obviously
for the purpose of organizing an attack on the people who do not agree
with them.
Mr. Hays. That is what you say.
Public education is under fire today in many quarters. During recent months
some of the most damaging attacks have been on the public schools at the local
community level.
While educators do not object to construtive criticism designed to improve
schools, they are growing concerned over unjustified criticisms and misleading
propaganda put out by individuals and groups whose motives are suspect.
As evidence has accumulated from a number of communities across America,
we have felt increasing need to get a full national picture of attacks on education.
It is not clear yet as to whether these attacks have been concentrated only
in a relatively few communities or are part of a widespread pattern.
One aim of this questionnai:qe is to get a national picture of the breadth and
concentration of recent unjustified attacks on public education.
You might conceivably find fault with that because they are saying
they are unjustified. I have never seen this before. Here are some
questions. You read some. I have not even looked at this. I will
read the first one and see what it says :
1. Have organizations, clubs, societies, groups (or individuals representing
them) attacked the public schools or public education in general in your com-
322 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
munity Answer Yes, No. If so what year or years did the attack or attacks
occur ?
2. If your answer to the above is Yes, please name the organizations. After
each one identified, indicate by N, S, or L, whether you believe it is a National,
State, or local organization.
3. If education has been attacked in your community since 1948, has the
attack been brought to a head over some issue (e. g., bond or tax rate election)
concerning school costs? Answer Yes or No.
In your opinion is the principal motive for the attacks in your community
a desire on the part of certain persons to reduce school costs regardless' of the
damage done to the school program and the welfare of children? Answer
Yes or No.
I believe you read the next one ?
Mr. Sargent. Some of them. It is all going into the record.
Mr. Hats (reading) :
5. Check any of the following forms of attack on the public school program
which have appeared in your community :
a. Failure to teach the three R's adequately.
b. Too many frills and fads.
c. The high cost of public schools.
d. Improper textbooks.
e. Progressive education.
f. Subversive teaching.
g. Failure to teach moral and spiritual values,
h. Communistic teaching.
i. Insufficient emphasis on United States history and the Constitution,
j. Indoctrinating children with the blessings of the welfare state.
k. Teaching Socialism.
1. Other forms (please explain).
6. The following are pamphlets presenting drastic criticism of public educa-
tion. After each please check appropriate columns.
Have Heard of
Have Read
Has circulated in this area.
(a) They want your child !
(b) Must American Youth Be taught that Communism and Socialism are
superior to Americanism?
(c) How Red are the schools?
(d) Progressive Education Increasing Delinquency.
(e) Private schools: The answer to America's educational problem.
(f ) How Red is the Little Red Schoolhouse?
7. Have any other pamphlets attacking the public schools been circulated in
your community? Answer yes or no.
8. If the answer is yes to the above question, please give titles, sponsoring
organizations, and indication of contents (if you have extra copies, we will
appreciate your sending one to us).
9. Has information concerning any of the following organizations come to your
attention?
a. National Council for American Education.
b. Pro America.
c. Committee for Constitutional Government.
d. America's Future, Inc.
e. Friends of the Public Schools.
f. Consitutional Education League.
g. American Educational League.
If so, from what source did this information come to you?
The Chairman. The questionnaire will fee printed in the record in
full.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 323
(The questionnaire referred to follows:)
Inquiry Into Unjustified Attacks on Public Education *
a questionnaire
Public education is under fire today in many quarters. During recent months
some of the most damaging attacks have been on the public schools at the local
community level.
While educators do not object to constructive criticism designed to improve
schools, they are growing concerned over unjustified criticisms and misleading
propaganda put out by Individuals and groups whose motives are suspect.
As evidence has accumulated from a number of communities across America,
we have felt increasing need to get a full national picture of attacks on educa-
tion. It is not clear yet as to whether these attacks have been concentrated only
in a relatively few communities or are part of a widespread pattern.
One aim of this questionnaire is to get a national picture of the breadth and
concentration of recent unjustified attacks on public education. The other aim
is to determine the characteristics and features of attacks on public schools as
they have occurred in various communities.
A superintendent of a large school system recently wrote to NEA as follows :
"For a period of 30 years I have been in public-school work, the first 10 as a
teacher, the second 10 as a supervisor, and the third 10 as a superintendent, and
while I have observed, in some instances, direct forces working against the
school program, I have never observed as organized an effort as seems to be
prevalent in communities at the present time."
This study has been approved by the executive committee of the National
Education Association.
Your cooperation in completing this questionnaire will serve our profession and
the institution of free public schools in America. National Commission for the
Defense of Democracy Through Education, National Education Association,
1201 16th Street NW, Washington 6, D. O.
Please note : You will not be quoted directly except with your express consent.
section i
Your name.
Your position.
Your community and State.
Your school system (please check).
Is your school system a city ?
A county or parish?
Other type?
Approximate number of pupils enrolled in your school system during 1949-50.
SECTION 2
Please answer the following and comment wherever possible:
1. Have organizations, clubs, societies, groups (or individuals representing
them) attacked the public schools or public education in general in your com-
munity? Yes__ No —
If so what year or years did the attack or attacks occur ?
2. If your answer to the above Is yes, please name the organizations. After
each one identified, indicate by n. S. or 1, whether you believe it is a national,
State, or local organization.
3. If education has been attacked in your community since 1948, has the
attack been brought to a head over some issue (e. g., bond or tax rate election)
concerning school costs ? Yes — No__.
4. In your opinion is the principal motive for the attacks in your community
a desire on the part of certain persons to reduce school costs regardless of the
damage done to the school program and the welfare of children? Yes — No__.
5. Check any of the following forms of attack on the public school program
which have appeared in jour community:
324 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
a. Failure to teach the three E's adequately.
b. Too many frills and fads.
c. The high cost of public schools.
d. Improper textbooks.
e. Progressive education.
f. Subversive teaching.
g. Failure to teach moral and spiritual values.
h. Communistic teaching.
i. Insufficient emphasis on U. S. history and the Constitution,
j. Indoctrinating children with the blessing of the welfare state,
k. Teaching socialism.
I. Other forms ( please explain ) .
6. The following are pamphlets presenting drastic criticism of public education.
After each please check appropriate columns.
(Column 1 headed) : Have heard of —
(Column 2 headed :) Have read —
< Column 3 headed ) : Has circulated in this area —
(a) They Want Your Child 1
(b) Must American Youth Be Taught That Communism and Socialism are
Superior to Americanism ?
(c ) How Red Are the Schools ?
(d) Progressive Education Increasing Delinquency.
(e) Private Schools : The answer to America's educational problem.
(f ) How Red Is the Little Red Schoolhouse?
7. Have any other pamphlets attacking the public schools been circulated in
your community ? Yes No __.
8. If the answer is "Yes" to the above question, please give titles, sponsoring
organizations, and indication of contents (if you have extra copies, we will
appreciate your sending one to us) :
9. Has information concerning any of the following organizations come to
your attention?
(a) National Council for American Education,
(b) Pro America.
(c) Committee for Constitutional Government.
(d) America's Future, Inc.
(e) Friends of the Public Schools.
(/) Constitutional Education League.
(g) American Educational League.
If so, from what source did this information come to you ?
10. Please name any of the above organizations which you believe attempted
to influence attitudes and action with regard to public education in your
community :
II. Have attacks in your community or area —
(a) Condemned an enriched, permissive school program and advocated a
simpler, less flexible program in which students "survive" to the degree that
they learn formal subject matter under conditions emphasizing competition?
( b ) Involved ideological criticism of the democratic philosophy as American
educators commonly understand it?
(c) Attempted to undermine the reputation of national educational leaders
(Dewey, Kilpatrick, etc.) professional organizations (NEA, AASA, etc.) or
teacher training institutions?
(d) Received any unusual help from the press in developing their campaign?
(e) Borne any relationships to parochial and private school interests?
12. To what extent do you think these attacks have been hurtful to the
schools? (Check one:) Very hurtful □. Hurtful □- Not especially hurtful D.
Beneficial in that they backfired □.
13. Have the public schools in your community or area received help from
any local community organizations in meeting attacks or major criticisms as
they have occurred? Yes No __.
14. If your answer to the above question is "yes" please name these organiza-
tions and indicate briefly how they have helped :
15. What measures are you taking, or have you taken, in your community to
forestall or offset attacks against the program of public education?
16. How successfully do you feel these measures to be?
17. Please add any comments which will be helpful in interpreting what yon
have indicated above or which supply information that you think is pertinent.
Please return this questionnaire as soon as possible to : National Commission
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 325
for the Defense of Democracy through Education, National Education Associa-
tion, 1201 16th Street NW., Washington 6, D. C.
A self -addressed enveloped is enclosed for your convenience. Tour cooperation
is deeply appreciated.
Mr. Hays. Go on and read it, but it seems to me it is an attempt to
find out what is going on.
Mr. Sargent. It is an attempt to gather evidence for the purpose
of lobbying and interfering with the local jurisdiction of school au-
thorities, and this is a tax-exempt corporation engaging in that lobby-
ing activity. It is not their business whether the people in Pasadena
like their superintendent.
Mr. Hats. I won't debate that question with you.
Mr. Sargent. It isn't.
Mr. Hats. But it is certainly the business of national organizations
of teachers and principals to know what attacks are made on the in-
stitutions which they work in and represent and a mere fact-finding
questionnaire to get that information— this committee sent out a lot
of questionnaires to universities all over the country asking what
grants they got from foundations, whether they had been refused, and
so on. Some of them didn't like it.
Mr. Sargent. That is not the half of it. The NEA officially inter-
fered with the Pasadena school controversy. Mr. Willard Given, the
executive secretary of the NEA, offered a resolution before the United
States Commission for UNESCO condemning the people of Pasadena
for firing Superintendent Goslin. Do you know that ?
Mr. Hats. I don't know. Maybe he was justified.
Mr. Sargent. He did. The lobbying was carried to UNESCO; a
speech on that subject was delivered by Mr. Lawrence C. Lamb, a
member of the Pasadena School Board, protesting this interference
with the integrity of the school system in the August 1, 1951, issue of
Vital Speeches. I asked for a Library of Congress copy, and unfortu-
nately the page containing this particular article seems to have been
torn out, so I will have to ask leave to put in an excerpt in the record
later. I- think it is important. I will get it later. That is the fact. He
went all the way to UNESCO to interfere with Pasadena's jurisdiction
and the school board member I named protested that it had come to a
point where the national propaganda hopped on the back of local citi-
zens trying to run their school affairs in their own way. 1
Mr. Hays. Was everybody in Pasadena unanimous about this thing,
or was there some controversy ?
Mr. Sargent. There was controversy. It was their right to be
right or wrong, and not to be interfered with in arriving at the conclu-
sion, right or wrong.
Mr. Hats. There was controversy ?
Mr. Sargent: Certainly there was extensive controversy.
Mr. Hays. There were two sides to the question ?
Mr. Sargent. Yes. But it was the duty of the NEA to take neither
side.
Mr. Hays. I don't know whether it is up to you to say what the
NEA's duty is. It is your opinion.
Mr. Sargent. It is lobbying, however.
1 The speech of Mr. Lawrence C. Lamb, referred to by the witness, appears following his
testimony at p. 403.
326 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mrs. Pfost. This questionnaire, however, indicates they are trying
to tell California what to do.
Mr. Sargent. They certainly are.
Mrs. Pfost. In the questionnaire ?
Mr. Sargent. Not the questionnaire alone, but the information ob-
tained from it was to be used for that purpose and is used for that
purpose.
Mrs. Pfost. How widely did the circular become circulated ?
Mr. Sargent. Fifteen thousand copies throughout the Nation.
Mrs. Pfost. It was not circulated only in California ?
Mr. Sargent. No, throughout the country. All principal districts,
about 15,000 of them.
Mrs. Pfost. I wanted to ask further, do you think these questions
in this area are out of line, that the National Education Association
should not concern themselves with this subject ?
Mr. Sargent. I think they are intended to obtain evidence to use in
interfering with school jurisdiction. They are trying to get, to use
a colloquial expression, the dirt on certain groups they want to get
after and oppose. These organizations, Pro America, for example, a
highly respected organization, why do they want to know what Pro
America is doing about this thing?
Mr. Hays. I don't know anything about Pro America. That is a
good catchy title. But are you familiar with the organization, Friends
of the Public Schools?
Mr. Sargent. I know there is such an organization with an office
in Washington.
Mr. Hats. Do you know anything about it?
Mr. Sargent. They have issued bulletins.
Mr. Hats. They are anti-Catholic.
Mr. Sargent. I don't agree with their stand.
Mr. Hays. But you don't think it is all right for them to inquire
about them?
Mr. Sargent. I think they have a civil right.
Mr. Hats. I think they have a civil right, but a duty to find out if
such organizations as that are propagandizing teachers. I get their
pamphlet. I don't subscribe to it. They sent it free. I file it in file
13. I have read enough to know it is an antireligious, bigoted outfit.
The Chairman. Since Pro America has been referred to, I am fa-
miliar with the organization, Pro America. It is concentrated very
heavily in California. It is composed of very fine ladies and is an
entirely patriotic and civic organization, and so far as I know, no
criticism has ever been leveled against the organization known as Pro
America.
Mr. Sargent. They also want to know whether people protest about
indoctrinating children with the blessing of the welfare state and
with communistic teaching. I have yet to see any evidence of any-
thing really effective that the NEA has done aside from adopting res-
olutions about Communists not teaching to effectively combat the
indoctrination such as contained in these books sponsored by them.
In any event, they have been actively interfering. They have been
doing much more than gathering information.
Mr. Hays. Are you inferring from that statement that the NEA is
pro-Communist?
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 327
Mr. Sargent. That the NEA is governed by a so-called liberal
clique following the liberal line. I didn't say Communist.
Mr. Hats. Is your definition of liberal the same as the letter I got
the other day which said beware of these people putting the tag of
liberal to you, because a liberal is a "non-dues-payihg Communist."
Would that be your definition of it?
Mr. Sargent. Some are and some are not.
Mr. Hays. But you think anybody that has any liberal ideas is a
little suspect?
Mr. Sargent. No ; I don't think that. There is a definite philoso-
phy of education in public affairs. In general the League for Indus-
trial Democracy crowd and the John Dewey-Kilpatrick faction in
Teachers College, who have succeeded in getting their particular views
made really an educational line through control of the National Edu-
cation Association, and they are promoting it and defending it. -
Mr. Hays. Do you think the NEA ought to be listed as a subversive
organization ?
Mr. Sargent. No ; I don't think so at all. I think their propaganda
activity should be very extensively inquired into. They lobby for
legislation. They have a legislative committee. They are infringing
on the jurisdiction of the local authorities of our school system, and
impairing the integrity of that organization.
Mr. Hays. What about your organization, the Sons of the American
Revolution ? Do they do any lobbying ?
Mr. Sargent. They propose some patriotic measures from time to
time which is their right. That is within their charter.
Mr. Hays. Anything they propose is patriotic?
Mr. Sargent. It is designed to do with things like national defense
exclusively, and the Constitution, as far as I recall.
Mr. Hays. What about the posters they had at the convention about
Bishop Oxnam and the hammer and sickle ?
Mr. Sargent. I don't know anything about the incident.
Mr. Hays. I understand quite a few of them disavowed the thing,
but some of the more extreme people sponsored it and had it there.
Mr. Sargent. Every large organization has people with varying
views. Another pamphlet here showing the extent of this organized
attack on the American people who do not like school conditions is
a pamphlet entitled, American Education Under Fire. The author
stated on the cover is Ernest O. Melby. This pamphlet states that it
was prepared with the cooperation of Mary Beauchamp, Prof.
Thodore Brameld, Prof. Herbert Bruner, New York University;
Prof. David K. Berninghausen, secretary, Committee on Intel-
lectual Freedom, American Library Association; Prof. H. Gor-
don Hullfish, Ohio State University ; Richard Barnes Kennan, execu-
tive secretary, National Commission for the Defense of Democracy
through Education, Washington, D. C.
Mr. Hays. Right there, I want to ask you a question. What is
wrong with Dr. Hullfish?
Mr. Sargent. I am not saying anything is wrong with him. I am
saying he sponsored the pamphlet.
Mr. Hays. Is there something wrong with the pamphlet ?
Mr. Sargent. It is a one-sided ease of the presentation of the
attack of people against the schools. Yes, I do. I don't know any-
thing about Hullfish at the moment.
328 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hays. I have a suggestion, and I suppose I will have to put
it in the form of a motion. I have had a slight contact and acquain-
tance with Dr. Hullfish, and I would like to subpena him. It is a
reasonable request, and I want to have him say something about
these things. 1 don't know what he will say. He won't be primed.
The Chairman. The chairman has no objection to subpenaing Dr.
Hullfish, but I think it is inadvisable to go about this subpenaing on
a hit-or-miss basis.
Mr. Hays. If we have not gone about the hit-or-miss business now,
I will put in with you so we might continue that.
I make a point of order that the House is in session and the com-
mittee has no right to sit.
The Chairman. Do you think you may be able to conclude this
afternoon?
Mr. Hays. I don't know whether you will reconvene or not. May I
say that you have to have permission of the House to sit ? I am going
to object. I think the minority has a right to have it in the record
that they want a few people to come in here that are available. If you
will brush it aside, then 1 will adopt the policy of hindering the oper-
ation as much as possible because it is one-sided. I want to bring in
some people and if you want to have a conference and agree to it,
I will withdraw my objection.
The Chairman. There is no disposition to shut off anybody that
wants to come or no disposition not to subpena anybody
? Mr. Hays. I will modify that to invite Dr. Hullfish because I don't
think you will have to subpena him.
The Chairman. To round out the study.
Mr. Hays. I would like to make this statement, Mr. Chairman. I
was advised that after the first day when I began to question this wit-
ness to the displeasure of some people that from here on in I was told —
and I have it on good authority — that Ohio State was going to be
cracked whenever they got a chance, and whatever professors could be
dragged in. That statement was made by somebody out in the
audience who was feeding information. I am going to be put in the
position right now of saying that as far as Ohio State is concerned, it is
run largely by a Republican board of trustees, but you are not going
to let anybody come in here and smear it.
The Chairman. What present disposition would you have that I
would be prejudiced against Ohio State University, Ohio State, and
citizens ?
Mr. Hays. I don't say you are. I want you to agree to let me bring
in some people.
The Chairman. I was long a friend of Ohio. In the first instance,
I served in the 166th Infantry Ohio Regiment of the Rainbow
Division. I have many friends in Ohio. My closest political associates
have been from Ohio, I am glad to say, on the national level. My entire
contact with Ohio University — Ohio State University — has been such
as to inspire the greatest confidence. But that I am not referring to
every individual that might be connected with Ohio State University.
So there is no basis whatever for the suggestion so far as this com-
mittee is concerned. I am confident that the mere fact that somebody
in the audience may have passed up such a statement — I would very
much appreciate those statements not being interjected.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 329
Mr. Hays. Mr. Reece, I did not interject Dr. Hullfish's name into
this hearing. I am trying to protect him from any inference that
there is something wrong with him.
Mr. Sargent. I did not interject him. I am reading an entire list.
I have referred to Ohio State always with some matter that included
it. I mentioned other names with equal impartiality and I will con-
tinue to do that.
Mr. Hats. I have not heard you mention any suspects at Tennessee.
The Chairman. If he finds them, I will want him to mention that.
Mr. Hays. I guess he can find them.
The Chairman. The committee will recess until 2 o'clock in the
hopes we can finish.
(Thereupon, at 12 o'clock noon, a recess was taken until 2 p. m. the
same day.)
AFTERNOON RECESS
The Chairman. Will the committee be in session ?
You may proceed.
TESTIMONY OF AARON M. SARGENT, ATTORNEY,
SAN FRANCISCO, CAUF.— Resumed
Mr. Sargent. At the session this morning there was-
Mr. Hays. Before you get started so I won't interrupt any state-
ment, and if you can't remember exactly what you said I have asked
them to bring up the transcript, but you mentioned Mr. Allen Zoll,
and do you remember what you said about him ?
Mr. Sargent. I said in substance that they had referred to a pam-
phlet written by him which had been distributed to some extent in
connection with the Pasadena school controversy, a pamphlet
Mr. Hays. This is all new to me. You say "they" had referred.
Whom do you mean ?
Mr. Sargent. Some of the various people, NEA among others. The
statement that Harold Benjamin made, this report on it refers to
Zoll's pamphlets and denounces this and what happened in Pasadena
as being an affair instigated by Allen Zoll, and charged directly it
was. The NEA's own commission investigated and found out that
Zoll did not instigate it and his writings had very limited effect on it.
Zoll has been very extensively smeared, and they have been attempt-
ing to smear many other people through Allen Zoll.
Mr. Hays. Let me ask you this : You wouldn't consider an Attorney
General's listing as a smear, would you? You have cited numerous
people who have been on the Attorney General's list yourself and I
haven't challenged you and said you are smearing them.
Mr. Sargent. I am not smearing them.
Mr. Hays. Let me read you what I got from the Attorney General.
Mr. Sargent. I know all about it.
Mr. Hays. But perhaps the audience doesn't and so I will read it.
This came from Mr. William Foley, head of the Internal Security
Affairs Office, of the Office of the Attorney General, Department of
Justice.
Mr. Zoll has been disclosed and he himself has disclosed that he is
the founder and national president of the American Patriots, Inc.
330 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
This organization was designated by the Attorney General and still
is a Fascist organization. In 1939, he was arrested for attempt to
extort money from the president of a radio station which had refused
Father Coughlin the right to speak on that radio station. He, Mr.
Zoll, caused a picket line to be thrown around that radio station. This
information was in the -New York Times of July 2, 1939, July 8, 1939,
and September 13, 1939. The picket line was thrown around the radio
station for the same reason as above.
Mr. Zoll attended a luncheon at which Mr. Fritz Kuhn, head of the
German-American Bund, was guest speaker in 1938. Mr. Zoll has been
reported by newspapers as being very active in association with the
Christian Front which is an anti-Semitic group.
Mr. Zoll was also cosponsor for meetings with Gerald L. K. Smith.
Now you say this is the fellow they tried to smear?
Mr. Sargent. No, I say that they tried to smear the people at
Pasadena through the things you have told us about Allen Zoll. And
to represent that Allen Zoll was instigating the whole performance.
Mr. Hays. But you did put pamphlets out ?
Mr. Sargent. He had some literature, and some people bought the
literature, and it is well written, and there is nothing objectionable
in the literature, and the California legislative committee found the
literature was not objectionable or Fascist or improper in any way.
Mr. Hats. But you have cited a bunch of people here, all through
your testimony, and inferred if they were on Attorney General's sub-
versive list, that was sufficient prima facie evidence that everything
they said or did, past, present, or future, was bad.
Mr. Sargent. I have not referred to that.
Mr. Hays. If we are going to use that definition, I think we ought
to apply it to everybody.
Mr. Sargent. I don't think I have referred to the Attorney Gen-
eral's list at all from the time I landed here until now.
Mr. Hays. You say they are on lists. And haven't you testified and
read that so and so belonged to 136 Communist-front organizations?
Mr. Sargent. The list I gave was from the House Tin- American
Activities Report, appendix IX of 1944. I gave the Zoll incident for a
definite reason. Zoll has been very, very extensively smeared, and I
personally don't know the merits of it one way or the other ; but I do
know the people of Pasadena had nothing to do with the affairs of
Mr. Zoll and I also know that the National Education Association
investigated and talked to Willard Goslin, and reported in writing to
Washington that the Zoll story, as applied to the people of Pasadena,
was false and had no important influence on the case.
After receiving that information, Harold Benjamin launched an
attack on the people of Pasadena in his report to the enemy.
Mr. Hays. Who is Harold Benjamin?
Mr. Sargent. He is connected with this defense commission, so-
called, of the National Education Association, and he vilified the
people of Pasadena knowingly after his own investigating agent was
down there and found that the charge was false.
Mr. Hays. That is a pretty serious charge.
Mr. Sargent. I saw the report, Mr. Hays.
Mr. Hays. But you just said that he vilified the people of Pasadena
knowingly, is that right?
Mr. Saegent. He tried to tag the Zoll story
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 331
Mr. Hays. Didn't you just say that? -'
Mr. Sargent. Yes, and it is true.
Mr. Hats. Now, then, Mr. Chairman, I would like to have an agree-
ment that we call in Mr. Benjamin and ask him about this.
The Chairman. Well, without passing or making an expression
about the advisability of whom we should or shouldn't call, I don't
think it is in the interest of good procedure to just sit here and
miscellaneously say we are going to call first one and then another.
: Mr. Hats. In the interest of fair presentation, these people have
been mentioned very unfavorably, and I don't know whether it is true
or not ; but it seems to me the only way you are going to get an objec-
tive picture is call them and let them testify.
The Chairman. We haven't heard from Mr. Sargent yet. It may
be that he will want to testify, and anybody that has been unfavorably
mentioned, and desires to testify, my own feeling is should be per-
mitted to testify. j
Mr. Hats. May I ask you this — —
The Chairman. Those who do not express a desire to testify, if the
committee feels that their testimony is important, in developing the
full story, then they should be required to testify.
Now that is what I feel should be the guide.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Chairman, here is the situation: We are allowing
Mr. Sargent here to go on at great length, and I have shown no dispo-
sition to limit him, and, in fact, I have told you that I will try to
accommodate myself to be here as long as he desires to talk.
But when I say that I would like to hear from some of these other
people, I sort of get a general sluffing-off and let-us-put-it-off attitude,
and you know as well as I do that the committee has limited funds.
And I think that you will agree with me, in public, that there
wouldn't be a Chinaman's chance now of getting any more funds from
the Congress, after the first 3 weeks of this.
When we run out of money, we are through. I just would like to
hear a few of these people who may have been smeared and/or at
least they may think they may have been smeared.
The Chairman. It isn't the intention of the chairman of the com-
mittee to request the committee to request additional funds of the
Congress. But if it is and funds should be required and the committee
should request it, I have confidence that the Congress might favorably
consider the request.
But that is not indicated at the present time. Also, I feel that there
would be ample funds to complete this full investigation, and go
through with the complete and full hearings so that nobody is going
to be shut off because of lack of funds.
Mr. Wormser. May I make a suggestion, Mr. Hays ?
I have tried to make clear to the attorneys for the major foundations
that we would suit their reasonable convenience in the calling of wit-
nesses. I suggest that they be asked what witness they would like
to have. After all, we want to reserve as much time for them as we
can.
Mr. Hats. Do you have any objection if I invite Mr. Benjamin to
appear and he accepts?
Now, that ought to be a fair thing. I am not even going to ask you
to subpena him. Let us invite him. You don't have any objection to
332 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
inviting him, and you keep saying everybody is invited and let us get
specific about it.
The Chairman. My thought is, as I say, that anyone that has been
unfavorably mentioned, if he desires to appear, he will have oppor-
tunity to appear. Anyone that the committee feels should appeal, in
order to develop the full story, will be or should be subpenaed to
appear.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Chairman, you sit there with three votes in your
pocket, and so it just boils down to who you feel should appear. I am
asking you pointblank : Can we have Mr. Benjamin ?
Before we get on to that, I believe we had an agreement before
lunch that Dr. Helper should be invited.
The Chairman. That is right.
Mr. Hays. And I also would like to have Mr. Benjamin invited. If
he declines, I will say no more about it.
The Chairman. Suppose we discuss that, and we will work these
things out. We are not going to have any trouble in reaching a deci-
sion about who should be called.
Mr. Hays. We are having a lot of trouble to get you to say Mr,
Benjamin can come.
The Chairman. You bring these requests up in such a way that you
are impugning the good intentions of somebody, unintentionally or
otherwise, that the chairman is not going to do the fair and objective
thing. Therefore, in public session you have to get him nailed down
on something.
I don't think that that is a dignified procedure. The chairman
certainly has shown no disposition to want to cut anybody off. I think
we can say that anybody that you upon reflection feel should be called
that arrangements will be made to call them.
Mr. Hays. I am not impugning anybody's motives. But when you
say that I have to nail things down, let me say this : That if past ex-
perience has showed me that I better nail them down, that is the way
I am going to do it.
The Chairman. Now, you are getting
Mr. Hays. I am not being a bit personal. I will say that I didn't
mention you, but if you want to put the shoe on, I can't help it.
But in my lifetime, let me say that I have noted that if you get
things nailed down there is hardly any arguments about who said
what and who didn't say what, and who we promised to bring in and
who we didn't.
As far as being fair and impugning anything, let me say to you that
you have brought this witness in and I didn't know that he was to-
be brought in until 2 or 3 days before. I had no knowledge that the
staff was going to bring this witness in and I didn't object to it.
We have heard him for a long, long time. I think we could dispense
with Dr. Hullfish, Mr. Benjamin, Ed Murrow, and a few more of
them, all put together in the amount of time he has had.
I don't think that that would be unfair.
The Chairman. Now, I think the references that you made which
might very well be inferred, and you made references to the chairman,.
is quite uncalled for. But still, that is not going to ruffle me in the
least.
Mr. Hays. I am not trying to ruffle you, I am trying to get an agree-
ment we call Mr. Benjamin in.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 333
The Chairman. During my many years on the Hill, I have gone
on the theory when you are dealing with Members of Congress you
are dealing with gentlemen. And I hope my experinece will not cause-
me to feel otherwise.
Mr. Hats. Let us not deal in inferences. If you feel that way, why
don't you just say so. I am a pretty outspoken fellow and I don't
make any inferences.
Any time you said I have made an inference, and it is no inference,,
and so if you are trying to say now that I am not a gentlemen, just
say so. That is the way to do that.
The Chairman. I don't use the kind of language that has been used
here, myself, that is not in my character, except under purposes of"
great provocation.
Mr. Hats. I imagine you were greatly provoked when you said some
of the things you did about some of the eminent Republicans in your
speech on the floor, about the Ford Foundation having prominent.
Communists in it, and so on.
You see, I am in a very anomalous position here. And I am only
trying to have fair play and to protect you might say the moneyed!
wing of the Republican Party by an attack from another wing of the
Republican Party. I don't suppose I will get much gratitude, but I'
have a tremendous sense of fair play.
If I am going to referee the fight between one group of Republicans
and another one, I think I ought to have a little bit of leeway about-
who would we call in as witnesses. I am trying to be the referee.
If there is going to be any bloodletting, I want it to be done under -
fair circumstances.
The Chairman. I feel under great obligation to you standing in the
position of referee.
Mrs. Pfost. Where does this Mr. Benjamin live? What is the
residence ?
Mr. Sargent. I presume it is Washington, D. C. He is connected
with or the last I heard he was connected with the National Com-
mission for Defense of Democracy of NEA. I think he works out of
National Headquarters. I don't know for sure.
Mr. Wormser. May I just put this before you
Mr. Sargent. He is from the University of Maryland.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Chairman, this may be of some help to us.
In studying what should go in our rules of procedure, I studied the
rules of other committees, and also the lectures of professors, and what
not. And some of them recommended a rule that where a person was .
referred to by a witness as a subversive, he should be notified of that
fact and given an opportunity to come in and say whether he was or
not.
That of course is an easy case. But here if a witness calls a man a
McKinley Republican or another witness calls a man an FDR Demo-
crat, I question and I will leave it to you whether those fellows,,
whether it is worthwhile calling them in and asking him if he is a
Southern Democrat instead of an FDR Democrat or McKinley Re-
publican.
In other words, clearly if the witness has something to contribute
on the purpose of foundations, then clearly they should be subpenaed.
But if they are just, shall we say, modestly embarrassed by being
called, let us say, a McKinley Republican, should we go to the trouble-
49720—54 — pt. 1 22
334 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
of always inviting them in to say whether he is or he is not or should
we restrict it to the question if he is called a subversive ? I definitely
say that this committee should invite him and tell him of the fact
and invite him to come in any say whether he is or he is not.
Mr. Hats. Well, of course, the testimony that Mr. Sargent has
given, a great deal of it, has implied many things. But when you try
to pin him down, he is very careful to back up and say, "Well, I
didn't call him so and so."
But by implication, you can call people a lot of things.
Now, the reason I asked for Mr. Benjamin specifically is that I
understand he is an official of the NEA, and «certainly the NEA has
been given a pretty rough time in Mr. Sargent's testimony. And
I would like to get Mr. Benjamin, and perhaps maybe somebody else
from the NEA, because you know out where I live the NEA, all of
the teachers in my district practically belong to the NEA; they are
respectable people, and I don't like to have them maligned by infer-
ence through an organization that they belong to.
I am not going to sit here quietly and let it be done, if these hearings
drag on until Christmas.
The Chairman. It is expected that someone from the NEA will be
called.
Mr. Hats. You keep saying "it is expected," and I want to tie it
down.
The Chairman. It should be the appropriate one that is represent-
ative of the NEA.
Mr. Hats. I kept hearing that "it was expected" we would start
these hearings every week from January on ; but we didn't get them
started. An so I just feel that I would like to get a few things tied
down so we know where we stand, that is all.
Mr. Sargent. May I proceed with this ?
Mr. Hats. Don't get too excited — you may not get too excited — I
am going to make a point of order that the committee is out of order,
and the House goes in session and we have no permission to sit.
Mr. Sargent. I am here to try to finish this afternoon.
The Chairman. You kept hearing after January that the com-
mittee was going to have hearings and it is having hearings.
Mr. Hats. It took a long time to get at them.
The record will show if the rules are changed, and as I have said,
I have had them changed in the middle of the game before.
The Chairman. I would not get excited about that.
Mr. Hats. I didn't even get excited when a person came in my
office today and said that I worked for a Republican Congressman.
And I think that you ought to know this. It just revolts me that there
was a discussion in our office this morning about the Republican Na-
tional Committee was going to double the amount of money that they
spend against you the last time and that you are getting too obnoxious,
and how they spent $33,000 the last time, the Republican National
Committee put in $8,000.
Now I suppose they are going to double that $8,000, but you know the
funny part of it is that the people of my district, Mr. Reece, have never
had any inclination to pay any attention from outsiders, and I get
a lot of Republican votes in spite of all of this outside money. I got
it the last time.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 335
The Chairman. I have no information on the subject about which
you are talking.
Mr. Hays. I am giving you some.
The Chairman. I. am glad to have the information.
Thank you very, very much indeed.
You may proceed.
Mr. Sargent. As far as Mr. Allen Zoll is concerned, he is a man
who has been very extensively smeared, either justly or unjustly, and I
am not familiar with the facts.
I have not read the various citations involved here, and I don't
know one way or the other. The charges may be true or they may
be untrue, or they may be partly true or partly false. I have not
referred here in any instance to the record of any person except on the
basis of my personal examination of the record that I have referred to.
I am only interested in the Zoll incident from one standpoint, that
is, that the known smear which had highly developed proportions was
applied through the report on the enemy of Harold Benjamin.
Mr. Hats. You can smear a Fascist, you mean it is possible?
Mr. Sargent. You can drag a Fascist, someone Fascist or non-
Fascist, you go drag that record in on a community and attempt to
show that the community is backing the man himself and smear
people who are in no way connected with what the original source
may be, that is what happened here.
Mr. Benjamin dragged it into Pasadena where it had no place and
a California legislative committee found it didn't have any place.
It is another example of this.
Mr. Hats. When you drag somebody's name into this, you are not
smearing them, and you are just being a good patriotic American,
like you have done with Dr. Hullfish and others.
Mr. Sargent. I didn't drag Dr. Hullfish in any derogatory capacity,
and I referred to him as one of the people who wrote a pamphlet.
Mr. Hats. You didn't say that you recommended him ?
Mr. Sargent. I think the pamphlet is unjustified and this is a piece
of propaganda.
Mr. Hats. But saying he wrote an unjustified piece of propaganda
isn't smearing him at all. That is just being truthful.
Mr. Sargent. The propaganda is his own work and I have a right
to discuss the man's work. The Pasadena case is not the work of
Allen Zoll.
Mr. Hats. I would like to state right here that there has never been
in my experience in a study of history a situation in which a congres-
sional committee has let anyone come in and indiscriminately smear as
many people as this committee has let this witness do in the past 3
days.
Mr. Sargent. My authority here is the report of the California leg-
islative committee under Senator Dilworth's chairmanship. It is the
eighth report and I read you from the report, and I read it factually.
Now, there has been reference here to the National Society of the
Sons of the American Kevolution, of which I am a member. I think,
in justice to that organization and in view of the reference that I am
entitled to read a statement of their position on this subversive teach-
ing question. It is a resolution adopted at their national congress,
held at Minneapolis, Minn., May 18, 1952.
336 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
It is as follows: By consent I will not read it word for word. I
can have the reporter copy it, but I will give you its substance. It is-
on page 5, column 1, carrying over to the first column on page 6 of
the document known as the bill of grievances.
It states in substance that they decided and believe the following to-
be a true statement of conditions affecting the public schools: That
textbooks, subversive textbooks and teaching practices originate from,
sources that are interstate and international in scope, effective control
is beyond State power ; that an intelligent and informed public opin-
ion is the only sound method of correcting the evil, and in accordance-
with American principles.
The public opinion to be effective should be national and should
be equal in strength to the subversive influences involved. And that :
An investigation of the kind required should be conducted in a judicial manner
as a nonpartisan impartial inquiry sufficiently broad in scope to inform the-
people as to the nature and extent of the subversive educational problem affect-
ing the public schools in the several States.
That the society has a proper interest in the matter under its char-
ter and that its officers are authorized and instructed to prepare a doc-
ument for Congress calling for a national investigation of these prac-
tices, and to do and perform any acts necessary to have it favorably
considered.
The petition so prepared, in accordance with that resolution —
known as the bill of grievances — presented to the United States Senate
Judiciary Committee and to the House of Representatives, reads a&
follows :
Be it resolved oy the National Society, Sons of the American Revolution, in.
annual congress assembled :
First: That we do hereby believe and determine the following to be a true
statement of the conditions affecting the public schools of many of our States,
resulting from the introduction of subversive textbooks and teaching practices :
(a) That such textbooks and teaching practices originate from sources-
which are interstate and national in scope ;
(o) Effective control thereof is beyond the power and outside the reach
of any processes available to the legislature of any one State ;
(c) Intelligent and informed public opinion affords the only sound method
of correcting this evil in accordance with American principles ;
(<Z) Public opinion, to be effective in this field should be made national
in scope and equal in strength to the subversive influences now affecting our
public school system ;
( e ) An investigation of the kind required should be conducted in a judicial
manner as a nonpartisan and impartial inquiry, sufficiently broad in scope
to inform the people as to the nature and extent of subversive education)
problems affecting the public schools in the several States ;
{/) That this society under its charter has a proper and direct interest
in this subject, sufficient to justify it in taking action to bring about such.
an investigation.
Second : That we do hereby authorize and instruct the officers and request
the trustees of this society to prepare and submit a petition to the Congress of
the United States calling for a national investigation of subversive teaching
practices affecting the public schools in the several States to the end that
appropriate action may be taken thereon, and to do and perform such acts as
they may deem necessary to have such petition favorably considered.
Mr. Sargent. The organization of which I am a member stands
behind the sort of inquiry which this committee is carrying on.
In the interest of clear thinking and also fairness, I think we should
state here, my testimony has, as you recall been confined entirely, I
think, to the 3 foundations. The Big Three, I think I called them.
That is Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Ford.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 337
Two of those or they all have ramifications of one sort or another,
and I have not referred to all of them. Rockefeller has 3, the Rocke-
feller Foundation, the General Education Board, and the Interna-
tional Education Institute. Carnegie, as you know, has the Carnegie
Oorp. of New York, which is the one that sponsored that survey,.
$300,000 survey on conclusions and recommendations. It also has a
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. And the Ford
Foundation has a giant fund with many subcorporations.
When I say the foundations, unless otherwise indicated, I mean
someone or more of that group. They are the money power behind
the condition, propaganda condition and other conditions you are
inquiring into.
I think it should be understood that there are areas not included
in the present scope here, areas having nothing to do with control of
propaganda, and such with which I think that your committee will
not be interested, and certainly I am not.
Mr. Hats. Could you give us just in brief a summary of a para-
graph or so, so that we can get it in a condensed form of just what
these 3 foundations have done that you object to?
Mr. Sargent. The Rockefeller Foundation has actively promoted
and supported the injection and the propagation of the so-called John
Dewey system of experimental education and has aided the introduc-
tion of Communist practices in our school system and is defending
and supporting the continuance of those practices in the schools.
Mr. Hays. That is the Rockefeller Foundation ?
Mr. Sargent. Yes, sir, and also the General Education Board and
the International Education Institute.
Mr. Hays. Carnegie has aided it through various grants; both of
them incidentally are carrying on a lobby and a very extensive lobby,
involving the schools which I will testify about this afternoon.
The Ford Foundation has become the lobby which has interfered
or is interfering with the integrity of local schools and is promoting
world federalism and world federal government, among other things,
and extending its power into many areas capable of being dangerous.
Do you have any strong belief that the Ford Foundation either is
Communist or has promoted communism in any way?
Mr. Sargent. I don't know the specific instances referred to in the
chairman's report and I can't testify on my own knowledge, but I
understand it has.
, But I don't personally know that and I can't testify to it.
Mr. Hays. Do you happen to have there among your papers a list
of the directors of these foundations?
Mr. Sargent. No.
Mr. Hays. Does the staff have a list of them ?
Mr. Sargent. I am not attempting to name names. I am talking
about action.
Mr. Hays. This is on my own ; I am going off on an expedition
here.
Miss Casey. We have their names as they appear in the latest annual
reports we have. I think in most instances that would be 1952.
I think also their letterhead may have the names. However, I am
sure these foundations — Carnegie, Rockefeller, and Ford — would
gladly give us a list of their officers and trustees from the time they
were established.
338 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hats. I am asking unanimous consent to put into the record at
this point the list of all the officers and directors of each of these
foundations.
The Chairman - . Without objection, it will be so ordered.
(The list of names is as follows :)
Carnegie Corporation of New York, 1911-54
Trustees
James R. Angell, 1920-21, ex officio ; president of Carnegie Corp.
Thomas S. Arbuthnot, 1953-52, ex officio ; president of Carnegie Hera
Fund Commission
Newton D. Baker, 1931-37
James Bertram, 1911-34, life member
W. Randolph Burgess, 1940
Vannevar Bush, 1939, ex officio ; president of Carnegie Institution of
Washington
Nicholas Murray Butler, 1925-45, ex officio; president of Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace
Oliver C. Carmichael, 1945-53, ex officio ; president of Carnegie Foun-
dation for Advancement of Teaching
Andrew Carnegie, 1911-19, life member
Mrs. Andrew Carnegie. 1919-29
John J. Carty, 1923-32
Samuel Harden Church, 1914-43, ex officio; president of Carnegie
Lotus Delta Coffman, 1936-38
Charles Dollard, 1948, ex officio ; president of Carnegie Corp.
Robert A. Franks, 1911-35, life member
William N. Frew, 1911-14, ex officio ; president of Carnegie Institute
William Frew, 1943-48, ex officio ; president of Carnegie Institute
John W. Gardner, 1954
Morris Hadley, 1947
William J. Holland, 1922-32, ex officio; president of Carnegie Hero
Fund Commission
David F. Houston, 1929-34
Henry James, 1928-47
Walter A. Jessup, 1934-44, ex officio ; president of Carnegie Founda-
tion for Advancement of Teaching (1934-44) and of Carnegie
Corp. (1941-44)
Devereaux C. Josephs, 1944, ex officio 1945^48 ; president of Carnegie
Corp.
Nicholas Kelley, 1936
Frederick P. Keppel, 1923-41, ex officio ; president of Carnegie Corp.
Russell Leffingwell, 1923
George C. Marshall, 1946-^50
John C. Merriam, 1921-38, ex officio ; president of Carnegie Institution
of Washington
Margaret Carnegie Miller, 1934
Frederick Osborn, 1936
Arthur W. Page, 1934
John A. Poynton, 1916-34
Gwilym A. Price, 1953
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 339
Trustees — Continued
Henry S. Pritchett, 1911-30, ex officio; president of Carnegie Founda-
tion for the Advancement of Teaching
Elihu Root, 1911-37, ex officio 1911-25 ;■ president of Carnegie Endow-
ment for International Peace
Elihu Boot, Jr., 1937
Charles M. Spofford, 1953
Henry Suzzalo, 1930-33, ex officio ; president of Carnegie Foundation
for Advancement of Teaching
Charles L. Taylor, 1911-22, ex officio; president of Carnegie Hero
Fund Commission
Charles Allen Thomas, 1951
Leroy A. Wilson, 1948-51
Robert S. Woodward, 1911-20, ex officio; president of Carnegie Insti-
tution of Washington
Officers
Chairman of the board :
Elihu Root, 1920-37
Nicholas Murray Butler, 1937-45
Russell Leffingwell, 1946
Vice chairman of the board : R. A. Franks, 1920-35
President :
Andrew Carnegie, 1911-19
Elihu Root, 1919-20
James R. Angell, 1920-21
Henry S. Pritchett, 1921-23 (acting)
Frederick P. Keppel, 1923-41
Walter A. Jessup, 1941-44
Devereux C. Josephs, 1945-48
Charles Dollard, 1948
Vice president :
Elihu Root, 1911-19
R. A. Franks, 1913-20
Charles Dollard, 1947-48
John W. Gardner, 1949
James A. Perkins, 1951
Secretary :
James Bertram, 1911-34
Robert M. Lester, 1934
Treasurer :
R. A. Franks, 1911-35
Robertson D. Ward, 1935-42
C.Herbert Lee, 1942
Assistant to the president :
Beardsley Ruml, 1920-22
William S. Learned, 1922-24
Morse A. Cartwright, 1924-26
Robert M. Lester, 1926-34
John M. Russell, 1934-40
Charles Dollard, 1938-45
Stephen H. Stackpole, 1940-45
340 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Officers — Continued
Executive associate :
Charles Dollard, 1945-47
Oliver C. Carmichael, 1945-53
Pendleton Herring, 1946-48
Whitney H. Shepardson, 1946-53
John W. Gardner, 1947-49
James A. Perkins, 1950-51
Executive assistant :
Stephen H. Stackpole, 1953
William W. Marvel, 1953
Eugene I. Burdock, 1953
-Associate secretary : Florence Anderson, 1951
Assistant secretary : Florence Anderson, 1947-51
Assistant treasurer: CA
Michael Pescatello, 1947
James W. Campbell, 1953
-Investment officer :
Barent Lefferts, 1932-46
S. S. Hall, Jr., 1935-40
Parker Monroe, 1935-39
C. Herbert Lee, 1937-^7
Michael Pescatello, 1946-47
Trustees of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace,
1910-54
Alexander, Wallace McK. (1935-39)
Anderson, Dillon (1953- )
IBacon, Robert (1913-19)
Ballantine, Arthur A. (1936-50, honorary 1953), member, finance
committee (1938-50) ; member, executive committee (1938-48) ;
chairman, finance committee (1948-50)
Bancroft, Edgar A. (1918-25), member, finance committee (1920-25)
Barrows, David P. (1931-51)
Bell, James F. (1939-42)
Brookings, Robert S. (1910-32)
Bullitt, William Marshall (1933-)
Bundy, Harvey H. (1948-), member, executive committee (1949-) ;
chairman, 1952 ; vice chairman of the board (1951-52) ; chariman of
the board, 1952-)
Burke, Thomas (1910-25)
-Butler, Nicholas Murray (1910-47), director, division of intercourse
and education (1911-45) ; president (1925-45) ; president emeritus
(1945-47) ; member, executive committee (1911-45) ; chairman, exec-
utive committee (1925^15)
Cadwalader, John L. (1910-14) ,.
•Catlin, Daniel K (1930-51, honorary 1951-54)
Chapin, W. W. (1939-54, honorary 1954)
Cherrington, Ben M. (1943-)
Choate, Joseph H. (1910-17), vice president (1911-17)
Clapp, Margaret (1951-)
Cole, David L. (1951-)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 341
Davis, John W. (1921-50, honorary 1950) ; vice president (1937-47) ;
acting president (1945^6) ; chairman, executive committee (1945-
46) ; vice chairman of the board (1947-50)
Davis, Norman H. (1931-43)
Delano, Frederic A. (1920-49), assistant treasurer (1923-29) ; treas-
urer (1929-36) ; member, executive committee (1929-36) ; mem-
ber, finance committee (1923-38)
Dodge, Cleveland H. (1910-19)
DuBridge, Lee A. (1951-)
Dulles, John Foster (1944-52), chairman of the board (1946-52);
chairman, executive committee (1946-52)
Dunn, Frederick S. (1951-)
Eisenhower, Dwight D. (1948-52)
Eliot, Charles W. (1910-19)
JEvans, Lawto'n B. (1926-34)
Finch, George A. (1940^), assistant secretary (1911-40), secretary
(1940-47) ; assistant director, division of international law (1917-
40); associate director,, division of international law (1940-43);
director, division of international law (1943-47) ; member, execu-
tive committee (1940-46) ; counselor (1948-50)
Foster, Arthur William (1910-25)
Foster, John W. (1910-17), member, executive committee (1911)
Fox, Austen G. (1910-37), member, executive committee (1911-37)
Franks, Robert A. (1910-35), member, finance committee (1911-35) ;
chairman, finance committee (1921-35)
Fraser, Leon (1938-45), member, finance committee (1938-45) ; treas-
urer (1941^:2)
Freeman, Douglas S. (1937-53)
Gaines, Francis Pendleton (1933-51), member, executive committee'
(1937-47)
Gray, George (1915-25), vice president (1918-25)
Gross, Ernest A. (1953-)
Hamlin, Charles S. (1923-38), assistant treasurer (1929-38) ; member,,
finance committee (1930-31)
Harrison, Earl Grant (1947-), member, executive committee (1947-50,.
1953-)
Heinz, Howard (1926-41)
Hill, David Jayne (1918-32)
Hiss, Alger (1946-50), president (1946-49) ; member, executive com-
mittee (1946-48)
Holman, Alfred (1920-30)
Houghton, Alanson B. (1930-41), treasurer (1936-41)
Howard, William M. (1910-30)
Jessup, Philip C. (1937-), director, division of international law
(1940-43)
Johnson, Joseph E. (1950-), president (1950-) .; member, execu-
tive committee (1950-) ; member, finance committee (1950-)
Kirk, Grayson L. (1953-) ; member, executive committee (1953-)
Lansing, Robert (1920-28) , vice president (1926-28)
Lowden, Frank O. (1923-41)
Manning, Richard I. (1930-31)
Mather, Samuel (1910-19) , member, finance committee (1911-19)
Molyneaux, Peter (1934-51)
342 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Montague, Andrew J. (1910-37), member, executive committee (1911-
35) ; assistant treasurer (1917-23) ; treasurer (1923-29) ; vice presi-
dent (1929-37)
Morris, Roland S. (1930-45), member, executive committee (1935-
45) ; assistant treasurer (1938-42) ; treasurer (1942-45).
Morrow, Dwight W. (1925-30) , member, finance committee (1925-28)
Murrow, Edward R. (1951-)
Nelson, Otto L. Jr. (1949-), member, executive committee (1949-)
Nolde, O. Frederick (1951-), member, executive committee (1951-)
Olds, Robert E. (1925-32)
Page, Robert Newton (1920-25)
Parker, Edwin B. (1926-29)
Patterson, Ellmore C. (1951-), chairman, finance committee (1951-)
Percy, LeRoy (1925-29)
Perkins, George W. (1910-20), chairman, finance committee (1911-
20)
Peters, William A. (1926-29)
Pritchett, Henry S. (1910--39), member, executive committee (1911-
35)
Reed, Philip D. (1945-53)
Rockefeller, David (1947-), member, executive committee (1947-);
assistant treasurer (1947-49) ; treasurer (1949-) ; vice president
1950-53; vice chairman (1953-)
Root, Elihu (1910-37) president (1910-25) ; chairman, executive com-
mittee (1911-25) ; member, executive committee (1925-30)
Ryerson, Edward L., (1933), member, executive committee (1951-53)
:Schieffelin, W. J., Jr. (1941), member, finance committee (1954)
Schmidlapp, Jacob G. (1910-19)
Scott, James Brown (1910-43), secretary (1910-40) ; secretary emer-
itus (1940-43) ; member, executive committee (191H0) ; director,
division of international law (191f-40) ; director emeritus, division
of international law (1940-43)
-Severance, Cordenio A. (1918-25)
Sheffield, James R. (1919-38), member, finance committee (1920-23,
1988-30, 1931-38) ; member, executive committee (1923-27, 1930-
38)
Sherman, Maurice S. (1926^47), member, executive committee (1935—
47)
Shotwell, James Thomson (1925-51, honorary 1951), director, divi-
sion of economics and history (1924-48) ; member, executive com-
mittee (1927-29, 1948-50) ; acting president (1948-49) ; president
(1949-50) ; president emeritus (1950)
Shuster, George N. (1954)
Sibley, Harper (1938), member, finance committee (1948)
Slayden, James L. (1910-24)
Smiley, Albert K. (1910-12)
Smith, Jeremiah, Jr. (1930-34)
Sprague, Charles A. (1954)
Straus, Oscar S. (1910-26)
Strawn, Silas H. (1926-46)
Sutherland, George (1920-25)
Taft, Robert A. (1935-38)
Taylor, Carles L. (1910-22)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 343
Tower, Charlemagne (1910-23), member, executive committee (1911-
23; treasurer (1912-23)
Wadsworth, Eliot (1937-51), assistant treasurer (1944-45) ; treasurer
(1945-49) ; member, finance committee (1945-49) ; member, execu-
tive committee (1945-49)
Wakefield, Lyman E. (1943-45)
Watson, Thomas J. (1934-51, honorary 1951) , chairman, finance com-
mittee (1935^£7) ; member, executive committee (1936-46, 1948-
51)
Waymack, W. W. (1941-), member, executive committee (1946-49)
White, Andrew D. (1910-18)
Williams, John Sharp (1910-22)
Woodward, Robert S. (1910-24)
Wright, Luke E. ( 1910-18 )
Wriston, Henry M. (1943-54)
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teach ing
Trustees
Eaymond B. Allen, 1948-
Frank Aydelotte, 1921-53
H. McClelland Bell, 1905-18
William L. Bryan, 1910-38
M. Le Roy Burton, 1915-25
Nicholas Murray Butler, 1905-47
Samuel P. Capen, 1935-50
Oliver C. Carmichael, 1937-
T. Morrison Carnegie, 1905-24
Lotus D. Coffman, 1930-38
Arthur H. Compton, 1946-54
James B. Conant, 1934-53
Edwin B. Craighead, 1905-17
William H. Crawford, 1905-20
Sir Arthur W. Currie, 1927-33
Carter Davidson, 1946-
Arthur H. Dean, 1950-
George H. Denny, 1905-
Albert B. Dinwiddie, 1923-35
Harold W. Dodds, 1935-
Dwight D. Eisenhower. 1950-53
Charles W. Eliot, 1905-09
Edward C. Elliott, 1934-46
Sir Robert Falconer, 1917-32
Livingston Farrand, 1929-39
Frederick C. Ferry, 1920-39
Dixon Ryan Fox, 1939-45
Robert A. Franks, 1905-35
Edwin B. Fred, 1946-
Eugene A. Gilmore, 1938-48
Laurence M. Gould, 1953-
Frank P. Graham, 1932-53
A. Whitney Griswold, 1950-
344 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Trustees — Continued
R. G. Gustavson, 1949-53
Arthur T.Hadley, 1905-21
William R. Harper, 1905-06
Ruf us C. Harris, 1945-
Charlies C. Harrison, 1905-10
John G. Hibben, 1920-32
Albert R. Hiss, 1918-36
William V. Houston, 1953-
Edwin H. Hughes, 1905-08
Alexander C. Humphreys, 1905-27
Walter A. Jessup, 1932-44
David S. Jordan, 1905-16
Devereux C. Josephs, 1947-49
Henry C. King, 1905-27
Grayson L. Kirk, 1953-
JamesH. Kirkland, 1917-37
Thomas S. Lamont, 1949-
Thomas W. Lamont, 1917-48
Ernest H. Lindley, 1934-40
Clarence C. Little, 1927-29
Robert A. Lovett, 1937-
Abbott Lawrence Lowell, 1910-33
Howard F. Lowry, 1948-
Norman A. M. MacKenzie, 1951-
John H. T. Main, 1924-31
Thomas McClelland, 1905-17
Samuel B. McCormick, 1905-23
Frederick A. Middlebush, 1937-
John S. Millis, 1949-
Walter C. Murray, 1918-38
William A. Neilson, 1920-46
John L. Newcomb, 1936-47
George Norlin, 1925-39
Josiah H. Penniman, 1924-41
Sir William Peterson, 1905-18
Samuel Plantz, 1905-24
Henry S. Pritchett, 1905-30
Nathan M. Pusey, 1953-
Ira Remsen, 1909-13
Rush Rhees, 1922-35
Jacob Gould Schurman, 1905-20
L. Clark Seelye, 1905-10
Charles Seymour, 1939-50
Kenneth C. M. Sills, 1933-52
William F. Slocum, 1906-17
Edgar F. Smith, 1913-20
Franklyn B. Snyder, 1940-49
Robert G. Sproul, 1939-
Henry Suzzallo, 1918-33
James M. Taylor, 1910-14
Charles F. Thwing, 1905-22
Alan Valentine, 1945-50
Frank A. Vanderlip, 1905-37
Charles R. Van Hise, 1909-18
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 345
Trustees — Continued
Robert E. Vinson, 1920-34
Kobert C. Wallace, 1938-51
Herman B. Wells, 1941-
Clement C. Williams, 1939-16
Woodrow Wilson, 1905-10
Benjamin F. Wright, 1952-
Henry M. Wriston, 1932-
Administrative officers
Presidents :
HenryS. Pritchett, 1905-30
Henry Suzzallo, 1930-33
Walter A. Jessup, 1934-44
Oliver C. Carmichael, 1945-53
Thomas S. Lamont (president ad interim), 1953-
Secretaries :
Albert LeForest Derby, assistant secretary, 1905-06
Walter M. Gilbert, assistant secretary, 1905-47
John G. Bowman, 1906-11
Clyde Furst, 1911-31
William S. Learned, assistant secretary, 1920-31
Howard J.. Savage, 1931-49
Paul Scherer, assistant secretary, 1947-
RobertM. Lester (associate secretary 1947-49), 1949-
Treasurers :
T. Morrison Carnegie, 1906-10
Robert A. Franks, 1910-35
Frank A. Vanderlip, 1935-37
Howard J. Savage, 1937-49
C. Herbert Lee, 1949-
Assistant treasurers:
John G. Bowman, 1910-11
Clyde Furst, 1911-21
Samuel S. Hall, Jr., 1921-39
Devereux C Josephs, 1939-45
Parker Monroe, 1945-48
C. Herbert Lee, 1948-49
Staff members :
A. Monell Sayre, 1905-13
Abraham Flexner, 1908-12
William S. Learned, 1913-46
Alfred Z. Reed, 1913-40
I. L. Kandel, 1914-23
Howard J. Savage, 1923-1931; 1949-51
Actuarial consultants:
Charles E. Brooks, 1918-20
Raymond L. Mattocks, 1922-53
Staff associates:
Harold W. Bentley, 1926-29
Paul Webb, 1931-32
David Spence Hill, 1931-34
W. Carson Ryan, 1936-40
Charles R. Langmuir, 1936-42
Kenneth W. Vaughn, 1942-47
346 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Trustees (or Directors) and Officers of Ford Foundations
The Ford Foundation has itself created five other agencies to carry-
on activities in special fields. Each such agency receives its funds;
from the Ford Foundation, but is entirely independent, with its own
charter and bylaws, as well as its own directors and officers. These-
agencies are, the East European Fund, Inc., the Fund for Adult Edu-
cation, the Fund for the Advancement of Education, the Fund for the-
Republic, Inc., Intercultural Publications, Inc., and Kesources for th&
Future, Inc. The directors and officers of each of these agencies are-
given following those of the Ford Foundation.
Trustees 1936-61
Edsel B. Ford (deceased 1943), formerly president, Ford Motor Co.,.
3000 Schaef er Road, Dearborn, Mich., 1936-43
B. J. Craig, formerly secretary-treasurer, the Ford Foundation, 1379"
Dorstone Place, Birmingham, Mich, 1936-51
Clifford B. Longley, attorney, Bodman, Longley, Boble, Armstrong &
Dahling, Buhl Building, Detroit, Mich. , 1936-4.3
Henry Ford II, president, Ford Motor Co., 3000 Schaefer Road,,
Dearborn, Mich, 1943-55
Frank Campsall (deceased 1946V, formerly assistant general mana-
ger and director, Ford Motor Co., Dearborn, Mich., 1943-46
Gordon S. Rentschler (deceased 1948), formerly president, Hooven-
Owens-Rentschler Co. and chairman, the National City Bank of New
York, New York, N. Y., 1945-48
Karl T. Compton (deceased 1954), formerly president, Massachusetts.
Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass., 1946-51
Benson Ford, vice president, Ford Motor Co., 3000 Schaefer Road r
Dearborn, Mich., 1947-57
Donald K. David, dean, Graduate School of Business Administration,.
Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass., 1948-55
James B. Webber, Jr., president, J. L. Hudson Co., 1206 Woodward
Avenue, Detroit, Mich., 1948-53
Charles E. Wilson, chairman of the executive committee, W. R. Grace
& Co., 570 Lexington Avenue, New York, N. Y., 1949-56
John Cowles, publisher, Minneapolis Star & Tribune Co., Portland!
and Fifth Streets, Minneapolis, Minn., 1950-56
Paul G. Hoffman (then president, the Ford Foundation), chairman
of the board (since 1953), the Studebaker Corp., South Bend, Ind. r
1950-53
Frank Abrams (retired), formerly chairman of the Board, Standard
Oil Co. (New Jersey) , New York, N. Y., 1952-55
Charles E. Wyzanski, Jr., judge, United States district court, Bostoiii
Mass., 1952-57
H. Rowan Gaither, Jr., president, the Ford Foundation, 477 Madison*
Avenue, New York, N. Y., 1953-57
James F. Brownlee, partner, J. H. Whitney & Co., New York, N. Y. r
1953-55
Frederick Lewis Allen (deceased 1954), formerly editor, Harper's;
magazine, vice president, Harper & Bros., New York, N. Y., 1953-54
John J. McCloy, chairman of the board, the Chase National Bank, New
York, N. Y., 1953-56
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS Si.7l
Trustees 19S6-64— Continued
Mark F. Ethridge, publisher, the Louisville Times and the Courier-
Journal, Louisville, Ky., 1954-56
Laurence M. Gould, president, Carleton College, Northfield, Minn.,.
1954-57
Principal elected officers from, first meeting of the hoard of trustees*
to August W, 196k
Chairman of the board: Henry Ford II, November 6, 1950, to date
Vice chairman of the board : Karl T. Compton, April 10 to October 1,,.
1951
President:
H. Rowan Gaither, Jr., March 1, 1953, to date
Paul G. Hoffman, November 6, 1950, to March 1, 1953
Henry Ford II, June 4, 1943, to November 6, 1950
Edsel B. Ford, February 4, 1936, to May 26, 1943
Vice president (formerly called associate director) :
Dyke Brown, March 1, 1953, to date
Thomas H. Carroll, June 30, 1953, to date
William H. McPeak, September 16, 1953 ,to date
Don K. Price, Jr., September 16, 1953, to date
Robert M. Hutchins, January 29, 1951, to May 31, 1954
Milton Katz, September 1, 1951, to January 14, 1954
Chester C. Davis, January 29, 1951, to July 1, 1953
II. Rowan Gaither, Jr., January 29, 1951, to March 1, 1953
Treasurer :
Oliver May, July 2, 1951, to date
B. J. Craig, February 4, 1936, to July 2, 1951
Secretary :
Joseph M. McDaniel, Jr., March 1, 1953, to date
Oliver May, July 2, 1951, to March 1, 1953
B. J. Craig, April 10, 1946, to July 2, 1951
Frank Campsall, June 4, 1943, to April 10, 1946
Clifford Longley, February 4, 1936, to June 4, 1943
EAST EUROPEAN FUND, INC.
Trustees {from inception to date)
Frank Altschul, president of General American Investors Co., Inc.,,
March 1951 to date
Paul B. Anderson, associate executive secretary, international com-
mittee of the Young Men's Christian Association, March 1952 to
date
Merle Fainsod, professor of government, Harvard University, March.
1952 to date
George F. Kennan, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, March-
1951 to November 1951 ; September 1953 to date
Philip E. Mosely, professor of international relations and director
of the Russian Institute of Columbia University, March 1951 to date
R. Gordon Wasson, vice president of J. P. Morgan & Co., Inc., March,
1951 to date
John E. F. Wood, partner in the law firm of Root, Ballatine, Bushby &,
Palmer, New York City, March 1951 to date
348 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Officers (from inception to date)
President :
George F. Kennan, March 1951 to November 1951
Philip E. Mosely, January 1952 to date
Vice president and treasurer : E. Gordon Wasson, March 1951 to date
Secretary :
George Fischer, March 1951 to May 1951
Elizabeth Meredith, May 1951 to October 1952
Donald A. Lowrie, October 1952 to February 1953
David C. Munford, February 1953 to date (secretary pro tempore
February 1953 to April 1954)
Director :
George Fischer, March 1951 to November 1951
Melville J. Buggies, March 1952 to October 1952
Donald A. Lowrie, October 1952 to February 1953
David C. Munford, full time, February 1953 to September 1953 ;
part time, September 1953 to date
Director, Chekhov Publishing House, Nicholas Wreden, executive
editor, Little, Brown & Co., September 1951 to date
Director, Eesearch Program on the U. S. S. R., Philip E. Mosely,
June 1951 to date
THE FUND FOR ADULT EDUCATION"
Directors
Sarah Gibson Blanding, April 5, 1951, to present
Harry A. Bullis, May 28, 1953, to present
Howard Bruce, April 5, 1951, to March 13, 1953
Rev. John J. Cavanaugh, April 5, 1951, to present
John L. Collyer, April 5, 1951, to present
Milton S. Eisenhower, May 28, 1953, to present
Clarence H. Faust, April 5, 1951, to present
Alexander Fraser, April 5, 1 951, to May 6, 1952
C. Scott Fletcher, April 5, 1951, to present
Clarence Francis, April 5, 1951, to present
Clinton S. Golden, April 5, 1951, to present
Paul H. Helms, April 5, 1951, to present
George M. Humphrey, April 5, 1951, to December 1, 1952
Allan B. Kline, April 5, 1951, to present
William A. Patterson, May 28, 1953, to present
Charles H. Percy, April 5, 1951, to present
Anna Lord Strauss, April 5, 1951, to present
James W. Young, April 5, 1951, to May 6, 1952
Officers
C. Scott Fletcher, president, April 5, 1951, to present
Alexander Fraser, chairman of the board, April 5, 1951, to May 6, 1952
Paul H. Helms, chairman of the board, May 6, 1952, to May 20, 1953
Clarence Francis, chairman of the board, May 28, 1953, to present
Joseph M. McDaniel, Jr., treasurer, April 5, 1951, to October 16, 1951
Ernest L. Young, acting treasurer, October 16, 1951, to present
Robert O. Hancox, acting secretary, April 5, 1951, to January 17, 1952
Martha C. Howard, secretary, January 17, 1952, to present
Ann C. Spinney, assistant secretary, July 11, 1952, to present
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 349
THE FUND FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF EDUCATION
Directors {from April 1951 to present, unless otherwise indicated)
Frank W. Abrams, formerly chairman of the board, Standard Oil
Co. (New Jersey), 30 Rockefeller Plaza, New York, N. Y. (chair-
man of fund until resignation from board in June 1953)
Barry Bingham, president, the Courier-Journal, Louisville, Ky.
Ralph J. Bunche, Director, Division of Trusteeship, United Nations,
405 East 42d Street, New York, N. Y.
Charles D. Dickey, director and vice president, J. P. Morgan & Co.,
Inc., 23 Wall Street, New York, N. Y.
James H. Douglas, Jr., Under Secretary of the Air Force, Pentagon
Building, Arlington, Va.
Alvin C. Eurich (see list of officers)
Clarence H. Faust (see list of officers)
C. Scott Fletcher, president, Fund for Adult Education, 1444 Went-
worth Street, Pasadena, Calif.
Walter Gilford, room 1010, 46 Cedar Street, New York 5, N. Y., for-
merly Ambassador to Great Britain and chairman of American
Telephone & Telegraph (since April 1954)
Mrs. Douglas Horton, 52 Gramercy Park North, New York 10, N. Y.,
formerly Director of the WAVES and president of Wellesley
College
Mr. Roy Larsen, president, Time, Inc., 9 Rockefeller Plaza, New York,
N.Y. • '
Mr. Walter Lippmann, 3525 Woodley Road NW., Washington 16,
D. C, columnist
Mr. Ralph McGill, editor, the Atlanta Constitution, Atlanta, Ga.
(since April 1954)
Mr. Paul Mellon, 716 Jackson Place, Washington, D. C. (president,
Old Dominion Foundation)
Mr. Walter P. Paepcke, chairman of the board, Container Corporation
of America, 38 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, 111.
Mr. Philip D. Reed, chairman of the board, General Electric Co., 570
Lexington Avenue, New York 22, N. Y. (until June 1953)
Owen J. Roberts, 1421 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia 2, Pa. (formerly
Associate Justice of the Supreme Court) (chairman of fund board
since June 1953)
James Webb Young, 420 Lexington Avenue, New York 17, N. Y.,
advertising consultant (until April 1952)
THE FUND FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF EDUCATION
Officers
Clarence H. Faust, president, Fund for Advancement of Education,
575 Madison Avenue, New York, N. Y. (April 1951 to present)
Alvin C. Eurich, vice president, Fund for Advancement of Educa-
tion, 575 Madison Avenue, New York, N. Y. (September 1951 to
present)
John K. Weiss, treasurer, Fund for Advancement of Education, 575
Madison Avenue, New York, N. Y. (April 1954 to present)
O. Meredith Wilson (secretary of the fund from December 1952 to
March 1954) ; Current address: President, University of Oregon,
Eugene, Oreg.
49720— 54— pt. 1 23
350 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Officers — Continued
Philip H. Coombs, secretary, Fund for Advancement of Education,
575 Madison Avenue, New York 22, N. Y. (secretary -treasurer until
April 1954) (secretary since April 1954)
Thomas A. Spragens (secretary-treasurer, June 1951-December
1952) ; Current address : President, Stephens College, Columbia, Mo.
THE FUND FOR THE REPUBLIC, INC.
Directory past and present
James F. Brownlee, partner, J, H. Whitney & Co., New York City,
December 1952-May 1953
Malcolm Bryan, president, Federal Reserve Bank, Atlanta, December
1952-January 1953
Huntington Cairns, lawyer, Washington, D. C, December 1952-Au-
gustl953
Clifford P. Case, president, The Fund for the Republic, Inc., May
1953-Marcli 1954 >v
Charles W. Cole, president, Amherst College, Amherst, Mass., Decem-
ber 1952-1956 1
Russell L. Dearmont, lawyer, St. Louis, Mo., December 19.52-1954*
Richard Finnegan, consulting editor, Chicago Sun-Times, Chicago,
111., December 1952-1954 1
JJavid F. Freeman, secretary, The Fund for the Republic, Inc., De-
cember 1952-November 1953-
Erwin N. Griswold, dean, Harvard Law School, Cambridge, Mass.,
December 1952-1956 x
Paul G, Hoffman, chairman of the board, the Studebaker Corp., South
Bend, Ind., February 1953-1954 *
Robert M. Hutchins, president, The Fund for the Republic, Inc., April
1954
William H. Joyce, Jr., chairman of the board, Joyce, Inc., Pasadena,
Calif., December 1952-1955 1
Meyer Kestnbaum, president, Hart, Schaffner & Marx, Chicago, 111.,
December 1952-1956 1
M. Albert Linton, president, Provident Mutual Life Insurance Co.,
Philadelphia, Pa., December 1952-1954 x
John Lord O'Brian, partner, Covington & Burling, Washington, D. C,
February 1953-1956 x
Jubal R. Parten, president, Woodley Petroleum Co., Houston, Tex.,
December 1952-1954 1
Elmo Roper, marketing consultant, New York City, N. Y., December
1952-1955 1
George N. Shuster, president, Hunter College, New York City, vice
chairman, August 1953, December 1952-1955 x
Mrs. Eleanor B. Stevenson, Oberlin, Ohio, December 1952-1956 *
James D. Zellerbach, president, Crown Zellerbach Corp., San Fran-
cisco, Calif., December 1952-1955 l
1 Annual meeting in November. Terms of office run until November
of the year mentioned.
tax-exempt foundations 351
Officers
Chairman of the "board, Paul G. Hoffman, February 1953 to present
Vice chairman of the board, George N. Shuster, August 1953 to present
Presidents, David F. Freeman, December 1952 to May 1953; Clifford
P. Case, May 1953 to March 1954; Robert M. Hutchins, June 1954
to present
Vice president, W. H. Ferry, July 1954 to present
Secretary, David F. Freeman, December 1952 to present
Treasurer, Isaac Stickler, December 1952 to August 1953
Acting treasurer, David F. Freeman, August 1953 to present
Assisant treasurer, Charles C. Dold, September 1953 to March 1954
INTERCULTURAL PUBLICATIONS, INC., 47 7 MADISON AVENUE,
NEW YORK 22, N. Y.
Directors
James Laughlin, president, Intercultural Publications, Inc., 477 Madi-
son Avenue, New York 22 s N. Y.
William J. Casey, 60 East 42d Street, New York 17, N. Y., lawyer
Charles Garside, president^ Associated Hospital Service of New York,
80 Lexington Avenue, New York, N. Y.
Joseph W. Hambuechen, First Boston Corp., 100 Broadway, New York,
"N. Y., banker
H. J. Heinz II, president, H. J. Heinz Co., Post Office Box 57, Pitts-
burgh 30, Pa.
Alfred A. Knopf, president, Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 501 Madison
Avenue, New York, N. Y.
Richard Weil, Jr., 2 East 67th Street, New York 22, N. Y., executive
Officers
James Laughlin, president
Charles Garside, secretary
Ernest J. Perry, treasurer
Ronald Freelander, assistant secretary
The board of directors has been serving since April 9, 1952.
Mr. James F. Brownlee, of Fairfield, Conn., also elected April 9,
1952, resigned from the board in December 1952.
Mr. Hay den Carruth served as assistant secretary from September
1952 to October 1953, at which time has was succeeded by Mr. Ronald
Freelander.
DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS OF RESOURCES FOR THE FUTURE, INC.
Resources for the Future, Inc., was incorporated in New York under
the membership corporation law October 7, 1952. By article VI of
the certificate of incorporation the following-named persons were
designated until the first annual meeting or until any special meeting
held for the purpose of electing directors :
Milton Adler, 12 Crown Street, Brooklyn 25, N. Y.
Charles T. Duncan, 229 West 74th Street, New York 23, N. Y.
Joseph H. Schnabel, 402 Ocean Parkway, Brooklyn 18, N. Y.
352 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
(Note. — The above-named directors named in the certificate of in-
corporation were on information and belief designated by law firm
employed to obtain the certificate of incorporation and are not indi-
vidually known to the present officers of the corporation.)
These directors named in article VI of the certificate of incorpora-
tion met on October 10, 1952, at which time each of them submitted
his resignation in turn and the following-named persons were named
directors:
William S. Paley
Ralph F, Colin (resigned November 5, 1952)
John S. Minary (resigned November 5, 1952)
The following persons were elected at subsequent meetings of the
corporation:
Elected November 5, 1952 :
Horace M. Albright
Edward J. Condon
E. B. MacNaughton
Leslie A. Miller
Fairfield Osborn (resigned December 8, 1953)
Beardsley Ruml
Stanley Ruttenberg
M. L. Wilson (resigned May 1, 1953)
Charles W. Eliot (resigned February 5, 1953)
Elected November 6, 1952 : Reuben G. Gustavson
Elected June 19, 1953 : Otto H. Liebers
The following persons have been elected officers of the corporation
since its inception :
Elected October 10, 1952 :
William S. Paley, president (resigned November 5, 1952)
Ralph F. Colin, vice president and treasurer (resigned Novem-
ber 5, 1952)
John S. Minary, secretary (resigned November 5, 1952)
Elected November 5, 1952 :
Horace M. Albright, president (resigned March 31, 1953, to be-
come effective upon the date of taking office by his successor)
Charles W. Eliot, executive director (resigned February 5, 1953)
Elmer Hennig, secretary and treasurer (resigned July 15, 1954)
Elected March 2, 1953 : Reuben G. Gustavson, president (to become
effective upon his acceptance and taking office on July 1, 1953)
Elected April 19, 1953 : Horace M. Albright, chairman of the board
Reuben G. Gustavson, executive director
Elected July 15, 1954:
Joseph L. Fisher, secretary
John E. Herbert, treasurer
tax-exempt foundations 353
The Rockefeller Foundation
List of ail persons who have served as trustees since incorporation in
1913, April 195k
Agar, John G., 1 lawyer, February 25, 1920, to November 9, 1928
Aldrich, Winthrop W., formerly chairman of the board, the Chase
National Bank of the City of New York, now Ambassador to Great
Britain, April 10, 1935, to June 30, 1951
Angell, James R., 1 formerly president, Yale University, November 9>
1928, to April 15, 1936
Arnett, Trevor, formerly president, the General Education Board, and
the International Education Board, Grand Beach, Mich., November
9, 1928, to April 15, 1936
Barnard, Chester I., formerly president, the Rockefeller Foundation
and General Education Board, 52 Gramercy Park North, New
York 10, N. Y., April 3, 1940, to June 30, 1952
Bowles, Chester, 2 formerly governor of Connecticut and formerly
United States Ambassador to India and Nepal ; Essex, Conn., April
7, 1954, to April 6, 1955
Bronk, Detlev W., 2 president, the Rockefeller Institute for Medical
Research, York Avenue and 66th Street, New York 21, N. Y., April
1, 1953, to April 6, 1955
Buttrick, Wallace, 1 formerly president, General Education Board, and
chairman, the International Education Board, January 24, 1917, to
May 27, 1926
Claflin, William H., Jr., 2 president, Soledad Sugar Co., Room 1006, 75
Federal Street, Boston 10, Mass., April 5, 1950, to April 6, 1955
Compton, Karl T., chairman of the corporation, Massachusetts Insti-
tute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass., April 3, 1940, to June 30, 1953
Davis, John W., lawyer, with firm of Davis, Polk, Wardwell, Sunder-
land & Kiendl, 15 Broad Street, New York 5, N. Y., February 24,
1922, to April 5, 1939
Dickey, John S., 2 president, Dartmouth College, Hanover, N. H., April
2, 1947, to April 4, 1956
Dodds, Harold W., 2 president, Princeton University, Princeton, N. J..
April 7, 1937, to June 30, 1954
Douglas, Lewis W., 2 chairman of the board, Mutual Life Insurance
Co. of New. York, 1740 Broadway, New York 19, N. Y., formerly
United States Ambassador to Great Britain, April 10, 1935, to April
.. 2, 1947 ; December 6, 1950, to April 6, 1955
Dulles, John Foster, Secretary of State, Washington 25, D. C., for-
merly member, Sullivan & Cromwell (lawyers), April 10, 1935.
to December 2, 1952
1 Deceased.
3 Present trustees.
354 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
List of all persons who have served, as trustees since incorporation in
1913, April 1954— Continued
Edsall, David L., 1 formerly dean, Harvard Medical School, and Har-
vard School of Public Health, May 25, 1927, to April 15, 1936
Eliot, Charles W., 1 formerly president, Harvard University, January
21, 1914, to May 23, 1917
Flexner, Simon, 1 formerly director, Rockefeller Institute for Medical
Research, May 22, 1913, to April 16, 1930
Fosdick, Harry Emerson, pastor emeritus, Riverside Church, 490
Riverside Drive, New York 27, N. Y., January 26, 1916, to February
23,1921 . .
Fosdick, Raymond B., formerly president, the Rockefeller Foundation
and the General Education Board, 25 East 83d Street, New York,
N. Y., February 23, 1921, to June 30, 1948
Freeman, Douglas S., 1 formerly editor, Richmond News Leader, and
biographer, Robert E. Lee and George Washington, April 7, 1937,
to December 5, 1951
Gasser, Herbert S., 2 member emeritus, the Rockefeller Institute for
Medical Research (formerly director), York Avenue and 66th
Street, New York, N. Y., April 7, 1937, to June 30, 1954
Gates, Frederick T., 1 formerly associated with John D. Rockefeller,
Sr., formerly chairman, general education board, May 22, 1913,
to July 2, 1923
Gifford, Walter S., formerly president and chairman, American Tele-
phone & Telegraph Co., formerly United States Ambassador to
Great Britain, 46 Cedar Street, New York, N. Y., April 15, 1936,
to April 5, 1950
Greene, Jerome D., formerly secretary, the Rockefeller Foundation,
formerly, member of board of overseers, Harvard University, 50
State Street, Boston, Mass., May 22, 1913, to January 24, 1917;
November 9, 1928, to December 6, 1939
Hadley, Herbert Spencer, 3 formerly Governor of Missouri and chan-
cellor, Washington' University, St. Louis, Mo., February 23, 1927,
to November 4, 1927
Harrison, Wallace K., 2 Harrison & Abramovitz, architects, 630 Fifth
Avenue, New York, N. Y., July 1, 1951, to April 4, 1956
Hepburn, Alonzo B., 1 formerly president, chairman of the board of
directors, and chairman, advisory board, Chase National Bank of
the City of New York, March 18, 1914, to January 25, 1922
Heydt, Charles O., formerly associated with John D. Rockefeller, Sr.,
34 Melrose Place, Montclair, N. J., May 22, 1913, to January 24,
1917
Hopkins, Ernest M., formerly president, Dartmouth College, 29 Rope
Ferry Road, Hanover, N. H., November 9, 1928, to December 2,
1942 , . ; .;
Howland, Charles P., 1 formerly lawyer-member of Rushmore, Bisbee
& Stern, November 9, 1928, to November 12, 1932
Hughes, Charles E., 1 formerly Chief Justice of the United States,
January 24, 1917, to February 28, 1921 ; November 6, 1925, to Novem-
ber 9, 1928
1 Deceased.
2 Present trustees.
f Died never having attended a meeting.
TAX-EXEMPT INUNDATIONS 355
List of all persons who have served as trustees since incorporation in
WIS, April 1954— Continued
Judson, Harry Pratt, 1 . formerly president, University of Chicago,
May 22, 1913, to February 27, 1924
Kellogg, Vernon L., 1 formerly permanent secretary, National Re-
search Council, February 24, 1922, to April 11, 1934
Kimberly, John R., 2 president, Kimberly-Clark Corp., Neenah, Wis.,
April 1, 1953, to April 3, 1957
Loeb, Robert F., 2 Bard professor of medicine, Columbia University,
620 West 168th Street, New York, N. Y., April 2, 1947, to April 3,
1957
Lovett, Robert A., 2 Brown Bros., Harriman & Co., 59 Wall Street,
New York, N. Y., formerly Secretary of Defense, May 20, 1949, to
April 3, 1957
Mason, Max, formerly president, the Rockefeller Foundation, 1035
Harvard Street, Claremont, Calif., January 1, 1930, to June 30, 1936
McCloy. John J., chairman of the board, the Chase National Bank of
the City of New York, 18 Pine Street, New York, N. Y, formerly
High Commissioner for Germany, April 3, 1946, to June 11, 1949 ;
April 1, 1953, to April 6, 1955
Moe, Henry Allen, 2 secretary general, John Simon Guggenheim Me-
morial Foundation, 551 Fifth Avenue, N«w York, N. Y., April 5,
1944,to,April4,1956
Murphy, Starr J., 1 formerly lawyer-personal counsel, John D. Rocke-
feller, Sr., May 22, 1913, to April 4, 1921
Myers, William I., 2 dean, New York State College of Agriculture,
Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y., April 2, 1941, to April 4, 1956
Parkinson, Thomas I., formerly president, Equitable Life Assurance
Society 7 Park Avenue, New York, N. Y., April 10, 1935, to
December 4, 1946 ,
Parran, Thomas, 2 dean, Graduate School of Public Health, the Uni-
versity of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pa., April 2, 1941, to April 4,
1956
Richards, Alfred N., emeritus professor of pharmacology, University
of Pennsylvania, 737 Rugby Road, Bryn Mawr, Pa., April 7, 1937,
to April 2, 1941
Rockefeller, John D., Sr., 1 business and philanthropy, May 22, 1913,
to December 4, 1923
Rockefeller, John D., Jr., business, and philanthropy, formerly chair-
man of the board, the Rockefeller Foundation and the General Edu-
cation Board, 30 Rockefeller Plaza, New York, N. Y., May 22, 1913,
to April 3, 1940
Rockefeller, John D., 3d, 2 business and philanthropy, chairman of the
.board, the Rockefeller Foundation and the General Education
Board, 30 Rockefeller Plaza, New York, N. Y., December 16, 1931,
to April 4 ; 1956
Rose, Wickliffe, 1 formerly member of International Health Board and
- president, International Education Board and General Education
Board, May 22, 1913, to June 30, 1928
Rosenwald, Julius, formerly merchant and philanthropist, January
24, 1917, to April 15, 1931
1 Deceased.
J Present trustees.
356 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
List of all persons who have served as trustees since incorporation in
1913, April 195b— Continued
Rusk, Dean, 2 president, the Rockefeller Foundation and the General
Education Board, 49 West 49th Street, New York, N. Y., formerly
Assistant Secretary of State for Far Eastern Affairs, April 5, 1950,
to April 3, 1957
Ryerson, Martin A., 1 formerly president and honorary president board
of trustees, University of Chicago, January 26, 1916, to December 3,
1928
Smith, Geoffrey S., 2 president, Girard Trust Corn Exchange Bank,
Broad and Chestnut Streets, Philadelphia, Pa., April 5, 1050, to
April 6, 1955.
Sproul, Robert G., 2 president, University of California, Berkeley,
Calif., April 3, 1940, to April 6, 1955
Stevens, Robert T., Secretary of the Army, Washington, D. C, for-
merly chairman of the board, J. P. Stevens Co., April 2, 1952, to
January 16, 1953
Stewart, Walter W., emeritus professor, school of economics and poli-
tics, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, N. J., April 15, 1931,
to December 6, 1950
Stokes, Anson Phelps, formerly canon, Washington Cathedral, Wash-
ington, D. C, Lenox, Mass., November 9, 1928, to April 12, 1932
Strauss, Frederick, 1 formerly associated with J. and W. Seligman &
Co. (brokers) , January 26, 1916, to April 15, 1931
Sulzberger, Arthur Hays, 2 publisher, the New York Times, and presi-
dent and director, the New York Times Co., 229 West 43d Street,
New York, N. Y., April 5, 1939, to April 3, 1957
Swift, Harold H., chairman of the board, Swift & Co., Union Stock-
yards, Chicago, 111., April 15, 1931, to April 5, 1950
Trowbridge, Augustus, 1 formerly dean of the graduate school, Prince-
ton University, November 9, 1928, to March 14, 1934
Van Dusen, Henry P., 2 president, Union Theological Seminary, Broad-
way and 120th Street, New York, N. Y., April 2, 1947, to April 3,
1957
Vincent, George E., 1 formerly president of the University of Minne-
sota, formerly president of the Rockefeller Foundation, January 24,
1917, to December 31, 1929
Whipple, George H., formerly dean, school of medicine and dentistry,
University of Rochester, 320 Westminster Road, Rochester, N. Y.,
May 25, 1927, to December 1, 1943
White, William Allen, 1 formerly proprietor and editor, Emporia Ga-
zette, Emporia, Kans., February 21, 1923, to April 10, 1935
Wilbur, Ray Lyman, 1 formerly president, Stanford University, Feb-
ruary 21, 1923, to December 4, 1940
Wood, W. Barry, Jr. (trustee-elect) , professor of medicine, school of
medicine, Washington University, St. Louis, Mo., July 1, 1954, to
April 3, 1957
Woods, Arthur M., 1 formerly police commissioner, New York City,
was assistant to Secretary of War, 1919, November 9, 1928, to April
10, 1935
1 Deceased.
2 Present trustees.
TAX-EXEMPT FOtJftfDATIONS 357
List of all persons who have served as trustees since incorporation in
1913, April 1954— Continued
Young, OweiiD., honorary chairman of the board, General Electric
Co., 570 Lexington Avenue, New York, N. Y., November 9, 1928, to
December 6, 1939
List of principal officers, 1913-54
Chairmen of the board of trustees :
John D. Eockefeller, Jr., 1917-40
Walter W. Stewart, 1940-50
John Foster Dulles, 1950-52
John D. Rockefeller 3d, 2 1952-
John D. Rockefeller, Jr., 1913-17
George E. Vincent, 1917-29
Max Mason, 1930-36
Raymond B. Fosdick, 1936-48
Chester I. Barnard, 1948-52
Dean Rusk, 2 1952-
Vice presidents:
Roger S. Greene, 1927-29
Edwin R. Embree, 1927
Selskar M. Gunn, 1927-42
Thomas B. Appleget, 1929^9
Lindsley F. Kimball, 2 1949-
Alan Gregg, M. D., 2 1951-
Secretaries :
Jerome D. Greene, 1913-17
Edwin R. Embree, 1917-24
Norma S. Thompson, 1925-47
Flora M. Rhind, 2 1948-
Treasurers :
Louis G. Myers, 1913-32
Lefferts M. Dashiell, 1932-38
Thomas I. Parkinson, 1938
Edward Robinson, 2 1938-
Comptrollers :
Robert H. Kirk, 1917-25
George J. Beal, 1925-53
H. Malcolm Gillette, 2 1953-
INTERNATIONAL HEALTH DIVISION
(International Health Commission, 1913-16, International Health Board, 1916-
27, merged with medical sciences to become division of medicine and public
health in 1951)
Directors
Wickliffe, Rose, 1913-23
Frederick F. Russell, M. D., 1923-35
Wilbur A. Sawyer, M. D., 1935^4
George K. Strode, M. D., 1944-51
2 Present trustees.
358 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
DIVISION OF MEDICAL SCIENCES
(Division of medical education, 1919-29, merged with International Health
Division to become division of medicine and public health, 1951)
Directors
Richard M. Pearce, M. D., 1919-30
Alan Gregg, M. D., 1931-51
DIVISION OF MEDICINE AND PUBLIC HEALTH
Directors
George K. Strode, M. D,, 1951
Andrew J. Warren, M. D., 2 1951-
DIVISION OF NATURAL SCIENCES AND AGRICULTURE
(Changed from division of natural sciences in 1951)
Directors
Max Mason, 1928-29
Richard M. Pearce, M. D. (acting), 1930
William S. Carter, M. D., (acting), 1930
Herman A. Spoehr, 1930-31
Lauder W. Jones (acting), 1931-32
Warren Weaver, 2 1932-
DTVrSION OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
Directors
Edmund E. Day, 1928-37
SydnorH. Walker (acting), 1937-38
Joseph H. Willits, 2 1939-54
DIVISION OF HUMANITIES
Directors
Edward Capps, 1929-30
David H. Stevens, 1932-^9
Charles B. Fahs, 2 1950-
General Education Board
Founded by John D. Rockefeller in 1902
List of all persons who have served as trustees since incorporation in
1908-April 1954.
Alderman, Edwin A., 1 formerly president, University of Virginia,
: Charlottesville, Va., November 27, 1906, to December' 31, 1928
Aldrich Winthrop W., formerly chairman of the board, the Chase
National Bank of the City of New York, now Ambassador to Great
Britain, April 15, 1935, to June 30, 1951
Andrews, E. Benjamin, 1 formerly chancellor, University of Nebraska,
Lincoln, Nebr., June 30, 1904, to May 24, 1912
Angell, James R., 1 formerly president, Yale University, New Haven^
Conn., February 23, 1922, to December 31, 1934
1 Deceased.
* Present trustees.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 359
List of all persons who have served as trustees since incorporation in
1903-April 195 A— Continued
Arnett, Trevor, formerly president, General Education Board and
International Education Board, Grand Beach, Mich-? February 26,
1920^ to December 31, 1936
Baldwin, W. H., Jr., 1 formerly president, Long Island Railroad Co.,
February 27, 1902, to January 3, 1905
Barnard, Chester I., formerly president, General Education Board
and the Rockefeller Foundation, 52 Gramercy Park North, New
York, N. Y., April 8, 1948, to June 30, 1952
Branscomb, Bennett Harvie, 2 chancellor, Vanderbilt University, Nash-
ville, Tenn., April 3, 1947, to April 4, 1957
Bronk, Detlev. W., z president, the Rockefeller Institute for Medical
Research, York Avenue and 66th Street, New York, N. Y., April 8,
1954, to April 5, 1956
Buttrick, Wallace, 1 formerly president, General Education Board and
chairman, International Education Board, May 14, 1902, to May 27,
1926
Carnegie, Andrew, 1 business and philanthropy, March 24, 1908, to
September 16, 1918
Chase, Harry Woodburn, formerly chancellor, New York University,
Box 491, Northport, N. Y., January 1, 1930, to December 17, 1936
Compton, Karl T., chairman of corporation, Massachusetts Institute
of Technology, Cambridge, Mass., April 4, 1940, to June 30, 1953
Coolidge, T. Jefferson, 2 chairman of board, United Fruit Co. and Old
Colony Trust Co., 80 Federal St., Boston, Mass., April 6, 1950, to
April 4, 1957
Curry, J. L. M., 1 general agent, Peabody Education Fund; general
agent, John F. Slater Fund, February 27, 1902, to February 12,
1903
Davis, John W., lawyer, Davis, Polk, Wardwell, Sunderland & Kiendl,
15 Broad Street, New York, N. Y., April 15, 1935, to December 8,
1938
DeVane, William C, dean, Yale College, Yale University, New Haven,
Conn., April 6, 1950, to April 7, 1955
Dillard, James H., 1 formerly president, Jeanes Foundation, and
president, John F. Slater Fund, February 28, 1918, to December 31,
1929
Dodds, Harold W., 12 president, Princeton University, Princeton, N. J.,
January 1, 1937, to June 30, 1954
Douglas, Lewis W., 2 chairman of board, Mutual Life Insurance Co.
of New York, 1740 Broadway, New York, N. Y., formerly Ambassa-
dor to Great Britain, April 8, 1937, to April 3, 1947 ; December 7,
1950, to April 7, 1955
Dulles, John Foster, formerly member, Sullivan & Cromwell, lawyers,
New York, Secretary of State, Washington, D. C, April 6, 1950,
to December 4, 1952
Eliot, Charles W., 1 formerly president, Harvard University, Cam-
bridge, Mass., January 28, 1908, to May 5, 1917
Flexner, Abraham, formerly director of studies and medical educa-
tion, General Education Board, director emeritus, Institute for
1 Deceased.
£ Present trustees.
360 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
List of all persons who have served as trustees since incorporation in
1903-April 1954— Continued
Advanced Study, 522 Fifth Avenue, New York, N."Y., January 22,
1914, to June 30, 1928
Fosdick, Raymond B., formerly president, General Education Board
and the Rockefeller Foundation, 25 East 83d Street, New York,
N. Y., February 23, 1922, to June 30, 1948
Freeman, Douglas S., 1 formerly editor, Richmond News Leader, Janu-
ary 1, 1937, to December 6, 1951
Frissell, Hollis B., 1 formerly principal, Hampton Institute, Hampton,
Va., November 27, 1906, to August 5, 1917
Gates, Frederick T., 1 formerly associated with John D. Rockefeller,
Sr. ; formerly chairman, General Education Board, February 27,
1902, to December 31, 1928
Gifford, Walter S., formerly president and chairman, American Tele-
phone & Telegraph Co., formerly Ambassador to Great Britain, 46
Cedar Street, New York, N. Y., April 15, 1935, to April 6, 1950
Gilman, Daniel C., 1 formerly president, Johns Hopkins University;
formerly president, Carnegie Institution of Washington, February
27, 1902, to October 13, 1908
Greene, Jerome D., formerly member of board of -overseers, Harvartl
University, 50 State Street, Boston, Mass., January 26, 1912, to
December 7, 1939
Hanna, Hugh H., 1 formerly president, Atlas Engine Works, June 30,
1905, to January 26, 1912
Harper, William R., 1 formerly president, University of Chicago, June
30, 1905, to January 10, 1906
Hopkins, Ernest M., formerly president, Dartmouth College, 29 Rope
Ferry Road, Hanover, N. H., January 1, 1930, to December 3, 1942
Howland, Charles P., 1 formerly lawyer-member of Rushmore, Bisbee
& Stern, February 27, 1919, to November 12, 1932
Jesup, Morris K., 1 formerly banker, February 27, 1902, to January 22,
1908
Judson, Harry Pratt, 1 formerly president, University s of Chicago,
Chicago, 111., November 27, 1906, to March 4, 1927
Lane Franklin K., 1 formerly vice-president, Pan-American Petroleum
& Transport Co. of New York ; formerly Secretary of the Interior
in Cabinet of President Woodrow Wilson, February 24, 1921, to
May 18, 1921
McCain, James R., president emeritus, Agnes Scott College, Decatur,
Ga., April 4, 1940, to December 5, 1946
Marston, Edgar L., 1 formerly investment banker, Blair & Co., January
26, 1909, to May 23, 1918
Mason, Ma, formerly director of natural sciences, General Education
Board, formerly president, the Rockefeller Foundation, 1035 Har-
vard Street, Claremont, Calif., January 1, 1930, to June 30, 1936
Mims, Edwin, professor emeritus of English, Vanderbilt University,
Nasville, Tenn., January 1, 1931, to December 31, 1936
Murphy, Starr J., 1 formerly lawyer, personal counsel, John D. Rocke-
feller, Sr., January 27, 1904 to December 31, 1905 ; January 22, 1907
to April 4, 1921.
1 Deceased.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 361
List &f all persons who have served as trustees since incorporation in
1903-April 195^— Continued
Myers, William I., 2 dean, New York State College of Agriculture,
Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y., April 3, 1941, to April 7, 1955
Norton, Edward L., 2 chairman of board, Voice of Alabama (WAPI,
WAFM-TV), 701 Protective Life Building, Birmingham, Ala.,
April 6, 1944 to April 5, 1956
Ogden, Bobert C., 1 formerly president, Union Theological Seminary,
February 27, 1902 to August 6, 1913
Page, Walter Hines, 1 formerly editor, Doubleday Page & Co., New
York, formerly Ambassador to Great Britain, February 27, 1902 to
December 22, 1918
Parkinson, Thomas I., formerly president, Equitable Life Assurance
Society, 7 Park Avenue, New York, N. Y., April 15, 1935 to Decem-
ber 5, 1946
Parran, Thomas, 2 dean, graduate school of public health, the Univer-
sity of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pa., April 3, 1947 to April 5, 1956
Peabody, George Foster, 1 formerly banker, treasurer of General Edu-
cation Board, February 27, 1902 to May 24, 1912
Rockefeller, John D., Jr., business and philanthropy, formerly chair-
man of the board of the Rockefeller Foundation and General Educa-
tion Board, 30 Rockefeller Plaza, New York, N. Y., January 29, 1903
to April 6, 1939
Rockefeller, John D., 3d, 2 business and philanthropy, chairman of
the board of the Rockefeller Foundation and General Education
Board, 30 Rockefeller Plaza, New York, N. Y., January 1, 1932 to
April 5, 1956
Rose, Wickliffe, 1 formerly member of International Health Board,
formerly president of General Education Board and International
Education Beard, February 1, 1910, to June 30, 1928
Rusk, Dean, 2 president, the Rockefeller Foundation and General
Education Board, formerly Assistant Secretary of State for Far
Eastern Affairs, 49 West 49th Street, New York, N. Y., December
6, 1951, to April 7, 1955
Shaw, Albert, 1 formerly editor, American Review of Reviews, Feb-
ruary 27, 1902, to December 31, 1929
Spaulding, Francis T., 1 formerly professor of education, Harvard
University, formerly commissioner of education and president of
University of State of New York, April 4, 1940, to April 2, 1942
Spaulding, Frank E., formerly superintendent of schools, Cleveland,
Ohio, chairman emeritus, department of education, graduate school,
Yale University, Casa de Manana, La Jolla, Calif., February 28,
to April 4, 1921
Sproul, Robert G., 2 president, University of California, Berkeley,
Calif., April 4, 1940, to April 4, 1957
Stewart, Walter W., professor emeritus, school of economics and poli-
tics, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, N. J., December 15,
1932, to December 7, 1950
Stokes, Anson Phelps, formerly canon, Washington Cathedral, Wash-
ington, D. G, Lenox, Mass., May 24, 1912, to April 14, 1932
Swift, Harold H., chairman of board, Swift & Co., Union Stockyards,
Chicago, 111., January 1, 1931, to April 6, 1950
1 Deceased.
2 Present trustees.
$62 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
List of all persons who have served as trustees since incorporation in
1903-AprU 1954— Continued
Trowbridge, Augustus, 1 formerly dean of the graduate school^ Prince-
ton University, January 1, 1930 to March 14, 1934
Van Dusen, Henry P., 2 president, Union Theological Seminary, Broad-
way and 120th Street, New York, N. Y., April 8, 1948 to April 4,
1957
Vincent, George E., 1 formerly president, University of Minnesota,
formerly president, the Rockefeller Foundation, May 28, 1914 to
December 31, 1929
Whipple, George H., formerly dean, school of medicine and dentistry,
University of Rochester, 320 Westminster Road, Rochester, N. Y.
December 17, 1936 to December 2, 1943
Wilbur, Ray Lyman, 1 formerly president, Stanford University, Jan-
uary 1, 1931 to December 5, 1940.
Woods, Arthur, 1 formerly Police Commissioner, New York City;
formerly Assistant to Secretary of War, January 1, 1930 to Decem-
ber 31, 1934
Young, Owen D., honorary chairman of board, General Electric Co.,
570 Lexington Avenue, New York, N. Y., February 26, 1925 to
December 7, 1939
List of principal officers — 1902-54
Chairman of the board of trustees:
William H. Baldwin, Jr., 1902-04
Robert C. Ogden, 1905-06
Frederick T. Gates, 1907-17
Vacancy, 1918-22
Wallace Buttrick, 1923-26
Vacancy, 1927-30
Raymond B. Fosdick, 1931-36
John D. Rockefeller, Jr., 1936-39
Ernest M. Hopkins, 1939-42
Walter W. Stewart, 1942-50
John Foster Dulles, 1950-52
John D. Rockefeller, 3d, 2 1952
Wallace Buttrick, 1917-23
Wickliffe Rose, 1923-28
Trevor Arnett, 1928-36
Raymond B. Fosdick, 1936-48
Chester I. Barnard, 1948-52
Dean Rusk 2 1952-
Vice presidents:
David H. Stevens, 1931-38
A. R. Mann, 1937-46
Jackson Davis, 1946-47
Robert D. Calkins, 1947-52
Lindsley F. Kimball, 2 1950-
1 Deceased.
* Principal executive officer prior to 1917 was called secretary and executive officer ;
see listing under Secretaries.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 363
List of principal officers— l90&^5Jk — Continued
Secretaries:
Wallace Buttrick (and executive officer), 1902-17
Starr J. Murphy (and executive officer) , 1905-06
Abraham Flexner, 1917-25
Trevor Arnett, 1920-24
William W. Brierly, 1925-49
Robert W. July, April 7-December 31, 1949
Edouard D. Eller, 1950-52
Flora M. Rhind, 2 1952-
Treasurers :
George Foster Peabody, 1902-09
Louis G. Myers, 1910-32
Lefferts M. Dashiell, 1932-38
Edward Robinson, 2 1938-
Comptrollers (auditor prior to 1936) :
Ernest A. Buttrick, 1922-31
George J. Beal, 1931-53
H. Malcolm Gillette, 2 1953-
Directors :
Abraham Flexner (studies and medical education), 1925-28
Frank P. Bachman (school surveys, public education), 1922-28
H. J. Thorkelson (college and university education, accounting),
1922-28
Charles R. Richards (industrial art), 1926-30
Whitney H. Shepardson (agricultural education), 1927-28
David H. Stevens (education J, 1929-37
Max Mason (natural sciences) ,_ 1928-29
Herman A. Spoehr (natural sciences) , 1930-31
Warren Weaver (natural sciences) , 1932-37
Edward Capps (humanities), 1929-30
Alan Gregg (medical sciences) , 1931-37
Edmund E. Day (social sciences, general education), 1930-37
R. J. Havighurst (general education), 1937-40
A. R. Mann (southern education) , 1937-46
Jackson Davis (southern education), 1946-47
Robert D. Calkins (southern education), 1947-52
Mr. Hays. Now, the reason I did that in view of the witness' state-
ment is that I don't know who they are. I know some of them, and I
am sure that some members of the Ford family are members or di-
rectors of the Ford Foundation. There are many very prominent
people associated with the Eisenhower administration. 1 want it
right in the record that these are the people that the witness — I won't
attempt to say because I am afraid he will qualify it, but we will let
the record say what he said about them. I want to go on record right
here as saying that I don't believe that such people, as the Fords,
as Paul Hoffman, and others that I happen to know are officials of
them, are in any way remotely or otherwise involved in any plot to
subvert this Government.
1 say to you in saying that I am defending the present administra-
tion, of which I am not a member.
2 Present trustees.
364; TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The Chairman. I am glad to have your support of the statement
which I have many times made : that the boards of directors of these
large foundations are composed in the main of most estimable men
of wide experience and, in most cases, extensive business connections;
and the complaint that I developed was that they were so engaged
with their other and more personal business and professional associa-
tions that they did not devote the time required to know what the
foundations, the administrative phases of the foundations, were
doing.
One of the chief and one of the principal purposes that I thought
might be served by this study was to develop the work of the founda-
tions and in that way the members of the boards of directors would
come to understand more fully just what the foundations are doing
and might thereby be encouraged to give more personal attention
to the direction of the activities of the foundations.
Mr. Hays. Boiled down, in other words, you are saying they are
too stupid to know what they are doing now and so we are going to
tell them.
The Chairman. It doesn't boil down to that ; if it did boil down,
it wouldn't boil down to that.
They are men of very great ability and so far as I know men of
high purpose.
Mr. Hats. Do you subscribe to the legal concept that a board of
directors of a corporation is responsible for the acts of that corpora-
tion?
The Chairman. Yes, I do.
Mr. Sargent. One of the questions before 'this committee, and a
very important and a very serious one, is going to be to decide whether
the condition we have here is negligence, abdication of duty, or de-
liberate intent.
Obviously, there may be varying degrees and there may be con-
ditions in certain departments and certain methods regarding the
handling of their affairs, to explain the condition we have here. I
am purposely not naming names on these boards except where I have
something indicating that a specific person did a specific thing.
I did state in the opening of these hearings that I thought there was
an antitrust question involved here, and I am entirely convinced that
there is such a question. The discussion seems to have brought it up at
this point and so now I want to mention it briefly.
There is a rule announced recently by the United States Supreme
Court, in an opinion rendered by Chief Justice Warren, which has a
very close bearing on this matter before us. It is the case of Her-
nandez against Texas, case No. 406, October term, 1953, decided May 3
this year.
The immediate question involved there was discrimination against
one of the Mexican race convicted of a crime in the State of Texas,
who protested the grand jury system and also the trial jury system
in the State on the ground that members of his race were systematically
excluded.
He proved no specific exclusion, but simply said the pattern showed
on its face that it was discriminatory, and that a pattern of that char-
acter in itself was sufficiently legal proof to maintain his charge.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 365
The Supreme Court unanimously sustained that contention and gave
the following statement of law which I think is pertinent, and so I
quote :
Circumstances or chance may well dictate that no persons in a certain class
will serve on a particular jury or during some particular period, but it taxes our
credulity to say that mere chance resulted in there being no members of this
class among the over 6,000 jurors called in the past 25 years. The result
bespeaks discrimination, whether or not it was a conscious decision on the part
of any individual jury commissioner.
The petitioner did not seek proportional representation, nor did he claim a
right to have persons of Mexican descent sit on the particular juries, which he
faced. His only claim is the right to be indicted and tried by juries from
which all members of his class are not systematically excluded. Juries selected
from among all qualified persons regardless of national origin or descent, to
I his much he is entitled by the Constitution.
A similar rule has been applied in antitrust cases, particularly in
the so-called theater cases, involving the right to use first-run moving
pictures, where certain groups in the industry get together ana
it just automatically comes out that certain people always get the first-
runs and other people never get them.
Decisions on that are Interstate Circuit, Inc., v. United States (306
TJ. S. 208), Ball v. Paramount Pictures (169 Federal Second 317) t
from the Court of Appeals in the Third Circuit.
Now, we wish to request this committee to apply a similar rule to
the matter before us and to decide by means of a sworn questionnaire
properly drawn whether there has been in fact systematic discrimina-
tion on the part of these large foundations against pro- American
projects and anti-Communists, and others, seeking to support and
defend the United States Government.
I am talking now about the chairman's speech relied upon by the.
House in the adoption of this resolution before you. We would like
to request
Mr. Hays. May I interject right there, to keep the record straight^
now you can impugn the motives of a lot of people, but let me finish
here. When you say that the House relied on the chairman's speech^
and I am not even going to quarrel with that, I just want to have the
record show that in the speech that appears in the record, the chair-
man only made about 2 or 3 minutes of it and the rest was inserted
later, long after the House had voted.
It was done by unanimous consent which is a perfectly legal pro-
cedure.
The Chairman. I am sure the gentleman from Ohio wants to be
reasonably accurate. As I recall, being in charge at the time, I yielded
myself 20 minutes.
Mr. Hays. And the interchange of where people interrupted you,
it will show where.
The Chairman. A substantial part of it was made on the floor.
Mr. Hays. I won't argue with the gentleman on that.
The Chairman. With reference to my speech since it has been char-
acterized so frequently, I _want to say this, for the information of
those who have been referring to it so frequently, that I was an advo-
cate when I made that speech. I had introduced a resolution which
I was asking the House to favorably consider. It was incumbent upon
me as the author of the resolution to set out the reasons why I thought
49720 — 54 — pt. 7 24
366 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
the resolution should be adopted. It was not incumbent upon me to
discuss or set out both sides of the question, in the sense of the word
that it becomes my responsibility now to see that both sides of the
question are fully developed.
We were discussing as to whether the resolution should be favorably
considered by the House, and I was pointing out why it should be
favorably considered, which just as I referred yesterday, and just as
Judge Cox did when he was setting out why his resolution should be
adopted, he mustered all of the reasons, I assume, or at least many rea-
sons, and some of them are stated in pretty strong language as to why
the resolution should be adopted. I think it is even stronger than what
can be found in my speech.
But I am just saying that to give the viewpoint from which my
speech was made. After I made the correction with reference to the
time.
Mr. Hats. The gentleman will understand that I feel he had every
reason to give his viewpoint, and I am not questioning anything he
said ; but Judge Cox's statement was pretty strong, I will agree with
you* But Judge Cox later had quite a change of heart.
The Chairman. X may have.
Mr. Hays. You anticipated my question.
The Chairman. I tried to anticipate it.
Mr. Hats. I was going to ask you if we could hope for that.
The Chairman. There is one legal concept, and this is in all serious-
ness — there is one legal concept about foundations that has disturbed
me. One of the fundamental concepts of American jurisprudence is
the rule against perpetuities. That is, we are inhibited under this
great American concept from passing property beyond the second
generation.
I fear that by a device of foundations — and this is not characteriz-
ing the foundations, whether it is good or bad, but it is just as preva-
lent in good foundations as in bad foundations, if the two classes exist.
A family, whether it owns a large or small fortune, or a man in the
same case, can set up a foundation and put the voting stock of that en-
terprise in the foundation, and name the board of directors of the
foundation, and then provide that that board shall be self -perpetuat-
ing, and possibly, as has been found in some of the foundations — and
I will not name them now — that the board cannot sell any of that stock
that controls the enterprise except by unanimous consent of the board
of directors.
That angle is a legal concept involved here that has disturbed me,
and which I think the committee ought to give consideration to in
connection with its deliberations.
Mr. Hays. I think that you have a very good point there, and I am
glad we find something occasionally we can agree on, but what you
have said brings in a foundation which I think is perhaps the most
outstanding example of what you are talking about, that has not even
been mentioned and so perhaps we ought to look them over ; I do not
know. That is the Duke Foundation. There is the one that J know
about, that that foundation cannot sell one share of Duke stock un-
less, I believe, it is the unanimous decision of the board.
Now let me just finish, and I am not going to say anything that will
offend you. The Duke Foundation has done a lot of worthy things,
and from what little I know about them they have established a great
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 367
fund that the Duke University Hospital operates under. I happened
to have the privilege — and I won't even mention what time it was, so
that there will be no political connotations — to go to Duke University,
because at <me time school teachers could go there without paying
tuition because of the Duke Foundation. I won't say what year it was,
but I was teaching, and I wasn't getting much money, and so I was
looking for a place to get what I wanted in the way of education as
•cheaply as possible. But that might be a thing that we ought to look
into, and I am not going to take any more time, except to say that
I concur with you, and that happens to be the one that I know the
most about, that does that very thing.
The Chairman. But the- same thing applies, in one degree or an-
other, with all of the foundations, or almost all of them. It is a ques-
tion of degree. The mere fact that that one foundation might not
require unanimous consent of the board to dispose of the voting stock
■of a corporation would not be controlling.
I am sorry. I only interjected that as a legal concept in connection
with foundations, and it disturbed me from the very beginning.
Mr. Hats. If we just go into that a little bit in this committee, it
might be more conducive of good than some of the stuff we have been
hearing.
The Chairman. The staff has been going into it, I assume, because
one of the earlier suggestions I made to them was along that line.
Mr. Sargent. The request I wish to make to the committee is that
a suitable questionnaire be signed under oath by responsible officers
of these various foundations, at least those engaged in the educational
■field — that is what we are talking about in this particular social study
area— and in matters having to do with behavioral studies, psychology,
and anything capable of dominating or affecting the mind or the
thought of a man. It should be requested from these foundations whose
capital is sufficiently large to give some degree of economic power and
influence — the amount, of course, is subject to your judgment, perhaps
.$25 million is a starting point for capitalization- — in order to elicit
information which seems clearly to be within the scope of the House
resolution.
For example, willful discrimination without cause against certain
types of activities here is unfair, in a very real sense, it is un-Ameri-
can, and it is not in accordance with the purposes of a foundation
charter which is a public enterprise.
I would like to suggest such a questionnaire be prepared, to elicit the
following information :
First of all, whether the foundation interrogated has made grants
to pro- American projects from some designated period of time. To
get a good picture here, suppose we start with 1930, and run up to
date. Ask for a list of what, if anything, they have done along that
line, and require them to describe briefly the nature of the project.
Whether they have supported studies which are critical of the wel-
fare state and socialism, or demonstrate the merits of the competitive
private property system.
Whether they have made any grants to active anti-Communist and
repentant Communists who have served the United States at self-
sacrifice by exposing communism within our borders.
Mr. Hats. Let me hear that last one again.
368 TAX-EXEI&^T FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Sargent. I am reading from the chairman's speech here :
Whether they have given grants to active anti-Communists and re-
pentant Communists who have served the United States at great self-
sacrifice, by exposing the Communist conspiracy within our borders.
Mr. Hats. Do you mean you are advocating that we give grants
to repentant Communists?
Mr. Sargent. People who have a demonstrated record of defense
of American principles under present conditions.
Mr. Hays. You might get a lot of repenters on a thing like that.
Mr. Sargent. People with an established record, you know what
I mean— people like Whittaker Chambers, for example. Those who
have served and demonstrated their patriotism and who have gone
through hell, mentally and otherwise, to stand up and defend' this
country of ours. Those men are entitled to consideration, and to
public respect.
Whether they have made any such grants in educational projects
relating to national defense and security, or the support or defense of
the Government of the United States.
Whether they are now, regardless of any prior policies, ready or
willing to make such grants.
Whether they are willing to make such grants for purposes of
critical study and analysis of the findings and conclusions of other
men in education heretofore aided by foundation grants for the pur-
pose of placing the other point of view before the people and having
those findings published and made publicly available.
Whether they are willing to have those studies made on the recom-
mendation of some group not dominated by the foundations them-
selves, or by any organization which has presently had the direction
and control of the sources into which this foundation money has been
placed.
In other words, it should be a completely objective, outside arrange-
ment formed in some proper way.
That will get you the facts. We won't have to debate about it.
Mr. Hats. I just have a question there, and I would not want to
debate it. I am casting no aspersions on your suggestion whatsoever,
and I just want to try to get an opinion here. Do you think such a
questionnaire would have any effect of looking like intimidation to
the foundations?
Mr. Sargent. I don't call it intimidation to ask these people whether
they are prepared to perform what I think is fully their duty at this
time.
Mr. Hats. In other words, you are pitching for some funds for the
Sons of the American Revolution.
Mr. Sargent. No, sir, I am pitching for some funds for the Ameri-
can people, who are the beneficiaries of these trusts and who are
entitled to have the money made available to defend their country.
Mr. Hats. You are pitching to have them give the people that you
approve of?
Mr. Sargent. I am pitching for everybody.
Mr. Hats. That is a magnanimous statement.
Mr. Sargent. It is true. I think that we should find out through
an appropriate questionnaire whether these foundations are now will-
ing to conform to the standards of foundation conduct referred to
here: Patriotism, loyalty, obedience to their charters, academic re-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 369
■sponsibility, and also a respect for their exemption privilege. Such
projects could now be started and organized under proper auspices and
there are dozens of competent men in the anti-Communist field who
could form a group just as responsible and just as«effectiv& as this
Council of American Learned Societies, which seems to direct all of
this money of the giant foundations into such very strange places.
It may be all of this in the past is a mistake, and if it is, all right,
let them say so. But this will get you the facts. If Congress should
find — and I certainly hope it will not find — but if Congress should
find that these people have not done it in the past, and they have no
intention of doing it in the future, I think that that .is something that
the House of Representatives wants to know about.
Mr. Hats. I think anybody, Mr. Sargent, in any foundation could
answer your questionnaire without any fear whatsoever of being pros-
ecuted for perjury or anything of the kind, and answer it favorably,
and still go right ahead and determine which people they are going
to give money to. Because your saying so does not make it so. They
may not agree with you.
Mr. Sargent. There is a discrimination pattern here which has defi-
nitely affected the book trade, and under which apparently almost
-entirely one class of literature gets into the channels of interstate
•commerce. ' In any event
Mr. Hays. Your book that you cited this morning, only yesterday
got into interstate commerce; and after I pointed out what kind of
a book it was, you repudiated it. I do not know how many more of
these you will repudiate when I have a chance to examine them, but
it will be interesting.
Mr. Sargent. Have you any objection to such a questionnaire being
submitted ?
Mr. Hays. The Chair and I, I think, are prepared to agree that we
will take the request under advisement.
Th& Chairman. Such a questionnaire would appear to be material
to this investigation and can be included as the suggestion of the
witness,-*-
Mr. Sargent. In order to make the request specific, between now
and the time I come back for questioning, I will prepare the outline
of what I think should be sent.
The Chairman. Had you repudiated the book to which you made
reference ?
Mr. Sargent. No. Of course not.
Mr. Hays. All but one paragraph.
Mr. Sargent. No, I didn't. I said the rest of the statements are
not necessarily authoritative as a research work.
Mr. Hays. But you just stated one paragraph was authoritative.
Mr. Sargent. I said I wouldn't take it one way or the other because
Tira&'ritJtning to do with the matter at hand.
Mr. Hays. I think that the audience here knows that you pretty
generally repudiated the book, except for one paragraph.
Mr, Sargent. This is a proposal to get specific information, and I
think it is a very inexpensive way and a very effective way, and the
results will be entirely factual, and I would like leave to prepare a sug-
gested form of questions that the staff might want to consider and the
1 The questionnaire suggested by Mr. Sargent appears following his testimony on p. 398.
370 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
committee might want to, as a means of performing part of your re-
sponsibility on this matter here. I think that it would be highly im-
portant to do. I will prepare such a statement.
Mr. Hats. You will submit it, and not as part of the record.
Mr. Sargent. I will submit it when I come back for testimony, and
whether it is in the record or not is a decision of the committee. I
would like to make a specific presentation.
Mr. Hats. I want the record to show that I am not hiring you to-
prepare anything.
Mr. Sargent. I am doing it as a part of my presentation here.
Now, if it please the committee, I have other material which is in-
teresting, and I think since we are trying to conclude this matter
today, I will first cover some major points of general importance to-
you and then go back and, to the extent I have time, take up these other
matters.
First of all, I would like to discuss the public policy aspects of this
situation. There seem to be a number of them. One is the monopoly,,
the question of monopoly, and economic power.
The tendency of large blocks of capital to gravitate into foundation
control ; the danger inherent in the mere size of a giant foundation such
as the Ford Foundation, just because of its magnitude, half a billion
dollars, under control in one place ; the extent to which interlocking
directorates increase that danger; and the parallel you have here,
these foundations are acting as intellectual holding companies with
Eower to dominate and direct public opinion. They are intellectual
olding companies to build new social orders acceptable to themselves
and not necessarily orders which the people themselves, without the
pressure of organized money, would necessarily adopt or promote.
There is a question in line with that. Here is an example :>f the
use of economic power. It concerns the Ford Foundation. I have here
before me a photostatic copy of a very recent publication called the
Corporate Director, a publication of the American Institute of Man-
agement. I understand that it has an economic, service. This is the
issue of April 1954, volume IV, ISTo. 1. It contains a study on the Ford
Motor Co., the first section, and the photostat I have here is a complete
copy of that portion of that release.
Mr. Hats. Who put it out ?
Mr. Sargent. The American Institute of Management.
The article is factual, and it commends itself to me as containing
some important facts here. I would like to ask that this particular
statement be put in as a part of the transcript, and I will summarize
for vou the nature of what it is.
It refers to the effect of the Ford Foundation owning 90 percent of
the capital stock of the Ford Motor Co. The fact that the members of
the Ford family are the officers of the Ford Motor Co., in a position
to draw salaries as may be determined, and in a position to allow the-
motor company to run at a cost basis with no dividends, and, by means
of that, to bring to bear destructive economic power on competitors
of the Ford Motor Co. which have to pay dividends to stockholders
and have to maintain a credit position, which a corporation doesn't
have to do when a large foundation owns almost all of the stock.
Mr. Hats. They have not been very successful with GM, have they t
Mr. Sargent. The article points out the fact that in 1928, Ford diet
that with very destructive economic consequences.
TAX-EXEMPT, FOUNDATIONS 371
Mr. Hays. Mr. Sargeant, you are not advocating that we should
break up the Ford Motor Co. like some people say we should break
up the New York Yankees, are you \
Mr. Sargent. No, sir. I am talking about the question whether a
foundation ought to be permitted to own the, large blocks of stock
in an economic concern such as this.
Mr. Hats. That brings me down to a very important question. You
seem to know a lot about this matter, and can you tell me any other
way the Fords could have hung onto their motor empire except this;
if they had to put it in where they paid the taxes on it, somebody else
would have been in there.
Mr. Sargent. They can do this in perpetuity as we stand now, arid
that is one of the dangerous weaknesses on this.
Mr. Hats. But I asked you a question : Do you know of any other
way the Ford family could have hung onto the Ford Motor Go. ?
Mr. Sargent. Probably not, but I am not sure that the Federal
Government should help them hold onto that stock.
Mr. Hats. I am not sure, either, but I just wonder if there was
another way.
Mr. Sargent. I presume there wasn't. This article discusses this
economic question
Mr. Hats. But you almost begin to talk like one of these Socialists
that you are complaining about. Here is preserving this great Ameri-
can fortune in a way which you admit is the only way in the world
they could have done it; but you think that is bad. We have just
been around nearly a full circle now.
I am not expressing an opinion.
Mr. Sargent. You will like this part of my testimony, but not the
other part.
Mr. Hats. No, I don't. Ever since the famous statement about
what is good for General Motors is good for the country, I do not
even run a General Motors car any more. I am a Ford man. That is,
just buy the cars, and I only own one of them.
Mr. Sargent. This article discusses that question, and it says the
purpose of the Ford Motor Co. is simply to receive and administer
funds for scientific and educational purposes. It says no other auto-
mobile manufacturer is in a position to ignore stability of earnings or
continuity of dividend payments. That if General Motors or Chrysler
earned no money, the management heads would roll and equity credit
would be impaired. Ford could declare no earnings and the public
not even know of it. All the public would know is that the Ford car
was top car on the production sheets and in the dealer's hands.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Sargent, right there, if they do not make any money,
the foundation does not have any money to operate on; is that right?
Mr. Sargent. Not at all. It has half a billion dollars, and it can
operate for years and years on capital.
Mx. Hats. In other words, it has a half a billion dollars besides its
stock in the Ford Motor Co. ?
Mr. Sargent. It has a total of half a billion, and I don't know what
all of the portfolio is.
Mr. Hats. That is an important question. Is their money in Ford
Motor Co. stock, or have they got a billion in loose change?
Mr. Sargent. They could sit on this situation and live on capital
for a while if they desired to.
372 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hays. Let us not in any event say that. I want to know where
their money is. Is it in Ford Motor Co. stock, or is it in cash ? That
is important, I think.
Mr. Sargent. It may be one and it may be the other, I don't know.
Mr. Hays. You made a statement inferring that it is neither fish
nor fowl, or whatever you wanted it to be.
Mr. Sargent. I said they have half a billion total assets, and that
is what their report shows, and they had 90 percent of the Ford
Motor Co.
Mr. Hays. Is there any way in the world, in order to make that
statement have some relation to the picture at all, that we can get the
staff to find out just what their assets are and whether it is in cash,
stock, or what ?
The Chairman. The staff can do it or, when we have a witness from
the Ford Foundation, I anticipate that that will be done.
Mr. Sargent. This organization says it is their belief that Federal
legislation is needed that will prohibit any charitable foundation,
pension, or fund from owning or controlling more than 10 percent of
any business enterprise and, if nothing else, the Federal authorities
should not allow tax exemption on income for more than 10 percent
ownership in any business corporation. Otherwise, the public has
no voice m the company, and the profit motive cannot survive due to
the great advantage enjoyed by companies that can offer unfair
competition.
Mr. Hays. You are inferring there, from reading that state-
ment, that the public should have some voice in the company.
Mr. Sargent. They mean by "public," have a voice in the general
distribution of shares.
Mr. Hays. I am a rugged individualist, and I have a dairy farm
and I have a few head of cattle, and I do not want the public to have
any part of running my enterprise. I am going to run it myself.
I suppose, or I thought that was part of this rugged Americanism
that we are all for. Now you say that the public does not have any-
thing to do with running the Ford Motor Co., and they didn't have
anytning to do with it when Old Henry was in it. There was a fellow
by the name Of Couzens, of Michigan, and he put $5,000 into it, and
Henry was genius enough — and I am talking about the original
Henry — that he made enough money that he was able to pay Senator
Couzens $30 million just to get him out of the company so he could
run it.
That is not bad, is it ?
Mr. Sargent. This legal device known as the foundation is. now used
to keep perpetual control.
Mr. Hays. Do you think that is bad ?
Mr. Sargent. I think once a corporation gets the tax-exemption
privilege, it enters into an area where it is -subject to a degree of public
legislation that it is not subject to as the individual owner would be,
certainly. This is public trust money.
Mr. Hays. Right there— and I hope that you can be helpful to us — ■
do you have any suggestion about any law that we might pass whereby
Congress or some other body could get in the picture of running this
fortune?
Mr. Sargent. Gradually you can do two things: One is, you can
prohibit the perpetual ownership of large blocks of stock like that in
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 373
these corporations, and compel orderly liquidation under penalty of
forfeiture of the exemption privilege. It is just like Samuel Insulls*
empire was broken up by holding-company legislation. You can
attack this evil.
Mr. Hays. I know a little bit about Samuel Insulls' empire, and
it wasn't broken up so much by holding-company legislation as it
just went bust.
Mr. Sargent. It led to this other legislation, which has been con-
sidered important.
Mr. Hays. Someone got to looking through the paper one day and
found it wasn't worth wallpaper.
Mr. Sargent. I think this merits committee consideration, and I
ask this be made a part of the record.
Mr. Hays. May the committee look at it before it is made a part of
the record ?
Mr. Sargent. I don't want to read it all.
The Chairman. I think that you have read it..
Mr. Hays. If you don't mind, I would like to see the heading of it,
Mr. Sargent. The other situation is not photostated, because it
relates to another matter.
Mr. Hays. It is published by the American Institute of Manage-
ment. What is that?
Mr. Sargent. I am simply presenting it as being a factual statement
of a problem here of importance.
Mr. Hays. I see no objection to it. I do not know who made the
study, but it can be put in the record and stand on its own merits.
Mr. Sargent. That is all I am asking.
The Chairman. Without exception it is so ordered.
(The study of the Ford Motor Co. as published in The Corporate
Director, follows :)
[From the Corporate Director, April 1954]
Backgbottnd Studies in Management Action
1— Ford Motor Co.
2— Pennsylvania Railroad Co.
Those old enough can perhaps recall the introduction of the Ford Model A to
the automobile market in 1928. This new car hit the dealers when consumer
demand was on the toboggan, and, represented the elder Henry's attempt to
recapture a major share of auto sales. It proved to be too much production too
late. In later years, more than one economist has retrospectively referred to
this increased model A output, with its concomitant ill effect on many Ford
dealers, as the straw that broke the camel's back, and helped precipitate the
deep depression of the thirties. No such general business decline would have
occurred had not conditions been ripe, but, nonetheless, Ford dealers were beset
with difficulties on a particularly large scale.
By the same yardstick, we must now measure the Ford Co.'s determined
effort to become top again by expanding output in the face of dwindling demand.
There can be no doubt of the fact that Ford is expanding and producing so as
to outdistance Chevrolet. This is a matter of public record (see table 1 and
table 2). Just as the great majority of automobile dealers know this to be
true, they also have reason to believe that demand is already exceeded by cur-
rent output of all automobiles. (The excess output of the past few years is
generally estimated at a figure between 400,000 and 500,000 cars.) In some cities
the situation is so unfavorable that best quality used cars can be had for as little
as : $10 downpayment. Most new cars may be*purchased at- dealer's; cost. Bank-
ruptcies of car dealers grow.
374
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
A large and influential bank recently published an economic opinion to thfe
effect that depressions cannot be prevented — only retarded.
We disagree with this economic contention. Production and price correction
are needed in order to eliminate the careless and the incompetent, and to re-
establish markets on firm foundations. However, they need not be disastrous,
nor need they occur in all industries at the same time.
GOVERNMENT ACTION
We concur in the Federal Government's obvious belief that action can and
should be taken by Government to encourage a rolling correction — industry by
industry — and, thus, protect the economy as a whole from paralysis. Hasn't
this very circumstance been occurring in the last few years to a greater de-
gree than ever before? Look at the recent records of the textiles or the pharma-
ceuticals, or the radio and television producers, as evidence that overproduction
can occur and be corrected within several industries without national calamity.
Why cannot this continue to be so if the proper Government action is available?
No competent financial man doubts the good that has come from SEC regula-
tions of the securities markets, and by the same token the businessman must
know that the same principles can, under certain circumstances, apply to conduct
in his sphere of activity^ It is said only the strong may survive, but when it
becomes obvious in any given industry, such as the automobile business, that
strength lies principally in size, then we must amend this saying to "only the
big survive." This we cannot accept.
Yet the battle of the giants is now upon us. If we. are to have an old-style
depression, it will undoubtedly come as a result of the unwillingness of large
producers to cut production for fear they will lose their dominance of the national
market. In no other industry will this be so true as among the automobile
manufacturers.
Table 1. — Orotving competition m the automotive industry
Year
Genera]
Motors
Chrylser
Ford
Total Big
Three
Independ-
ents
1941
Percent
48.37
40.04
41.53
45.65
Percent
23.37
21.21
21.96
20. 33
Percent
18.28
19.13
23.17
25.21
Percent
90.02
80.38
86.66
91.19
Percent
9.98
1948 -
19.62
1952
13.34
1953.. .......
8.81
Source: Automotive Industries.
Table 2. — Current automobile production
[Low-priced cars — as of Mar. 8, 1954]
Last week
Like 1953
week
Previous
week i
Ford
Chevrolet. .
Plymouth.
Studebaker
Hudson
Nash
Willys
Kaiser
30, 292
25, 700
6,774
2,216
850
771
400
295
20,291
26,585
13, 213
3,915
2,171
4, 969
670
1,208
28, 591
29,119
6,040
1,896
1,581
350
224
i Revised.
Source: Ward's Automotive Reports.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 375
In the year just past, General Motors increased its percentage of the total
output from 41.5 percent to 45.6 percent, while Ford output rose from 23.1 percent
to 25.2 percent. In the meantime, all the others, including Chrysler, lost ground.
We now see a mad scramble among the independents to merge and fight for sur-
vival. It is'fast becoming fact that Survival can be possible only through mergers
in a great many industries. The really profitable and, therefore, safe business
enterprises of today are those that can abandon a market once it becomes over-
competitive, and concentrate on new items out of research. This is the fact
behind the outstanding success of such companies as Du Pont, Union Carbide,
and Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing.
It is a serious matter to our entire economy that an industry as important as
the production of automobiles is now almost surely at the mercy of 2 warring
giants, 1 with the benefit of Government favor and the other with the incalculable
advantage of a tax umbrella. General Motors has taken the place of Kaiser-
Frazer at court, perhaps on the premise that to the victor belongs the spoils.
We all know that military tank production is now on a 1-contract basis with
General Motors, yet any large manufacturer will tell you that every large business
should have the safety of 2 or more supplies of any 1 article.
But the main theme of our story is the Ford Co. and its tax position. In the
first week of the current year, total car production was at the annual rate
of 6.2 million cars (much in excess of last year's sales), yet Chrysler, Hudson,
and Studebaker were cutting production. The battle was essentially between
Chevrolet and Ford. It is admittedly, and publicly, a policy of the Ford Co. to
once again outproduce and outsell the Chevrolet by the simple method of forcing
dealers to take shipments as they are scheduled at the factory. The philosophy
of this may be explored as follows — "build more and better production facilities,
produce more and more, regardless of the effect on the national economy, so
long as we do not produce more than the total market." The quotation is ours*
At the recent 5-day meeting of the National Automobile Dealers' Association
in Miami, Mr. L. D. Crusoe, general manager of the Ford division of the Ford Co.
stated, "If we let the dealers tell us how much to produce our output would fall
and prices go up. Unless we talk this business to death, we won't have enough
cars by April."
Enough cars for what? The embarrassed dealers? The overcrowded roads?
The partial payment plans? But all this is still fairly extraneous. The main
purpose of our study is to point out that the attitude at Ford is different from
that of other auto manufacturers. Why is it different and what should be done
about it?
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATION
Table 3.— Highlights in the growth of the Ford Foundation
Total assets
Year : (thousands of dollars)
1936 _— '25
1943 a 30, 500
1950 * 510, 972
1952__ ' 518, 422
1 Incorporated in Michigan, Jan. 15, 1036, on a grant from Bdsel Ford.
3 Outright grants from the Ford family and the Ford Motor Co. since 1936. Edsel Ford
died in 1043. Part of his estate was eventually bequeathed to the foundation.
3 The greater part of these assets, consisted of 3,089,908 shares of class A nonvoting com-
mon stock of Pord Motor Co. carried at $135 per share ; valuation fixed for estate tax
purposes in settlement of the late Henry Ford's estate.
Sources : Business Week, Oct. 7, 1950. The Ford Foundation Annual Reports, 1950 and
1952.
The Ford Motor Car Co. was owned by Henry Ford, the First, at the time of
his death 'on April 7, 1947. The taxable value of the company' at the' time was so
great public sale would have resulted had not a tax-exempt foundation been
iormed to receive the stock of the company tax free.
The Fords made the foundation the residuary legatee for their estates. Their
heirs were named to receive specific bequests. Deducted from the amounts
A"
376
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
willed to the Ford Foundation were the estate taxes owed to the Government by
the Ford heirs as a result of their legacies. Therefore, though the foundation's
bequest was not taxable, the money it actually received was reduced by the taxes-
on the other part of the estate.
The purpose of the Ford Foundation is simply stated in its charter : "to receive
and administer funds for scientific, educational, and charitable purposes, all for
the public welfare." So now, most of whatever dividends are paid by Ford go
to the Ford Foundation and, regardless of the doubts that many informed individ-
uals have as to the wisdom of this foundation's disbursements, .the fact is that
control of the Ford Co. remains in the hands of the Ford family. Total out-
standing stock of the Ford Motor Co. is 3,452,900 shares. Of this, the Ford
Foundation holds 3,089,908 shares of class A nonvoting stock. The remaining
10.5 percent, or 362,992 shares, is owned by the Ford family. Their holdings
include all 172,645 shares of voting stock.
Table 4. — Directors of Ford Motor Co.
Name
Outside
Inside
Henry Ford II-.. ..
President — Ford Motor Co.
Benson Ford
Vice president, Lincoln-Mercury
William C. Ford
Division.
Vice president.
J. R. Davis — -. .
Do.
Ernest E. Breech
Executive vice president, Ford
William T. Gossett . _— . —
Motor Co.
Vice president and general counsel.
John S. Bugas -
Vice president, industrial relations-
L. D. Crusoe
Vice president, manufacturing
D. S. Harder
(Ford Division) .
Vice president, manufacturing.
T. 0. Yntema
Vice president, finance.
Irving A. Duffy .
Vice president, purchasing-
Harold T. Younaren__
Director of Ford Motor Co.-
Dean, Harvard Graduate School
of Business Administration.
Vice president, general manager
and director of the J. L. Hudson
Co. Department Store,
Donald K. David. - ..
James B. Webber, Jr.
Table ^.—Trustees of the Ford Foundation
Name
Outside
Inside
Henry Ford II i
President, Ford Motor Co.
H. Rowan Gaither, Jr. 2
Chairman, Pacific National Bank
of San Francisco.
President, Minneapolis Star &
Tribune Co.
Chairman, Standard Oil Co. of
New, Jersey.
John Cowles - . .
Frank W. Abrams .
James E. Webber, Jr ...
Also, .member of board of directors,
Donald K. David .
Ford Motor Co.
Do.
Charles E. Wilson
Benson Ford
Chairman of executive committee,
W. R. Grace & Co.
Vice president, Ford Motor Co.
Charles E, Wyzanski, Jr .. --
Judge, United States District
Court, Boston, Mass.
1 Chairman of trie trustees.
2 President and director, the Ford Foundation.
How else could one explain Henry II heing president and his two brothers
being vice presidents? Whether or not the Ford Motor Co. makes a profit or pays:
any dividends in any one year is of scant consequence, either to the company
itself or the Ford family. Neither their salaries nor their positions are affected!
No other automobile manufacturer is in a position to ignore stability of"
earnings or continuity of dividend payments. If General Motors or Chrysler
earned no money and paid no dividends this year,, management heads would roll,.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 377
and equity credit would be seriously impaired. Ford could report no earnings
■and declare no dividends, and the public would not even know of it. All the public
would know is that Ford car was top car on the production sheets and in the
•dealers' hands, regardless of the economic disaster of overproduction that could
result. "
The AIM has given much study to this problem, and has decided to pass on
to its members, and all those concerned with business theory, the benefit of its
findings. It is our belief that in this case, and in many others, Federal legis-
lation is needed that will prohibit any charitable foundation, pension fund, or
union, from owning more than 10 percent of any business enterprise. If noth-
ing else, the Federal authorities should not allow tax exemption on income
from more than 10-percent ownership of any business corporation. Otherwise,
the public has no voice in the company, and the profit motive cannot survive
due to the great advantage enjoyed by companies that can offer unfair competi-
tion through lack of need for" equity credit. This necessary legislation can also
prevent families from entrenching themselves without due regard to their
ability.
Both these problems are serious, whether the business be large or small, if we
are to remain a nation of competent businessmen.
The Chairman. In connection with the question you raised a mo-
ment ago, if there was any way by which control of that particular
company could have been retained by the family without creating a
foundation, as I see it, that raises a question as to whether our tax
structures would be such as to make it difficult for a family to go
along and hold their fortune, whether it is big or little.
Mr. Wormser. On that point, a labor union had a very interesting
committee several years ago studying foundations, and they came up
with an interesting suggestion. That was that no foundation should
have in its portfolio more than 5 percent of the stock of a private
corporation, because if they had more than that, such as the Duke
thing, there might be a tendency of the foundation people to worry
too much about the welfare of the private corporation, to the detriment
of the foundation. That is just one suggestion that one committee
came forth with.
The Chairman. Another suggestion that has been made, with ref-
erence to the legal structure of foundations, is that there might be
a requirement or there might be a limit placed on the life of the
foundation, and that they be required to be liquidated in a certain,
period of years, that is, use the assets as well as the income.
Mr. Sargent. I was about to speak to that perpetuity question, Mr.
Keece. One of the very serious difficulties confronting anyone draft-
ing a trust is this matter of perpetual existence. The donor of a trust
may select men of judgment known to him who can be relied on
because of their integrity and their experience, and so forth, to carry
out a desired purpose and to see it through. If men of experience are
selected, the average trustee will be probably around 40 years old or
closer to that period. If you run along beyond 25 years after that
point, you will have men of age 65, retirement age, and you will have
the filling of vacancies by the action of a majority of an existing board,
and you develop more and more in certain directions. And experience
seems to indicate that some of these evils we are talking about are
the result of perpetual trusts which are unsound in practice.
Mr. Hats. You say you have people over age 65. Do you mean
that is not so good ?
378 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Sargent. The tendency is to reach normal retirement age, and
that is the way the timetable works on many people, in practice.
Mr. Hats. Then they become foundation trustees 1 I do not under-
stand.
Mr. Sargent. I say a trustee, an original trustee age 40 when ap-
pointed, when the trust has had a life of 25 years, will be a 65-year-old
man, and that you will have through natural causes a considerable
replacement in your directorate on that foundation because of the
lapse of time.
Mr. Hats. I did not want to misunderstand. You did not advocate
they should have to retire at age 65 ?
Mr. Sargent. No. But the normal operation of the mortality table
brings that about.
The Chairman. The committee will stand in recess for about 15
minutes.
(Brief recess.)
The Chairman. You may proceed, Mr. Sargent.
Mr. Sargent. We were discussing public policy questions involved
in this foundation matter.
One question of great and far-reaching importance is the extent to
which these giant foundations are guardians, acting in fact as guard-
ians of the people, for all practical purposes. Andrew Carnegie a
number of years ago announced what has been referred to as his
gospel of wealth. The dust jacket on the book known as Fruit of an
Impulse — £5 Years of Carnegie Foundation — 1905-1950, by Howard
J. Savage, contains a statement by Mr. Carnegie on the matter, I pre-
sume one made many years ago. It refers to the obligation of a man
of means to do charitable and worthwhile things for others, which is
an entirely commendable impulse and very understandable. His obli-
gation to administer his personal money in a way which, in his judg-
ment, will be beneficial, and so forth.
The concept here to which I refer now is the indefinite handing
down of that sort of a guardianship power to others to be executed or
administered perpetually, and to impress their so-called superior wis-
dow on the community.
The part of the statement that I think is pertinent, I want to read
now as follows :
Called upon to administer and strictly bound in duty to administer in a
manner which in his best judgment is calculated to produce the most beneficial
results for the community, the man of wealth thus becoming the mere trustee
and agent for his poorer brethern, bringing to their service his superior wisdom,
experience, and ability to administer, doing for them better than they would
or could do for themselves.
That, of course, was Carnegie's concept of himself, but in practice
these trustees have adopted the same concept of their trust money and
of what they may do.
I have here a certified copy of the articles of the Ford Foundation,
and this is a photostatic copy but it is a true copy, I am sure, furnished
to me by the secretary of state of the State of Michigan. I have read
this, and this article II here — the only part pertinent to our present
purpose — is that these trustees have power to receive and administer
funds for scientific, educational, and otherwise charitable purposes,
all for the public welfare.
I find not a single restrictive clause in here limiting in any way
what these gentlemen may do. If they say it is public welfare, so be
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 379
it, it is public welfare. It is absolute power to shape the destiny of a
nation. The corporation has perpetual existence. That is under
article VII. It has a series of subeorporations. One of them is known
as the Fund for the Advancement of Education, which operates, I
understand, in the formal education field, colleges, and possibly else-
where.
This corporation has also general power to receive and administer
funds exclusively for scientific, educational, and charitable purposes.
Again for purposes defined by a self-perpetuating board of trustees.
From what I have been able to determine, this is really in a financial
sense a captive corporation of the Ford Foundation, because its opera-
tions would stop any time that the appropriations stopped. The Ford
Foundation passes it over to this one, and this one then administers.
So this is a hand, and the Ford Foundation is the body. That is the
arrangement.
We have another one here which operates in the adult education
field, called the Fund for Adult Education. It has similar corporate
power, unlimited power to administer and receive funds for scientific,
educational, and charitable purposes— which are whatever a self-
perpetuating board says is charitable or welfare. There is no control
whatsoever.
The people are the beneficiaries of these trusts, they are public trusts,
and it is supposed to be public money. The people do not decide these
policies, and when they protest them they find that the financial power
of the foundation opposes their wishes, and imposes something else the
people do not want.
The Ford Foundation used its financial power to attempt to resist
the will of the people of Los Angeles in connection with a pamphlet
known as the E in UNESCO. This pamphlet was put out by the Los
Angeles City School Department, and it promotes various UNESCO
activities, and it includes the international declaration of human
rights.
Mr. Paul Hoffman, the president of the Ford Foundation, per-
sonally appeared before the Los Angeles Board of Education and
sought to prevent the removal of these pamphlets out of the Los
Angeles city schools by the action of a duly constituted board of the
city of Los Angeles, and in so doing he engaged in lobbying, an
activity prohibited to the Ford Foundation.
I have a news clipping, bearing date of August 26, 1952, Tuesday,
in the Los Angeles Times, and it contains a picture of Mr. Hoffman,
several other gentlemen with him, and the statement below reads as
follows :
Urge that it stay — These proponents of teaching UNESCO were on hand as
speakers. From left : Dr. Hugh M. Tiner, Pepperdine College president ; Paul G.
Hoffman, of Ford Foundation ; Elmer Franzwa, district governor of Rotary, and
William Joyce.
Mr. Hats. What is wrong with that ?
Mr^ Sargekt. He has no right to engage in lobbying, and he was
opposing a local matter and should not have in any way interfered
with it. He was president of the Ford Foundation.
Mr. Hays. You would not want anybody to say you have no right
to come here and expound your views, would you ?
Mr. Sargent. He did it as president of the Ford Foundation, and
used the power of the Ford Foundation as a leverage in the case.
380 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hays. But you are president of a foundation, and I do not
know the name of the foundation, but should you divorce yourself
of that before you come down here and express your opinion ? You
cannot choke off opinion in this country.
Mr. Sargent. I am here on your subpena, and responding as an
individual.
Mr. Hats. You offered to come, did you not ?
Mr. Sargent. I didn't offer to come. I was requested to come, and
I did nothing whatever to initiate my coming here, sir.
Mr. Hays. You mean to say this is the only committee in the Con-
gress that brought you in, and the others you just tried to get before ?
Mr. Sargent. That is not so.
The Chairman. Since that question has been raised, I think pos-
sibly I should make a statement regarding it. Knowing of Mr.
Sargent's standing and wide knowledge, or at least that was my
information, in this field as it relates more particularly to the educa-
tional and propaganda aspect, I suggested to Mr. Wormser or Mr.
Dodd, possibly both, that they have a talk with Mr. Sargent with a
view of seeing, first, if he would be able to make a contribution to the
study and, secondly, to see if he would be willing to come if the
committee should invite him.
I do not knowjust how to word it, but that is the story with relation
to his appearing here. I am confident the members of the staff
carried it out.
Mr. Hays. I do not care how he got here. I understood that the
subpena is so he can get his plane fare, and I have no objection to
that. But the fundamental point, I do not think we are trying to
gloss it over intentionally, is, Does Mr. Sargent have a right to his
views and Mr. Paul Hoffman does not, or do they both have a right?
Mr. Sargent: Mr. Paul Hoffman has no right to lobby before the
Los Angeles City Board of Education and actively urge that.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Paul Hoffman, as president of anything at all, has
a right to be a Kepublican and have Mr. Eisenhower elected.
Mr. Sargent. He didn't go there as a Kepublican.
Mr. Hays. I am asking you. If you would confine your answers to
my questions, we would save a lot of time. I say he has a right to be
a Republican.
Mr. Sargent. Certainly.
Mr. Hays. And he can still be president of the Ford Foundation.
Mr. Sargent. That is correct.
Mr. Hays. And he can make speeches for the Republican Party.
Mr. Sakgent. As long as he doesn't drag the name of the Ford
Foundation into it.
Mr. Hays. But if he appears there, and he is president of it, they
are automatically going to say he is president of the Ford Foundation.
I am a Member of Congress and I could go to a milk producers' meet-
ing and talk about milk but if the papers said I am a Member of
Congress, I could not do much about it.
Mr. Sargent. He was brought out there actively by the American
Association for the United Nations for the express purpose of making
a presentation at that meeting.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Sargent, I happen to know a little bit about Paul
Hoffman, and I don't think that he was brought any place for any
purpose. Paul Hoffman is a reputable, outstanding American, who
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 381
does not lend himself to any un-American activities, and when you
imply that he does or that you use the word "propaganda" in a bad
form, you are leaving the impression he did something he ought not
to have done. I want to take this opportunity to disagree with you,
and say to you that I don't think Mr. Paul Hoffman ever at any time
did anything which would adversely affect the United States m any
way, shape, or form.
Mr. Sargent. He was overstepping his exemption privilege, and he
was brought in there for a lobbying purpose.
Mr. Hats. You say he was doing that, but that does not make it so.
I keep repeating that.
Mr. Sargent. I heard the officer of the local unit, in the Ambassa-
dor Hotel in Los Angeles, of the American Association for the United
Nations discuss the arrangement for the bringing of Mr. Hoffman to
that meeting and I was in their office at the time buying literature,
and I overheard the conversation. Mr. Meherin was the name and
that is when it was going on.
Mr. Hays. You are inferring that because he was president of the
Ford Foundation and he went out there to advocate this, he auto-
matically brought the Ford Foundation into it.
Mr. Sargent. They were discussing how they were going to handle
it and they were afraid the UNESCO pamphlet was going to be
thrown out and they were discussing other ways in which they could
back up Mr. Hoffman and bring more strength to bear on that Los
Angeles City Board of Education. I overheard that conversation,
and I was in the office at the time. Mr. Hoffman was lobbying inten-
tionally.
Mr. Hays. When he advocated General Eisenhower's election he
did that, but he had a right to do that.
Mr. Sargent. He was doing this as an activity of the Ford Founda-
tion in my opinion.
Mr. Hays. I am glad that you put that in your opinion. Did the
Ford Foundation pay his way out there ?
Mr. Sargent. I don't know who paid his way out there.
Mr. Hays. But you would like to make a lot of nasty inferences
about it.
Mr. Sargent. I don't make any inference about anything about
which I don't know. Mr. Hoffman was there and the clipping says
he was there, and the name of the Ford Foundation was affiliated
with it. The American Association for the United Nations, another
organization, was distributing the literature or the pamphlet I have
here, and it came from their Los Angeles chapter, Ambassador Hotel,
which I obtained at about that time.
Now, briefly, I want to tell you something about this propaganda,
which is also very favorably looked upon from the foundation's stand-
point, and very vigorously opposed by an active body of American
public opinion, because of its directive effect on our constitutional
system.
Mr. Hays. This propaganda that you talk about, this is Mr. Hoff-
man's propaganda ?
Mr. Sargent. The universal declaration of human rights.
Mr. Hays. You were talking about Mr. Hoffman and propaganda.
Mr. Sargent. I am talking about the pamphlet.
49720— 54— pt. 1- 25
382 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hats. Can you get back to Mr. Hoffman? Did you say he
was distributing propaganda?
Mr, Sargent. I said he was backing up this thing here, this
UNESCO pamphlet before the Los Angeles City Board ol Education.
Mr. Hays. You are calling it propaganda.
Mr. Sargent. This pamphlet is propaganda for the United Nations
and its activities.
Mr. Hays. Now, can you answer this question "Yes" or "No" : Was
Mr. Hoffman then actively engaged in this propaganda ?
Mr. Sargent. I understand that he was.
Mr. Hays. All right ; that is the question.
Now, that is bad, you say.
Mr. Sargent. I say it is not in accordance with the tax exemption.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Zoll, who has been cited by the Attorney General as
a Fascist, you say what he puts out is not propaganda ?
Mr. Sargent. I didn't say anything about that.
Mr. Hays. You defended him, and you are in a rather peculiar posi-
tion, and you are defending a man on the Attorney General's list,
and attack the reputation of a man like Paul Hoffman.
Mr. Sargent. I did not defend Mr. Zoll, I said I knew nothing one
way or the other. I said Mr. Zoll had been extensively smeared, and
that the National Education Association sought to transfer the smear
against Mr. Zoll to the people of Pasadena, and it did so.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Zoll, a fascist, has been smeared, but you are not
trying to smear Mr. Paul Hoffman, are you?
Mr. Sargent. I am not trying to do anything except say he was
there for political purposes, and he was.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Chairman, if you sit here and let this man do this
kind of thing to people like Paul Hoffman, I just want to state that
the doors of the Democratic Party are open to him any time he wants
to come in.
Mr. Sargent. The clipping showing the presence of Mr. Hoffman
in that meeting I will leave with the committee, this Los Angeles
Times article, August 26, 1952.
Now, this UNESCO project for universal declaration of human
rights is a very important thing, and I believe that you should have
some of the story. The American Bar Association for several
years prior to this had been urging that much more time be granted
for study of this proposal because of its far-reaching effects. Their
resolutions begin as early as the year 1949, and run through, as I
recall, to about 1951, and they ask for a delay on the ground that
the legal profession and the public had not studied this proposal, and
it was of great importance. This pamphlet evidently was put into
the schools at a time before the legal profession itself, or about the
time the legal profession was beginning to get a sound idea and it
was made school material in the meantime.
Let us have a look at this : Here is article 1, which overthrows an
essential principle of the Declaration of Independence. The Declara-
tion of Independence says that men have unalienable rights granted
to them by God and the laws of nature. This says that men are born
free and equal, and should act in a spirit of brotherhood.
Mr. Hays. Now, then, right there ■
Mr. Sargent. There is no God in it, just brotherhood.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 383
Mr. Hats. Do you say that saying, now the very implication of
brotherhood carries a connotation of religion, does it not?
Mr. Sargent. A majority group sort of religion, but not the con-
cept in the Declaration of Independence, sir.
Mr. Hats. It is no inference, it so happens I believe in the Christian
religion. I also understood that Christ preached brotherhood. JSlow
are you saying there is something bad about that?
Mr. Sargent. No, I am talking about the effect of this as a legal
document.
Mr. Hats. But brotherhood isn't good unless it comes from your
side, is it?
Mr. Sargent. I say this is bad to substitute this provision for the
Declaration of Independence.
Mr. Hats. To act in a spirit of brotherhood, I have sort of advo-
cated that, and if I am being Leftist I would like to get away from it.
Mr. Sargent. This is a substitution for the Declaration of Inde-
pendence concept, and the present controversy over the Bricker
amendment
Mr. Hats. Was it different, now, Mr. Sargent? You have a very
voluminous flow of verbiage there but let us pick a little structure out
of it. What did you say the Declaration said again ?
Mr. Sargent. The Declaration of Independence says all men are en-
dowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, to which the
laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them. That is the gist
of it.
Mr. Hats. We subscribe to that.
Mr. Sargent. Yes ; those rights belong to you and to me, at birth,
and they are ours. .
Mr. Hats. Will you please read the other one ?
Mr. Saegent. The other one says all human beings are born free
and equal in dignity and they are endowed with reason and conscience
and should act toward one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Mr. Hats. You say that there is something subversive about that ?
Mr. Sargent. I didn't say subversive ; I said it makes an important
change in our basic law in connection with the other provisions of this
declaration I am about to discuss.
Mr. Hats. It seems to me that the teachings of God have certain
elements of brotherhood in them that you cannot get away from, and
when you start picking or finding fault with the word "brotherhood,"
that you are quibbling on pretty technical ground with language.
The Chairman. It does not seem to me it is on very technical ground
when he makes reference to God having been left out of the provision
that was substituted for the Declaration of Independence.
Mr. Hats. This wasn't substituted for the Declaration of Inde-
pendence at all, and you cannot leave God out whether you want to or
not. He will be around, and I expect that He will even have an opin-
ion on this if you want to get right down to it. I am not going to tell
you what I think it will be, because that is not my province ; I am not
omnipotent, and I wish the witnesses wouldn't try to be omnipotent,
either.
Mr. Sargent. I will tie this in for you. I am discussing this from
the standpoint that this is a proposal for a possible treaty which will
become the supreme law of the land, and may be judicially interpreted
as a modification of our existing legal system. Article 1, to be under-
384 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
standable, should be read in connection with article No. 29, that is sub-
division 2, which says :
In the exercise of his rights, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations
as are determined by law for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect
for the rights and freedoms of others, and meeting its just requirements of mor-
ality, public order, and the general order of a democratic state.
Now, that term "general welfare of a democratic state" seems to
create a power by majority vote to limit the rights granted in the rest
of this article. The next subdivision of 29 says that these rights and
freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and
principles of the United Nations.
In other words, if someone does not believe in the United Nations
and wants to do something contrary to what you want to do, he hasn't
any civil rights at all. Subparagraph 3 says so, in article 29. Article
25 provides for social housing and medical care, which are made con-
stitutional rights.
Article 26 says that the purpose of education is the furtherance of
the activities of the U. N. Article 21 guarantees free access to public
service, and that could interfere with the right to discharge Govern-
ment personnel who are bad security risks.
Article 19 guarantees freedom of opinion and expression through
any media.
Mr. Hays. Are you reading from your own notes ?
Mr. Sargent. I will read the original for you, and it is a true quote.
Article 19 says:
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression, and this right
includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive, and
impart foreign ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
Now that could be interpreted to protect the right to advocate forci-
ble overthrow of this Government.
Mr. Hays. It could be interpreted, and I don't know who is going
to interpret it, and I suppose possibly it could be interpreted the way
you have been interpreting things, depending on what you mean.
Mr. Sargent. If a court laying this alongside of our present con-
stitutional law saw this they could reason that there must have been
an intent to substitute something different, and otherwise why make
the change. This tends to throw our constitutional law out on the
table to be argued out all over again.
Mr. Hays. I have a sneaking suspicion that Congress is going to
protect that. They haven't passed that thing yet, have they?
Mr. Sargent. Not yet, but these are the grounds upon which many
people very seriously opposed this pamphlet which was being actively
used in Los Angeles city schools. Article 14 says that everyone has
the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries the asylum from per-
secution. Doesn't that mean that the immigration laws can be broken
down and we can be compelled to receive hordes from any nation in
the world regardless of the impact on American conditions? This
article would seem to say so.
There have been many, many things written on this. And very,
very serious objections made. The proponents of the Bricker amend-
ment agree I think in substance, and have additional reasons from my
own for opposing that particular proposition. That is an example
of more propaganda, and more propaganda power, and the Ford
Foundation through Mr. Hoffman apparently backs that one.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 385
Mr. Hats. You are a pretty cagey lawyer, and you keep saying
seemingly. Apparently you just tread on the border of libel, but you
don't quite get over it.
Mr. Sargent. I am talking about the UNESCO propaganda bill
here.
Mr. Hays. You mentioned Mr. Paul Hoffman.
Mr. Sargent. He was there using the weight and prestige of the
Ford Foundation to try and influence a city board of education in
support of this proposal, which is legislation to make that a part of
the law of the United States.
Some of you gentlemen may be interested in what kind of a propa-
ganda outfit this UNESCO really is. You will find the detail on that
in a pamphlet entitled "Every Man's United Nations, a Ready Refer-
ence to tne Structure and Functions of the Work of the United Na-
tions and its Related Agencies."
It is a publication of the United Nations Department of Public
Education, in New York, and the publication date is 1952, and this is
a third edition. It is quite recent. UNESCO is discussed commenc-
ing at page 312, and it talks about their worldwide activities, that
they are preparing a scientific and cultural history of mankind, and
that they set up an international clearing house to promote exchange
of publications between libraries and institutions, and that they have
study programs.
Mr. Hats. Does the Government of the United States belong to that
organization at all ? Do they contribute to it ?
Mr. Sargent. I think there was some question before the Senate
Appropriations Committee about further contributions toward it, if
I recall correctly. We still belong to it, and we
Mr. Hats. Who is our representative there? Do you know?
Mr. Sargent. This is UNESCO, this is a separate thing.
Mr. Hays. This is a; subdivision of the U. N.
Mr. Sargent. This is the body incidentally to which Mr. Willard
Givens, of the NEA, offered a resolution protesting the removal of
Superintendent Goslin from Pasadena.
Among other things, UNESCO has put out a pamphlet called
Television and Education in the United States. This is printed,
UNESCO, Paris, 1952.
Mr. Hays. Now just a minute before you start putting that docu-
ment in the record. Is that put out by some foundation ?
Mr. Sargent. No, UNESCO.
I am talking about the propaganda power of this setup we have
here, which the foundations seem to have, and it bears on the propa-
ganda power of foundations.
Mr. Hays. It has about as much relation to this investigation as
Chic Sale's book, if I can figure it out.
Mr. Sargent. This discusses the propaganda network, that
UNESCO is looking at. I think, Mr. Hays, you will find that the
foundations are supporting educational television, and taking a flip
at that one also.
Mr. Hays. These foundations are supporting education television,
and UNESCO has a book about it, but what is the relationship ?
Mr. Sargent. I am talking about the organized power of founda-
tions.
386 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hats. I have a television program, too, and I am not connected
with any of those. You just use the word "television," and everybody
hooks up that has anything to do with television.
Mr. Sargent. There is an organized movement Underway with some
foundations
Mr. Hats. You said yesterday you didn't believe in astrology, did
you not, and you don't use a crystal ball, either.
Mr. Sargent. Must we go back to that ? I am talking about this
pamphlet here, and I am talking about the pamphlet on educational
television, sponsored by UNESCO, in which they have examined the
educational policies of the American Broadcasting Co., Columbia, Du
Mont, National Broadcasting Co., and they have inquired into the use
of television so far in the schools of Philadelphia, Chicago, Minneap-
olis, and they have conducted some research on television and children
and even considered its use as a teaching tool.
Mr. Hats. Now you say that is a book put out by an organization
which you refuse to state has any foundation funds, and you said it is
published in Paris, and you say it is a bad book and perhaps it is.
I wouldn't know. But will you kindly try to relate it to the hearing
and tell us what we should do about it ? Should we pass a law pro-
hibiting them from importing it, or what ? I am at a loss.
Mr. Sargent. You should consider seriously adopting a law which
will keep foundations out of entering into things
Mr. Hats. But this book, Mr. Sargent, where do they get into the
picture with this particular book ?
Mr. Sargent. This is one of the UNESCO activities.
Mr. Hats. And you said UNESCO is not financed by the founda-
tions.
Mr. Sargent. I say they are supporting the UNESCO program,
and the UNESCO program includes this, which is propaganda power.
Mr. Hats. They are supporting it 100 percent ?
Mr. Sargent. I didn't say 100 percent.
Mr. Hats. Well, you see there is the point.
Mr. Sargent. Did I say 100 percent ?
Mr. Hats. Mr. Reece is a Republican, I am a Democrat, and we
subscribe generally to the principles of our party, but we do not sub-
scribe to every single thing that every Democrat or every Republican
has done, and sometimes we even vote against them.
Mr. Sargent. We are in an area where propaganda power is acquir-
ing enormous importance to the people, and becoming a growing
danger, unless kept within some kind of bounds, and foundation
money is being used for operations of which that situation is a part.
There was foundation support offered incidentally in my own com-
munity for the Bay Area Educational Television Association in San
Francisco. That was to promote publicly owned and operated tele-
vision stations for educational purposes. There was one foundation
there at least, and they went to the State government indicating that
thev would back the project. They are going even into that field.
Now, here is another area. I don't want to take your time on this
now, but I would like to deal with it very briefly. I suggested a
questionnaire to get the discrimination facts on this case. That is
to ask the foundations if they have done any of these patriotic or
other things favored by those who do not agree with them. In 1950,
in October, when I was Chairman of the Americanization Committee
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 387
of the National Society, Sons of the American Revolution, I sent a
letter to a list of 115 textbook publishers, throughout the country, to
determine what materials were available for instructing students and
adult groups desiring to study the propaganda and activities of Social-
ist and Communist organizations, or for the study of the economic,
financial and political and constitutional effects of Fabian socialism
and the social welfare state. I have an affidavit here, confirming the
fact that such a letter was sent, and the affidavit contains a copy of my
file copy of the letter, and a list of these book publishers' names.
I have here a stack of letters containing their replies. The sub-
stance of the replies is that practically no material of this kind was
available by any of these publishers. Some of the publishers were
not engaged in that line of work and their names of course should not
be considered. A substantial number of others were in areas where it
was possible.
The list itself was obtained from the official list of book publishers on
file in the State of California Department of Education, at Sacra-
mento. I would like to offer the affidavit now, and I would like to at my
convenience in the next few days prepare a digest containing the sub-
stance of what those letters show, prepare an affidavit based on that
digest and then offer that affidavit when I return for cross-examination.
It will show the extent to which there is a serious lack of this kind of
educational material. I think the committee would be interested in
the facts.
May I do that?
The Chairman. That will be done, without objection.
Mr. Hats. I am not going to let him put in a lot of documents that
I do not know anything about, and so I object.
Mr. Goodwin. What is the harm of letting them in? I assume that
although the gentleman from Ohio apparently wants to clear up things
pretty well as we go along, it is my thought that there will be ample
opportunity later on in executive session for us to evaluate all of this
testimony that comes in, and there decide.
Mr. Hats. I don't think any committee would let anyone prepare
a statement and without even knowing the thing that is in it, let it be r
come a part of the record. There is a matter of expense, printing,
and it may have no pertinency, and so on and so forth. I think the
committee should look at it. This is the first time I have objected.
The gentleman has put in many things.
Mr. Sargent. I will furnish an affidavit certifying it and I will let
a member of your staff examine the letters here and check it for him-
self. It just seemed to be a convenient way to give you the information
without reading a lot of letters.
Mr. Hats. Are you going to put all of the letters in there ?
Mr. Sargent. I am going to give you the substance of it.
The Chairman. See if I understand your suggestion correctly, that
you are going to make a digest of your actions and a summary of the
substance of the replies, which go in the record, and then the letters
would be submitted for the record without printing.
Mr. Sargent. I would rather keep possession of the letters, and I
don't think you want the letters.
The Chairman. Would you restate your suggestion ?
Mr. Sargent. What I am going to do is prepare a summary of the
replies received from these publishers. Classifying the material oh
388 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
the basis of those that said they had nothing, giving a few typical
comments from letters that are informative and generally disclosing
the result of the survey. I will show the entire stack of letters to the
committee staff for their own checking in case they think anything else
should be included. This is just a convenient way of summarizing the
net results of these replies.
It is just a convenient way of summarizing the net replies.
The Chairman. I think it is well to have the digest in, if a member
of the staff took the responsibility for checking the accuracy of the
summaries.
Mr. Sargent. Some of them took a paragraph or two explaining the
situation, and others said nothing at all. There are perhaps a dozen
or more letters having an informative value, and where there is some-
thing in the letter we will quote the paragraph and give the name and
address of the publisher. It is to show what kind of a result we got
out of the survey.
The Chairman. Mr. Sargent, why don't you go and prepare it.
Mr. Sargent. Yes, and I will bring it back with me.
The Chairman. I think that would be the best procedure. 1
Mr. Sargent. Now, I was referring this morning to this pam-
phlet
The Chairman. In the meantime, a member of our staff might take
a look at it.
Mr. Sargent. I was referring to this pamphlet this morning, and I
partly read the names, and the pamphlet American Education Under
Fire by Ernest O. Melby. I read most of the names, I think. Kichard
Barnes Kennan, executive secretary of the National Commission for
the Defense of Democracy Through Education, Washington, D. C.,
and he is one of those preparing the pamphlet. Morton Puner of the
Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith is one. Professor Thut is
one, of the University of Connecticut, and Prof. William Van Till,
University of Illinois.
Mr. Hats. Is that the complete list ?
Mr. Sargent. That is the complete list, and I read the others this
morning. That completes the list.
Mr. Hats. What pamphlet is that?
Mr. Sargent. This completes the list.
Mr. Hats. What is the name of the pamphlet ?
Mr. Sargent. It is American Education Under Fire.
Mr. Hats. That is the one Dr. Hullfish has included in the list of
names.
Mr. Sargent. Yes. The pamphlet states that it is sponsored by the
following. Two of these are agencies of the National Education Asso-
ciation. The first agency of that group is National Commission for
the Defense of Democracy Through Education. That is the one which
Mr. Benjamin acts for.
The second department of NEA is the Association for Supervision
and Curriculum Development. Also named is the American Edu-
cation Fellowship, and the John Dewey Society. The copyright
on the pamphlet is held by the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai
B'rith.
* Mr. Saint's analysis of the textbook publishers' replies appears following his state-
ment, at p. 393
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 389
This contains a discussion of the controversies involving the schools,
and the pamphlet being a joint one shows that all of these groups are
sponsors for it.
Mr. Hays. Is there something implied that there is something
wrong with B'nai B'rith now ?
Mr. Sargent. Nothing implied one way or the other, except that
they sponsored this.
Mr. Hays. And that is a bad pamphlet ?
Mr. Sargent. It is an attack on people who do not like conditions
in the schools, as I interpret it. I think that it is interesting to find
so many groups joining in such a statement. It is another example
of the infringement of local jurisdiction, in my opinion. I am citing
it for that reason.
This pamphlet commences with page 7, and talks about school con-
troversies from Inglewood, N. J., to Eugene, Oreg., and from New
York to Pasadena, stating that the Nation is pitted with battlefields
of the war against modern education, and this pamphlet attempts to
tell of the tremendous forces and consequences involved in the fight.
The first section analyzes the powers and motivations behind the tax
on the public schools and it draws upon the experience of Willard L.
Goslin, described in this pamphlet as one of the Nation's ablest
educators.
If you read this pamphlet through as a whole, you will find it is
a sponsorship of the fortunes of Mr. Goslin again.
Mr. Hays. Going back to another book you mentioned, you cited
this Senate investigating committee, the so-called Dilworth com-
mittee, and we seem to be around, full circle in the attacks on religion
and the Catholics and the Jews and this thing attacks the American
Friends Service Committee. Do you subscribe to that part of it?
Mr. Sargent. What part is that?
Mr. Hays. Where it mentions in a very unfavorable way the Ameri-
can Friends Service Committee.
Mr. Sargent. Let me see what you mean, show me the passage that
you are talking about.
The Chairman. That is the Dilworth committee report.
Mr. Hays. I will show you the passage. I have listened to a lot
of stuff from you, and I turned it down, but apparently I have lost
the place.
Mr. Sargent. The Dilworth committee is a very reliable committee
of our legislature, and it has worked for many years.
Mr. Hays. You go ahead and I will find this in just a moment.
Mr. Sargent. You are asking about the Anti-Defamation League,
and I would like to state positively for the record I am not anti-
Semitic in any way, and I have never adhered to that point of view,
and I have very high respect for people of that faith who have done
work on behalf of our country.
Alfred Kolberg, of New York, is a very patriotic and useful citizen,
and Rabbi Benjamin Schultz is another, and I am fully sympathetic
with the problems among that group which arise in connection with
this subversive activities question, and if your committee desires in-
formation on some of the unfortunate conditions existing among that
group, I suggest that you read the book What Price Israel by Alfred
M. Lilienthal. It is a 1953 publication of Henry Regnery & Co.
390 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
of Chicago. I want to make that clear, because there is a tendency,
unfortunately, to refer to anyone who even mentions the name of
this organization as having anti-Semitic points of view which I posi-
tively don't have, and I have never adhered to.
Mr. Hays. I have found there are a number of references to' the
■American Friends Service Committee, and I just got this book about
a moment ago.
Mr. Sargent. It is probably a citation of some individual.
Mr. Hays. This is in your report, and it says as follows :
The participation of the American Civil Liberties Union and League of Women
Voters and the American Friends Service Committee and the Federation for the
Repeal of the Levering Act —
which I am not familiar with —
was of great assistance to and lent respectability to the Communists in the
spread of their seditious propaganda.
. That is a bad inference, isn't it?
Mr. Sargent. It probably is, and the report speaks for itself.
! Now, as an indication of the extent to which a certain branch of peo-
ple in education are actively working for the world govermnent move-
ment, I would cite you the eleventh yearbook of the John Dewey
Society. The John Dewey Society is one of the organizations sponsor-
ing that pamphlet. The book is called Education for a World Society,
and its copyright date is 1951, and it is published by Harper Bros.,
New York.
The editors named on the title page here are Christian O. Arndt,
chairman, professor of international educational relations, School of
Education, New York University.
Samuel Everet, assistant professor of education, College of the City
of New York.
The consultants are Harold Benjamin, dean of the College of Edu-
cation, University of Maryland, and George S. Counts, professor of
education, Teachers College, Columbia, and Professor Van Til, pro-
fessor of education, College of Education, University of Illinois.
The book in question is one which advocates world government in
substance, and the use of education as a means of bringing it about.
That is educational propaganda.
Mrs. Pfost. Is the publication of that book paid for by the foun-
dations?
Mr. Sargent. I don't know, and I don't know what support of the
John Dewey Society is, but this is cited as an example of the extent to
which we have - an organized clique for world government within the
educational profession,. and I think that you can compare that with
the foundation policy of supporting similar ideas, in effect the
strengthening of the hands of those people.
Mr. Hays. But it has actually no tie whatsoever that you know of
to the foundations, except what you have given ?
Mr. Sargent. I think it will be connected up when your staff gets
jnto the other phases of this problem. I am giving you a part of the
evidence within my knowledge.
:■' The Chairman. Mr. Sargent, it is now 4 : 20.
Mr. Sargent. Give me 5 minutes and I can finish. I just have a
summary statement and I am through. My statement is simply this :
I have discussed the public policy questions, and there are legal ap-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 391
proaches to this matter which I think the committee may want to
consider. One is a declaratory statute confirming the fact that expend-
itures for education in antisubversive works are within the scope of
present revenue laws and the tax exemption privilege will not be im-
paired by the approval of any project of that kind;
In other words, that there is under existing law a right to defend
the Government of the United States, and there can be no legal ques-
tion involved. That could have the effect of releasing substantial
money for patriotic people wanting to defend our country and remedy
these conditions.
Secondly, providing for unlimited deductibility of educational con-
tributions for the defense of constitutional government.
Third, a statute requiring a foundation to reject any applications
tending to promote the spread of communism, socialism, or the welfare
state.
Fourth, a mandatory provision, providing that if any foundation
elects to go into these controversial subjects having to do with so-
cialism, and so forth that they must afford equal facilities to both sides
as a condition of engaging in such work. Otherwise the statutes
should declare they are engaging in propaganda.
Finally, we think it would be useful.
Mr. Hays. Just a moment. You say "we think." Who is "we"?
Mr. Sargent. The people I have talked to about this.
Mr. Hays. You wouldn't mind changing that and making it "I
think?"
Mr. Sargent. I think so and I think many people will agree with
me, that the denial of the right of critical analysis and critical study
is one of the most glaring weaknesses in our present situation.
Academic freedom perhaps requires that these controversial and
debatable subjects be supported. But if a foundation wants to do that,
it should be willing to support both sides and let each one thresh it
out with the other. If the foundation won't take in both sides, it
should take in neither.
Finally, we think there should be some statutory declaration con-
firming the rights and duties of foundation trustees, their responsi-
bilities as trustees, to be patriotic, loyal, to defend the Government of
the United States, and to refrain from engaging in any activity in-
volving possible overthrow of the Government by force, violence, or
other unconstitutional means.
Now, Mr. Chairman, at the opening of this session there was an un-
derstanding that questions would be postponed until the end of my
testimony, and a transcript would be written up and I would appear.
I am prepared to do that, and I will be here without further notice at
whatever time you see fit to adjourn to.
The Chairman. I don't think it would be convenient in view of the
Memorial Day weekend recess, for the committee to meet before Tues-
day, and we have an understanding that it is not convenient for the
members to meet on Tuesday, so the next meeting of the committee
will be next Wednesday, and the time to be announced.
Mr. Sargent. May I ask that my matter be brought up ?
The Chairman. And then Dean Rusk will follow you.
Mr. Hays. I do not know whether I will have any time to analyze
all of this.
392 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Sargent. I am a long distance from home, and I think I should
be released. If you want to send me home, and bring me back for
examination later, I am perfectly willing to do that, if you want to pay
the freight on two trips.
Mr. Hays. When we go over this, if we find that there hasn't been
enough exploration made in it, and other members want to question
you, I certainly would be in favor of it.
Mr. Sargent. It is entirely agreeable with me.
Mr. Hays. I have very heavy commitments made long before these
hearings were set down, and up to now I don't even have all of your
testimony.
Mr. Sargent. I have no objection to being brought back on reason-
able notice, if you would prefer that.
Mr. Hays. We would give you reasonable notice.
Mr. Sargent. I just want to make it clear that I offered in the first
place, and I offer again to come back at any convenient time sug-
gested by you on reasonable notice, that is for any examination you
wish to conduct.
The Chairman. You may be excused for the time being, and
you can go back home. If we need you we will give you ample
notice so that you can come at the convenience of yourself and of the
committee.
Mr. Hays. Although I may disagree on some things, the committee
has been kind enough to respect my commitments over the weekend,
and I would be the last person in the world to want to hold you here, so
that you would be present when it was convenient to me, and I cer-
tainly think that the committee should agree to that.
Mr. Sargent. I assumed over the weekend you would be ready to
go, in which case I would be here.
Mr. Hays. I want you to know that I concur and suggest that you
be allowed to go, and that you will be given ample notice when you
return.
Mr. Sargent. Then I am excused and I come back when requested.
The Chairman. I want to express appreciation for your testimony,
and the time you have taken, and I hope it hasn't been unpleasant.
Mr. Sakgent. I am glad to be of as much service as I can be, and I
want to thank you.
The Chairman. We will stand in recess until Wednesday morning
at 10 o'clock. The room in which we will meet will be announced.
(Whereupon, at 4 : 25 p. m. the committee was recessed, to recon-
vene at 10 a. m., Wednesday, June 2, 1954.)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 393
Analysis of Replies From Textbook Publishers to Letter (October
1950) or Aaron Sargent
Proceedings Before the Select Committee To Investigate Tax-
Exempt Foundations, House of Representatives, House Reso-
lution 217
United States of America,
District of Columbia, City of Washington, ss :
Aaron M. Sargent, being first duly sworn, deposes and says :
The following matters, relating to an inquiry conducted on behalf
of the National Society, Sons of the American Revolution, into the
textbook situation, are true to my own knowledge :
I am a member in good standing of that society. During the period
May 1950 to May 1951, inclusive, I served as chairman of its com-
mittee on Americanization. My duties at that time included repre-
senting the interests of said society in regard to the subversive
teaching problem affecting the public schools.
On October 27, 1950, as chairman of that committee, I sent to
each of the texibook publishers hereinafter mentioned a standard
form of letter identical with the photostat attached to this affidavit.
That photostat is a true copy of my file copy of the letter in ques-
tion. The purpose was to determine the extent to which textbooks
and teaching materials were then available for instructing students
and adult groups in the propaganda and activities of Communist
and Socialist organizations and to enable them to study the economic,
political, and other effects of Fabian socialism and the social welfare
state.
Attached to this affidavit at pages 4 to 7, inclusive, is a true list
of the names and addresses of the various book publishers to whom
the letter in question was sent.
This affidavit is furnished in connection with my testimony to the
above committee respecting the replies received to that communication.
Aaron M. Sargent.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 26 day of May 1954.
[seal] Rebecca M. Smith,
Notary Public.
[Letterhead of National Society, Sons of the American Revolution]
October 27, 1950.
American Book Co.,
New York, N. Y.
Gentlemen : We are conducting a survey to determine what text-
books, outlines, or other teaching materials are available with ref-
erence to the following:
1. For instructing students and adult groups desiring to study the
propaganda and activities of Socialist and Communist organizations;
2. For study of the economic, financial, political^ and constitutional
effects of Fabian socialism and the social welfare state.
394 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Our analysis is intended to cover all grade levels and include a
listing of books dealing with one or more or all of the above subjects.
Please indicate whether you have any publications of this type. If
so, may we have a list of titles and authors, together with circulars
and other descriptive material ?
Very truly yours,
[seal] Aaron M. Sargent,
Committee on Americanization.
1. Ginn & Co., Statler Building, Boston, Mass.
2. The Grolier Society, Inc., 2 West 45th. Street, New York, N. Y.
3. Harcourt, Brace & Co,, Inc., 383 Madison Avenue, New York, N. Y.
4. D. C. Heath & Co., 285 Columbus Ayenue, Boston, Mass.
5. Houghton Mifflin Co., 2 Park Street, Boston, Mass.
6. The MacMillan Co., 60 Fifth Avenue, New York, N. Y.
7. Row, Peterson & Co., 1911 Ridge Avenue, Evanston, 111.
8. Benjamin H. Sanborn & Co., 221 East 20th Street, Chicago, 111.
9. Scott Foresman & Co., 433 East Erie Street, Chicago, 111.
10. Silver Burdett Co., 45 East 17th Street, New York, N. Y.
11. Webster Publishing Co., 1808 Washington Avenue, St. Louis, Mo.
12. American Technical Society, Drexel Avenue at 58th Street, Chicago, 111.
13. Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 35 West 32d Street, New York, N. Y.
14. A. S. Barnes & Co., Inc., 67 West 44th Street, New York, N. Y.
15. W. S. Benson & Co., Austin, Tex.
16. C. C. Birchard & Co., 285 Columbus Avenue, Boston, Mass.
17. The Blakiston Co., 1012 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, Pa.
18. The Bibbs-Merrill Co., Inc., 724 North Meridian Street, Indianapolis, Ind.
19. The Book House for Children, 360 North Michigan Avenue, Chicago, 111.
20. P. F. Collier & Son Corp., 250 Park Avenue, New York, N. Y.
21. F. E. Compton & Co., 1000 North Dearborn Street, Chicago, 111.
22. Thomas Y. Crowell Co., 432 Fourth Avenue, New York, N. Y.
23. The Economy Co., Oklahoma City, Okla.
24. Encyclopaedia Britannica, 20 North Wacker Drive, Chicago, 111.
25. Encyclopedia Americana, 2 West 45th Street, New York, N. Y.
26. Field Enterprises, Inc., educational division, 35 East Wacker Drive, Chi-
cago, 111.
27. The Gregg Publishing Co., 270 Madison Avenue, New York, N. Y.
28. E. M. Hale & Co., Eau Claire, Wis.
29. C. S. Hammond & Co., 305 East 63d Street, New York, N. Y.
30. Harper & Bros., 49 East 33d Street, New York, N. Y.
31. Henry Holt & Co., Inc., 257 Fourth Avenue, New York, N. Y.
32. Longmans, Green & Co., 55 Fifth Avenue, New York, N. Y.
33. Loyola University Press, 3441 North Ashland Avenue, Chicago, 111.
34. The Manual Arts Press, 237 North Monroe Street, Peoria, 111.
35. McCormick-Maithers Publishing Co., 1501 East Douglas Avenue, Wichita,
Kans.
36. McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 330 West 42d Street, New York, N. Y.
37. Charles E. Merrill Co., Inc., 400 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio
38. Newson & Co., 72 Fifth Avenue, New York, N. Y.
39. W. W. Norton & Co., Inc., 101 Fifth Avenue, New York, N. Y.
40. Oxford University ;Press, 114 Fifth Avenue, New York, N. Y.
41. Pitman Publishing Corp., 2 West 45th Street, New York, N. Y.
42. Prang Co. Publishers, a division of American Crayon Co., Sandusky, Ohio
43. Prentice-Hall, Inc., 70 Fifth Avenue, New York, N. Y.
44. Rand, McNally & Co., 536 South Clark Street, Chicago, 111.
45. Rinehart & Co., Inc., 232 Madison Avenue, New York, N. Y.
46. William H. Sadlier, Inc., 11 Park Place, New York, N. Y.
47. Scholastic Magazines, 7 East 12th Street, New York, N. Y.
48. Science Research Associates, 228 South Wabash Avenue, Chicago, 111.
49. The L. W. Singer Co., Inc., 249 West Erie Boulevard, Syracuse, N. Y.
50. South-Western Publishing Co., 634 Broadway, Cincinnati, Ohio
51. The Steck Co., Ninth and Lavaca Streets, Austin, Tex.
52. The United Educators, Inc., 6 North Michigan Avenue, Chicago, III.
53. The University Publishing Co., Lincoln, Nebr.
54. D. Van Nostrand Co., Inc., 250 Fourth Avenue, New York, N. Y.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 395
55. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 440 Fourth Avenue, New York, N. T.
56. The John C. Winston Co., 1010 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pa.
57. World Book Co., 313 Park Hill Avenue, Yonkers, N. Y.
58. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.
59. Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn.
60. Columbia University Press, Morningside Heights, New York, N. Y.
61. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 111.
62. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, Mich.
63. University of California Press, Berkeley, Calif.
64. Northwestern University Press, Chicago, 111.
65. University of Rochester Press, Rochester, N. Y.
66. "University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, Minn.
67. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, N. Y.
68. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N. J.
69. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, Boston, Mass.
70. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wis. ;
71. Stanford University Press, Stanford University, Calif.
72. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Md.
73. New York University Press, New York, N. Y.
74. Washington University Press, St. Louis, . Mo.
75. Dartmouth College Press, Berlin, N. H.
76. University of Colorado Press, Boulder, Colo.
77. University of Iowa Press, Iowa City, Iowa
78. University of California Press, Los Angeles, Calif.
79. University of Southern California Press, Los Angeles, Calif.
80. City College of New York Press, New York, N. Y.
81. Roosevelt College Press, Chicago, 111.
82. Syracuse University Press, Syracuse, N. Y.
83. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, N. C.
84. University of Washington Press, Seattle, Wash.
85. University of Illinois Press, Champaign, 111.
86. University of Texas Press, Austin, Tex. •
87. American Book Co., 88 Lexington Avenue, New York, N. Y.
88. Hinds, Hayden & Eldredge, Inc., 105 Fifth Avenue, New York, N. Y.
89. Simon & Schuster, Inc., 37 West 57th Street, New York, N. Y.
90. Charles Scribner's Sons, 597 Fifth Avenue, New York, N. Y.
91. King's Crown Press, Columbia University, New York, N. Y.
92. The Bobbs-Merrill Co., 468 Fourth Avenue, New York, N. Y.
93. Random House, 457 Madison Avenue, New York, N. Y.
94. E. P. Dutton & Co., Inc., 300 Fourth Avenue, New York, N. Y.
95. The John Day Co., 2 West 45th Street, New York. N. Y.
96. Charles H. Kerr & Co., 510 North Dearborn Street, Chicago, 111.
97. The Ronald Press Co., 15 Bast 26th Street, New York, N. Y.
98. Henry Regnery Co., 20 West Jackson Street, Chicago, 111.
99. Allyn & Bacon, 11 East 36th Street, New York, N. Y.
100. Little. Brown & Co., 34 Beacon Street, Boston, Mass.
101. The Viking Press, 18 East 48th Street, New York, N. Y.
102. Doubleday & Co., Inc., Garden City, N. Y.
103. The Tower Press, Inc., 900 West Van Buren, Chicago, 111.
104. National Education Association, 1201 16th Street NW., Washington, D. C.
105. American Textbook Publishers Institute, 1 Madison Avenue, New York, N. Y.
106. Duke University Press, Durham, N. C.
107. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, Pa.
108. Ohio State University Press, Columbus, Ohio.
109. Vanderbilt University Press, Nashville, Tenn.
110. American Education Fellowship, 11 East Walton Place, Chicago, 111.
111. American Book Publishers Council, Inc., 62 West 47th Street, New York, N. Y.
112. Farrar Straus & Co., Inc., 53 East 34th Street, New York, N Y.
113. Smith & Durrell, Inc., 25 West 45th Street, New York, N. Y.
114. Social Sciences Publishers, Inc., 1966 Broadway, New York, N. Y,
115. Campus publishing division of Dorville Corp., 37 Wall Street, New York,
N. Y.
396 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Palo Alto, Calif., July 26, 195 Jf.
Subject : Analysis of letters from textbook publishers.
To the Honorable Carroll Reece, Chairman, and Members of the
House Committee To Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations,
Washington, D. C:
Gentlemen: In testifying at your May 26, 1954, hearing, I re-
ferred to a preliminary survey conducted in October 1950 by the
Americanization committee of the National Society, Sons of the Amer-
ican Revolution, to determine the condition then existing in the
textbook publishing business from the standpoint of antisubversive
teaching material. The following letter was sent at that time to a list
of 115 textbook publishers throughout the country :
We are conducting a survey to determine what textbooks, outlines, or other
teaching materials, are available with reference to the following:
1. For instructing students and adult groups desiring to <8tudy the propaganda
and activities of Socialist and Communist organizations ;
2. For study of the economic, financial, political, and constitutional effects of
Fabian socialism and the social welfare state.
Our analysis is intended to cover all grade levels and include a listing of books
dealing with one or more or all of the above subjects. Please indicate whether
you have any publications of this type. If so, may we have a list of titles and
authors, together with circulars and other descriptive material.
Very truly yours,
Aaron M. Sargent,
Chairman, Committee on Americanization.
That letter was sent to all members of the American Textbook
Publishers Institute and to all other important publishers listed on the
records of the California State Department of Education. It is a fair
cross section of the textbook publishing industry.
Some firms said they operated in special or technical fields not within
the scope of the survey. These names have been disregarded in the
present analysis. There were 52 publishers who replied and were
engaged in areas that should include some kind of material within the
scope of the survey. The replies from this group reveal the following
condition :
Number
37
6
4
2
3
Description
Nothing available
Claiming some material bearing on certain phases
Eelating to civics and patriotism in general _.
Books on League of Nations, United Nations, and Democracy
Miscellaneous _
Percent
71.1
11. &
•kT
3.»
6.T
The following are typical comments :
(1 ) Publishers having nothing available
"The National Education Association does not have any publications
dealing with socialism, communism, and the other topics contained in
your letter. We are not a publisher of materials designed primarily
for use by pupils and students. Practically all of our materials are
designed for use by teachers and other professional persons employed
by school systems and none of them bear on the topics you have listed."
"Regret to sav that we do not have a single book dealing specifically
with either of the above two general objects. * * * The type of book
mentioned in your letter is generally issued by a trade publisher.
* * *
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 397
We are exclusively a textbook publisher and as such we publish only
such books as are required by the standard curricula of the Nation."
(Cites as a reference, a history on economic doctrine.)
"We specialize in the basic texts and do not contemplate publishing
within the near future books which emphasize particular philosophies
or ideologies."
"We do not publish any textbooks which would fit your needs in
connection with the survey you are conducting described in your
letter."
"We no longer publish texts on the elementary and high-school level.
We have nothing of this kind on the college level."
"(We) publish no texts or teaching materials concerned with social-
ism, communism, or the social welfare state."
"Believe we have but one publication that would cover any of the
topics outlined in your letter." (Cites a text on applied economics.)
(#) Reporting some material available
American Education Fellowship (formerly the Progressive Educa-
tion Association) sent a list of publications including the following:
American Education Under Fire, by Melby.
Design for America, by Brameld.
A Guide to Soviet Education, by King.
International Year Book of Experimental Education.
France (New Plans for Education).
UNESCO in Focus, by Henderson.
Replies from three universities show some material at the college
or adult level. The books cited cover crisis in Great Britain; co-
operative movement in Canada ; Russian culture ; death of science in
Russia; American-Russian rivalry in Far East; Christianity and com-
munism ; defense of Western Europe ; Korea and foreign policy ; Rus-
sian aims and America.
Two publishers referred to some material on topics such as outlaw-
ing the Communist Party ; British socialism ; welfare state; free medi-
cal care, and a booklet What About Communism ?
($) Civics and patriotism in general
Replies listed under this heading cite books on the Constitution,
citizenship, and material of a patriotic or inspirational character.
(4-) League of Nations and democracy
Replies from two publishers are listed. The books mentioned are in
the following areas :
History of League of Nations.
The United Nations.
Democracy and You.
Federal Government and You.
(5) Miscellaneous
Under this heading I classify the reply of one publisher of books
at the adult level citing material that would be useful for reference
purposes. Another reply cites material from procedings and maga-
zines of various educational associations. The remaining item lists
49720— 54— pt. 1 26
398 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
two books by authors with known anti-anti-Communist points of view.
One of these attacks the Federal loyalty and security program.
(Note. — Photostat copies of all letters received by Mr. Sargent from the text*
book publishers queried are in the permanent files of the committee, as well as a
list of the letters quoted in his analysis. Mr. Sargent in transmitting this
list for ready reference by the staff, wrote under date of July 28: "I purposely
left out publishers' names in order to raise no question about the fairness of the
survey and to avoid being in the position of making 'an attack' on any particular
interest. Use of the names of NEA and American Education Fellowship seemed
justified on another ground, inasmuch as these are both organizations whose
names have already been brought in on the hearings.")
In making this analysis it was not and is not my purpose to limit
freedom of opinion or freedom of publication with respect to any of
these books. The sole object is to ascertain whether there has been
restraint of publication and restraint of trade with respect to books
representing a positive and effective teaching approach to the prob-
lem of combating subversion.
It is my opinion, based on this investigation and on my own research,
that there is a serious shortage of such material. I believe that this
condition is due, to a considerable extent, to the policies and attitudes
of tax-exempt foundations.
Dated : July 27, 1954.
Respectfully submitted, , Aaron M. Sargent.
United States or America, State or California,
City and County of San Francisco, ss:
Aaron M. Sargent, being first duly sworn, deposes and says:
I am the witness above named who presents the within analysis
to the House of Representatives Committee To Investigate Tax-
Exempt Foundations. I personally prepared said analysis, which is
based on letters from textbook publishers in my possession. I am
familiar with the contents of the foregoing and certify that all state-
ments of fact therein are true to my own knowledge.
Aaron M. Sargent.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 27th day of July 1954.
[seal] Clara E. Hay,
Notary Public.
Palo Alto, Calif., July 23, 1354.
Subject: Proposed questionnaire.
Hon. Carroll Reece,
Chairman, House Committee on Foundations,
Washington 25, D.C.
Dear Mr. Reece : In accordance with leave granted at your hear-
ing of May 26, 1954, I have prepared and enclose herewith original
and two copies of my proposed Statement on Questionnaire to Founda-
tions.
Questions in that form will, I believe, obtain vitally needed informa-
tion with a minimum expenditure of time and money.
I respectfully request that the committee make this statement a
part of the record.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 399
If I can be of any further assistance in this matter, do not hesitate
to call upon me.
Sincerely,
Aaron M. Sargent,
Attorney at Law.
Palo Alto, Calif., July 23, 135 Ip.
Subject: Statement on questionnaire to foundations.
To the Honorable Carroll Reece and Members of the House Committee
To Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations, Washington, D. C.
Gentlemen : On May 24, 1954, I appeared before your committee
and gave testimony in response to subpena. At the May 26, 1954, hear-
ing I indicated that important evidence could be obtained with a
minimum of time and expense by using a questionnaire to be answered
under oath by responsible officers of the foundations. Leave was
granted to submit an outline of the questions to be propounded, and
it was understood the matter would be taken under advisement (Rep.
Tr. vol. 8, pp. 835, 838). I now submit the following statement to
show the kind of evidence which can be so obtained.
The subversive movement which emerged and gained a foothold in
the Federal Government during the 1930's began many years before
that time. It was directed by a radical intellectual elite and it oper-
ated by infiltration, propaganda, and smear. Radical cells were or-
ganized in Federal agencies and educational groups. The Ware cell
set up by Communists in the Department of Agriculture is an exam-
ple. This intrigue was exposed by Dr. William A. Wirt, who was
destroyed for taking a patriotic stand. In Washington, during this
period, it was the fashion to be pro-Communist. Radicals were able to
infiltrate, in the name of reform, under cover of this crisis. They took
advantage of these conditions to bring about revolutionary change.
The, people trusted their new leaders and were betrayed. Even men
in high places were deceived. The mass indoctrination in education,
as we know it today, developed more gradually.
This committee is vitally concerned with the extent to which founda-
tions may have financed, aided, or protected this radical propaganda
and infiltration. The part played by the Garland Fund is well known.
Undoubtedly there were others. To fully explore this subject will
require an exhaustive study of the history and development of the
American subversive movement. Obviously, this is a long-range study.
The question which can be determined now is the following :
"Has foundation support ever been given to educational projects
designed to combat subversion V
Large foundations have monopoly power. Their action in denying
applications amounts to censorship where there is a discriminatory
purpose in exercising this arbitrary right of rejection. Has there been
such a veto against projects concerning national defense and security?
400 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The foundations with large income and asset value are the follow-
ing:
Name Endowment
Rockefeller Foundation $321, 054, 125
General Education Board (a Rockefeller affiliate) 140,077,288
Carnegie Corporation of New York 177,187,884
Ford Foundation 502, 587, 957
Total 1, 140, 907, 254
The combined asset value of these giant monopoly power founda-
tions is therefore in excess of 1,100 million. These figures are based
on reports filed with the Cox committee.
The Carnegie and Rockefeller Funds have operated for many years.
The Ford Foundation was established more recently, but its present
impact is the greatest, and its influence is highly important.
For the purposes of this questionnaire, the year 1920 is taken as a
starting point. The radical group was well organized at that time. .
The New York Legislature had already determined, in creating the
Lusk committee, that there was an active conspiracy to overthrow the
Government. This committee exposed radicalism centering in particu-
lar in New York City. It filed an exhaustive four- volume report oh the
subject of Revolutionary Radicalism. Since the headquarters of the
Carnegie and Rockefeller Foundations were located in this area, their
trustees must have been put on notice even at this early date.
The Garland Fund operated from 1922 to 1928 with offices at 2
West 13th Street, New York City. It contributed $2 million to radical
groups and its board included Communists and Socialists. (See testi-
mony of Walter S. Steele at hearings of House Special Committee
To Investigate Communist Activities, 71st Con., 2d sess., H. Res. 220.)
Eastern business and financial interests favored a soft policy toward
Communist Russia. In March 1926 a group of prominent men ad-
vocated diplomatic recognition. Ivy Lee, a public relations man,
made a special trip and spent about 2 weeks in the Soviet Union. He
then wrote books and sought to reinterpret the "Russian menace."
Evidence on this will be found in the New York Times, issues of
March 27, 28, 29, 30, and 31, 1926, and in the writings of Mr. Lee.
In 1926 Carnegie Corporation made a $300,000 grant to a Social
Studies Commission of the American Historical Society to review
textbooks and curriculum practices. That commission in its report
advocated use of the public schools to promote socialism and a col-
lective economy. (See "Conclusions and Recommendations.")
-Prof. George S. Counts, of Teachers College, Columbia University,
began his Russian travels and study of Soviet education in 1929. In
1932 he advocated use of the public schools to "build a new social
order."
Congress began its investigation of subversion in 1930 with the
appointment of a special committee pursuant to House Resolution 220.
Our study should therefore begin with the date of the first legisla-
tive investigation of the subversive movement. As above-mentioned,
this was the Lusk committee inquiry of 1920. It is possible, with a
questionnaire, to obtain data such as the following :
(1) Whether at any time during the period 1920-53, inclusive, the
foundations have ever supported research or education designed to
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 401
expose the conduct, propaganda, or activities of the Communist or
Socialist movements in this country ;
(2) Whether they have supported the work of active anti-Commu-
nists, anti-Communist organizations, or repentant Communists who
have since demonstrated their loyalty and rendered valuable service
to the cause of freedom by combating and exposing subversion ;
(3) Whether they have supported the publication and/or distribu-
tion of an ti- Communist or anti- Socialist books, pamphlets, instruc-
tional material, or other literature ;
(4) The description of all projects of this nature, including names,
dates, and amounts, with an outline of the nature, scope, and purpose
of suchprojects ;
(5) The total amount granted by these foundations for education
and educational research in each year during the period January 1,
1920, to January 1, 1954, inclusive.
It will then be possible to determine —
(a) The total and the percentage of foundation resources spent for
national defense and security;
(b) Whether the charge of discrimination against conservatives
and anti-Communists, frequently laid at the door of the foundations,
is true or false ;
(c) The possibility of antitrust liability in the case of the giant
funds with monopoly power;
(d) Whether from the national defense standpoint these founda-
tions have earned or justified their tax-exemption privilege.
While the giant funds, such as Ford, Carnegie, and Kockefeller,
have great financial power, there are other smaller foundations whose
assets, in the aggregate, are substantial. With a special question-
naire, the committee may ascertain :
(1) The nature and extent of this other foundation capital;
(2) The number of such foundations having charter power to sup-
port education for national defense and security ;
(3) Their willingness to exercise this power;
(4) The reasons why any foundation may be unwilling to assume
this responsibility.
No infringement of civil liberty is involved in obtaining this in-
formation. The committee has the right and the duty to investigate
possible violations of the Federal antitrust laws. Federal taxpayers
now carry a heavy burden in the hot and cold w T ars against communism.
If private enterprise in the field of tax-exempt foundations is un-
willing to exercise its power and carry a fair share of this educational
burden for national defense, it may be necessary to tax the founda-
tions just as other corporations are now taxed. The tax revenues
thus obtained would support congressional investigations and other
work made necessary by this abdication of trust responsibility.
Since 1949 appropriations for the Senate Internal Security Com-
mittee and the House Un-American Activities Committee have
totaled $1,908,000. The average annual cost has been $419,000.
Taxes were increased at least $35 billion on account of w T ar in Korea.
There were 140,500 casualties. The total cost will never be determined.
It is the duty of foundations to be patriotic and loyal — not merely
in a negative, but in a positive sense ; to obey the law ; to respect their
exemption privilege; to comply with reasonable standards of ethical
402 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
conduct. The statement attached hereto is a reasonable standard of
conduct which should be adopted by this committee.
The American people are patriotic. They pay heavy taxes. They
carry their full share of responsibility in supporting and defending
the Government and Constitution of the United States. Many of
them have rendered military service. Some have made the supreme
sacrifice.
Are the foundations patriotic or unpatriotic ?
What is the attitude of the business and financial leaders who sit as
trustees on the boards of these great tax-exempt corporations?
Dated : July 23, 1954.
Eespectf ully submitted.
Aaron M. Sargent.
United States of America,
State of California,
City and Comity of Santa Clara, ss:
Aaron M. Sargent, being first duly sworn, deposes and says :
I am the witness above named who presents this to the House of
Representatives Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations.
I personally prepared this statement and am familiar with its con-
tents. All statements of fact therein are true to my own knowledge.
Aaron M. Sargent.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 23d day of July 1954.
[seal] Leone Flynn,
Notary Pvhlio.
MAY 24, 1954, STATEMENT
The investigation required of this committee is one of the most
important matters which has ever come before the Congress of the
United States. It concerns national security, the defense of the prin-
ciples set forth in the Constitution of the United States. You will
find that the situation confronting you is the result of a disregard of
trust responsibility — a condition amounting to abdication of duty by
the trustees of the tax-exempt foundations which have exerted such a
great influence in the history of our country since the turn of the
century.
In discharging its responsibility and weighing the evidence, this
committee must have some standard or yardstick to apply. I believe
the following are the legal and moral standards which apply to this
trust relationship :
standards op foundation conduct
It is the duty of tax-exempt foundations and their trustees to ob-
serve and be guided by the following standards of conduct :
First : Patriotism.
To bear true faith and allegiance to the philosophy and principles of
government set forth in the Declaration of Independence and the
Constitution of the United States.
Second : Loyalty.
To be active and positive in supporting the United States Govern-
ment against revolutionary and other subversive attacks.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 403
To put patriotic money at the disposal of patriotic men in the field
of education to enable them to support and defend our Constitution
and form of Government.
Third : Obedience to law.
To faithfully obey the laws of the United States and the provisions
of State law under which foundation charters are granted.
Fourth : Respect for exemption.
1 To use the tax-exemption privilege in good faith, recognizing the
purpose for which that privilege is granted.
To refrain from supporting communism, socialism; and other move-
ments which (1) increase the cost of government, (2) endanger na-
tional security, or (3) threaten the integrity of the Federal Gov-
ernment.
Fifth : Academic responsibility.
To limit their activities to projects which are, in fact, educational,
and are conducted in an academically responsible manner in accordance
with proper academic standards.
To refrain from using education as a device for lobbying or a means
to disseminate propaganda.
The money administered by these foundation trustees is public
money. The beneficiaries of these trusts are the American people : the
parents of children in our public schools. Education is a sacred trust.
A high degree of integrity is expected of those connected with it. We
must consider the ethical duty of foundation trustees from that
standpoint.
House or Representatives : Congress or the United States
In Re Proceedings of Seleot Committee To Investigate Tax Exempt
Foundations (H. Res. 217) — Testimony of Aaron M. Sargent
Inset: Excerpts from June 13, 1951, speech of Lawrence C. Lamb,
member of Pasadena Board of Education (Vital Speeches, issue of
August 1, 1951, pp. 625-628)
The following excerpts from an address of June 13, 1951, to the
Sons of the American Revolution at Pasadena, Calif., by the Honor-
able Lawrence C. Lamb, member of the Pasadena Board of Education,
are presented for insertion in the transcript of the committee hearings
of May 26, 1954, volume 8, page 800, at line 15, viz :
As a preface let me say that I feel that it is my duty to make this report. It
would be so much easier to coast through the balance of my term of office of
school trustee by saying nothing and doing nothing. However, too many people
are convinced that what happened in Pasadena during the past year has grave
national implications, that free, public education as we know it, is imperiled;
that a nationalized educational system would be a controlled system of educa-
tion ; that Federal aid to education would mean Federal control with its attend-
ant political bureaucracy and regimentation. * * *
For the past 2 years I have been 1 of a crew of 5 very unhappy people engaged
in riding out a storm of violent educational controversy, the fury of such pro-
portions as has seldom been experienced in any community before, much less
in Pasadena. * * *
Our educational system, like our political systems, has evolved over a period
of many years and is based on the democratic principle "of the people, by the
people, and for the people." Since it was purposely omitted from the Federal
Constitution it is a prerogative of the State. It has its checks and balances
404 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
with ultimate authority vested in all of the people, who elect a board of lay
citizens to represent them. * * *
This is what the board is for : to act, in effect, as a mirror ; to reflect the think-
ing and actions of the superintendent to the people and the thinking and actions
of the people to the superintendent. This relationship between all parties is
a vital one requiring mutual confidence and respect. Any subversion or break-
down subjects the whole system to failure. * * *
What happened in Pasadena has happened in many other of the surrounding
towns and school districts : Glendale, Los Angeles, Inglewood, etc. But the
question is asked : If superintendents are relieved as a matter of course all around
us, why then the "battle royal" in Pasadena, assuming national proportions
with the focus of as much unfavorable publicity as could possibly be brought
to bear? In other districts there have been divided boards, superintendent con-
tracts paid off in advance — sometimes 2 in 1 year — superintendents have violated
their code of ethics by going over the "heads of their boards" to the people, have
preached democracy openly and practiced autocracy behind the scenes, yes, even
boards have been submerged by ground swells of public opinion, but no national
implications were involved. Why then did Pasadena, almost overnight, become
involved in a cataclysm of strife, bitterness, name calling, smearing, and defama-
tion of character, an emotional binge of such proportions that it defies descrip-
tion? Why did experts fly here from their bastions in eastern cities to investi-
gate and cross-question us? * * * How did we rate so highly that a national
publishing house would send their topflight authors here to write a book por-
traying our Pasadena people and their representatives as villains, idiots, and
stupid fools and yet the president of this same publishing house refused an inter-
view and admitted he was not the least bit interested in hearing the "other side"
from one who made the trip to New York, at her own expense, for that purpose?
What power so great is it that can persuade the president of such a venerable
institution as Harvard University to promulgate his verdict solely on hear-
say? * * *
In answer to these questions, certain facts stand out distinctly and vividly.
Pasadenans had the nerve to demand their rights. The right to adhere to the
laws of the State educational code, in spirit as well as the letter, and secondly,
the right to question what was being taught to their children. * * *
Our people are filled with fear and anxiety. They know that sinister in-
fluences and ideologies are seeking to subvert and undermine our national and
cultural institutions. * * *
Without doubt there are subversives in the public schools of America. Where
would you go to gain control of the minds of youth but to the schools? Sub-
versive activity and influence in a school system can be so clever, well concealed,
and dangerous that it often fools the better informed and responsible leaders
of the community, often enlisting them as gullible non-Communistic dupes. Al-
though I am loath to believe there are any in our Pasadena schools, many of
us have been the victims of commie types of intimidation and persecution. They
always use the characteristic defense of smear agitation tactics.
If you notice this same procedure is used against the regents of our great
State university where topflight educators complain that loyalty oaths re-
strict their academic freedom". * * *
As to free public education on the national scene, in light of what has hap-
pened to us here. I am not so optimistic and I prophesy that we will, with
increasing frequency, hear of similar situations like Pasadena's, where the
"enemies" of education dared to criticize- ineptness,fadism, and the tolerance
of leftist antics in their school systems. * * *
Our powerful national lobby and pressure educational organizations with their
altruistic sounding titles, impressive personalities, and who consider them-
selves sacrosanct in the field of education, must beware that they do not become
guilty of the same despotism they attempt to lay at the door of others. With
foundations and war chests of millions at their disposal it is very easy to forget
that children come first. As an example let me read you an excerpt from the
New York Times, May 12, 1951 :
"Was on Illiteracy in World Is Urged — Head of UNESCO Proposes to Its
United States Unit a 12-Xear Plan at a Cost of $20 Million
"The United States Commission for UNESCO today voted support of a resolu-
tion, which will be rephrased to incorporate suggestions made from the floor,
for the purpose of backing up the public-school system in cases such as that
of Willard E. Goslin, forced to resign as superintendent of schools of Pasadena,
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 405
Calif. The resolution was offered by Willard E, Givens, executive secretary of
the National Education Association."
A photostatic copy of this speech as printed in the August 1, 1951,
issue of Vital Speeches of the Day, is 'attached hereto.
Dated: July 22, 1954.
Respectfully submitted.
Aaron M. Sargent.
United States of America, State of California,
City and aunty of San Francisco, ss :
Aaron M. Sargent, being first duly sworn,, deposes and says:
I am the person who appeared and gave testimony in the above
entitled matter on May 26, 1954. The excerpts to be inserted at
volume 8, page 800, of the transcript of said hearing are true copies
and the photostat attached hereto is a true reproduction of the speech
in question as above described.
Aaron M. Sargent.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 22d day of July 1954.
Clara E. Hat,
Notary Public.
My commission expires April 17, 1956.
Why the "Battle Royal" in Pasadena
"The schools belong to the people, not the board, nor the educators, nor the
students"
(By Lawrence C. Lamb, member, Pasadena Board of Education, Pasadena, Calif.,
delivered to the Sons of the American Revolution, Pasadena, Calif., June 13,
1951)
As a preface let me say that I feel that it is my duty to make this report.
It would be so much easier to coast through the balance of my term of office
of school trustee by saying nothing and doing nothing. However, too many
people are convinced that what happened in Pasadena during the past year
has grave national implications, that free, public education as we know it, is
imperiled ; that a nationalized educational system would be a controlled system
of education; that Federal aid to education would mean Federal control with
its attendant political bureaucracy and regimentation. I am not an alarmist,
do not scare easily, but do believe that to be forewarned is to be forearmed.
For the past 2 years I have been 1 of a crew of 5 very unhappy people engaged
in riding out a storm of violent educational controversy, the fury of such
proportions as has seldom been experienced in any community before, much
less in Pasadena. As I have always maintained, I am not an educator, and
do not pose as an expert. Mine is an attentive ear and an open mind. As such
I was elected to the Pasadena School Board 2 years ago as a representative
of all of the people in our school district, without the aid of any party or political
group. I am strictly free and independent and have scrupulously maintained
this relationship by avoiding identifying myself with pressure groups. I have
tried to extend the same courtesy and attention to all.
Now that our recent tax election has passed, insuring our educational program
for the forthcoming year, a great weight of concern has been lifted from our
minds. The success of the election here was basic to our local situation as it
clearly demonstrated and proved beyond a doubt that our people, parents, busi-
nessmen, taxpayers alike, are intelligent, anxious to support their public schools
and have confidence in our present school administration — as overwhelmingly
so as they repudiated the administration of a year ago. Now many questions
can be answered without danger concerning the events of the past year here.
John Quincy Adams once said, "There is nothing so powerful as the truth and
often nothing stranger." As to the events relative to our former school admin-
istrator, that the board of education trustees after much consideration would
406 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
deliberately choose without reason, the course of action they did, so perilous
to their personal interests and integrities, is unthinkable. That there might
have been considerations, other than personal ones, inimical to our educational
program and philosophies, few people were aware of at the time. It's rather
a long story, so we will begin by showing how our educational system of free
public schools is legally constituted.
Our educational system, like our political systems, has evolved over a period
of many years and is based on the democratic principle "of the people, by the
people, and for the people." Since it was purposely omitted from the Federal
Constitution, it is a prerogative of the State. It has its checks and balances
with ultimate authority vested in all of the people, who elect a board of lay
citizens to represent them. Thus being responsible to the people this board
is charged by law with certain duties, chiefly policy and finance. Although
education is considered a State function, that the schools belong to the
people of each community is attested by the fact that these people organize
themselves within local school districts, each with its own board. To support
their school districts, the people tax themselves ad valorum, with some aid
coming from State educational appropriations. This gives the people every
right, as long as they are paying the bill, to decide what their schools should be.
"The schools belong to the people, not the board, nor the educators, nor the
students, but to all the people."
The board of education, being lay citizens, must and should delegate all
functions to professionals trained in their respective fields. The most important
position to be tilled is the office of superintendent of schools. This person must
be well qualified in the elements of administration and education, not solely
in one or the other but in both. As an administrator here he has control of
many millions of dollars to be spent annually either wisely or unwisely. As
his educational philosophies are to be used in the education of the children of
the people of this district, they have an inherent right to know and understand
them. This is what the board is for : to act, in effect, as a mirror ; to reflect
the thinking and actions of the superintendent to the people and the thinking
and actions of the people to the superintendent. This relationship between
all parties is a vital one requiring mutual confidence and respect. Any subver-
sion or breakdown subjects the whole system to failure, and results in failurfc
for the administrator and suspicion and hostility on the part of the people,
who have no choice but to take it out on the board who hires the superintendent.
Therefore, one does not have to use much imagination to see that any strong-
willed superintendent could put over his own program if he were able to subvert
or divide his board or undermine and weaken it into a virtual rubber stamp. Bril-
liant but unscrupulous educators, with their dynamic speeches in educational jar-
gon, have no trouble selling their people first, who, preoccupied with the business
of life, sincerely want to believe but who cannot spare the time to check up on
the speaker's statements. Usually they sound quite reasonable and harmless
yet within them may be implications noticed only by a few of the astute.
Surely, we all want good schools ; we all want peace, too ; but do we all have
the same price in mind? The policy of going over the heads of the board to
the people, by the superintendent, although fine at first, eventually bogs down
when the people fail to keep up with him and his enervated board is not there
to mediate and interpret for him.
So it was that what happened in Pasadena has happened in many other of the
surrounding towns and school districts: Glendale, Los Angeles, Inglewood, etc.
But the question is asked : If superintendents are relieved as a matter of course
all around us, why then the battle royal in Pasadena, assuming national pro-
portions with the focus of as much unfavorable publicity as could possibly be
brought to bear? In other districts there have been divided boards, superin-
tendent contracts paid off in advance — sometimes 2 in 1 year — superintendents
have violated their code of ethics by going over the heads of their boards to the
people, have preached democracy openly and practiced autocracy behind the
scenes, yes, even boards have been submerged by ground swells of public opin-
ion, but no national implications were involved. Why then did Pasadena, almost
overnight, become involved in a cataclysm of strife, bitterness, name calling,
smearing, and defamation of character, an emotional binge of such proportions
that it defies description? Why did experts fly here from their bastions in
eastern cities to investigate and cross-question us? Why did telegrams in
criticism of the board's action arrive from almost every national teachers' and
administrators' organization? Why did the national periodicals, such as Life
and Time portray the martyrdom of an individual without taking the trouble
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 407
to get the facts on both sides of the question? How did we rate so highly that
a national publishing house would send their top-flight authors here to write a
book portraying our Pasadena people and their representatives as villains, idiots,
and stupid fools and yet the president of this same publishing house refused
an interview and admitted he was not the least bit interested in hearing the
other side from one who made the trip to New York, at her own expense, for
that purpose? What power so great is it that can persuade the president of
such a venerable institution as Harvard University to promulgate his verdict
solely on hearsay? Yes ; even Winchell as well as other newspapers and periodi-
cals parroted his example with the same unscientific approach. And lastly, why
was it that the original report of the National Education Association Commis-
sion for the Defense of Democracy was ready for release last April and has not
to date made its appearance?
Well, I can remember not so long ago how we used to listen patiently and
smile indulgently when some crackpot would suggest that Pasadena's school
system was being made a guinea pig for the Nation. Our smile has become
a wee bit wry now. Is it possible that Pasadena which always prided its'elf on
having the very best of everything, and which combed the whole country for
the top-flight administrator, was sold a bill of goods? Is it possible that our
board, goaded, harassed, and frustrated with administrative errors and failures,
too numerous to mention, inadvertently upset a timetable? That perhaps in
our blundering way we fired the heir-apparent? Is it possible, after all, that
there is a blueprint for nationalization of our schools with its attendant regi-
mentation and slight fee for handling?
In answer to these questions, certain facts stand out distinct and vividly.
Pasadenans had the nerve to demand their rights. The right to adhere to the
laws of the State educational code, in spirit as well as the letter, and, secondly,
the right to question what was being taught to their children. In the first in-
stance, the board was required to take action to correct; in the second case,
involving philosophies of education, only the citizens took issue with the program,
the board assuming the position of arbitrator. Here is where the term "progres-
sive education" came in.
Again stating that I am not a technician on educational philosophies, that I
believe in modern methods and I realize that times are changing I would like
only to reflect here some of the thinking that others have made known to me
on so-called progressive education.
In the first place war times are not normal times. Our people are filled with
fear and axiety. They know that sinister influences and ideologies are seek-
ing to subvert and undermine our national and cultural institutions. Icono-
clasts have succeeded in tearing down and destroying many of our ancient
monuments and landmarks. Individualism and self-determination concepts are
being discredited and debased as selfish and not sympathetic to the welfare of
society. In many quarters such watchwords as thrift and private enterprise
are blacklisted. No wonder then are our people confused by the cannotations
of "teaching the whole child," "learning what we live," and "no indoctrination
for good or bad." Some believe that in taking possession of the "whole child"
schools invade the realm of the home and church, further weakening them where
their influences should be strengthened; that individualism stems from the
home and that complete socialization of the child at school would level and
submerge individualism and personal initiative. They say it is hard to be an
individual now that we are caught in the whirlpool of "isms." Nazism — putting
the race first; communism — the class first; and with fascism, the state taking
precedence over the individual. AH we come out with is a social-security num-
ber. This was certainly not the idea of our Founding Forefathers had in mind.
Also where will we exepect to find moral and spiritual values if the home is
superseded? There has been a great lessening of emphasis on these values in
our training institutions lately and with the Bible practically shut out of our
schools, some people attempt to stigmatize them as godless.
Next, "to learn what we live" is most discouraging. None of us are quite
satisfied with our lives. What then must we expect from children subjected to
this materialistic age and bombarded by movie, television, and funny book con-
taining the suggestions of every conceivable type of crime? Should they not be
spared even from the example we set for them in our bars and night clubs?
Never has secular knowledge reached such new heights and human folly such
new lows. "Art for art's sake," "business for business' sake," and "education
for. education's sake." And lastly, not being able to "teach for good" raises
many an eyebrow. Just how can be expect our children to enjoy "the good life"
408 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
without being able to identify it to them in terms of high ethics and principles, is
a mystery to most. Naturally, our children must adjust themselves to present
conditions but the increasing ratio of penal and mental institutions does not speak
so well for present systems.
Totalitarianism is our public enemy No. 1 of today. Many of the ideological
"isms" are not so dangerous per se except wherein they insist on being totalitar-
ian. Each would destroy all other competing "isms." That is what makes them
dangerous. They can't stand competition. Could it be that we face this same type
of enemy in education— totalitarianism? When anyone who has the nerve to
question faddism, unsatisfactory teaching methods, ill-disciplined students, and
the crackpot antics of school executives is smeared as an enemy of public educa-
tion, is it not time to alert the people who own the schools ? Also those who have
reason to be concerned about subversive and communistic influences within our
schools get the same treatment — smear attacks and intimidation. Without
doubt there are subversives in the public schools of America. Where would you
go to gain control of the minds of youth but to the schools? Subversive activity
and influence in a school system can be so clever, well concealed, and dangerous
that it often fools the better informed and responsible leaders of the community,
often enlisting them as gullible noncommunistic dupes. Although I am loath to
believe there are any in our Pasadena schools, many of us have been the victims
of commie types of intimidation and persecution. They always use the charac-
teristic defense of smear agitation tactics.
If you notice this same procedure is used against the regents of our great State
university where topflight educators complain that loyalty oaths restrict their
academic freedom. Anyone who will take the trouble to read the book supple-
ment of the June 1951 Reader's Digest entitled "Eleven Tears in Soviet Prison
Camps" may well wonder what price freedom, academic or otherwise. In my
opinion, their complaint is nothing else but the age-old apathy of the employee to
take orders from the boss. Of course, they are perfectly willing to reach into the
public purse, but these petty inhibitions irk them. All of us need to reaffirm our
faith in the things that made America great ; it is good for us. It is possible to
change faith overnight. Recently one of our fine local educators expressed
surprise that the law required a minister to take the oath before he could collect
an honorarium for his commencement speech. Why should a minister be im-
mune? Isn't he human, an American and entitled to the same privileges as any
of the rest of us? Very frankly, I would be willing to reaffirm my faith daily as
a prayer of thanksgiving for the blessings I receive in this free land of ours.
Therefore, these reports that the loyalty oath make our teachers nervous,
uncertain, and fills them with anxiety only fill me with amusement. Any teacher
who is worried has a very good right to be, as every honest teacher knows he is
safe and secure by his tenure and his rights as a citizen, which every one of u»
will fight to keep secure for him.
Concerning the book This Happened in Pasadena, we must not give all the
discredit to author Hulburd. He only compiled it. Several of the writers we
know of live right here in Pasadena, some within our schools and some outside.
They will never be molested. They will only have to live with themselves. One,
an official of one of our local civic organizations, when making a speech before a
service club here, was so brazen as to publicly lament and deplore the unfavor-
able publicity the book occasioned here and at the same time virtually recom-
mended the book. Hypocrisy is not to be found only in low places.
As to our educational program here in Pasadena I believe the future looks
brighter and clearer. Never again do we have to be a national battleground.
Let us never again buy a pig in a poke. Let us search and develop our talent
within our own system which we know intimately and they know what we want.
That a man has no honor in his own country is an exploded myth. Truly, we
want the best ; but whose word are we to take for what is the best? It is true
that some very good board members have been expended here for the best interests
of our schools, people whose allegiance to our children transcended all personal
considerations. Who chose to retire rather than prolong any controversy that
might possibly jeopardize the recent tax election? To them I bow in deep respect
as only another board member could appreciate the poignancy of their position.
Time will reveal them as exemplary public benefactors. To avoid the sacrifice of
others, perhaps our successors, I have given considerable thought and attention,
especially, to our board routines and procedures, I feel there could be a marked
improvement by identifying in print a simplified code of board policies and
rules which when circulated, would not only be informative to our people but
would be of inestimable value to our new board members. I am busy now on
this codification and believe it will eventually be a valued contribution.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 409
As to free public education on the national scene, in light of what has happened
to us here, I am not so optimistic and I prophesy that we will, with increasing
frequency, hear of similar situations like Pasadena's, where the enemies of
education dared to criticize ineptness, faddism, and the tolerance of leftists
antics in their school systems. True, public education has always had its enemies,
and always will, but we must keep open the market place of competitive thought
and opinion. Our powerful national lobby and pressure educational organiza-
tions with their altruistic sounding titles, impressive personalities and who con-
sider themselves sacrosanct in the field of education, must beware that they do
not become guilty of the same despotism they attempt to lay at the door of others.
With foundations and war chests of millions at their disposal it is very easy to
forget that children come first. As an example let me read you an excerpt from
the New York Times, May 12, 1951 :
"War on Illiteracy in World Is Urged — Head of UNESCO Proposes to Its
United States Unit a 12- Year Plan at a Cost of $20,000,000
"The United States Commission for UNESCO today voted support of a resolu-
tion, which will be rephrased to incorporate suggestions made from the floor,
for the purpose of backing up the public school system in cases such as that of
Willard E. Goslin, forced to resign as superintendent of schools of Pasadena,
Calif. The resolution was offered by Willard E. Givens, executive secretary of
the National Education Association.
"It calls upon citizens throughout the United States to oppose attacks on
public education ; and upon education projects in furtherance of the ideals of this
Nation and the purposes of UNESCO. A National Education Association investi-
gation in Pasadena had shown that a redistricting had brought a block of Mexi-
can children into two new junior high schools, which was protested by a school
development council."
Please note that the article is not even correct. It was not a block of Mexican
children ; neither did it involve two junior high schools ; nor did the school devel-
opment council protest it. However, for propaganda purposes it may have been
more expedient to use them. It should be remembered that the power to oppress
others always contains within it the seed to destroy itself.
In closing let me say that controversies concerning educational practices and
systems demand research, technical information, legal and financial experience.
No one group or faction can meet a local situation that is troublesome and solve
it effectively. It calls for a pooling of effort of all segments of the community.
It is a time for clear thinking without animosities and petty jealousies. A time
when we can meet together as good citizens.
In May 1903, Theodore Roosevelt said this of the qualifications of a good
citizen :
"I ask that we see to it in our country that the line of division in the deeper
matters of our citizenship be drawn, never between section and section, never
between creed and creed, never, thrice never, between class and class ; but that
the line be drawn on the line of conduct, cutting though sections, cutting through
creeds, cutting through classes ; the line that divides the honest from the dis-
honest, the line that divides good citizenship from bad citizenship, the line that
declares a man a good citizen if, and always If, he acts in accordance with the
immutable law of righteousness, which has been the same from the beginning
of history to the present moment and which will be the same from now until the
end of recorded time."
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 2, 1954
House or Representatives,
Special Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations,
Washington, D. C.
The special committee met at 10:10 a. m., pursuant to recess, in
room 301, New House Office Building, Hon. B. Carroll Reece (chair-
man of the special committee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Reece (presiding), Goodwin, Hays, and
l J fost.
Also present: Rene A. Wormser, general counsel ; Arnold T. Koch,
associate counsel; Norman Dodd, research director; Kathryn Casey,
legal analyst.
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
Mrs. Pfost. Mr. Chairman, before we begin our hearings this morn-
ing, I should like to make certain proposals.
When I was appointed a member of this committee, I assumed I
^vas to be allowed to participate fully in its work. I thought that on
this committee, as on other committees, I would be informed in
advance of the subject matter to be discussed at the hearings so I
could bring to them such perceptions and knowledge of the subject as
I might have, and to make use of them. Instead, I find myself sitting
here nour after hour and day after day, listening to controversial and
oftentimes confused testimony, and trying to piece together bit by
bit its substance and its conclusions in almost the same manner as
would a visitor in this committee room. It is a very unsatisfactory use
of my time and a waste of the taxpayers' money.
Now, as the chairman and members of this committee well know,
when a jury is asked to render a verdict in a court trial, the counsel for
both sides present an outline of their case and in the opening state-
ment before the evidence is given. Likewise, when a case on appeal
is presented to a reviewing court, briefs are furnished well in advance
of the hearing in order that the court may be advised of the nature
of the case. These are not idle requirements — they are wise provisions
growing out of centuries of experience to insure the court and jury
the best possible opportunity to understand how each piece of evidence
and argument presented to them fits into the whole picture.
This committee is being asked to sit in a capacity similar to that
of a court or jury. We are having a story presented to us. We have
a counsel and trained lawyers. But have we received testimony suffi-
ciently in advance to enable us to acquaint ourselves with its nature ?
Have we ever been briefed by the staff on the overall picture? Have
we ever been told in advance the general outline of what a witness is
going to say — the significance of his testimony and how it fits into
411
412 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
the whole picture ? This has not been done, and why not, Mr. Chair-
man ?
This committee was formed about 10 months ago. During the
greater part of that time the Federal Government has been paying out
tens of thousands of dollars for the services of the committee staff. If
the staff has not had time during these months to prepare accurate
outlines and studies for these hearings, let us adjourn until such time
as the staff is ready. If our pace since the hearing started has been
too speedy, then let us slow down.
If it is not lack of time, then is it, as I suspect, carefully planned
strategy to prevent certain members of this committee from prepar-
ing themselves in advance for these hearings? If this is so, why is
it so ? Surely the members of the staff are not afraid to have their
work examined. Could it be possible that there is a design in the
making, the nature of which those in control of this committee wish
to keep secret ? And is that design to present one side of the picture
only — without rebuttal testimony immediately following which per-
haps could change the picture considerably ?
I am becoming increasingly alarmed by the manner in which these
hearings are being conducted. If, as it now appears, this is not to be
an objective inquiry to get the facts, but rather a sounding board for
propounding loaded evidence, then let us find out right now.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I move that these hearings be adjourned until
such time as the whole committee has been thoroughly briefed as to
the nature of this inquiry, namely : (1) The points to be considered;
(2) the present schedule of witnesses to be called throughout the
entire hearings; and (3) the length of time it is expected that the
hearings will consume.
I also embody in my motion the request that all committee members
be given the names of those who will testify at least a week in advance
of their appearance here, together with an outline of what they are
going to say.
JNow, I do not desire to be an obstructionist, nor will I be, but neither
am I willing to sit here in the dark day after day, merely to constitute
a quorum. I want to know what is going on — and why.
Mr. Chairman, I should like an answer to my questions and a vote
on my motion before we proceed further with these hearings this
morning.
The Chairman. Mrs,. Pfost, there is no indisposition to give you
an answer to any questions you may have propounded in the pre-
pared statement which has been presented, nor will there be any in-
disposition to give you a vote on the motion, although the Chair does
question the propriety of the motion at this time. It seems to the
chairman that the committee has followed the orderly procedure.
The staff has on numerous occasions discussed with the committee
the course of the inquiry, and in an overall way the subject matter
that was intended to be presented to the committee as a direction of
the inquiry to be made. In the very opening session, the Director of
Research made a presentation to indicate the results of certain pre-
liminary studies, and then called witnesses who presented criticisms
of the foundations, and it was intended and it is the purpose of the
committee to complete the hearing of those who do have criticisms of
the foundations. Then the foundations and representatives of the
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 413
foundations and others whom the committee might decide should
appear to develop all of the facts.
Knowing the criticisms that had been made, they would appear
and give testimony to develop the whole picture, which has seemed
to me, as chairman, to be a logical procedure. It seemed to the com-
mittee to be a logical procedure, and I might say, to the foundations
with which it has been discussed, it has appeared to be logical pro-
cedure.
I don't look upon this as a court or as a trial. This is an inquiry.
This is a study group to develop the facts connected with this very
important question. We have, as I stated in my earlier statement,
some 7,000 foundations in the United States, with resources of about
$7 billion, possibly considerably in excess of that, with a national
income in excess of $300 million, most all of which has been made
possible through tax exemptions. Therefore, the Congress and the
people have a very proper interest in determining and ascertaining
whether these very vast sums derived from tax exemptions are being
spent in accordance with the tax-exemption statutes, and whether
they are being spent in accordance with the best interests of the
country.
Certainly the manner of procedure has been a well-adopted type
of procedure in an inquiry of this nature. While it may not be
particularly pertinent to the question which you raise, so far as I am
concerned, and I am satisfied that is true of the members on my right,
we have tried to be entirely objective in our procedure, and in develop-
ing this information. So far as I am concerned, I am not represent-
ing any cause or any side. Neither do I look upon this as an investiga-
tion of foundations primarily. It is an investigation of the activities
of foundations to ascertain whether those activities are in accordance
with the law and with the best interests of the country.
Does anyone wish to be heard on the motion ?
.- Mr; Hays. Mr. Chairman, I have just seen this question about 5
minutes before the committee came into session. It seems to me that
Mrs. Pfost has made some very pertinent points that I would be
inclined to agree with, and I would like at this time to second her
motion.
I would like to take issue, Mr. Chairman, with at least one point
you made. That is, that you said that this was a study to get the
facts. I hope that is what it is, and I believe that you believe that is
what it is. But I would like to point out, Mr. Chairman, that up to
now — I hope this morning, and I believe this morning we perhaps
will get some facts when we get to the witness — up to now so far we
have had a series of people on the stand who have been sworn and who
have testified to their opinion. I submit to you, Mr. Chairman, that is
a very unusual procedure, that it is not a well-adopted type of pro-
cedure, that it is so unusual that I don't think you can ever find any
records of any committee of Congress before who has spent 3 weeks
listening to sworn opinions.
I submit to you, Mr. Chairman, that opinions have no force and
effect unless the committee or whoever is listening to the opinions has a
groat deal of respect for the person whose opinions are being stated.
Even then they will just continue to be opinions.
I would be interested in knowing, Mr. Chairman, before we vote
on this motion, if there is any information available as to whether
49720— 54— pt. 1 27
414 TAX-EXEMPT POTINDATIONS
in all of the college professors, we will say, that the staff must have
contacted, there have been any of them who have expressed a dif-
ference of opinion from the ones that we have had in here, Professors
Briggs and Hobbs, and if so, whether the staff has any plans to call
any 1 or 2 or 3 of them and let us hear what they have to say.
Mr. Chairman, I won't attempt to spring any traps on anybody. I
have here in my possession the head of the political science department
of one of the great universities
(The chairman rapped the gavel.)
Mr. Hats. Just let me finish my statement. You are not going to
stop me by that. You can break that thing.
The Chairman. You are talking about springing traps.
Mr. Hats. I am saying I am not trying to.
The Chairman. You have cast slurs on this chairman. I have
determined that I was not going to lose my good disposition.
Mr. Hats. I will pardon you for a momentary loss of it. It is quite
all right.
The Chairman. I am not going to do it. But from now on this
committee is going to be conducted in accordance with rules of pro-
cedure.
Mr. Hats. Now, Mr. Chairman, perhaps you have been looking at
television too much, but I think I nave told you before and I will
try very kindly to tell you again, that you can bang your gavel all you
please, but you are not going to silence me when I think I have some-
thing pertinent to say.
Let me say I am not casting any aspersions on you, Mr. Chairman,
and you certainly lost your temper a little too quickly. I pardon you
for it. I want to say that I compliment you that you have maintained
very good control up to this point. All I started to say is that I have
a letter from a professor of political science, who is the. head of a
political science department of one of the great universities of the
South, who disagrees with the things that have been said here, and
who offers voluntarily to come in and tell what he thinks about it.
All I was trying to do, Mr. Chairman, is to find out if we have any
plans to let people like that come in. I think it is pertinent in view
of the motion that Mrs. Pf ost has made.
The Chairman. The chairman is calling an executive meeting as
soon as it might be convenient for the committee members to attend,
hoping that it may be tomorrow afternoon, at which time these matters
will be discussed, and when we will not have the pleasure of being on
television. It happens, however, since you made reference to my
having observed television too much, that I am one man who has not
observed television more than 2 or 3 times within the past year, and
not at all in connection with the proceedings of this committee. I
am not indicating that is not due to any lack of satisfaction I get out
of observing television, but I have had other things to do.
Mr. Goodwin?
Mr. Goodwin. Mr. Chairman, if there is anything this Congress and
this committee has not got at the present time it is time to waste. I
think we should vote down the motion of Mrs. Pf ost in order that we
can get along as speedily as we can. I take it from the agenda of the
morning that we go on to a little different subject and I assume that
the testimony of the morning will come in very nicely at the point and
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 415
work in with what Mrs. Pfost has in mind, and then to develop what
I had understood was the policy that had been set down by the staff,
and approved by the committee, for the conduct of these hearings,
namely to hear first and develop the testimony with reference to
criticisms which have been made, not of foundations, as the chairman
so well said, but the work of foundations, and what they have been
doing, and then at the proper time follow this statement and appear-
ances from the foundations themselves.
I think it would be unfortunate if it should be allowed at the pro-
ceedings at this particular time when we are getting on. Incidentally,
Mr. Chairman, I don't think these lights are helping the committee m
the slightest.
Mrs. Pfost. Will my colleague yield I
Mr. Goodwin. Certainly. I had finished, Mrs. Pfost.
Mrs. Pfost, Thank you. Doesn't my colleague feel that it would be"
helpful to us, if we knew several days in advance the witnesses that
were going to be called, and the subject matter that is going to be
discussed, so that we might be better prepared to interrogate the
witness at the time he appears here, rather than to pick it up bit by
bit as they drop it here as a witness before this committee ?
Mr. Goodwin, I agree with Mrs. Pfost. I understood that was
being done, that the staff were furnishing us information.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Chairman, may I explain one thing to Mrs.
Pfost. Running the schedule of the hearings in the sense of giving
witnesses specific days is very difficult. Today, for example, we had
expected two witnesses to appear, both of whom are canceled, Mr.
Rusk and Mr. Sargent were coming back for cross-examination. The
cancellation of witnesses whom I expected to be on the stand for a
considerable period of time has happened to us on a number of oc-
casions, and makes it very hard to tell you in advance who we are
going to have.
Today we have scheduled the Commissioner of Internal Revenue
without much notice, but I don't think that is a very serious difficulty
to the committee. The questions you have relating to the tax law it-
self probably would not need very much preparation. As a matter
of fact, the statement is going to be read which covers pretty much
the whole situation. It is very difficult to schedule these hearings.
Mrs. Pfost. Mr. Wormser, don't you have some idea of the schedule
of witnesses and the people you are planning to call in to testify dur-
ing the entire length of these hearings ?
Mr. Wormser. Yes, for a certain distance.
The Chairman. May I interject. Mr. Wormser, I understand the
rearrangements are the result of Mr. Rusk's not appearing. As to
why he preferred not to appear at this time I have no inf ormation,.
other than that he presumably thought it would be better, as the com-
mittee had originally planned, for him to appear in due time after
the criticisms had been presented. Again, that was the information
that Mr. Rusk transmitted to me. His preference was that criticisms
be first presented in accordance with the procedure which the commit-
tee is following. At the suggestion of Mr. Hays it was decided to
call him this morning and a subpena was issued.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Chairman, would you yield right there for a clarify-
ing statement? I think you will agree with me that I stated at that
416 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
time I had only 1 or 2 questions to ask Mr. Rusk, and when he wrot&
the letter down asking to be called later, I believe that you will agre&
with me that he said in that letter that he was afraid that there would
be more questions which would lead into a general discussion, and he
had not had time to get all the documents together that he wanted.
While he would put himself at the disposal of the committee, he
preferred to wait until he had completed his case and been called in
at such time as he had. Isn't that the substance of what he said?
The Chairman. That is the substance, coupled with the fact that
all the foundation people have agreed that it was a better procedure
to present the criticisms in accordance with the procedure which the
committee is following.
Another witness who had been called, I understand, is unable to
come. In accordance with the suggestion you have made, you have
had the statement that is to be presented by the Internal Eevenue
Service.
Mrs. Pfost. Mr. Chairman, when did we get it ?
The Chairman. Since these other witnesses are unable to come, it
was decided that the staff member, Mr. McNiece, would present his
statement. Copies of that the committee members have had, I think,
for some few days. I want to compliment the Director of Internal
Revenue and his staff for getting their statement up as early as this,
in advance of the committee meeting. In my years of experience
here, I have more frequently seen the Department representatives
bring their mimeographed statements with them and hand them to
the members of the committee upon arrival. So I feel very grateful
to the Internal Revenue Service.
Mrs. Pfost. I am grateful also to have the complete text. However,
maybe you are overlooking one of the points I have made. Surely the
staff must have some idea of at least the subject matter that is going to
be discussed by these witnesses before they appear. Without some
short briefing, we have no idea of what the staff is going to require.
The Chairman. I might say, if I may, Mrs. Pfost, that this is a
statement by the Internal Revenue Service, and not a statement by
the staff members. Therefore, we were not in a position to brief you
in what the representative of the Director of Internal Revenue
Service might say.
Mrs. Pfost. Mr. Chairman, I am speaking of witnesses in general.
Certainly my motion has nothing to do with Mr. Sugarman"s testi-
mony. Here we have been holding our meetings for 3 weeks. We
have had very, very little advance notice of who is coirring, the sub-
ject matter to be discussed, or to know what the procedure is to be.
I don't know who is going to be called tomorrow, or the remainder
of the week, or I would not have known had I not called the office
yesterday afternoon of the staff members to find out. I didn't even
know the routine that we were going to proceed under.
That is the question I am putting in the form of a motion.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 417
The Chairman. If I may make a further response, neither was the
Chairman definite about it, because one of the witnesses that had
been summoned is not finding it convenient to appear. So Mr. Mc-
Miece is appearing in advance.
Mrs. Pfost. Does not the Chairman have some idea?
Mr. Hats. Could you tell us who that was?
The Chairman. Professor Colegrove.
Mr. Hats. That is all I wanted to know. Up to now I didn't know
he was not coming.
The Chairman. He appeared to have very good reasons which are
rather cogent -that did not go to his own convenience, I might add.
Mr. Hats. May I ask one further question ? I am very pleased with
the advance notice that we have been given on Mr. Sugarman.
Mrs. Pfost. I am, too.
Mr. Hats. That is the kind of thing we have been asking for
here. I would just like to know if we can count on that same sort
of prepared statements from the witnesses from now on, even if they
bring them in with them? I don't care if I have them in advance.
If they bring them along, jt is very helpful. I think it is a good
precedent.
The Chairman. When it is convenient to have the prepared state-
ments, they will be prepared and they will be presented to the mem-
bers of the committee as far in advance as it might be possible for
the committee to receive them.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Chairman, I would like to say we have one
witness coming on Friday, Professor Rowe, who will not have a state-
ment, as far as I know. I have not yet been able to see Mr. Rowe. I
have talked to h,im on the phone. My chief interest in calling him is
that he appeared before the McCarran committee, and testified at
some length on the foundations, and I think his testimony is very val-
uable. I don't know what he is going to say.
Mr. Hats. May we have his full name and where he is from?
Mr. Wormser. It is David Rowe, of Yale.
The Chairman. Are we ready for a vote? All in favor of Mrs.
Pfost's motion, say "aye."
Mr. Hats. Aye.
Mrs, Pfost. Aye.
,. The Chairman, Opposed, "no,"
Mr. Goodwin. No.
The Chairman. No. Mr. Wolcott's proxy votes no.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Chairman, right there, I would like to say this, that
the motion would have been lost in any case, because of a tie vote, but
the next time the chairman votes a proxy, I am afraid I will have to
raise a point of order, and cite the section of the Rules of the House.
But I won't at this time.
The Chairman. If you so desire, that may be done. Who is the first
witness ?
418 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr, Wormser. Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Andrews, Commis-
sioner of Internal Eevenue, and the Assistant Commissioner, Mr.
Sugarman. I have called them for several reasons, primarily because
I think the committee ought to know what the criteria are that the
Bureau uses in determining whether foundation activities cross the
line. Mr. Sugarman has a written statement, but I believe Mr.
Andrews would like first to make an oral statement. I think they
might both be called together.
The Chairman. Of course that is permissible. Mr. Commissioner,
will you and Mr. Sugarman come forward, please ?
The procedure which the committee has adopted is to qualify all
witnesses, if you don't mind. Do you solemnly swear the testimony
you are about to give in this proceeding shall be the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God ?
Commissioner Andrews. I do.
Mr. Sugarman. I do.
The Chairman. First, Mr. Commissioner, I wish to apologize for
detaining you, as busy as I know you are, while housekeeping matters
have been discussed here.
Commissioner Andrews. I might say, Mr. Chairman, that it is not
unusual for us before the bar to be sort of innocent bystanders. That
is all right with us.
Mrs. Pfost. You make me feel a little better, Mr. Commissioner.
TESTIMONY OF T. COLEMAN ANDREWS, COMMISSIONER OF INTER-
NAL REVENUE, AND NORMAN A. SUGARMAN, ASSISTANT COMMIS-
SIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE
Mr. Wormser. Would you state your name and address for the
record, please?
Commissioner Andrews. T. Coleman Andrews, 1516 Park Fairfax,
Alexandria, Va.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Sugarman, would you also, please?
Mr. Sugarman. Norman A. Sugarman, 8403 Donnybrook Drive,
Chevy Chase, Md.
Mr. Wormser. I understand, Commissioner, you would like to make
an oral statement first?
Commissioner Andrews. Yes, sir ; I would, if I may, Mr. Chairman,
Mrs. Pfost, and gentlemen of the committee.
This, as you probably know, is a pretty technical question, and for
that reason the presentation this morning will be made by Mr. Sugar-
man, who is the Assistant Commissioner in Charge of Technical
Matters. However, beforehand, I would like to say just a few things
about the matter from the standpoint of the Eevenue Service in a
general way.
First of all, I would like to assure the committee that we, of course,
are aware of the problem involved in this question of exempt organi-
zations. There are tens of thousands of such organizations, in fact,
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 419
-well over 100,000 of one kind or another. Not all of them, in fact by
no means the majority of them, are in the category that constitutes a
problem. Nevertheless, the number of them is growing to some ex-
tent, and we in our awareness of the situation are trying to do some-
thing about it from the standpoint of the jurisdiction that we are
supposed to exercise over this type of organization. Formerly the
entire matter was handled in the Revenue Service here at the head-
quarters in Washington. In the general plan of decentralization of
the operation of the Revenue Service, however, we have concluded,
and I believe wisely, that the best way to get on top of the problem, to
the extent that it is a problem, is to decentralize the review and con-
trol of these organizations to our field offices. So that now the question
of reviewing the returns and dealing with matters pertaining to
exempt organizations is under the control of the district directors of
which there are 64.
Generally always there is at least 1 district director's office in each
State; in some States there are more than 1, which accounts for the
fact that there are 64 of them. There all problems dealing with the
matter of exempt organizations are handled by the directors when
there is precedent for the settlement, or rather determination, of
decision in the particular case. If it is a new problem, of course, it
has to come to Washington for review, and usually for the answer.
Or if it is a problem as to which the director is not satisfied that he
is sure just what to do, then he may on his own motion send it in to be
reviewed here.
So we are doing something about it, as much as we can, but there
is an aspect of this matter that I think should be brought to the atten-
tion of the committee as a matter of background.
The Revenue Service is charged primarily, of course, with collect-
ing the revenues. That is not quite as trite as it may sound. As you
ladies and gentlemen know, we are today confronted in the Revenue
Service with raising the highest level of taxation that the country has
ever had. We found ourselves 16 months ago beset with problems of
an organizational and managerial nature of the most serious conse-
quences. One of them, of course, is the matter of keeping abreast of
what is happening in the case of these exempt organizations.
I have explained just what we have done in order to be sure that
we are aware of the operations of these organizations ; what has to be
done in order to keep track of them, however, is another matter.
Since our problem is primarily one of collecting taxes it must be re-
membered that when we devote any time at all to keeping abreast of
whether or not a corporation once given exempt status continues to be
entitled to that status is from our point of view a sterile operation,
pretty largely. In other words, by the very nature of the law itself,
as you will see from the presentation which Mr. Sugarman will make,
we find ourselves in the position in our control of the returns of these
corporations where the time that we spend on it is not fully productive
and cannot possibly be, it cannot be productive except to a very small
420 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
degree under the most optimistic outlook. So as to these corporations
or these organizations,' we are in the position where contrary to our
general experience, where when we carry on enforcement activities,
there is a very substantial return on the effort expended, many *tiBitf&sv
as a matter of fact, the cost of it here, whatever we do, is a matter
of spending money for which there is very little return.
We, like all Government organizations, are not surfeited with funds,
and we have to divide our funds up in a way that we can make the
best use of them. I want you to know, however, that notwithstanding
this particular problem as to these particular types of organizations,
that we are not slighting this aspect of our operations. We are giv-
ing just as much attention and will continue to give it as much atten-
tion as its priority in terms of importance demands.
Those are the general observations I would like to make, plus this
one. I, of course, could not help but listen with a great deal of interest
to what Mrs. Pfost said about the problem of the committee. , Ob-
viously, and without undertaking, Mr. Chairman, to inject myself into
the policy of the committee, any statement of the kind that we have
here this morning naturally would lay a groundwork of the under-
standing of the problem which we are very happy indeed to provide.
I should like to suggest, therefore, if it is in order, that Mr. Sugarman
be permitted to read his statement in its entirety, though it is a bit
lengthy. I think it would be extremely useful to the members of the
committee to see exactly what the situation is from the standpoint of
the revenue laws, and what the problems involved are.
Thank you very much.
The Chairman. Does counsel have any questions ?
Mr. Wormser. I presume you will stay, Mr. Andrews, through Mr.
Sugarman's recitation. There may be some questions that I would like
to direct to you, instead of Mr. Sugarman, after he is through.
Commissioner Andrews. I came with that purpose. We will stay
just as long as the committee feels it needs us.
Mr. Wormser. I suggest Mr. Sugarman go on with his statement.
Mr. Hats. There are two brief questions in order to clarify in my
own mind something the Commissioner said.
One, Mr. Commissioner, did I understand you to say that under the
new policy the tax exemption determinations would be under the
control of the district directors insofar as they have precedent to
guide them ?
Commissioner Andrews. That is right. In other words, the district
directors will have the right to grant exempt status in those situations
where it is perfectly obvious from the laws, rules and regulations, and
precedents, that there is no question about the organization being en-
titled to exempt status, the idea, of course, being to avoid loading the
headquarters up with just purely routine decisions.
Mr. Hays. I understand that. But there will be a central control
over that, and they will operate very closely in conformity with
precedent ? In other words, you won't have every director going on
his own to grant tax exemption if he thinks so? He has to follow
tTJCK^BXEMPH EOtHSTDATIONS 421
pretty efosely the policies laid down by the Bureau as I understand ;
is that correct ? ;■>../, ;m.
Commissioner Andrews. That, Mr. Hays, is true asrtd all; of our
operations. The field has not been turned loose on its own. One of
the fundamental aspects of our form of organization, with the plan-
ning and control headquarters in Washington, and the decentraliza-
tion of operations to the field, is to enable us to better review the
decisions of the operating officials and be certain that proper principles
and policies are being followed. That would be true m this case..
Mr. Hays. Thank you. I have just one other question. .
I understood, I think, you to say that once the tax-exempt status is
granted, that you continue to keep a constant surveillance on that
operation, that you don't keep checking them constantly to see whether
they are violating their exempt privileges, because, I believe you said,
it was a rather sterile operation. But I do assume, if you have any
complaint at all, that you give it a recheck ; is that correct '(
Commissioner Andrews. First of all, let me correct the impression
I seem to have given you. I don't mean that we don't keep check on
them. It is a part of our duty to compare from time to time what is
actually taking place with what these organizations said in their
charters and other documents they intended to do and upon which
their exemption was granted. We will and are carrying out a review
of their operations to the extent that we can, and we expect to be
able to step that up somewhat considerably from here on out.
Mr. Hats. Thank you. That does clear it, because I had the other
impression.
The Chairman. In your statement, Mr. Commissioner, you referred
to the fact that there were in excess of 100,000 tax-exempt activities
of all types. It was my information that there were some 300,000
tax-exempt organizations of all types. I am wondering if that figure
is high?
Commissioner Andrews. Actually we have not made any detailed
analysis of it, but I inquired about that before we came over here,
and our present estimate is in the neighborhood of 120,000 of all kinds.
That would be churches and colleges and universities and chambers
of commerce, and community funds, and that sort of thing.
Mr. Sugarman corrects me to say that would not include all the
churches.
Mr. Koch. Will you venture a guess as to how many are operating
under 101, subdivision (6) , that being the category we seem to be par-
ticularly interested in ?
Commissioner Andrews. I could not answer that as of today be-
cause we have not yet completed our study of that. But in 1946, 1 be-
lieve there were some 14,000 in that category. Of course, it has in-
creased some since then.
Mr., Wormser. Isn't it true, Mr. Andrews, that the category is so all-
inclusive that it makes it rather difficult to extract statistical informa-
tion about foundations % It includes colleges and various other insti-
tutions which are not from the public standpoint foundations.
422 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Commissioner Andrews. Yes, that is true. This is one type of ac-
tivity, frankly, which almost defies accurate statistical analysis. I
think the figures that you have already before you, which ^under-
stand were put in some time ago, may be relied upon as being at least
substantially correct.
The Chairman. We thank you very kindly, then, if you will be
available. You may be seated wherever you think it is most com-
fortable, or we would be glad to have you sit there with Mr. Sugar-
man.
Commissioner Andrews. If it is agreeable to the chairman, I will
stay where I am.
The Chairman. Very good. The chairman wants to make this one
observation, before Mr. Sugarman begins. The difficulty of gather-
ing the statistical data to which the Commissioner referred was one
of the reasons that the chairman had in mind, as constituting a basis
for this inquiry, the uncertainty of it all, and in view of the impor-
tance it was my idea that we ought to get into a postion of being able
to draw a more accurate picture of it all.
You may proceed.
Commissioner Andrews. Mr. Chairman, if I may, I would like to
add one thing with respect to what you said. To the extent that we
are able to do so, we are ready, willing and anxious to help the commit-
tee clarify some of the mystery of this thing. We will do what we
can in that direction.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Do you have any preliminary statement to make in connection with
this statement?
Mr. Wormsbr. No. I have a number of questions which I think
will bring out additional material after Mr. Sugarman has read his
statement.
The Chairman. If it is agreeable to the committee, the committee
will permit Mr. Sugarman to complete his statement and then subject
himself to inquiry. You may complete your statement uninterrupted.
Mr. Sugarman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I apprecite your cour-
tesy in letting me read the statement without interruption.
I am happy to have the opportunity to appear before your com-
mittee to make this statement as to the application of the tax laws re-
lating to exempt organizations. We in the Revenue Service have been
very much interested in your study and are glad to make whatever
contribution we can to your deliberations.
We have had several meetings with your counsel, Mr. Wormser,
and members of the staff, to explore the background of the matter.
I believe that these meetings have been helpful in relating the work of
the Eevenue Service in the exempt organizations field to the overall
responsibilities of the Service.
I would like, therefore, to take a few moments at this time to indicate
what that relationship is.
I. THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE REVENUE SERVICE TOR TAX
COLLECTION AND ADMINISTRATION
The basic job of the Internal Revenue Service is the collection of
taxes to finance the operations of Government. The proper perform-
ance of this function must not only be the principal concern of the
Revenue Service but it is also a matter of vital interest to the Nation.
The taxes — and therefore our principal functions — are imposed by
laws enacted by the Congress. There are more than 70 different Fed-
eral internal revenue taxes so imposed. These range all the way from
taxes on adulterated butter to the surtax or* personal holding com-
panies, from taxes on wagers to taxes on wines, and from the taxes you
pay on the wages of your household help to taxes on the millions of
income of our larger corporations. The collection of these taxes in-
volves the processing of nearly 95 million tax returns. It includes the
examination of these returns, the assertion of deficiencies, penalties,
and interest, the allowance of refunds, the collection of delinquencies
and the conduct of litigation wherever necessary. Back of this, how-
ever, is our tremendous job of maintaining voluntary compliance by
providing tax forms, instructions and other types of taxpayer
assistance.
In seeing that the taxes levied by Congress are paid, the Revenue
Service does not seek to act as a regulatory agency. We know full
well the importance of taxes in the conduct of business and in other
activities; but we do not attempt to tell anyone how to run his business
or what financial or. personal decisions he should make. Our job is to
determine the tax consequences of decisions and actions of others and
in so doing to apply the tax laws fairly in accordance with the terms
of the statute.
Each of the many tax laws we administer has provisions imposing
tax as well as provisions exempting various persons, organizations and
transactions from tax. These exemptions are not uniform for all taxes
and it is necessary in each instance to determine their application in
accordance with the particular rules laid down by Congress as con-
strued by the courts.
The function which these exemption provisions perform in the tax
system is to establish the areas of nonliability for tax, and conversely
to limit or define the taxable persons or objects. The determination of
exemption, therefore, is an adjunct of the machinery for placing all
taxable persons and objects on the tax rolls and determining their
liability.
In the administration of the tax laws, the determination of exemp-
tion follows the pattern generally of procedures for other determina-
tions. The national office of the Revenue Service prepares tax regula-
tions, which are issued with the approval of the Secretary of the
Treasury, setting forth the statutory provisions and the basic rules
for their implementation. The national office also prepares the forms
and instructions which are used by all taxpayers and exempt organi-
423
424 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
zations required to file tax returns, information returns and applica-
tions for exemption. The national office also issues rulings and other
technical guide materials indicating the application of principles and
official interpretations to the facts of various categories of cases. The
national office also develops the nationwide policies and objectives of
programs for audit and enforcement of liability under the law.
The Revenue Service has a system of regional administration under
the general direction of the national office. There are nine regional
commissioners each of whom carries out the policies and programs of
the national office through field operations conducted by district
directors.
The district directors have responsibility for the enforcement of
the tax lawsin their districts. They receive and process tax returns,
conduct the necessary audits and examinations to determine liability,
provide taxpayers with opportunities for hearings where there is dis-
agreement, and assess and collect the taxes that are due and owing the
Government.
It is incumbent upon persons and organizations claiming exemption
from tax to establish their exemption. Organizations claiming ex-
emption must file their applications with district directors' offices.
District directors are authorized to determine exemption in routine
cases where the application of the statute is clear under already issued
regulations and rulings of the national office. Cases which present
involved or questionable issues and do not fall in the routine category
are referred to the national office for the issuance of a ruling as to
whether exemption is proper under the law.
Certain exempt organizations are required to file annual informa-
tion returns. These are checked against the list of such organiza-
tions in the district director's office. The district directors have the
responsibility for examining these returns and determining whether
the organization is entitled to continued exemption under the law.
If upon such examination and review, it is determined that the
organization is not entitled to exemption, then the organization is
subject to the usual provisions and liability applicable to taxable
organizations.
The Internal Revenue Service, however, does not have the final
authority to deny exemption to any organization. Where the Serv-
ice asserts that a tax is owing, its determination may be appealed to
one of several courts. This appeal may be made by either of the
following procedures: The disputed tax liability may be paid and
then suit brought by the taxpayer for refund in a United States
district court or in the United States Court of Claims. On the other
hand, the party has the right under existing law to choose to appeal
an asserted income, estate or gift tax deficiency prior to paying the
tax, in which case an appeal is taken to the Tax Court of the United
States. An adverse decision rendered by a district court, the Court
of Claims, or the Tax Court may be appealed to a higher court in such
cases, just as in other tax cases. Accordingly, judicial interpreta-
tions play an important role in determining the course of adminis-
tration of the exemption provisions.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 425
II. TAX LAW PROVISIONS FOB EXEMPTION
As previously indicated the revenue laws contain numerous pro-
visions providing and affecting the exemption of many kinds of organi-
zations and activities. In testimony in 1952 before the Cox commit-
tee we filed a compilation, 50 pages in length, containing the text of
the various tax law provisions. This indicates the volume and scope
of the statutes on this subject which we are obliged to interpret and
administer. The terms of each of these provisions are, of course, of
paramount importance because they state the tests which the Revenue
Service has available to it by statute for determining exemption.
However, I shall confine my remarks today to the provisions of law
relating to exemption of organizations from the income tax since I
believe that these are the provisions in which you are most interested
in your current study.
In general, the statutory pattern under the income tax exemption
provisions may be described as follows : (a) The granting of exemp-
tion to certain organizations; (5) the allowance of related tax benefits
in the form of deductions for contributions, - (<?) limitations imposed
on exemption and related tax benefits; and (d) filing and publicity
requirements.
A. EXEMPTION fBOVlSIONS
The principal provisions of the present law governing exemption
from tax of organizations, including foundations, are found in section
101 of the Internal Revenue Code. This section exempts from the
income tax 18 types of organizations, which come within the limita-
tions stated in the statute. These organizations may be generally
described as follows :
Labor, agricultural, and horticultural organizations. 1
Fraternal beneficiary societies. 2
Credit unions and certain mutual reserve fund organizations. 3
Cemetery companies. 4
Business leagues, chambers of commerce, real estate boards, and
broads of trades. 5
Civic leagues, and local associations of employees with charitable or
educational purposes. 6
Clubs organized for recreation and pleasure. 7
Local benevolent life insurance associations, and mutual ditch, irri-
gation, or telephone companies. 8
Mutual nonlif e insurance companies with gross income $75,000 or
under. 9
Farmers' cooperatives (which are subject to tax, however, on income
not allocated to patrons) . 10
Crop financing organizations for farmers' cooperatives. 11
1 See sec. 101 (1).
8 See sec. 101 (3).
'See sec. 101 (4),
4 See sec. 101 5).
'See sec. 101 (7).
« See sec. 101 (8).
*See sec. 101 (0).
8 See sec. 101 (10).
»See sec. 101 (11).
P» See sec. 101 (12).
u See sec. 101 (13).
426 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Corporations organized to hold property for any other exempt or-
ganization. 12
Corporate instrumentalities of the United States specifically exempted
by Congress. 13 ,,,--{'
Voluntary employees' beneficiary association."
Local teachers' retirement fund associations."
Religious or apostolic associations. 16
Voluntary Federal employees' beneficiary associations. 17
Religious, charitable, scientific, literary, or educational organiza^
tions. 18
The last category contains the general classification in which we
believe this committee is most interested. This category is provided
in paragraph (6) of section 101 as follows:
Corporations, and any community chest, fund or foundation, organized and
operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, literary, or educational
purposes, or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals, no part of
the net earnings of which inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or
individual and no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on
propaganda, or otherwise attempting, to influence legislation.
Religious, charitable and educational organizations have been ex-
empt from income tax in all revenue acts. The language of the pres-
ent provisions of section 101 (6) has been in effect since 1934. In
passing, it may be noted that exemption from income tax carries with
it exemption from personal holding company and excess profits taxes.
Elective treatment is also provided such organizations as to whether
they and their employees will be subject to the social security taxes,
and they are exempt from the Federal unemployment tax.
It will be noted that section 101 (6) applies to corporations, com-
munity chests, funds and foundations which qualify under the statute.
The term "foundation" is not defined in the statute ; and for tax pur-
poses a so-called foundation may be an "association" treated as a
corporation or may be a trust. The Internal Revenue Code does not
seek, or make it necessary, to distinguish between so-called founda-
tions and other organizations for purposes of the exemption statutes.
B. DEDUCTIONS FOE CONTKIBUTIONS TO SECTION 101 (6) ORGANIZATIONS
The full meaning of exemption from income tax as a religious,
charitable, etc., organization under section 101 (6) is not apparent
without a consideration of those sections of the Internal Revenue Code
granting deductions for income, estate, and gift tax purposes for con-
tributions to certain organizations. In general, an exempt status as
an educational, charitable, etc., organization will permit contribu-
tions to the organization to be deductible for purposes of income,
estate and gift taxes.
For income tax purposes, the deduction is generally limited in the
case of an individual to 20 percent of his adjusted gross income
and in the case of a corporation to 5 percent of its net income.
These percentage limitations do not apply to trusts if they comply
with certain conditions under section 162 (a) and section 162 (g) of
33 See sec. 101 (14).
i" See sec. 101 (15).
"See sec. 101 (16).
15 See sec. 101 (17).
"See sec 101 (18).
w See sec. 101 (19).
"See sec. 101 (6).
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 427
the Internal Revenue Code. A trust which satisfies the conditions
may deduct the full amount of its gross income which is paid, perma-
nently set aside or used for purposes equivalent to those under section
101 (6) . This may actually render the trust not taxable for a period
of time, although it does not seek classification as an exempt
organization.
Legislation enacted in 1950, however, provides rules under which
both exempt organizations and trusts may lose, in whole or in part, the
tax advantages heretofore available to them.
C. BESTRICTIONS ON EXEMPTION AND BELATED TAX BENEFITS
The basic limitations on the tax exemption privilege are stated in
section 101 (6) itself, which requires that, to qualify for exemption
under that subsection, no part of the net earnings of the organization
may inure to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual,
and no substantial part of its activities may be devoted to carrying
on propaganda, or otherwise attempting, to influence legislation.
Section 101, as amended by the Revenue Act of 1950, also provides that
if an organization is operated primarily to carry on a trade or
business for profit, it shall not be exempt on the grounds that its
profits are payable to an exempt organization.
Supplement U of the Internal Revenue Code also provides that if
an organization exempt under section 101 (6) (other than a church)
carries on a trade or business which is unrelated to its exempt func-
tion, its exemption is not lost but the income from such business is
subject to the income tax. Supplement U was added to the Internal
Revenue Code by the Revenue Act of 1950 and was first effective for
taxable years beginning in 1951.
Additional restrictions are provided in sections 3813 and 3814 of
the Internal Revenue Code, which were also added by the Revenue
Act of 1950 and which first became effective for taxable years be-
ginning in 1951. Section 3813 provides that, with certain exceptions,
organizations exempt under section 101 (6) shall lose their exemption
if they engage in specified prohibited transactions. It should be
understood that these transactions are not actually forbidden by the
revenue laws but are prohibited only in the sense of being inconsistent
with continued tax privileges. These provisions prohibit the creator
of the organization, a substantial contributor thereto, or a member
of the family of either, or a corporation controlled by either, (1) from
receiving a loan of income or corpus of the organization without
giving adequate security and reasonable interest, (2) from receiving
compensation from the organization except a reasonable allowance for
personal services actually rendered, (3) from receiving services from
the organization on a preferential basis, (4) from selling a substantial
amount of securities or property to the organization for more than
adequate consideration, (5) from buying a substantial amount of
securities or property from the organization for less than adequate
consideration, and (6) from participating with the organization in
any other transaction which diverts a substantial amount of income
or corpus to such person. Provision is made for appropriate dis-
allowance of deductions for contributions to an organization engaging
in such transactions and for subsequent restoration of its exemption
where appropriate.
428 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
: Section 3814 provides that an organization may lose its exemption
under section 101 (6) if, in view of its exempt purposes, its total
accumulations of income are unreasonable in amount or duration, or
are used to a substantial degree for other than exempt purposes, or
are invested in such a manner as to jeopardize the carrying out of
such purposes.
It should be noted that the prohibitions on certain transactions and
against accumulations under sections 3813 and 3814 are not applicable
to those organizations exempt under section 101 (6) which are
religious organizations, educational organizations with a faculty,
curriculum and pupils in attendance at the place of education, pub-
licly supported organizations, and organizations to provide medical
or hospital care or medical education or research.
D. FILING AND PUBLICITY REQUIREMENTS
In general, Organizations exempt under section 101 (6) are not re-
quired to file income tax returns like taxable corporations. Section
54 (f) of the Internal Revenue Code does require, with certain excep-
tions, that section 101 (6) organizations file annual information
returns. These returns call for statements of gross income, receipts,
disbursements and other financial information. No return is required
to be filed in the case of a religious organization, an educational or-
ganization with a curriculum and a body of students present at the
place of education, and a charitable organization supported primarily
by the general public.
Section 153 of the code also provides that each section 101 (6)
organization required to file the annual information return shall also
furnish information showing (1) its gross income, (2) its expenses,
(3) its disbursements from income for exempt purposes, (4) its
accumulation of income in the year, (5) its aggregate accumulations of
income at the beginning of the year, (6) its disbursements of principal
in current and prior years for exempt purposes, and (7) a balance
sheet as of the beginning of the year. The statute requires the above-
listed information to be made available by the Department for public
inspection.
These requirements of section 153 of the code were added by the
Revenue Act of 1950 and first became effective for the taxable years
beginning in 1950.
III. INTERPRETATION OF THE TAX EXEMPTION PROVISIONS
The provisions of the tax laws on exempt organizations are subject
to the same problems of interpretation and application as other pro-
visions of the tax laws. However, there are two factors which make
the problems of interpretation and application unusually difficult
under the provisions of section 101 (6) which is the general section
granting exemption to charitable, religious, and educational organiza-
tions. ^ The first factor is that while the statute uses such terms as
"charitable," "scientific," and "educational" as tests for exemption,
these terms are not defined in the statute. They are matters on which,
obviously, reasonable minds may differ ; and they are not terms com-
monly used in financial or accounting matters so as to have acquired
a ready meaning for tax purposes.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 429
The second important factor is that the statutory terms have re-
mained virtually unchanged even though the conditions and circum-
stances in this country have changed., As indicated earlier, religious,
charitable, and educational organizations have been exempt frGnv
income tax in all revenue acts. These provisions came into the law
at a time when, comparatively, the rates were very low. The courts
indicated that while normally provisions exempting taxpayers from
tax are to be strictly construed, the exemption under section 101 (6)
is to be liberally construed. The Supreme Court in Helvering v. Bliss
said, in 1934 (293 U. S. 144), that the provisions granting exemption
of income devoted to charity are liberalizations of the law in the
taxpayer's favor, were begotten from motives of public policy, and
are not to be narrowly construed. This approach appears to have
dominated judicial thinking in this area. Thus, the courts have held
that, while charitable acts normally are considered as being done
without recompense or profit, it is not necessary for exemption as
charitable that an organization provide its services free of charge ; 19
the term "educational" is broader than mere activities such as those of
schools and colleges, it includes the encouragement of good citizen-
ship; 20 and the term "scientific" is broader than the basic sciences and
includes, for instance, improvement of motion picture photography. 21
The Revenue Service in its administration of the tax laws is, of course,
bound to give effect to the principles and interpretations contained in
court decisions.
Mr. Wormser, your counsel asked me particularly to discuss today
political propaganda and Un-American activity as factors affecting
exemption under the income tax laws. I shall be glad to discuss these
matters as they are encountered in the interpretation and application
of the tax laws.
A. POLITICAL PBOPAGANDA
In considering the phrase "political propaganda" from a tax law
standpoint, it is first necessary to distinguish between two kinds of
organizations which may be regarded as political. The first includes
those engaged in political activity in the popular sense of the term,
that is the promotion and support of a political party and the support
of candidates for office. The second includes those organized and
operated primarily for the purpose of promoting principles of gov-
ernment, or are engaged in activities pertaining to the conduct or form
of government, or seeking to effect certain systems of administration,
or in legislative activities to accomplish these or other purposes.
There is no provision of law exempting political organizations of the
first type from Federal income tax. In this connection, attention
may be called to the provisions of the income tax regulations which
prohibit deduction from gross income for contributions of —
sums of money expended for lobbying purposes, the promotion or defeat of legis-
lation, the exploitation of propaganda, including advertising other than trade
advertising, and contributions for campaign expenses * * *. 22
The ban against deductions for such purposes has also been applied
by the Supreme Court in the Textile Mills Securities Corp. case, "
18 Salem Lutheran Home Association, Tax Court memo, op., May 26, 1943.
"Rose D. Forbes. (1927), 7 BTA 209.
81 American Society of Clnematographers (1040), 42 BTA 675.
"Sees. 39.23 (o)-l and 39.23 (q")-l of Regulations 118.
33 Textile Mills Security Corp. v. Commissioner ((1941) 314 V. S. 326).
49720 — 54 — pt. 1 28
2a
43G TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
also Roberts Dairy Go. v. Commissioner?* to deductions claimed as
trade or business expenses.
Organizations of the second type referred to generally apply for
•exemption under section 101 (6) of the Code as educational organiza-r
lions. The determination of whether they are -exempt is then made
under the statutory language which requires first that they be organ-
ized and operated exclusively for educational purposes.
The phrase "political propaganda" as such does not appear in the
tax Code or regulations. Nor are the terms "propaganda" and
"political" defined in the tax statutes or the regulations. The require-
ment, that as condition to exemption of an organizing "no substantial
part" of its activities "is carrying on propaganda, or otherwise at-
tempting, to influence legislation," was added to the statute by the
Revenue Act of 1934. It has remained in the law without change.
The committee reports and the language of the 1934 Act establish
that the words "carrying on propaganda" do not stand alone but must
be read together with the words "to influence legislation." Thus the
law expressly proscribes only that propaganda which is to influence
legislation.
Moreover, the statutes does not deny exemption to organizations any
part of whose activities is carrying on propaganda, or otherwise at-
tempting to influence legislation, but only to organizations, a substan-
tial part of whose activities is of this nature.
The term "exclusively" is also a troublesome one in attempting to
determine whether an organization is organized and operated exclu-
sively for educational purposes. The statute does not define "exclu-
sively." While it would seem to be synonymous with "solely," the
courts have interpreted the word much more liberally.
One writer in the tax field has described the precedents as estab-
lishing the following rule:
* * * A primary devotion is enough ; totality of devotion is not required. The
general or predominate purpose is to be considered. Activities which are
not * * * educational in themselves, but merely the means of accomplishing
the desired purposes, do not prevent the desired purposes from being deemed
"exclusive" under the statute. * * * a purpose, "incidental, contributory, sub-
servient, or mediate" to one of the statutory purposes will not prevent an organ-
ization from being within the required category. 8 "
Thus, with such terms as "educational," "exclusively," "substantial,"
and "propaganda" in the statute, there has been a long history of
varying interpretations and difficulty in establishing readily definable
lines as to exemption of educational organizations and the effect of
political activity in determining exemption.
The present Treasury Department regulations contain the following
pertinent provisions as to exemption of educational organizations :
An educational organization within the meaning of the Internal Revenue Code
is one designed primarily for the improvement or development of the capabili-
ties of the individual, but, under exceptional circumstances, may include an
association whose sole purpose is the instruction of the public, or an association
whose primary purpose is to give lectures on subjects useful to the individual
and beneficial to the community, even though an association of either class has
incidental amusement features. An organization formed, or availed of, to dis-
seminate controversial or partisan propaganda is not an educational organiza-
** C. C. A. 8, 1952, 195 F. (2d) 948.
M l Paul, Federal Estate and Gift Taxation (1942), sec. 12.19.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 431
tion within the meaning of the code. However, the publication of books or the
.giving of lectures advocating a cause of a controversial nature shall not of itself
be sufficient to deny an organization the exemption, if carrying on propaganda,
or otherwise attempting, to influence legislation forms no substantial part of its
activities, its principal purpose and substantially all of its activities being clearly
of a nonpartisan, noncontroversial, and educational nature. 26
Of necessity the regulations leave many questions to be resolved in
individual cases upon consideration of all the facts and circumstances
■of each case. In addition, the court decisions must be considered. A
brief summary of the trend of judicial decisions under section 101 (6)
may therefore be helpful.
Resort to the courts is a natural result of the statute, since it pro-
vides much leeway for varied opinions in a field in which persons are
likely to have strong personal views. Accordingly, court decisions
have been numerous and have played a major role in establishing the
scope of the exemption.
In the early days, the Revenue Service tried to resolve cases in-
volving controversial subjects by distinguishing between education on
the one hand and propaganda on the other.
The statute was interpreted as requiring disallowance of exemption
where there was an attempt to disseminate information about con-
troversial matters or to develop and publicize facts leading to a sug-
gested solution of current social, economic, or other problems.
This was based upon Treasury regulations which held that "asso-
ciations formed to disseminate controversial or partisan propaganda
are not educational within the meaning of the statute." It was held
with a few exceptions that an organization was not exclusively edu-
cational when either its purposes or activities touched upon a subject
thought to be controversial.
Taxpayers very soon began to contest this position and the result
was a series of circuit court decisions requiring a considerably broader
interpretation of the statute.
An early case involved the American Birth Control League. 2T
This organization was organized to collect and distribute informa-
tion about the political, social and economic facts of birth control and
to enlist the support and cooperation of statesmen and legislators in
effecting repeal and amendment of statutes dealing with its prevention.
The Bord of Tax Appeals denied deduction of contributions to the
League on the ground that it was not "exclusively educational" be-
cause it was formed to disseminate propaganda about a controversial
matter and engaged in efforts to influence legislation.
In 1930, the court of appeals for the second circuit affirmed, resting
its decision on the much more narrow ground that Congress did not
intend to subsidize political activities as educational ana intimating
that the controversial aspect of the subject matter was not significant.
The court stated :
* * * The collection and publication of the information * * * was also a
legitimate scientific enterprise, like any collection of medical data. We cannot
discriminate unless we doubt the good faith of the enterprise.
This raises the only question which seems to us important, which is, whether
the league is also agitating for the repeal of laws preventing birth control * * *
Political agitation as such is outside the statute * * *.
"Sec, 39.101 (6)-l (c) of Regulations 118.
» Slee v. Commissioned (G. C. A. 2, 1930, 42 F. (2d) 184).
432 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Another case ** concerned the deductibility of contributions to the
League for Industrial Democracy, organized " to promote an intel-
ligent understanding of the movement for a new social order based
on production for use, and not for profit" and which \,o that end,,
carried on research, published findings and conclusions and promoted
debates and discussions on social and economic problems.
The Board of Tax Appeals denied the deduction on the basis that
the league dealt with a controversial subject and had an ultimate-
objective which stamped its activities as partisan.
In 1931, the court of appeals for the second circuit reversed, holding
that, in the absence of a definition by Congress, the term "education"
was to be given its plain, ordinary meaning of "imparting or acquiring
knowledge" and that although the league claimed to have a definite
social doctrine, it "had no legislative program hovering over its activi-
ties" and was exclusively educational within the usuaL meaning, of
the word. The decision followed the Birth Control League case by
indicating also that a preconceived objective is not fatal to 101 (6)
exemption.
Still a third case 29 involved the deductibility for estate tax purposes
of two bequests, (1) to an organization to teach, expound, and propa-
gate the ideas of Henry George and (2) to another organization to
advocate Mr. George's ideas, to advocate abolition of taxes on industry
and its products in favor of a single tax on land, and to promote social
intercourse among single-tax people.
The Board of Tax Appeals sustained the Commissioner in toto,
holding that a legislative program was outside the intendment of the
statute and that each organization had a legislative program.
In a 1932 decision the court of appeals for the second circuit reversed'
as to the first bequest, holding that the recipient organization was
untainted by any legislative program even though the bequest was
made as one method of furthering the testator's desire that the prin-
ciples be enacted into law. The court affirmed disallowance of thfe
second bequest on the implied premise that it is not exclusively educa-
tional to disseminate conclusions without facts or to publicize a parti-
san viewpoint without explaining the reasons.
This decision is also consistent with the Birth Control League case
in indicating that education can sometimes go hand in hand with a
preconceived objective.
Also, the court seemed to acknowledge a difference between a fair
and full statement of facts concerning one side of a disputed question
and presenting preconceived opinions unsubstantiated by any basic
factual data.
Another precedent setting case involved an income-tax deduction
for contributions to the World League Against Alcoholism. 30 This
organization had as its purpose "to attain, by the means of education
and legislation, the total suppression throughout the world of
alcoholism * * *."
The Board of Tax Appeals found that despite its stated purpose,,
the league itself had no legislative program and indulged in no politi-
cal activities, but denied the deduction on the ground that the organ-
3a Wepl v. Commissioner (C. C. A. 2, 1931, 48 F. (2d) 811)
fLeubscher v. Commissioner (C. C. A. 2. 1932. 54 F. (2d) 998).
30 Cochran v. Commissioner (C. C. A. 4, 1935, 78 F. (2d) 176)
TAX-EXEMPT EOKJNDATI0NS 438
ization disseminated information about controversial' topics which
Some of its affiliates used in furtherance of legislative purposes.
In a 1935 decision the court of appeals for the third circuit reversed,
saying that the league's own purpose to eliminate alcoholism was not
controversial, and that, while it gathered and made available facts
about prohibition and other controversial issues, it did so impartially
:and that "the true test is not what the member organizations did with
the information supplied by the league, but in what spirit the infor-
mation is gathered and supplied."
The Board of Tax Appeals has followed these views of the circuit
•courts. In a case involving the League of Nations Association, 81 the
Board of Tax Appeals stated :
Indeed in the light of the broad meaning of the word "educate," some of the
activities of the association were educational, notwithstanding the highly contro-
versial character of the subject.
Other activities were beyond the realm of education, such as the writing of
letters to legislators * * *, urging our adherence to the World Court, presenting
issues before national political conventions, urging members to select candidates
for Congress * * *.
The 1934 amendment to the law by which were added the words
""and no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on propa-
ganda, or otherwise attempting, to influence legislation," indicated an
awareness by the Congress of the tenor of the court decisions already
discussed, and by indirection, a reluctance to hold the line on the basis
of the narrow interpretation by the Service of the 101 (6) educational
exemption.
Congress saw fit only to circumscribe the exemption with a restric-
tion against substantial activities to influence legislation. The com-
mittee reports show that as first proposed, the 1934 amendment to the
statutes read "and no substantial part of the activities of which is par-
ticipation in partisan politics or in carrying on propaganda, or other-
wise attempting, to influence legislation." 32 The words "participation
in partisan politics" were stricken from the bill, as enacted. All this
reasonably leads to the conclusion that the Congress at that time was
reluctant to require a narrow application of section 101 (6) as to
^'educational" organizations as the Service had at first attempted.
In 1940, the court of appeals for the first circuit held that contribu-
tions to the Birth Control League of Massachusetts, affiliated with
the American Birth Control League, were deductible after the organi-
zation had abandoned any legislative activities. 88
On the basis of these judicial precedents, we must conclude that it
is now reasonably established under the law that an organization may
have as its ultimate objective the creation of a public sentiment favor-
able to one side of a controversial issue and still secure exempt status
under section 101 (6) , provided it does not, to any "substantial" de-
gree, attempt to influence legislation, and provided further that its
methods are of an educational nature.
The cases are legion where a fine line must be drawn in determining
whether, on the basis of all facts presented, the organization may
qualify for a section 101 (6) exemption, or if not, whether it may
" James J. Forstall (1933), 29 B. T. A. 428.
M S. Rent. No. 558, 73d Cong., 2d sess., p. 26; C. R. 1939-1 fpt. 2) 586, 606.
*» Faulkner v. Commissioner (C. C. A. 1, 1940, 112 F. (2d) 987),
434 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
qualify under any other subsection of 101 (such as section 101 (&)
which provides for exemption of civic organizations not organized for
profit but operated solely for the promotion of social welfare), or
whether it does not qualify for any exemption and must, "therefore,
file income tax returns.
The task is an exceedingly difficult one for the Revenue Service. It
is one which we approach with full knowledge of its importance and
the necessity for complete objectivity.
B. UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITY
The term "un-American activity" poses some of the same problems
in relating it to tax law criteria for exemption as does the term "politi-
cal propaganda."
The term "un-American" does not appear as such, in the tax laws
or regulations. I have no hesitancy in stating, however, that it is the
firm policy of the Revenue Service to deny exemption to any organiza-
tion which evidence demonstrates is subversive.
The determination of the Revenue Service denying exemption must,
however, be based on lack of qualification under the terms of the tax
law, namely failure to qualify as an organization organized and
operated exclusively for educational purposes. It is our belief that an
organization which is truly subversive cannot be considered as ex-
clusively educational.
The Revenue Service is advised by the Department of Justice of
organizations shown on the Attorney General's subversive list result-
ing from a determination by the Attorney General under the Federal
employee's security program. 34
There are no organizations on that list which are also on our list of
exempt organizations.
In addition, statutory restriction on exemption is imposed by sec-
tion 11 (b) of the Internal Security Act of 1950. Under this act all
Communist-action and Communist-front organizations are required to
register with the Attorney General. Section 11(b) provides that :
No organization shall be entitled to exemption from* Federal income tax,
under section 101 of the Internal Revenue Code, for any taxable year If at any
time during such taxable year (1) such organization is registered under section
7, or (2) there is in effect a final order of the Board requiring such organiza-
tion to register under section 7.
Thus far no organizations have been reported to us by the Depart-
ment of Justice as registered under the Internal Security Act. I
understand the Department of Justice is engaged in seeking to require
registration of certain organizations. There has been no applica-
tion of this act to any organization currently exempt under the tax
laws.
Accordingly, under the laws administered by the Internal Revenue
Service, determinations are not made as to whether an organization
is un-American. It is sufficient for denial of exemption if it is de-
termined that the organization does not meet the present statutory
tests.
In conclusion, I would like to express appreciation for this oppor-
tunity to acquaint you with the work and procedure of the Revenue
Service in this important field.
** Pursuant to Executive Order No. 10450, dated April 27. 1953.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 435
I appreciate your attention to our problems under the tax laws and
I hope that my remarks have in turn given you some helpful infor-
mation.
The Chairman. Mr. Wormser, do you have some questions you,
wish to propound ?
Mr. Wormser. Yes. I would like to bring out first, if my under-
standing of the law is correct, that the only penalty which is im-
posed for the two major violations, engaging in subversive activity
or political activity is a loss of the income tax exemption, and the-
corresponding right to deduct against income tax for donations to-
the foundation. The principal of the fund remains and could still
be used for subversive or political purposes.
Mr. Sugarman. I think I shou
d add this. Of course, the impo-
sition of the tax with interest where it is determined that the or-
ganization while claiming exemption has not been exempt, particu-
larly the interest at 6 percent, could become fairly severe, and it is-
possible that a negligence, a fraud or even criminal penalties could
be imposed. I might say that such cases are rare, however.
Mr. Wormser. If you had the circumstance where the foundation
had started and operated for a number of years fully complying with
the law, and had gotten into the hands of persons who used it for un-
happy purposes, the statute of limitations would bar you.
Mr. Sugarman. Yes, that would be the case.
Mr. Wormser. As counsel of the committee, I am very sympa-
thetic to your difficult problem of drawing lines. There are several
areas in which the committee might consider making suggestions to-
Mr. Goodwin's Committee on Ways and Means to help you out of the
difficulty.
Take for example the political activity, where you have a quanti-
tative test, how do you apply that quantitative test? Is it by some
rule of percentage of the fund paid out to political purposes, or
dollar amount in relation to something else, or do you look at the
substance of what they have done ?
Mr. Sugarman. Mr. Wormser, we have explored many times the
possibility of working out some sort of quantitative test. At least
thus far we have come to the conclusion we cannot do that as a prac-
tical matter, because the nature of the organizations and the type of
activities vary so much. As a result, we take a substantive approach,
and attempt to look at the totality of operations of the organization
and judge the importance of the type of activities in question in the
total effect. As I indicated before in a quotation, in regard to the-
term "exclusively" you will see that the interpretation has been such
that it is the primary motivation which is really involved.
Mr. Wormser. It is an aspect of law on which you might conceiv-
ably get some help from the Ways and Means Committee.
Mr. Sugarman. Is it an aspect of law on which we have problems,,
and they are matters on which the most careful judgment must be
exercised.
Mr. Wormser. In connection with the subversive activities, do you
apply yourself only to the direct activities of the foundation itself ,.
or do you also check what grants it may have made to subversives or
to subversive organizations? Do you take that into account?
Mr. Sugarman. Yes, sir. The determination of exemption of
course is not merely on the basis of the activities of the organization
436 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
itself, but how its funds are used. In that connection when an or-
ganization makes contributions or distributions to other organiza-
tions, those other organizations in turn must be exempt. Whenever
we find an organization which to any noticeable degree is making con-
tributions to nonexempt organizations, we give them a warning letter,
and then follow up on that. Usually they abide by the warning letter
in order to retain their exemption.
Mr. Wormser. In that connection, and also in relation to political
activity, I would like to go on a bit with Mr. Hays' question. I would
like to know in a little detail what steps you actually take in checking
these activities. Do you, for example, require them to send you all
their publications ? The mere reports don't of course disclose the sub-
stance of what they have done. How do you go about this very
difficult job of being a watchdog ?
Mr. Stjgarman. I will be glad to answer that question although I
think I will have to break my answer into two parts. The first part
relates primarily to our method prior to our authorizing our field
offices to take a greater part in this work. That is, prior to October
of last year, all of the applications and all of the returns of these or-
ganizations came into Washington. That created a tremendous prob-
lem for us because the receipt of over 100,000 information returns
from these organizations every year of course meant a tremendous
task if we were to attempt to screen and examine every one of them.
We nevertheless had a program of screening them, and examining as
many as we were able to and referring to our field offices for direct field
examination of those in which we found any questionable activities
or financial items. So that our basic approach has been that through
review of their returns, which includes the data as to receipts and dis-
bursements, we would look for signs which would indicate the need
for further investigation.
I might add that of course a considerable source of investigation
and further study of these organizations is through our careful watch-
ing of published reports, including newspaper reports of activities
and of course through complaints which we receive from time to time
from taxpayers, from various other organizations, and I might say
also through Members of Congress.
Mr. Wormsee. Ordinarily, however, you would not see their pub-
lications, would you ?
Mr. Sugarman. No, we do not see all of their publications. I
should add that upon the receipt of complaints or publicity which
come to our attention, we will ask these organizations to supply
additional information to us, and we do follow up on that basis.
I might add, as I say, the second part, that since October of last
year we have authorized our field offices to examine these returns and
earlier this year, as a matter of fact, just last month, we authorized
our directors' offices to take the first step jn determining the exempt
status of these organizations in passing upon the exemption applica-
tions which are now required to be filed with them.
Our purpose in that was to bring to our local offices the responsibility
for work which we felt that they, being right on the scene and 411 a
position to know the facts, probably were in a better position than we
were in the first instance to assemble the necessary information, and
to keep on top of these problems.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 437
Accordingly, they now have the responsibility in the first instance
for examining these returns and passing on the exemption applications.
We feel that being in their own communities they can know what the
local situation is, and be able to keep up much better than we can- in
Washington the changing scene in terms of the type of activities of
these organizations through what they know goes on in the commu-
nity, the work of important men who may be forming foundations, the
newspaper reports, and other things which are available to them
locally, and they in the first instance can act as our gatherer of facts
and make determinations which are clearly under our established
rules and regulations, and then referring to us at the national office
those policy questions or controversial areas as to which further guid-
ance is needed.
I might say that our decentralization to our directors' offices of these
functions is comparatively new and for that reason we cannot point
to any figures which would indicate increased activity, but we believe
this will actually accomplish that in a stepped-up program of looking
further at these applications and returns, and the activities of these
organizations generally.
Mr. Wormser. Actually, though, you are not adequately staffed
and probably could not be to do a complete job of auditing the sub-
stance of the performance of these foundations. You rely chiefly on
miscellaneous outside information and have to, I suppose.
Mr. Sttgarman. Mr. Wormser, as the Commissioner has indicated,
we must of course balance the matter of the administration of the
exempt organizations with the administration of all the other pro-
visions of the Code, and also keeping in mind that our principal job is
tax collection. Our experience has indicated that by and large there
are comparatively few of the exempt organizations that really stray
from the nature of their original exemption. I am not saying that
by way of indicating that doesn't mean we don't have to check on
them, but I am saying in terms of the revenue consequences our re-
sults in this area are comparatively less productive than others. Ac-
cordingly, considering the balance of our total activities, and the
budget available to us, we do devote as much as we are able to this
area. What we are trying to do is by streamlining some of our pro-
cedures and by putting more of our activities at the local level to get a
greater use of the money that is available so that we can accomplish a
greater coverage wjtth the funds now available.
Mr. Wormser. Let me turn to something else, Mr. Sugarman. In
connection with the political activity, what significance do you give to
lobbying as such?
Mr. Sugarman. Of course, the term "lobbying" is not in our
statute, but it is in the regulations in regard to that provision I
quoted earlier on the Supreme Court decision in the Textile Mills
case that deductions are not permitted for contributions for lobbying
purposes. Actually, our statutory base is the language of propa-
ganda or otherwise attempting to influence legislation. The qualifica-
tion there, of course, is that the statute denies exemption only if a
substantial part of the activity of the organization is lobbying. . So
that the type of general education— public education—which an or-
ganization may propagate, which may end up in people expressing
their views to the Congress generally, would not come within the cate-
438 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
gory of lobbying, unless it is directed particularly to that end or takes
the form particularly of letters or telegrams and so forth, from the
organization to the Members of the Congress.
Mr. Wormser. I understand there are some exempt foundations
which are actually registered lobbyists.
Mr. Sugarman. There may be some that are, Mr. Wormser, but our
only control on that is whether or not that is a substantial part of
their activities. I would gather that some of them probably regis-
tered not because they considered themselves lobbyists in perhaps all
senses of the term but out of excess of caution, because they do have
occasion to appear before the congressional committees, and others.
Mr. Wormser. It is a factor, but not conclusive in your determina-
tion?
Mr. Sugarman. As I indicated before, this term, like others, must
be related to the particular activities of the organization, and looking
at the totality of its operations to see whether this forms a substantial
part of its activities.
Mr. Wormser. Part of form 990 (a) which the foundations are
required to file is confidential, and can be seen only with an Executive
order.
Mr. Sugarman. That is correct.
Mr. Wormser. Do you know the history or the origin of that re-
quirement? It seems to me that everything a foundation does" as a
public trust fund virtually should be susceptible to public scrutiny.
I don't understand why that was inserted in the law.
Mr. Sugarman. Mr. Wormser, the background of that matter is
that this whole subject of public inspection or publicity of information
in tax returns has been one which Congress has considered many times,
and it goes back to the early history of our tax laws. I can recall
from research I have made on the subject that back before the 1920's
there was controversy about it and for a time there was legislation to
make all tax returns public, and for a time there was a little pink
slip which people were to file which was made public, even though the
whole return was not. The present law we are operating, section 55 of
the Internal Revenue Code, applies to all types of return forms which
are filed under the income, estate, and gift taxes, and it is quite
clear by stating that such returns shall be open to inspection only upon
order of the President and under rules and regulations prescribed
by the Secretary of the Treasury and approved by the President.
I might add that there are also provisions which authorize inspec-
tion of returns or the obtaining of copies of them by, of course, the
taxpayer himself, or by stockholders of corporations, or by the Gov-
ernor of the State for tax purposes, and by the Ways and Means Com-
mittee of the House, the Finance Committee of the Senate, and the
Joint Committee on Internal Revenue Taxation, and by select com-
mittees of Congress when so specially authorized by a resolution of
Congress. However, except for these exceptions, the statute applies
across the board to all types of returns in requiring that they be held
confidential except upon order of the President and under regulations
which are approved by him.
The subject of exempt organizations for the reason you indicate,
that is, it is a matter of public support and tax exemption, may be in
somewhat of a different category than other types of organizations,
and it is for that reason that I think Congress in 1950 did provide
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 439
legislation which not only provided for certain types of information
to be filed in a return, but also that this information be made public.
JEowever, Congress did not seek to eliminate section 55, but merely
-added these specific provisions which I read to you, which indicated
that certain types of information should be made public, and this in-
formation is on public inspection in our offices of directors of internal
revenue and anyone here of course can by going to such an office obtain
that information and look at the return. However, that is a duplicate
■copy of the return which is filed by the organization. It does not con-
tain all the information which we ask for in the actual return form,
and the actual return form then itself is subject to the statutory pro-
visions on secrecy.
I should add that the Eevenue Service has been working on this
whole subject of publicity. We have in process a study on that matter
which, if approved — and I might say that the approval is beyond the
Internal Eevenue Service, because it requires authority which we do
not at the present time have — would provide for a greater publicity
■or public inspection on the part of the papers, the applications which
-are filed by these organizations.
Mr. Wormser. There is, of course, a sharp distinction between 990
(a) and income-tax returns. It is not strictly speaking an income-tax
return. It is an information return, is it not ?
Mr. Stjgarman. That is correct.
Mr. Wormser. And the information which is excluded from public
scrutiny includes grants made by the foundation, does it not ?
Mr. Sugarman. It includes the contributions which are made to the
foundation. In other words, the form 990 (a), page 1, provides for
reporting of receipts not reported elsewhere on this form, the principle
of which is contributions, gifts and grants received. The third page,
the duplicate copy, which is the copy which is left on public inspection
in the directors' offices, contains much of the same information except
that which I referred to, that is, the additional data not other-
wise called for, and particularly who made contributions to the
organization.
I might say that there are additional schedules and information of
course that we will ask for in examining the applications which would
not be in the duplicate copy, which is on public inspection.
Mr. Wormser. Now, Mr. Sugarman, would it not be useful to the
bureau, and also possible to serve a public purpose, if section 101 (6)
were broken down, separating the foundations, as we ordinarily use
the term, from the miscellaneous organizations that are now included
in it, because it is conceivable that some things should restrict founda-
tions in the ordinary sense which would not restrict a college, for ex-
ample. Isn't that possibly a useful suggestion to make to the Ways
and Means Committee ?
Mr. Stjgarman. I would have to say that anything that would help
to clarify the statute would be to the interest of the sound administra-
tion of the tax laws which we would welcome. I would have to say
that the form and the manner in which such legislation might be con-
sidered is something that is really outside of the province of the
Eevenue Service because there you get into basic tax policies and re-
lated policies, which are a matter for the Secretary of the Treasury,
as far as our department is concerned.
440 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Wormser. One more question, Mr. Sugarman. There is nothing:
in the statute which protects the public against the use by foundations
or the use of foundations to control business enterprises. You referred
to restrictions thafe the funds of the foundation cannot her invested in?
such a manner as to jeopardize the carrying out of the foundation's
purposes. That I can see might cover some instances in which it
might be alleged that because assets were frozen, they could not be-
properly applied to the foundation purposes. Beyond that, there is;
nothing in the law which prevents funds being invested as the founda-
tion wishes.
The case of the Duke Foundation has been mentioned. I know of no-
criticism of the Duke Foundation except as an illustration of some-
thing which might be worthy of attention. As I understand it, the
trustees of that foundation cannot sell Duke power stock without
unanimous consent of the board, which makes it virtually impossible.
You have a frozen asset, and one which permits control or partial
control of the corporation. There is nothing in the law which in any
way prevents that.
Mr. Sugarman. Mr. Wormser, I think I would have to say this,,
that the very nature of a fund or foundation is that it has funds for
investment and these may be invested in a business or other type of
security.
Mr. Wormser. Excuse me. Let me put a more extreme case than
that. Suppose we had a foundation which had unremunerative assets,
which produced no income, which had perhaps a principal value, but
produced no income; would you consider that jeopardized the carry-
ing out of the purposes?
Mr. Sugarma>t. If it actually did not produce income, we would be
curious as to whether it is making any distributions, and if it is making
distributions, what the purposes of those distributions were. Our
concern, of course, must be with the activities of the fund or founda-
tion in determining whether or not it is operating for the charitable,,
educational, or whatever purposes may be that they qualify under
the statute. So that the mere fact of not having income would be-
comparatively unimportant if all the other qualifications under the
statute were met which related to how the fund or foundation waa
being used.
I think I should hasten there to say this, that Congress did provide
in 1950 for a tax on unrelated business income. So that the business;
activities of the 101 (6) organization would be subject to tax, although
the tax exemption as to its other activities would not be destroyed.
Congress did also provide in 1950 these provisions on prohibited trans-
actions and on undue accumulations. I think I would have to say this^,
that the problem in that regard is one of drawing a line between the-
general activities of organizations which are attempting to maintain
their funds for exempt purposes, and those which may have other
purposes in mind. I think the law has been on the books too few years
for us to say whether or not it has accomplished all the purposes that
Congress may have intended at that time. I think a little more experi-
ence will perhaps be necessary, perhaps a study of further cases, before
we would be in a position to say whether there are other problems of
that nature.
Mr. Wormser. Am I correct in my information that Canada has, at
law prohibiting the ownership of more than 10 percent of any one;
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 441
enterprise by a foundation? I believe Mr, Hays will be interested in
the fact that if it is a fact that they also prohibit more than 10 percent
of the foundation funds being used abroad outside of Canada.
Mr. Sugarman. I am not personally acquainted with that. I would
be very glad to check that item and supply whatever information we
can on it.
I might say we have a somewhat related provision in our law, how-
ever, which would prohibit the type of investment by a foundation on
behalf of a corporation or individual who was the particular con-
tributor which would tend to jeopardize the foundation's funds.
You will recall I referred to that provision in section 3813 previously.
Mr. Wormsbr. There is no restriction, incidentally, on the per-
centage or amount of funds spent abroad ?
Mr. Sugarman. No. The only provision is that it must be a domes-
tic corporation, but it may use its funds abroad.
Mr. Koch. Just what is there in the information return that would
put you on notice that this particular foundation might be engaged
in prohibited political propaganda ?
Mr. Sugarman. I think I would have to say that actually there is
very little on our information return.
Mr. Koch. In other words, naturally you don't ask them, what
books have you published, or what pamphlets have you published dur-
ing the last year. You certainly would not get that. Nor would
there be an item in there for a lot of expenditures to a certain print-
ing concern or to a book publisher, probably not even that.
Mr. Sugarman. I think I wou
d want to add this, however, that
we do ask for information as to the disbursements and the purposes.
That information generally comes in attached schedules. There is not
room on this form obviously for that type of information. What we
attempt to do there is to see whether or not the information is rel-
atively enough complete so that it gives us a lead as to what the or-
ganization is doing.
Mr. Koch. Might it help if your questionnaire, return, or what
ever it is, had a (Question, "State any books or pamphlets that you may
have issued during the last year, and the amount you paid for that,"
because that would be a red flag. Otherwise I think you would never
liear of some of these propaganda machines- unless somebody from
the outside registered a complaint.
Mr. Sugarman. I think you would appreciate that that is a very
difficult problem, because it is quite obvious, for example, that we
would not want one of our great universities to send us each year all
the books and so forth that they publish.
Mr. Koch. No.
Mr. Sugarman. The matter is one of selectivity. As I indicated
before, as to a great many, by far the largest number of organiza-
tions, there is not a particular problem. There are always those that
are on the fringe, of course. They are comparatively few in the
group. In designing our tax-return forms, and our information-
return forms, we try to develop the type of information which will
Eermit us to screen in the first instance those which should be classi-
ed for a more intensive audit. There are a number of ways of get-
ting at that prohlem of the types of organizations that should be in-
vestigated in greater detail than the matter of the information they
fcome in through the return.
442 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
One of the aspects that we have under consideration is that when
these organizations file their applications initially, that is the best
time for us to determine the nature of the organization, because-
usually those that are on the fringe are those of *fche type that you
know at the outset whether or not they are going to be an established
community chest or school or college or whether it is going to be one-
of those that you might from time to time make a more careful exami-
nation of. So for that reason our best key is through the application
itself with the idea of following up on those applications from time
to time.
I might say in that regard there is also the matter of publicly
obtaining what leads and information we can through such informa-
tion as comes to us from the public and press and other sources.
Mr. Koch. The statute, of course, does not define what political
propaganda is, and you have no regulation which Would help the
foundation in guiding its activities, have you ?
Mr. Sugarman. We do not have a detailed regulation other than
that I read to you. We do, however, publish rulings from time to
time in the Internal Revenue Bulletin on matters which attempt to
set the precedents and provide the basic guidelines which supplement
the regulations, and indicate the interpretations and principles which
we are following in deciding individual cases.
Mr. Koch. On this business that a substantial part must be used,
if a certain person whom I won't mention, but who is sitting in this
chair, paid $10,000 for propaganda, I assure you that would be very
substantial. But take a $100 million foundation, if they spent $10,000*
on propaganda, would you say because of the relative importance or
the relative degree -that that is substantial in my case or in this man's
case and not substantial where the company has $100 million of assets,,
and maybe $30 million of income, or $3 million ?
Mr. Sugarman. As I indicated before, I don't think we can decide
that question by purely dollar amounts. For example, if that $10,000
were spent for telegrams to members of Congress, that might be
substantial.
Mr. Koch. We are also in the twilight zone when we talk about this
term "substantial," aren't we?
Mr. Stjgarman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Wohmser. Mr. Cnairman, I wonder if I might ask Mr. Goodwin
whether he would mind as a member of the Ways and Means Com-
mittee if I ask Mr. Andrews and Mr. Sugarman if they have any con-
structive suggestions to offer as to possible changes in the law ?
Mr. Goodwin. I see no objection to that, Mr. Chairman. Both of
these gentlemen, of course, understand, as we do — both the Commis-
sioner and Assistant Commissioner Sugarman — that we probably have
no jurisdiction over a topic of that sort further than to send oyer a
hint by way of a recommendation to the Ways and Means Committee.
I see no objection to their being interrogated. In fact, I would like
to see them interrogated on that point.
Mr. Wormser. I would like to have this opportunity if you have
any suggestions for constructive changes in the law to offer them.
Commissioner Andrews. I will undertake to answer that question,
Mr. Wormser. It has to be almost completely negative for the reason
that while it is true that we have been studying this question for some
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 443
months now, we have not yet developed any conclusive ideas that would
lead us to suggestions for changes in the law.
Moreover, of course, if we did develop ideas of that kind, we would
naturally transmit them to the Secretary for such consideration as
he might wish to give them and for forwarding to the Committee on
"Ways and Means if it were his determination to do so. That is neces-
sitated by the fact that in the division of responsibility in the Treasury
Department, the responsibility for changes in legislation is vested in
the Under Secretary of the Treasury, and, therefore, any changes or
suggestions we would have would go through him, rather than direct
from us.
We do not at the present moment have any concrete, suggestions to
make, and I am not just sure when we will reach that point
Mr.' Wormser. Then I have only one further suggestion, Mr. Chair-
man. That is that Mr. Andrews and Mr. Sugarman be invited later
to submit any additional statement to the committee which they might
think is pertinent to these discussions, if they care to.
The Chairman. I am sure the committee will be glad to receive any
additional information any time they might desire to transmit it.
The Chair has 1 or 2 questions, but anticipating that the other mem-
bers of the committee might propound those questions, he will recog-
nize Mr. Goodwin.
Mr. Goodwin. Mr. Chairman— —
Mr. Hays. Mr. Goodwin, would you yield at that point ?
Mr. Goodwin. Certainly.
Mr. Hats. Before you start, I wonder if we can get some agreement
about recessing. The House is in session. I want to be as helpful as
I can. I don't want to. make any points of order. I would like to get
an agreement as to some definite time. I have some commitments dur-
ing the lunch hour, and I am sure the other members do, and I am sure
we don't want to keep Mr. Andrews and Mr. Sugarman waiting around*
here now or have them come back in an hour when we can't get back,
and we can settle that now.
Mr. Goodwin. I will be very brief. I have just 1 or 2 questions.
The Chairman. If we have time to finish with him, we could recess
for the luncheon period. I am sure it would be convenient to them to
do so. I have only 1 or 2 questions in any event which will require a
very brief period. I think you and Mrs. Pfost are in the best position
to determine how long it will be required to complete with them.
Mr. Hays. I would say the questions I have would perhaps take as
long as Mr. Wormser did, which might run 40 minutes or so.
Mr. Goodwin. I will be about 3 minutes.
The Chairman. Why don't we in any event conclude with, Mr.
Goodwin's questions. Then if you think it will take something like
three-quarters of an hour, I would leave it up to you as to whether you
prefer to proceed and complete with the questioning before we recess
or recess and come back. They have been very generous with, their,
time, but I am sure they will be glad to meet the convenience of the
committee.
Mr. Hays. I think I would be glad to go along with Mr. Goodwin,
but I think it would be an imposition to try to complete this all before
lunch.
The Chairman. What is your situation, Mr. Commissioner and Mr.
Sugarman ?
-444 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Commissioner Andrews. We can come back after lunch ; whatever
you ladies and gentlemen wish. It is all right with us.
The Chairman. Some other considerations have arisen, and if it is
(Conyenient for you to come back at 2 : 45, the committee will recess
until 2 : 45 in this same room.
(Thereupon a,t 12 : 05 p. m., a recess was taken until 2 : 45 p. m., the
samed^y.)
i
AFTER RECESS
The Chairman. The committee will come to order, please.
When we adjourned, I think Mr. Hays was about to propound
some questions. Mr. Goodwin expects to be here any minute.
TESTIMONY OF T. COLEMAN ANDREWS, COMMISSIONER OF INTER-
NAL REVENUE, AND NORMAN A. SUGARMAN, ASSISTANT COM-
MISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE— Resumed
Mr. Hats. Mr. Sugarman, first let me say that I appreciate the
fact that you have made such a concise and well-documented state-
ment. I think it is factual and will add considerable to the under-
standing of this committee, about the problem which we are trying
to investigate. However, I do have a few questions to clarify perhaps
jn my own mind as much as anything else.
I don't want you to feel that if I am questioning you closely about
a certain phase of your testimony that I am doing it in an antagonistic
manner. As I say, I think your testimony has been good. It has been
£he first that I have seen before the committee that has been right to
the point, in my opinion. But there are a few things I think it would
be well if we had a meeting of the minds on, and any questions I ask
you are with that attitude in mind.
Mr. Sugarman. Thank you. Could I interrupt? I am sorry to do
so. I don't tknow whether you prefer if we had a microphone. We
don't seem to have one this afternoon.
Mr. Hats. These are the ones we use.
The Chairman. Will you check, Miss Casey, and see ?
Mr. Hats. I don't think they are working.
On page 2 of your statement, sir, the last complete paragraph on
ihe page, you state that we do not attempt to tell anyone how to run
his business, or what financial or personal decisions he should make.
I assume that applies also to foundations, as well as an individual
taxpayer ?
Mr. Sugarman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hats. On page 8 of your statement, Mr. Sugarman, you are
quoting from paragraph 6 of section 101. I believe this is paragraph
6. "Corporations or any community chest fund or foundation organ-
ized and operating exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, liter-
ary, or educational purposes." I am interested in those words "or
educational purposes." Do you try to put any interpretation on what
educational purposes are ?
Mr. Sugarman. As I indicated earlier, Mr, Hays, we must attempt
to interpret these words just as we do the other words, and what is
educational, of course, is a subject on which reasonable men may
4iffer. That is the reason we have had this long history which I
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 445
described of litigation — not litigation for litigation's sake, so much,
but to attempt to establsh ground rules.
As I indicated in the statement, if I can refer for a moment to page
23, I have attempted to summarize there what seems to me what the
judicial precedents establish as educational in the area where the term
is most difficult to define. It is pretty obvious, I think, what the term
means when you talk about an established college, university, or school
of some sort. But in the adult educational organizations, those that
bring their activities to the public, is where the difficulty lies, and as
I have indicated on page 23, in the second full paragraph beginning
on that page, that we believe is what the court decisions add up^ to.
Mr. Hats. In other words, you are referring now on page 23 in the
paragraph which I have marked in my copy on the basis of these
judicial precedents ?
Mr. Sugarman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hays. That is an attempt on your part to summarize just what
we were talking about back on page 8 about educational purposes ?
Mr. Sugarman. Yes, sir, that is our summary of what we believe
our present law is in the difficult area of the interpretation of the
work, I would say.
Mr. Hats. I have that marked and it seems to me that is a very
good summary, and a good liberal interpretation of what must be a
very difficult matter to interpret.
Mr. Sugarman. That is right.
Mr. Hats. Right at that point, perhaps I should direct this question
to the Commissioner.
Mr. Commissioner, the assistant counsel just before lunch started
to develop, or did ask you a question which opened in my mind a rather
interesting vista, in which he asked you if you got all the publications
of the various foundations. I would assume by that he would take
into consideration publications that were written with foundation
grants or where the author had a grant or partial grant and so on.
I believe Mr. Sugarman answered by saying that you did not make
any attempt to do that, is that correct
Commissioner Andrews. Let us put it this way. Usually we can
depend upon the public if there is some provision of law that they don't
like to be pretty vocal about it. They will write to us. They will write
to their Congressmen and Senators, and they will sometimes write to
the Treasury Department, if it is a matter of legislation that affects our
area of operations.
In this particular case, I think it is safe to say that as to particular
organizations, that people might object to, the basis of their complaint
is almost invariably some document that the person complaining
doesn't like. Consequently, in the course of your normal operations
you would accumulate certain documents pertaining to a particular
organization which contains statements that the people complaining
do not like.
But to answer your question specifically, I would say though it is
not a matter of written rule, that if we were to direct any of our field
agents to review the record of one of these organizations in the light
of what its charter said it was set up to do to compare about what it is
actually doing, or what it was supposed to be doing, I would assume
as an auditor myself that the auditor would naturally go to at least
some of the documents that were published and distributed by that
40720 — 54 — pt. 1 29
446 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
organization to see how that all ties in with what they profess to be
doing.
Therefore, I would say that the answer to the question is not that we
do not get that type of information, but rather that it develops and
comes in in the ordinary course of our administration of the law, either
by complaint from a taxpayer, or in the course of the review by our
people who do review the operations to see how they are really
operating.
Mr. Hays. What I was trying to get at, Mr. Commissioner, is that
I was wondering if you would want to operate such a department
where you had all of these publications coming in, both direct and indi-
rect, and books and pamphlets people may have written who had some
connection with the foundation, you would pretty soon be running a
censorship department down there.
Commissioner Andrews. That aspect of it, I am sorry to say, I didn't
get from your original question. I would like to answer that in two
ways. In the first place, the physical volume of that sort of stuif would
impose a tremendous storage problem upon us. In my opinion, by all
odds the vast majority of it would be of no practical benefit to us. In
the second place, of course, one of the main problems that we have to
be very careful about is that we do not become censors. I know that
question came up only recently in connection with a ruling that we bad
to make. I was a little bit afraid that one word might indicate that
perhaps we were setting ourselves up as censors and we changed the
word, because we don't want to take that position, and goodness knows,
we don't want to be in it.
Mr. Hats. That is what I wanted to clarify. Although I don't
know you except by reputation, I had an idea that would probably
be your answer. They say nobody loves a tax collector, and I don't
know whether that is true or not— that is an old saw — I am sure you
would not want to add to your job of collecting taxes that of being
censor.
Commissioner Andrews. I have always wondered why people
sought the job of tax collector, and I can say for myself I didn't. But
it is a job that has to be done, and the most you can hope for is respect.
If you attain any popularity, that is just a little dividend.
Mr. Hats. Let me say to you, sir, that you have the respect of the
Congress and the public at large as far as I am able to ascertain.
Commissioner Andrews. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Hats. Before we go back to your statement, there is another
little thing that occurred to me that might be interesting to develop
along here which might shed a little light on this whole problem. I
assume you are aware of the antitrust suit which has been filed against
the American Telephone & Telegraph Co. The Government alleges
that it is a monopoly. I don't expect you to be completely familiar
with it. You know there is such a suit ?
Mr. Sttgarman. I have heard about it, yes, sir.
Mr. Hats. The A. T. & T. regardless of what suit as well as any
other corporation is entitled to deduct from its income tax its expenses,
and of course charitable contributions, too, up to 5 percent, is that
correct ?
Mr. Stjgarman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hats. I won't ask you whether you are a music lover or not,
because that is something that has no place in the record, but I might
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 447
ask you did you ever hear this Telephone Hour on the radio every
Monday night ?
Mr. Sugarman, I don't think I have recently.
Mr. Hays. It is a very fine musical program. Let me say I am all
for it. I think it is a good program. It has about the best musical
talent you can obtain, and I would assume it is pretty costly. I assume
they deduct that somehow or other. Do you suppose that would be
a business expense ? It would not be a charitable contribution, would
it? What is your guess %
Mr. Sugarman. The cost of advertising, whether it is by radio or
television or newspaper generally comes under the heading of business
expense, and is deductible under the provisions of the statute which
permit the deduction of ordinary and necessary business expenses.
Mr. Hays. The thing that occurred to me, and the reason for all
this is, would a monopoly have any reason to advertise ?
Commissioner Andrews. I asked Mr. Sugarman to let me answer
that question, if you don't mind.
Mr. Hays. I would be glad to have you answer it.
Commissioner Andrews. That comes back, Mr. Hays, to the first
question that you asked — I believe it was the first one — about our not
wishing to tell anybody how to run his business. In this particular
situation, and specifically, I would say that the telephone company
knows more about what to do in order to make the people happy with
the telephone service that they get than we do. Eadio and television
are set up as means of communication which have been used exten-
sively, and I suppose probably money wise at least, perhaps almost
as extensively as the printed w T ord. I certainly would be the last one
to join issue with them over the question of whether or not that was
an ordinary or necessary expense.
In the first place, I suppose I would naturally be a little prejudiced
about that because I believe in private enterprise, and I think that
anything that they can do to build up public good will is all to the good.
As a matter of fact, I could make quite a speech about the public rela-
tions policy of the telephone company which I happen to think is
pretty good. I don't mind admitting that we are trying to model ours
to some extent after theirs. If we can achieve the same degree of public
acceptance that they have, then I will be a popular tax collector.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Commissioner, let me say that you and I agree
thoroughly about that. I will tell you why I brought that question
up. It is simply because there has been a great deal of issue made
prior to your appearance in these hearings about the tax loss to the
government about not collecting the taxes from these tax exempt
foundations. Of course there is a loss. If we did not have any tax
exempt foundations, I suppose the Government would collect more
taxes. That would automatically follow. But on the other hand, we
might lose a lot of things that are pretty good, such as medical research.
So the same thing follows with the telephone company, and I am glad
that you take the position of not telling them how to run their bus-
iness. We do lose the money in taxes. On the other hand, you don't
want to take the position, and certainly I feel as a Congressman I
don't want to take the position, and I assume you would not want to
recommend to the Congress, that we take the position of telling the
telephone company that you can't do this because Ave are going to lose
tax money.
448 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Commissioner Andrews. We don't lose tax money by that.
Mr. Hays. Maybe not. Maybe we gain it because we collect it from
the advertisers.
Commissioner Andrews. That is just the point. There is quite a
difference between money spent for advertising with a company which
in turn is going to report that income for taxation, and money that is
paid out in contributions to an organization that does not pay any
taxes. In other words, when you make a contribution, let us say, to a
community fund, that income at that point ceases to be productive in
the form of taxes, except when they get ready to spend that money
themselves. So that these things have a very deep and sometimes very
intricate and complicated economic path.
The Government itself, however, from a revenue standpoint must
look at the thing from the standpoint of how much money is siphoned
out of the stream of revenue in the ordinary turnover of money and
income if it wants to really find out where it is losing tax revenue.
Sometimes these things that are spoken of as tax losses or as items
that deprive the Government of revenue do not actually deprive the
Government at all. You have to analyze them.
Mr. Hays. That could be true of foundation expenses, too ?
Commissioner Andrews. To a large extent foundations might spend
their money, for instance, with people who have to pay income tax on
it. As a matter of fact, a great many of them do.
Mr. Hays. In other words, then, we are agreed that you can't just
say because they don't directly pay any of the foundations or the
A. T. and T., that it is a complete loss to the Government ?
Commissioner Andrews. I don't think it is a complete loss unless
it stops right there, which it seldom does.
Mr. Hays. That is right. In other words, it keeps on circulating at
u certain velocity.
Commissioner Andrews. That is right.
The Chairman. As I understand, the basis for the company's adver-
tising, which will apply even in the case of the telephone company,
is that it increases the utilization of its services, and thereby does in-
crease its profits and increases taxes to the Federal Government. The
whole purpose of advertising is increased business, whether it is a
telephone company or some more competitive business.
Commissioner Andrews. I think that is true. I think that probably
is one of the reasons why we have more telephones in the United States
than all the rest of the world put together.
Mr. Hays. I want you to understand, Mr. Commissioner, that I was
not picking on the telephone company. .
Commissioner Andrews. I didn^t assume that.
Mr. Hays. I was using that as an example to see if we could get
some meeting of the minds on the fact that just because the primary
individual, corporation, foundation or whatever it might have been,
didn't pay taxes, that immediately all that became sterile and the Gov-
ernment didn't get any return anywhere along the line.
Commissioner Andrews. I understood it that we were discussing
the principle.
Mr. Hays. That is correct.
Now, Mr. Sugarman, going back to your statement on page 13, I
don't think that this needs any particular further interpretation, but I
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 449
just want to remphasize again at the bottom of the page, you say that
while normally provisions exempting taxpayers are to be strictly con-
strued, the exemption under section 101 (6) is to be liberally construed.
You have certain court decisions which have down through the years
set up that policy up, is that right ?
Mr. Sugarman. That is right.
Mr. Hats. If you did anything other than construe it liberally, you
would be flying in the face of court opinions, would you not ?
Mr. Stjgarman. It is just the fact that any taxpayer who thought
we were not applying court decisions could take us to court and pre-
sumably would win.
Mr. Hays. Going on to page 14, you cited this decision — No. 21 for
the citation at the bottom of the page — saying that it includes the
encouragement of good citizenship.
There is a term — and of course we are going to have trouble defining
it — and would you say that term is one that there could be honest dif-
ferences about as to what constitutes good citizenship %
Mr. Sugarman. Yes. Basically as the court indicates it is the same
problem as what is education. The purpose of the example is to indi-
cate what I think is fairly obvious, that of course we are not talking
solely about classroom instruction when we are talking about educa-
tion. It can include the type of thing that goes to the adding of the
knowledge of people generally.
Mr. Hays. I will ask you this. We had a witness before the com-
mittee who made the rather flat statement that such subjects as teach-
ing social awareness, I would call it, he says they should not mention
housing or the lack of it in a classroom, that is not education. You
would not get down to that narrow definition of it in your department,
would you ?
Mr. Sugarmak. As I have indicated, I don't think the courts would
let us under existing laws.
Mr. Hays. In other words, while the witness may have a perfect
right and certainly did have a perfect right to his opinion about that,
that that had no place in the curriculum, that is a debatable question
on which people might have an honest difference of opinion. If some
foundation gave a grant to study housing, you would not say that was
proscribed, would you ?
Mr. Sugarman. Of course, Mr. Hays, I think I would have to say
this. Not having heard the testimony of the witness, I would hesi-
tate to comment. He may have been talking, of course about his opin-
ions and concepts of education generally while I of course must talk
about the terms of the present statute we operate under, and the court
decisions. The only thing I can say is that under the present statute
and court decisions, they have so construed the word education lib-
erally as including the discussion of many topics of public interest,
and I assume housing would be one of them, although I cannot recall
any case that particularly touches on that subject.
Mr. Hays. I am going out of the chronological order now but I
remember one of the tax decisions you cited occurred back in 1932.
Mr. Sugarman. Yes, sir. There were a number of them back in the
early thirties.
Mr. Hays. Could you refer to that specific one .in 1932. Do you
happen perhaps to know more nearly which one it is ?
450 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Sugarman. The Leubscher case in 1932, decided by the Court
of Appeals for the Second Circuit involved the contributions to an
organization, to a corporation to teach and expound single-tax ideas.
That may have been the one that you had in mind.
Mr. Hays. I think that is the one. As I recall it, they said that
they could go ahead and teach that. That was not barred or pro-
scribed.
Mr. Sugarman. Yes, Sir.
Mr. Hats. Although we might not agree with it, they held it was
their right to advocate it.
Mr. Sugarman. Yes. They allowed the deduction of the contribu-
tion in that particular case up to the point that the organization was
not using this material to actually influence legislation. But as long
as it was a matter of teaching the subject, even though it had an
advocacy involved in it, that it would be entitled to the exemption.
But they would stop short and deny the exemption if the organiza-
tion engaged in legislative activities.
Mr. Hats. That was a pretty significant case in setting out the
whole policy of your Department, wasn't it ?
Mr. Sugarman. It was one of a series. You will recall in the state-
ment I referred to cases that came up in the first, second, third and
fourth circuits. When all those four circuit courts of appeals took
the same approach, both the Tax Court and the Revenue Service fol-
lowed that approach, because litigation became useless.
Mr. Hays. I am not going to ask you this question. I am merely
stating it so you won't think I am trying to be rather involved here.
The reason I wanted that particular case cited and the others is be-
cause it has been stated here that this whole policy of foundation has
been part of a great new deal, fair deal, some kind of a deal, plot.
I wanted to get that in the record about this 1932 decision, because I
don't think anybody could say it was part of any plot of that kind.
It predated. I am not asking you to comment on it one way or an-
other, because I don't want you to get involved in it. I will check on
that court and find out its complex and may have something to say
about it further along.
Now, I am interested on page 16, Mr. Sugarman, in a little further
development of the paragraph which is the first one to begin on that
page, starting,
The committee reports and the language of the 1934 act establishes that the
words "carrying on propaganda" do not stand alone but must be read together
with the words "to influence legislation."
I think it is pretty clear there what you mean and how you operate,
but would you want to develop that a little further? In other w T ords,
fhat is the only kind of propaganda that is proscribed by the law, is
that correct ?
Mr. Sugarman. That is the only kind that is expressly proscribed.
My only point here is merely a grammatical one, and that is that the
statutory provision has the words "or otherwise attempting" sur-
rounded by commas. So if you leave that phrase out, "or otherwise
attempting", the statutory provision on that point at least reads simply
"no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on propa-
ganda to influence legislation."
I mention that only because of the interest in the subject or the
term "propaganda" and to indicate that in terms of express provi-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 451
sions, the statute refers only to propaganda to influence legislation,
and not otherwise to other types of propaganda. In order to complete
my answer, however, I would have to say the problem of what is edu-
cational is still with us.
As to that point I would have to refer to the previous summary
of the judicial precedents in which I indicated that one point which
the courts developed was that the organization must not only, as I
have indicated on page 23 in that paragraph, the second full paragraph
on that page, not to a substantial degree attempt to influence legis-
lation, but also its methods must be of an educational nature. It is
on that point we get back to what is an educational method.
Without getting into the term "propaganda", we get into the same
problem of whether or not the method smacks of attempting to educate
people, to give them the data, the information on which they may
draw conclusions, or whether it is merely opinion and so forth which
gives some resort to conclusions without the facts.
Mr. Hays. That leads us into a rather interesting situation. You use
the word "propaganda" and the law uses the word "propaganda" and
the committee here has used the word "propaganda" and various wit-
nesses. I wonder just what is propaganda. It is conceivable that the
word might mean different things to different people, isn't it ?.
Mr. Sttgarman. That is correct. As I indicated at the earlier stages
the Revenue Service at one time attempted to draw a line between
propaganda and education by indicating that organizations engaged
in disseminating knowledge or their views on controversial subjects
may be engaged in propaganda and not entitled to exemption. The
courts felt we should not draw that line into the statute. For that
reason, organizations of that sort may now be granted exemptions
under the existing judicial precedents.
I think that propaganda problem is one that we pretty well leave
alone in the sense that in this area, like many others, we find that
attempts to define terms do not help us particularly when we get to
actual cases. For example, the matter of sending telegrams to mem-
bers of Congress to vote a particular way is a pretty concrete example
of what we would consider propaganda to influence or otherwise
attempting to influence legislation. We can spot that type of activity
without worrying about whether it comes under some precise defini-
tion of Dropaganda.
Mr. Hays. In other words, no matter how we define propaganda,
you are not interested in it in your department unless it is for the pur-
pose of influencing legislation as far as these foundations are con-
cerned ?
Mr. Sugarman. I say we are not interested in the sense of attempt-
ing to work out a scientific definition of it. We are interested in activ-
ities which some people might regard as propaganda. But we would
rather evaluate the particular activities against the precedents we
have already, rather than attempt to evaluate against some definition.
Mr. Hays. Of course, you would be interested in subversive propa-
ganda or Communist propaganda.
Mr. Stjgarmah. Yes, sir; but that is basic, the matter of the sub-
versive activities that are carried on.
Mr. Hays. The reason I spend some little time on it is that it is a
case again, it seems to me, of where we ought to know pretty much
452 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
what you mean by it, and what we mean by it, so we know we are
talking about the same thing. It is a difficult word to define.
I might say, Mr. Chairman, I would welcome any interruption by
you or any other member of committee, or the counsel, if it could be
helpful in getting some kind of definition for the purposes of the
committee on this word so we are all talking about the same thing. I
am not trying to belabor the issue or becloud or befuddle anything.
Mr. Goodwin. It might occur to me to inquire what is the matter
with the interpretation that the service is putting on the definition
now?
Mr. Hays. There is not a thing as far as I am concerned, Mr. Good-
win. The only thing is as you perhaps know as well as I do over the
years the word "propaganda" itself in the minds of a good many
people has come to have some sort of undesirable connotation. We
are not talking about that kind of propaganda.
Mr. Goodwin. So has a lobbyist. They got around that by saying
what is it now, public relations counsel .
Mr. Hays. I would say that the hearings might have developed this
so far, that if it is something you are against and don't agree with,
that is propaganda, but if it is something that is for your side, that
is merely an attempt to educate the public. Is that right ?
Mr. Wormser. Might I suggest that we ask the Commissioner and
the Assistant Commissioner whether they think that an attempt by
Mr. Goodwin's committee to define some of these terms in the statute
would be useful or make your work more difficult ?
Mr. Sugarman. I would make just this one comment, Mr. Wormser,
that I am sure you will appreciate as a lawyer, that frequently the
addition of more words does not necessarily clarify, and I think I
would have to withhold judgment on that suggestion, until we had an
idea what the legislation might be.
The Chairman. When you were asked originally whether you had
set up standards by which to judge and interpret some of these re-
quirements, you said that you had not, and then you had just made
another statement, both of which impressed me, that definitions or
standards are difficult to relate to individual cases.
During the course of your discussion — and this relates to the whole
subject about which you have been interrogating the Commissioner,
Mr. Hays, and the Assistant Commissioner — that they have very diffi-
cult problems in setting out definitions or standards that apply to
these individual cases as they come up. I can well understand that
problem. I am also impressed, as I am sure you are, that many of us
who look at it from where we sit have great difficulty keeping our
emotions from entering into our estimate of what might be propa-
ganda or what might be education, because in a measure we are
affected or might tend to be affected by our own feeling on the sub-
ject, whereas we hope always that the Internal Revenue Service and
its personnel are entirely objective when it comes to these highly
important questions.
Mr. Hays. I would say generally speaking, Mr. Chairman, that I
agree with you, and I certainly think that all the members of the
committee, although I don't presume for any other than myself, can
appreciate the difficulty with which your Department must sometimes
be faced on making some of these determinations.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 453
I notice that you used somewhere along in your prepared statement
the fact that there is a mighty fine line or very thin line, or words to
that effect, on some of these cases. I can see that. It seems to me that
your testimony has indicated that your Department has leaned over
backward to prevent any suspicion of censorship or bias on your part
from entering into it. I certainly for one want to express my apprecia-
tion. I think that is the difference, if I may digress for just a minute
or two, between our system and the system in the world that we are
fighting. That is, the Government doesn't say that you have to chan-
nel everything into our line of research and thinking, and that is per-
haps the reason in the battle for scientific knowledge that in order
for them to keep up not alone let them be ahead that they have had
to resort to spying and stealing secrets, because of the fact that their
government acted as an oppressing agent on independent scientific
research.
I think that it is all good. Certainly I don't want anything I say
or do here or any questions I ask you to make your job more difficult.
I am merely trying to get on the record of this committee just how
you go about it so the committee can be guided in its search for the
if acts and its conclusions when it goes to write a report.
I have just one more question.
Mr. Wohmser. Mr. Hays, apropos of that, would you be interested
in pursuing this idea, whether we are not putting an extraordinary
difficulty on the shoulders of the Bureau in this whole situation?
There is no direct taxpayer relief except through the States. I don't
know whether it is practical to have it through the Federal machinery.
But the Commissioner has the entire burden of testing these various
areas. In other words, he has to bring a lawsuit or precipitate one
which then has to go to the courts to determine where the line is drawn.
He draws it for the moment in arbitrary fashion, but in the end it re-
sults in litigation. Maybe there is some way of relieving the Commis-
sioner in part of that very arduous and difficult task. He has to pre-
cipitate lawsuits.
Mr. Hays. Mr, Wormser, I might say to you in partial answer to
that, that if the Congress could be helpful in any way that the Com-
missioner and Treasury Department would like them to be, I am sure
it would be the wish of Congress to do it. I think over the years we
have found that you can't spell out every single little thing, and you
can't in advance try to anticipate all the problems that are going to
come up. There is a saying around here on the Hill, and it was here
before I came, that Congress has never passed a bad law. If it has
been bad, it has been because of bad administration. I will say that
is a biased point of view, perhaps, but the point I am trying to make
is that we have to give some discretion to the people who do administer
the laws that are passed up here.
I think you have made perhaps the best point of all, perhaps inad-
vertently, that if Mr. Andrews or any preceding or successive Com-
missioner makes a decision that any particular foundation, taxpayer
or individual question, they do have recourse to a final arbiter, who
is not the Congress or the Commissioner, but the courts. Certainly
Mr. Sugarman in his prepared statement has indicated by a whole
series of court decisions how the policy was shaped in conformity
with the law and the Constitution and all the things that you take
into consideration when you go into court.
454 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
If there are any concrete suggestions, as aws said this morning, that
you would have, I am sure that either this committee or the Ways and
Means, or some other committee would be glad to consider them.
Mr. Wormser. This is, of course, only a very small part of the Com-
missioner's job. The machinery he has for it is very modest. I doubt
whether you could get an increased appropriation for watchdogging
foundations. Really his office is not geared for the job. I wish some-
body would think of a solution which would assist him in that very
difficult problem. He hasn't got the manpower really to check these
activities ; I am sure that is correct, isn't it, Mr. Andrews.
Commissioner Andrews. I would say so, yes. I think the problem
that you are up against in this particular situation here is the inher-
ently prolific character of human ingenuity.
Mr. Koch. Could we raise this point? Mr. Hays referred to the
1932 decision, and that was before the statute was amended in 1934
where for the first time they specifically mention propaganda for leg-
islative purposes. Yet without that new amendment in 1934, in 1932,
the courts nevertheless disallowed one bequest because it was tainted
with a legislative program. So the point I make is this : If the addi-
tion of those words merely add to our confusion, it might be better to
strike them out, and go back to the original one which merely said
educational purposes. There the court said, "Well, if it has a legisla-
tive taint, we won't grant the deduction." If we can't decide reason-
ably what is a good, definition of propaganda, maybe we should yank
it out of the statute.
Mr. Hays. That is a very interesting thing, and I would like to hear
the Commissioner or Mr. Sugarman or both comment on that. Per-
sonally I think that their job would be infinitely more difficult if those
words were not in. I would like to hear them express themselves on
whether they would like to have it taken out. Personally I don't
think it would be good.
Mr. Koch. I don't know.
Mr. Sugarman. I would like to say this one point. The study we
made previously of the problem indicates that at that time Congress
was aware of the court decisions and what they were indicating, and
that they struggled with the question of whether they should put limi-
tations on the type of activities of these organizations. As indicated
at first, there was a thought of putting in a phrase, excluding partisan
activities and so forth. It finally ended up with the present langxiage
in 1934, no substantial part of activities which is carrying on propa-
ganda or otherwise attempting to influence legislation. It is our view
that that basically represents the insertion in the statute of what the
courts had already decided.
Mr. Hays. In other words, you think, sir, that is a limiting provi-
sion, rather than opening the gates ?
Mr. Sugarman. It is a little bit of both, Mr. Hays. It is limiting
in the sense that the court decisions were limiting in saying that at-
tempting to influence legislation as a matter of public policy was not
the type of thing Congress intended to grant exemptions or deduc-
tions for, and accordingly they would not recognize it as a proper
activity if carried on to a substantial extent by an exempt organi-
zation.
It opens the gates only in the sense that by spelling out this particu-
lar type of propaganda or other activities, in the legislative field, that
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 455
indicates that Congress was not attempting to put limitations upon
activities of organizations which might be considered educational even
though in a controversial area, as long as it was not a legislative
purpose.
The Chairman. Any other questions?
Mr. Hays. I have one, yes. This is a hypothetical question. If you
feel that it would be pushing you in a corner to answer it, I won't insist.
It just occurred to me that it was an interesting thing.
I remember in studying history that several historians that I read
said that one book more than any other had a tremendous influence
on the abolition of slavery. I think you perhaps know what that is.
Uncle Tom's Cabin. Suppose at the time this author, Harriet Beecher
Stowe, had been working on a foundation grant, and there are a lot
of authors working under them today, and she produced this book;
would you hold that the foundation was guilty of activity designed to
influence legislation under your definition now?
I will answer the question, and my guess is that you would not. But
I just wondered.
Mr. Sugarman. Mr. Hays, may I preface my answer this way : We
have a rule in the Revenue Service which is administratively necessary
that we do not issue rulings on hypothetical cases. I don't say that to
duck your question but simply to indicate that we try to steer clear of
hypothetical cases, because we always find when we get them presented
to us, there are always some more facts in the background, and for that
reason any answer we give merely leads to further controversy when
people try to compare the answer with actual facts, when someone
examines the returns a few years later on.
To get to your point, if a foundation did make a grant to an indi-
vidual who had the public effect of stirring the minds and imagination
of the people and ultimately had an effect on legislation, we would
hardly either grant or deny the exemption to the foundation on the
basis of merely one book, because as I indicated, the statute requires
that no substantial part of the activities be propaganda to influence
legislation. I hardly think that in any sizable foundation, one book
would make that much difference.
I would also want to add this other point in connection with it. As
we indicated in the court decisions on the organization that was
attempting to abolish alcoholism in the entire world, that in connection
with its very ambitious program, the court indicated that the mere fact
that others used its literature for legislative purposes did not prevent
the organization from having its exemption.
Mr. Hats. That is the question I am trying to get at. In other
words, although this may be produced by foundation money and some-
body uses it that doesn't make the foundation in violation because they
made the grant in the first place ?
Mr. Sugarman. I think that is right, although I would want to say
that what we look to in that connection is the spirit with which the
material was developed and intended to be used. Again, that is a word
which is very difficult to define and apply. But basically I am getting
back to this concept of educational methods which includes the matter
of attempting to impart real information and knowledge. If it is writ-
ten for subversive or other purposes, then of course we have a different
situation.
456 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hays. Thank you very much, Mr. Sugarman. May I ask in
conclusion that I was briefed beforehand that you were very intelli-
gent and hardworking, and that you would not be put into a corner by
any questions I might ask. I am glad to find out that I didn't even
need to be solicitous about it.
Mr. Sugarman\ Thank you very much.
Mr. Goodwin. One question for purposes of clarification in my own
mind. I understand that when a taxpayer is aggrieved by action of
the Bureau on exemptions, he has two options, first to pay the tax,
and then to go after a refund, or to say that he won't pay the tax
until he has prosecuted his appeal.
In the first instance he goes to the Court of Claims and in the sec-
ond instance to the United States Tax Court ?
Mr. Sugarman. In the first instance he has his choice of the Court
of Claims or the United States District Court, depending upon the
usual rules of jurisdiction of those courts.
Mr. Goodwin. But he may go to the Court of Claims ?
Mr. Sugarman. Yes.
Mr. Goodwin. In the second instance, his right of appeal is to the
United States Tax Court.
Mr. Sugarman. That is right.
Mr. Goodwin. One other question. Is it a fact that since the origi-
nal Kevenue Act was written, and coming down through the period
when there have been two or three revisions of the tax code, that the
Congress has apparently shied away from any temptation to write
new definitions into the law, or to attempt to amplify the meaning of
the original terminology %
Mr. Sugarman. I think that is correct, sir. We had this addition in
1934, which, as I say it is my impression
Mr. Goodwin. Propaganda for political purposes.
Mr. Sugarman. That basically put into the statute what seems to
reflect the court decisions. The next change came in 1950 when
changes were proposed in the Ee venue Code which go to the financial
transactions of the organizations, represented by the so-called pro-
hibited transactions and the accumulations of income by exempt
organizations.
Mr. Goodwin. Aren't those about the only two instances where the
Congress has made any attempt to mess around with the original
terminology ?
Mr. Sugarman. Basically that is right, sir.
Mr. Goodwin. Now, my final question : I want to put that to the
Commissioner. Would it be a fair statement to say that this is an
indication that the Congress is pretty well satisfied with the way the
Bureau and the Department are interpreting the original terminology,
and the way in which the courts are placing their decisions ?
Commissioner Andrews. I think that is a fair conclusion, yes.
Mr. Goodwin. Would it also be a fair statement to say that this also
indicates, as applied to any temptation that there might be to spell
out something with regard to application of the rule of exemptions
to foundations, an indication that the Congress is pretty well satis-
fied with the behavior of the foundations themselves in cooperating ?
Commissioner Andrews. I assume that would be an equally sound
conclusion, yes, sir.
Mr. Goodwin. That is all, Mr. Chairman.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 457
The Chairman. There are two observations that I wish to make,
and they may need no questions.
One was with respect to what was said about creating taxable in-
come. The donations of the foundations are sterile in the sense that,
as long as the income of the foundations, when spent, gets into tax-
able transactions, that may result in increased taxes.
Commissioner Andrews. In part.
The Chairman. The capital of foundations is tax sterile until spent.
During the course of your statement you made reference to the fact
that most of these provisions in the law were enacted at a time when
the tax rates comparatively were low, I am interested in the question
that Mr. Wormser raised in one of his questions. In the event a tax
exemption is withdrawn as a result of some violation that would justify
the withdrawal, the capital or corpus of the foundation does not become
taxable, as I understand it.
Commissioner Andrews. That is correct.
The Chairman. I realize there may be legal prohibitions that would
make it very difficult to reach in the usual ways. It is a matter of
considerable importance, it seems to me. Take, for example, some of
the foundations whose tax-exempt status has been withdrawn as a
result of violations, like the Garland Fund and the Marshall Fund,
which I think under the findings of the Internal Revenue Service, had
fallen into pretty bad practices. The foundations had gotten into
unfortunate hands. The tax exemption was withdrawn. What posi-
tion did that leave the people in who own the capital of those founda-
tions ? Were they free, then, to continue to spend the capital of the
foundations as they saw fit after the tax exemption was withdrawn?
Mr. Sugarman. Sir, the only right we have in connection with
organizations that may once have been exempt and are held no longer
exempt is the same as that we have with other organizations, namely,
to determine their taxable income, and to impose a tax on that income.
We have no tax on the capital of organizations as such.
The Chairman. Take the Garland fund, for example ; I think it
is universally agreed that the Garland fund engaged in practices that
would not be generally approved. I think it would be generally agreed
that many of their activities were subversive. You withdraw the tax-
exempt status. But that still left the capital of the Garland Fund to
be spent in any way that the people in charge might wish to spend it.
Still the capital of that fund was made possible through tax exemption,
that is, possibly 85 per cent of it was as a result of the government or
the people foregoing taxes and that found its way into the Garland
Fund, and became the capital of that fund. So after all, it is possible
if a foundation should fall into unfortunate hands that the entire
capital that is made possible through tax exemption could be used
even for subversive purposes or propaganda, lobbying or any activity
which the people who at that time in charge of the fund might desire
to spend the money for.
Mr. Stjgarman. Mr. Chairman, those activities would not be matters
over which we would have control unless there were some tax aspects.
However, there might be other laws they might run afoul of such as
the one I referred to previously in referring to the Internal Security
Act, the matter of registration that is involved in that .
The Chairman. A more recent foundation w^as, I believe, called the
Des Moines University Lawsonomy. That sounds interesting to me.
458 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
As I understand it, this foundation called the Des Moines University
of Lawsonomy was established-
Mr. Hays. Would you tell me what that last word is ?
The Chairman. The man who founded this university was named
Lawson, so he called it Lawsonomy, as a charitable enterprise. After
he set up his foundation and acquired a tax-exempt status, that gave
him a good standing, we might say, and as I understand ? he entered
into business transactions and selling surplus commodities of the
Government. We would all be disposed to a charitable activity of
that kind to dispose of surplus commodities. He paid no taxes on
that income because it flowed into the foundation. During the course
of the foundation he violated the tax-exempt laws and the tax exemp-
tion was withdrawn, bufrhe still had his few hundred thousand dollars
that he acquired to spend in riotous living or any other purpose for
which he desired to spend it. I am not criticizing, by what I am
saying, the Internal Revenue Service, because the Internal Revenue
Service stopped it as soon as it became evident what was happening,
iust as it did in the case of the Garland fund and the Marshall fund.
But what I am pointing out is what appears to be a weakness.
It would be difficult to imagine, but a foundation with a capital of
$500,000 could possibly fall into unfortunate hands in the course of
years — 25, 50, 75 — and even if the tax-exempt status should be with-
drawn, the corpus of the foundation would still be available — without
the payment of taxes — to be spent on any of these purposes which are
proscribed by the law.
Commissioner Andrews. Mr. Reece, let me see if I understand
what you are getting at. Your question is directed to what the situ-
ation is, as I understand it, when an exempt organization or a pre-
viously exempt organization is declared no longer exempt, but still
has on hand a substantial amount of money that it has been allowed
to receive without taxation. Is that it ?
The Chairman. That is right.
Commissioner Andrews. I just asked Mr. Sugarman a moment ago
on the side what the situation would be there from the standpoint of
perhaps asserting a tax on that portion of those funds received back
to the point where the statute of limitations might run, assuming
that the condition that gave rise to the declaration of nonexempt
status existed back as far as that. I didn't hear exactly what he said,
but I got the impression that he said that would be a pretty line legal
point, and I would certainly have to agree with that.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Chairman, may I introduce another thought
which might help this discussion ?
Would it be possible, do you suppose, to change the law making all
initial gift taxes or State-tax exemptions for charitable contribu-
tions permanently conditional, so that the statute of limitations would
not run, and if the organization were later declared to be subversive
or engaged in something nefarious, retroactively then the original
exemption to the extent that the funds remained could be withdrawn ?
Mr. Hays. May I add one to that, and amend that a little bit?
How about this 27i/^ percent oil depletion allowance. You might get
some nefarious characters accumulating capital that way. If you
are going to amend this, you might put that in so if they did anything
nefarious you might take that away from them. It is a possibility
here.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 459
Mr. Sugarman. Mr. Chairman, just as a thought by way of back-
ground on this particular problem, I would like to call your attention
to the fact that in 1950 the Congress had somewhat the same prob-
lem under consideration in connection with the so-called prohibited
transactions in regard to organizations, funds of which were being
used to promote various business and other activities of the people
who founded the foundations. In that, Congress was fairly careful
in the authority which it gave the Department with regard to revok-
ing the exemption of any organization because of prohibited trans-
actions. I would like to read the provision that Congress inserted
into the law at that time.
This is in section 3813 of the Internal Revenue Code.
An organization shall be denied exemption from taxation under section 101 (6)
by reason of paragraph 1 (that Is the prohibited transaction provision) only for
taxable years subsequent to the taxable year during which it is notified by the
Secretary of the Treasury that it has engaged in a prohibited transaction.
So it required us to give notice and then the effect of that notice
would only be beginning with the following year.
Unless such organization entered into such prohibited transactions with the
purpose of diverting corpus or income from its exempt purpose and such trans-
action involved a substantial part of the corpus or income of such organization.
The limitations on a future application of that revocation you will
note would place a considerable burden in determining the facts of
such diversion or the purposes.
The Chairman. I brought that up largely for the purpose of call-
ing attention to that condition which does obtain which would seem
to me to be somewhat serious even at present and potentially more so.
I have this in mind. I don't know whether it would be feasible or not.
We speak about foundations and we are not clear in our minds as
to just how the funds for the foundations come about, and at whose
sacrifice the funds come about. In that connection I was impressed
with what you said in your statement that these provisions of the law
came into being at a time when comparatively the rates were very low.
I am wondering if it w T ould be practicable to take one of the founda-
tions that has been set up — one of the larger foundations which has
been set up — more or less under our present tax structure, and indicate
what the taxes on that estate would have. been had it been disposed of
in the usual way to individuals, members of the family, or otherwise,
and then the amount of taxes that was paid when provision was made
for the foundation. Of course, the one outstanding example naturally
is the Ford Foundation. I just wonder if it would be practicable to
give us on one of these large foundations the percentage of the capital
that came about as a result of foregoing the payment of taxes which
would otherwise have been paid %
Mr. Stjgarman. Mr. Chairman, I am sure we would be glad to
make a computation on any case you would care to name on which we
have records. I would merely like to suggest that one difficulty in
that regard. The current planning of people of course is based upon
existing law which includes an unlimited deduction for estate- and
gift-tax purposes, of contributions to these organizations. Should
that law be different, I think we can assume that people might plan
their affairs differently. For example, if there were a limitation on
the amount of deduction for estate-tax purposes to these foundations
people might well plan their affairs so as to have a smaller estate at
460 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
death, and to transmit more of their property during life and obtain
the advantages of whatever deductions would be available to them
during life. So I would merely like to suggest that while a com-
parison could be made on the basis of all exemption or no exemption
under existing law in any particular case, I think we would have no
assurance that such case would actually occur if the exemption had
been denied.
Mr. Hats. May I interject a comment there if you will yield ?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Wormser, our counsel, is an expert on this business
of planning estates so you don't have to get "clipped" any more than
you have to on taxes.
Mr. Wormser. Would you like me to show you how to do it, Mr.
Hays?
Mr. Hats. I have your book, but my problem now is to get the
estate to plan.
Mr. Wormser. That is one thing I don't know anything about.
Commissioner Andrews. Mr. Hays, I don't think you need to worry
about that as long as you have the present law. You won't have to
worry about that.
The Chairman. Anyway, would one be justified in stating in an
overall way that where a foundation of 3, 4, or 5 million dollars was set
up, that 85 percent of that is the result of exemption of taxes ?
Mr. Sugarman. Frankly, Mr. Chairman, offhand I would not be
able to express a judgment on any particular figure.
The Chairman. I realize that. Are there any other questions ?
Mr. Hats. You have opened one there that I just want to ask about.
You asked Mr. Andrews if funds that are not spent by these founda-
tions are not sterile until spent taxwise, and I believe your answer was
that they are. Isn't that about what you said % I am not trying to
rephrase it.
Commissioner Andrews. In a sense that they never were taxed, as-
suming that all of it came from tax-exempt contributions, and to the
extent they remain in the foundation or whatever type of organiza-
tion it is unspent, and undisbursed, they, of course, are not producing
any tax revenue.
Mr. Hats. Undivided profits would go in the same category, would
they not, as long as they are not divided and remain, for instance, in
a bank? Some Danks carry quite a sizable amount of money in un-
divided profits.
Commissioner Andrews. On the other hand, generally speaking
your undivided profits or undistributed earnings of business organiza-
tions presumably are producing economic activity which creates in-
come and that gives you taxes.
Mr. Hats. Yes, I agree with that, and I wondered if you were not
saying that. This money that the foundations have and have not
spent, they don't have that in a bag in the vault some place. They
have it doing exactly the same thing as undivided profits in a bank.
Commissioner Andrews. It is producing income to the extent that
it is invested. But it is producing rent on capital, rather than pro-
ducing goods or having to do directly with the distribution of goods.
Mr. Hats. I am not finding fault with the undivided profits. I
just want to make the point that it is sterile as far as producing taxes
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 461
are concerned until such time as it is divided, the same as the founda-
tion money is sterile until the time it is spent.
The Chairman. Would the gentleman yield ?
Mr. Hays. Surely.
The Chairman. If I am not badly misinformed, the earnings that
are passed on to the surplus fund in a bank, you pay the income on
before they go into the fund of undivided profits. So if you found
some way of avoiding the payment of that income tax in transferring
the earnings over to the undivided profits, I would like to have you
advise me.
Mr. Hats. I think it might be possible to advise you because the
banks seem to have a feeling that they save on taxes by transferring
certain amounts of money into undivided profits as a sort of hedge and
reserve. Certainly they would pay more taxes on it if they distrib-
uted it as dividends to their shareholders.
The Chairman. I don't want to speak for the banks
Mr. Hats. I have a little personal interest, and maybe we could get
some free advice from the Commissioner.
The Chairman. There is no way by which a bank can avoid paying
the tax on its earnings merely by transferring those earnings into undi-
vided profits.
Mr. Hays. Of course they can't. I think we are talking about two
different things. I was looking at it from the standpoint until that
money goes out from the bank in the form of dividends of until this
foundation money goes out in the form of grants, that they are in a
comparable situation.
The Chairman. No. The Commissioner and his minions are only
there at the end of the year. They don't wait until they are paid out.
Mr. Hays. They get more when it is paid out.
One other thing I might ask you, Mr. Sugarman. You mentioned
this morning, and I think you used the words, comparatively few
foundations have strayed from the original purposes that they were set
up for. Would you be able, not today, because you perhaps don't have
it at your fingertips, a little later advise the committee how many have
strayed? Maybe you have it right there.
Mr. Sugarman. I think I can give you some information on that in
regard to figures we collected for a prior period which I do not think
is substantially different today. That is, in the 2-year period ending
June 30, 1952, we had revoked the exemption during that 2-year period,
not for all time, of 55 organizations that previously had been granted
exemption in the category that we are talking about.
Mr. Hays. In order to get some sort of basis of comparison or a per-
centage figure, 55 out of how many approximately that have that
status 'i
Mr. Sugarman. I think this covered the group in excess of 30,000
that is in our category or organizations contributions to which are
deductible, principally the 101 (6) organizations.
Mr. Hays. That answers the question very satisfactorily. Thank
you. I have one more question, and perhaps the Commissioner won't
care to comment on that, but I would like to preface it by a preliminary
question.
What percentage of the total revenues of the Government come
from the income tax ? Could you give us a rough idea ?
Commissioner Andrews. You mean the individual income tax ?
49720— 54— pt. 1 30
462 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hays. All income tax, individual, corporate, and so on.
Commissioner Andrews. I would have to check that to answer in a
formal hearing of this kind. I could give you that.
Mr. Hays. It does not really matter. Would you say a substantial
part?
Commissioner Andrews. A very large part of it ; practically all of it.
Mr. Hays. That brings me to the $64 question, and if you don't want
to comment on it, you don't need to. But one of the witnesses we had
before this committee, and he and I got into a friendly discussion about
it, made the flat statement that the income tax was a socialist plot and
that it had been foisted off on this unsuspecting country of ours and it
is part of a big plot to destroy us. Would you care to comment on that ?
Commissioner Andrews. No, I don't think I want to comment on
that. I don't know the full context of what the gentleman said.
Besides, it doesn't fit into the question of tax administration. I think
I better let that one pass.
Mr. Hays. Whether or not it is a plot, you have it on the books and
you are going to collect them.
Commissioner Andrews. Whatever may be the purpose of this tax
system we have, it is my job to get the money.
Mr. Hays. That is why I say plot or not, it is on the books and you
are going to collect it.
Commissioner Andrews. I am probably in the Light Brigade. It
is not my business to reason why, but to do what the law says do.
Mr. Hays. I won't press it further.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Chairman, may I ask one final question? This
is merely for our education. I have the impression, Mr. Andrews,
that the high rates of taxation is recent years have very materially
increased the incidence of foundations. I don't say that unhappily
because I happen to like foundations. In fact, I have helped organize
plenty of them. But there has been a growing tendency to use foun-
dations to solve business problems, the problems of liquidating estates
which would be frozen if the decedent left chiefly corporate taxes, and
had very little capital and so also solve problems of continuing busi-
nesses as such.
Moreover, there has been also, I believe, a marked tendency by corp-
orations themselves to create their own foundations, not merely to
distribute their 5 percent charitable grants for the year, but also to
do perfectly properly those charitable things which may be inciden-
tally useful to their own businesses.
Has that not been that marked tendency in recent years?
Commissioner Andrews. There is no doubt in the world about
that.
Mr. Wormser. I am not saying that critically. As a matter of fact,
I like it. I think it is a good thing.
The Chairman. Mr. Commissioner and Assistant Commissioner, we
appreciate very greatly your coming up today. We had not antici-
pated taking this much time, which makes us doubly appreciative.
Your testimony has been very enlightening to the inquiry which the
committee has underway. As far as I know, I believe it is the most
comprehensive presentation made by the Internal Revenue Service on
this subject before one of these committees, and we thank you very,
very kindly.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 463
Mr. Hays. I would like to concur, Mr. Chairman, and to thank you
for the minority, and to compliment you on the presentation, and to
say to you that if you gentlemen could get yourselves on television a
little bit, I think it would add to the public relations of the tax-collect-
ing department, and the people wouldn't think that tax collectors are
as bad as somebody makes them out to be.
Commissioner Andrews. I might say, Mr. Hays, that in our modest
sort of way we take advantage of occasional opportunities to do that.
The Chairman. If there is a television representative present
Commissioner Andrews. If we have been able to assist the com-
mittee in its understanding of this problem, of course we are happy.
The time element is not important to us except to the extent that we
want to give you gentlemen whatever time you may need from us.
Anytime we can help you, let us know.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Commissioner Andrews. Thank you, sir.
The Chairman. It is of course too late to call any other witness.
When the committee adjourns, it will adjourn to meet at 10 o'clock
tomorrow in room 304, Old House Office Building. That is the Armed
Services Subcommittee room in which we met 1 day last week. It
happens that Mr. Wolcott is having a meeting of his committee in this
room tomorrow so it is not available. We hope it will be available
after tomorrow.
(Thereupon at 4 :15 p.m., a recess was taken, the committee to recon-
vene at 10 a. m., in room 304, Old House Office Building.)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
THURSDAY, JUNE 3, 1954
House of Representatives,
Special Committee to Investigate Tax Exempt Foundations,
Washington^ D, O,
The special committee met at 10 : 20 a. m., pursuant to recess, in
Room 304, House Office Building, Hon. Carroll Reece (chairman of
the special committee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Reece (presiding), Goodwin, Hays, and
Pfost.
Also Present : Rene A. Wormser, general counsel ; Arnold T. Koch,
associate counsel; Norman Dodd, research director; Kathyrn Casey,
legal analyst ; John Marshall, chief clerk.
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
Mr. Wormser, who is your first witness ?
Mr. Wormser. Mr. McNiece will be the next witness, and Mr.
Koch will interrogate him.
The Chairman. Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are
about to give in this proceeding shall be the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth, so help you God ?
Mr. McNiece. I do.
Mr. Koch. Mr. Chairman, Mr. McNiece has prepared a statement
on the interrelationships of foundations, education and government,
and in that statement he will attempt to trace the flow of money, men
and ideas between these three groups. Whether that is good or bad
or any part of it is good or bad is something we may wish to deter-
mine at the close of the hearings after we have heard all the various
points of view.
I would like to have Mr. McNiece read his statement and illustrate
it with the chart as he goes along.
The Chairman. You may proceed.
Mr. McNiece. Mr. Chairman there is a question of procedure I
would like to raise. This report consists largely of excerpts or quota-
tions from documents and books. I believe we have a supply of them
here for reference purposes. It would expedite this hearing materi-
ally if we could continue to read those excerpts from the manuscript
without interruption to take the time to find the books. We have them
here, and we are ready to do it in accordance with whatever the com-
mittee's wishes are.
The Chairman. You vouch for the accuracy ?
Mr. McNiece. Yes ; if any question is raised at any time we will dig
up the information.
The Chairman. Without objection, that will be the procedure.
465
466 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. McNiece. One more statement I would like to make that con-
cerns procedure. This report, as is indicated, is the initial staff report
on relationships between foundations and education. It is dated May
20, 1954, because this was originally scheduled for presentation at
that date, and upon that date copies of this document were given to all
members of the committee.
This presentation will concern largely, if we follow the diagram,
the area encompassed by foundations and the suspended educational
units in the center, and then swinging around to the left. In other
words, through the field of education. Later, a section of the report
will cover the relationships principally between foundations and gov-
ernment as shown on the chart and then just a few moments devoted
to closing the triangle by swinging across horizontally through the
Federal or United States Office of Education.
Mr. Koch. Does your present report only deal with the educa-
tional matter ?
Mr. McNiece. That is right. This section of the report.
That brings up the next statement I would like to make. We have
prepared and ready for distribution to the members of the commit-
tee, and the only copies we have, of the so-called Economic Report
and the Public Interest. They are ready today. The short interme-
diate section referring to relations between foundations and the gov-
ernment is in the course of preparation and mimeographing at this
moment, because we have included data right up to the last minute.
It is supposed that they will be ready for us by noon.
I want to make that statement in explanation of the fact that the
whole thing is not ready for the committee as of this moment.
The Chairman. You may proceed.
STATEMENT OF THOMAS M. McNIECE, ASSISTANT RESEARCH
DIRECTOR, SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE TAX-EXEMPT
FOUNDATIONS
PREFATORYi STATEMENT
Mr. McNiece. From the jungle of semantics various people may de-
rive different interpretations from the same statement. In the simplest
terms possible, we wish to say that in this report, regardless of other
interpretations, we intend to draw no conclusions, but rather to portray
such available facts as we have been able to gather on this complex
subject. This report covers but one phase of the larger work that is
being done.
Furthermore, we are not criticizing change as such. Rather does
the evidence which will be offered seem to show that the pattern is
one of evolving collectivism, the ultimate aim of several varieties of
political thought with different names and a common objective.
To explain our reference to a common objective, we wish to quote
from the sources indicated a number of statements on this subject.
Report of the Joint Legislative Committee Investigating Seditious
Activities, filed in New York State, 1920. I believe that was known
as the Lusk committee.
In the report here presented the committee seeks to give a clear, unbiased
statement and history of the purposes and objects, tactics and methods, of the
various forces now at work in the United States . . . which are seeking to under-
mine and destroy, not only the government under which we live, hut also the
very structure of American society ;
... In the section of this report dealing with American conditions, the com-
mittee has attempted to describe in detail the various organizations masquerad-
ing as political parties, giving the principles and objects for which they stand,
as well as methods and tactics they employ in order to bring about the social
revolution.
In every instance the committee has relied upon the so-called party or organ-
ization's own statements with respect to these matters . . .
Those (organizations) representing the Socialist point of view are the Socialist
Party of America, the Communist Party of America, the Communist Labor Party,
and the Socialist Labor Party. Each of these groups claim to be the most
modern and aggressive body representing Marxian theories.
A study of their platforms and official pronouncements shows that they do
not differ fundamentally in their objectives . . .
These organizations differ but slightly in the means advocated to bring
about the social revolution . . . they differ slightly in the matter of em-
phasis . . .
League for Industrial Democracy : Definition of "Democracy", New
Frontiers, Vol. IV, No. 4, June 1936 :
The fight for democracy is at one and the same time also a fight for socialism,
democracy, to be sure, rests on liberty, but its substance is equality . . .
But finally, equality is social equality. All political institutions of democracy
are perverted by private property in the means of production. Personal, legal,
political equality — they all can be fully realized only when private property
is abolished, when men have an equal control over property.
Democratic Socialism by Roger Payne and George W. Hartman,
1948, page 77.
467
468 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
These men are English authors.
In the socialist society of the future there will be two things in which it will
be fundamentally different from the present society. One of these is collective
ownership of the means of production and distribution; the other is a complete
democracy under which the political, economic, social and international life
will be complete democratized.
The Socialist Call (official Organ of the Socialist Party) April
1954, page 5 :
Socialists regard the capitalist system of private property relations,
with its complex, disputable, sometimes unfathomable inner economic laws and
relationships, as a wall that stands between humanity and its goals in economic
affairs, between man and his bread and peace of mind.
THE INTRODUCTION
On page A1161 of the appendix of the Congressional Record of
February 15, 1954, there appears the copy of an article by Seymour
E. Harris, professor of economics at Harvard University. This arti-
cle is entitled, "The Old Deal," and appeared originally in the maga-
zine Progressive in the issue of December 1953. We are quoting the
first paragraph of this article :
In the 20 years between 1933 and 1953 the politicians, college professors,
and lawyers, with a little help from business, wrought a revolution in the
economic policies of the United States. They repudiated laissez-faire. They
saw the simple fact that if capitalism were to survive, Government must take
some responsibility for developing the Nation's resources, putting a floor under
spending, achieving a more equitable distribution of income, and protecting the
weak against the strong. The price of continuing the free society was to be
limited intervention by Government.
Stepping backward for a span of 9 years, we wish to submit
another quotation, this time from the issue of October 15, 1943, of
the magazine Frontiers of Democracy, the successor to an earlier
one to which reference will be made later and which was called "Social
Frontier," Dr. Harold Rugg of teachers college, Columbia University,
was the editor of the latter magazine and the author of the article
from which this excerpt is made.
Thirteen months will elapse between the publication of this issue of Frontiers
and the national election of 1944. In those months the American people must
make one of the great decisions in their history. They will elect the President
and the Congress that will make the peace and that will carry on the national
productive system in the transition years. The decisions made by that Gov-
ernment, in collaboration with the British and Russian Governments, will set
the mold of political and economic life for a generation to come. * * * We have
suddenly come out upon a new frontier and must chart a new course. It is
a psychological frontier, an unmarked wilderness of competing desires and
possessions, of property ownerships and power complexes. On such a frontier
wisdom is the supreme need, rather than technological efficiency and physical
strength in which our people are so competent.
"We are strong enough but are we wise enough? We shall soon see for the
testing moment is now. Our measure will be taken in these 13 months. The
test is whether enough of our people — perhaps a compact minority of 10 million
will be enough — can grasp the established fact that, in company with other
industrializing peoples, we are living in a worldwide social revolution.
We propose to offer evidence which seems to indicate that this
"revolution" has been promoted. Included within this supporting
evidence will be documented records that will show how the flow of
money, men, and ideas combined to promote this so-called revolution
just mentioned.
I'AX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 469
The money in large part came from the foundations. Men and
ideas in a great measure came from the intellectual groups or so-
cieties supported by this money and found their way into the power-
ful agencies of education and Government. Here in these pivotal
centers were combined the professors, the politicians, and the lawyers
mentioned a moment ago.
Foundations, education, and Government form a triangle of influ-
ences, natural under the circumstances and certainly without criti-
cism in itself as long as the three entities exist and the liaison is
not abused or misused in the furtherance of questionable activities.
The Organization Chart
The nature of these threefold relationships can be most clearly and
quickly illustrated by reference to the chart prepared for the pur-
pose and entitled, "Relationships Between Foundations, Education,
and Government." Let it be emphasized again that there is no ele-
ment of criticism or condemnation to be inferred from this chart. It
is what is commonly considered as a functional organization chart,
and its purpose is to display graphically what it is difficult to describe,
to see and to understand by verbal description only.
As previously suggested, the chart is basically in the form of a
triangle with appended rectangles to indicate the functional activi-
ties in their relationship to each other. At the apex we have placed
the foundations. At the lateral or base angles, on the left and right,
respectively, are the educational and governmental members of the
triad. Suspended from the rectangle representing the foundations
are those representing the intellectual groups which are dependent
to a large extent upon the foundations for their support.
The relationships between and among these organized intellectual
groups are far more complex than is indicated on the chart. Some
of these organizations have many constituent member groups. The
American Council of Learned Societies has 24 constituent societies,
the Social Science Research Council 7, the American Council on
Education 79 constituent members, 64 associate members, and 954
institutional members. In numbers and interlocking combinations
they are too numerous and complex to picture on this chart.
Mr. Koch. May I suggest that this chart he refers to should be
deemed in evidence and part of the record ?
The Chairman. I so understood.
Mr. Koch. Go ahead.
Mr. Hays. Where will it be inserted, not that it makes any differ-
ence. Will it be at the end of his statement or at the middle ?
Mr. Koch. I should think right here where he is talking about it.
The Chairman. Under the caption "Organization Chart."
Mr. McNiece. I would think that would be the natural place for it.
Mr. Koch. Go ahead.
Mr. McNiece. These types of intellectual societies may be con-
sidered as clearing houses or perhaps as wholesalers of money received
from foundations inasmuch as they are frequently the recipients of
relatively large grants which they often distribute in subdivided
amounts to member groups and individuals.
For illustrative purposes, the following four societies are listed:
American Council of Learned Societies, including the American His-
INTER-RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN
FOUNDATIONS, E DUCATION AN D GOVERNMENT
4-
O
FOUNDATIONS
AMERICAN COUNCIL
OF LEARNED SOCIETIES
AMERICAN HISTORICAL
ASSOCIATION
SOCIAL SCIENCE
RESEARCH COUNCIL
NATIONAL ACADEMY
OF SCIENCES
AMERICAN COUNCIL
ON EDUCATION
FEDERAL
OFFICE OF EDUCATION
NATIONAL
EDUCATION
ASSOCIATION
STATE
DEPARTMENT
RESEARCH:
ECONOMIC
BIOGRAPHIC
SOCIAL SCIENCES
INTERNATIONAL AREAS
NATIONAL
PLANNING BOARD
1933-34
NATIONAL RESOURCES
PLANNING BOARD
1939-43
EDUCATION
PSYCHOLOGICAL
WARFARE
SOURC£: House of Representatives.
Special Committee to Investigate
Tan Exempt Foundotions.
Moy 1954
EDUCATION
CHARITIES
MEDICINE AND HEALTH
NUTRITION
EMPLOYMENT
SOCIAL SECURITY
RECREATION
SOCIAL SCIENCES
NATURAL SCIENCES
!1_
INTERNATIONALISM
MILITARY
FINANCE
COMMERCE
AGRICULTURE
INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION
NATURAL RESOURCES
PUBLIC WORKS
HOUSING
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 471
torical Association, Social Science Research Council, National Acad-
emy of Sciences, American Council on Education.
The four shown on the chart are enough to illustrate the relation-
ship of such societies to the governmental and the other educational
units shown on the chart. Furthermore, credit or appreciation has
been expressed by both educational and governmental circles for aid
received from each of these four organizations.
Below the rectangle representing education appear the various
branches of the educational effort. To avoid undue complexity, no
attempt has been made here or at any other points on the chart to
portray any but the principal areas of operation. Under the govern-
mental function a few divisions of activity are shown. These are con-
fined to the executive branches of Government where the greatest
changes have occurred.
INTERPRETATION OF THE CHART
The lines connecting the various rectangles on the chart symbolize
the paths followed in the flow or interchange of money, men, and ideas
as previously mentioned. The focal point of contacts between these
connecting lines and the rectangles are lettered somewhat in the man-
ner used in textbooks of geometry and trigonometry in order to facili-
tate identification and reference in describing the existing relation-
ships. Finally, this chart as a whole will be useful in locating the
areas in which we have found evidence of questionable procedure
against what we deem to be public interest.
Leaving the chart for a few moments, we shall refer to certain
information derived from the record of the Cox committee hearing.
Information From the Cox Committee Hearing
Reference to the record shows that definite orders were issued in
Soviet circles to infiltrate "all strata of western public opinion" in
an effort to accomplish two objectives: one, to penetrate and utilize
intellectual circles for the benefit of the Soviet cause and two, to
gain access to foundation funds to cover the cost of such effort. Tes-
timony of Messrs. Bogolepov and Malkin described firsthand knowl-
edge of these instructions. Testimony of Mr. Louis Budenz confirmed
this, even to listing the names of committee members appointed to
accomplish this objective. Testimony of Mr. Manning Johnson added
further confirmation of these facts and in addition provided the
names of certain individuals who had succeeeded in penetrating or
receiving grants from several of the foundations.
Evidence of actual Communist entry into foundation organiza-
tions is supplied in the Cox committee record. This testimony in-
volves at least seven foundations, namely, the Marshall Field
Foundation, the Garland Fund, the John Simon Guggenheim Founda-
tion, the Heckscher Foundation, the Robert Marshall Foundation,
the Rosenwald Fund, and the Phelps Stokes Fund.
Mr. Hats. Could I interrupt there ?
472 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. McNiece. Certainly.
Mr. Hats. I don't want to make a habit of this, because I agreed
not to. I want to know if those are the only foundations that the
staff found any evidence of Communist infiltration ?
Mr. McNiece. That is the only ones I found. I may have over-
looked some in the mass, but it was not intentional.
Mr. Hays. In other words, you did not find any in the Big Four
or Big Three?
Mr. McNiece. No. I think there was some varying testimony on
that which will come out later.
The tax-exempt status of the Eobert Marshall Foundation was
revoked by the Internal Revenue Bureau and the Rosenwald Fund,
which was one of limited life, was liquidated in 1948 in accordance
with the date specified by the founder.
Reference to the Cox committee record shows that some 95 indi-
viduals and organizations with leftist records or affiliations admittedly
received grants from some of our foundations. These were divided
as follows :
Rockefeller Foundation, 26
Carnegie Corporation, 35
Russell Sage Foundation, 1
Wm. C. Whitney Foundation, 7
Marshall Field Foundation, 6
John Simon Guggenheim Foundation, 5
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 15
A total of 95.
It should be clearly understood that there is no significance to be
attached to the numerical differences or comparisons in the foregoing
list. There are too many variables involved to warrant any conclusions
whatever on relative performance among the foundations listed.
Among these are the differing number of grants made and the varying
opportunities for thorough search or screening of the records involved.
This list does not include all the grants of this character that were
made. At this time we are not concerned with the question as to
whether or not the foundations knew or could have found out about the
questionable affiliations of these grantees before the grants were made.
The fact is, the funds were given to these people. This is the impor-
tant point of interest to us. These grants were made to professors,
authors, lecturers, educational groups, and so forth, and all virtually
without exception were included within educational circles. It should
be obvious that with the passage of time, the activity of this many
people and organizations dedicated to spreading the word in the edu-
cational field, would have an influence all out of measurable propor-
tion to the relative value and number of grants. This influence is
increasing and will continue to increase unless it is checked.
PERSONNEL, AND ADVISORY SERVICES FROM HIGH LEVEL,
During the last 20 years and especially in the last decade, the Gov-
ernment has made increasing demands upon the educational world for
assistance from academic groups or societies. As will be brought out
later in the documented records, it is from these centralized and inter-
locking educational groups that much of the influence which we ques-
tion has arisen.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 473
To indicate the magnitude of these sources of influence a few matters
of record may be mentioned.
The National Planning Board requested aid from the Social Science
Research Council in compiling a section of one of their planning
reports. A committee from the Social Science Research Council ac-
tually prepared this section of the report. The creation of this com-
mittee for the purpose is described in the annual report for the Social
Science Research Council for 1933-34. The National Planning Board
rendered a final report for 1933-34. On page 54 of this report is the
following caption : "The Aid Which the Social Sciences Have Ren-
dered and Can Render to National Planning, June 1934."
Immediately below this is the phrase :
Memorandum prepared for the National Planning Board by a committee of the
Social Science Research Council.
In 1950, the Russell Sage Foundation published a booklet entitled,
"Effective Use of Social Science Research in the Federal Services."
On page 5 of this report is the following statement to which we have
added some italic :
This pamphlet has been written because the Federal Government has become
the outstanding employer of social scientists and consumer of social science mate-
rials in the conduct of practical affairs. Expenditures of the Federal Government
for social science research projects, either under direct governmental auspices or
under contract with private agencies, and for personnel in administative capaci-
ties having command of social science knowledge, far exceed the amount given
by all the philanthropic foundations for similar purposes.
Further evidence of the importance placed on this source of aid
in governmental operations is offered in the following extracts from
the annual reports of the Rockefeller Foundation wherein they refer
to the granting of a total of $65,000 to facilitate planning for adequate
supply of personnel qualified for "high level work" in public affairs
and education.
On page 313 of the 1949 annual report, the following statement
appears :
American council of Learned Societies Personnel in Humanities. Careful
planning to assure a steady supply of people qualified for high-level work is
needed in public affairs as well as in education and institutional research. Con-
siderations of national welfare have led a number of governmental agencies
to ask how many specialists of particular kinds now exist, how they can be
located and whether they are now being replaced or increased in number.
Another reference appears on page 412 of the annual report for
1 95 1. It follows herewith :
American Council of Learned Societies — Personnel in the Humanities. Dur-
ing the last several years extensive studies have been made of the demands for
and the possible supply in the United States of personnel with unusual academic
training. Because of the importance of having the humanities adequately rep-
resented in such studies, the Rockefeller Foundation in 1949 made a grant of
$31,000 to the American Council of Learned Societies to permit the addition
to its staff of Mr. J. F. Wellemeyer, Jr., as staff adviser on personnel studies.
In view of the effective work done by the staff adviser, the Rockefeller Foun-
dation in 1951 made an additional 2-year grant of $34,000 for continuation of
this activity.
In the foregoing record from the annual report of the Rockefeller
Foundation for 1949 is the very clear statement of the need for an
adequate supply of personnel sufficiently qualified in the humanities
for public affairs, education and institutional research. In itself
474 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
there should be no criticism of this objective. It does ? however, seem
to confirm that much of the influence which we are discussing comes
from highly centralized sources. This naturally increases the oppor-
tunity to effectuate highly coordinated plans in all affected areas of
activities and functions. Any criticism that arises should be directed
to the final product or end result of this liaison. If such end results
are harmful or opposed to the public interest all who have partici-
pated in the development of the situation should share the responsi-
bility, and especially if such activities and their support are continued.
Inasmuch as the term "public interest" will be used in this report
from time to time, it will be well to define it in the sense that it is
used in this section of the report of the staff committee. The same
conception of the public interest is used in the economic section of
the staff's report. Public interest is difficult to define but for the
purpose of this study, we can probably do no better than to refer to
the preamble of the Constitution of the United States wherein it
is stated that the Constitution is established —
in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tran-
quility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and
secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.
Mr. Hays. Mr. McNiece, right there, maybe we ought to mark that
passage, because I think the "promote the general welfare" clause is*
going to be a pretty debatable thing when we get into it.
Mr. McNiece. I think so.
Mr. Hats You don't have a staff definition of that ?
Mr. McISTiece. Of public welfare ?
Mr. Hays. Of general welfare.
Mr. McISTiece. I think it encompasses a great many activities wnich
will come out later perhaps outside the pale of enumerated powers..
The last three words in the foregoing quotation impose a respon-
sibility for the future upon us of the present. Later, as we approach
the lower right-hand angle, we will have occasion to introduce for-
mally the report on economics and the public interest. It will be tied
up especially with the rectangle indicated as "social planning."
We would now like to offer the supplement, which is very brief,
entitled, "Supplement to the Initial Staff Report on Relationship
Between Foundations and Education."
The ensuing financial data will give some idea of the great amount
of funds and their distribution made> available in the educational field
by a few of the larger foundations.
The statement is by no means complete. In fact it contains the con-
tributions of only six of the larger foundations where the specific bene-
ficiaries are named.
These six are as follows :
The Carnegie Corporation of New York
The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching
The Rockefeller Foundation
The General Education Board
The Ford Foundation (two instances only)
Great benefit has unquestionably resulted to all mankind from the
contributions of these and other foundations and there is no inten-
tion to gainsay or minimize this or to detract from the credit due
the foundations for these benefits.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
475
What this investigation does seem to indicate is that many small
grants have found their way into questionable hands and many large
ones in points of concentrated use have been devoted to purposes that
are promoting a departure from the fundamental concepts of edu-
cation and government under our Constitution. That this may be
recognized by those engaged in such activities is indicated by the
frequent references in their own literature to the "age of transition"
through which we are passing, and the responsibility that must be
assumed by educators in leading the way. No one in full possession
of his faculties should oppose change for the better but change for the
sake of change alone may prove to be a dangerous delusion.
The following record has been summarized from the annual reports
of the foundations previously named :
Associations receiving grants
Period
Amount
American Council on Education. ___ _ .
1920-52
1923-52
1924-52
1923-52
1933-51
1929-52
1929-62
1915-52
1916-52
1932-43
1925-52
$6, 119, 700
574, 800
5, 113, 800
3, 064, 800
1, 938, 000
2, 081, 100
3, 843, 600
20, 715, 800
1, 229, 000
4, 257, 800
11, 747, 600
American Historical Association.
American Council of Learned Societies-,- - - -
Council on Foreign Eelations _. __ ___ __ __ _ _
Foreign Policy Association _
Institute of International Education __ . .
Institute of Pacific Relations--.
National Academy of Sciences (including National Research Council) ._-
National Education Association ... ___ _.
Progressive Education Association-
Social Science Research Council
Total-.. _
60, 686, 000
Note.— The foregoing grants follow the lines AD, thence CB on the chart.
tjpectfic university grants
London School of Economics
Teachers' College— Columbia University
Lincoln School— Columbia University...
Period
1929-52
1923-52
1917-52
Amount
$4, 105, 600
8, 398, 176
6, 821, 100
Note.— The foregoing grants follow the line AB on chart.
Grants by the Eockefeller Foundation (derived from a consolidated
report of the Rockefeller Foundations) and the General Education
Board combined to universities and including only the totals to the
ten largest beneficiaries of each of the two foundations in each State
of the United States :
Period
Amount
To universities. _. .
1902-51
1902-51
$256, 553, 493
33, 789, 569
Total fellowship grants.. » . ...
Total. ..
290,343,026
According to our compilations, the Carnegie Corp. has contributed
to all educational purposes, from 1911 to 1950, approximately
$25,300,000.
(These grants follow the line AB on the chart.)
These data are representative of the conditions which they disclose.
It has been difficult to assemble these figures in the manner shown in
476 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
the time available. If there are any errors in the compilation, we
firmly believe that they minimize the contributions.
A PRODUCT OF FOUNDATION SUPPORT
On the organization chart previously discussed, the American
Council of Learned Societies is the first group listed under the "Clear-
ing House" designation. One of the constituent societies of this
Council is the American Historical Society and it is separately shown
as such because it has a most prominent role in our investigation.
Under this association was formed a Commission on Social Studies.
Its plans and objectives can be most fairly stated by quoting from
the official report of the association. The following statement ap-
pears on page 47 of the annual report of this association:
The study advocated is to comprise a collection of general statistical infor-
mation, the determination of specific objectives, the organization of content, in
the light of these objectives for teaching purposes, the methods of instruction
and testing and of the preparation of teachers. An extensive personnel and
5 years of work were required by this plan. Means for its execution are
now being sought.
The idea just expressed originated in a report in 1926 by a Com-
mittee of History and Other Studies in the Schools.
The "means" for the execution of the plan were supplied by the
Carnegie Corp. In a series of six annual grants extending from 1928
to 1933, inclusive, this foundation supplied a total sum of $340,000
to the American Historical Association for the use of the Commis-
sion on Social Studies formed to carry out the recommendations of
the Committee on History and Other Studies in the Schools.
As finally completed, the report- of this committee was published in
16 separate sections. The 16,th and final volume %i the report was
published by Scribners in May 1934. It is entitled, "Report of the
Commission on the Social Studies — Conclusions and Recommenda-
tions of the Commission."
It is with this final volume of conclusions and recommendations that
the staff committee is concerned. I.t covers a tremendous field of
recommendation and application actively in process as of this day.
Support for this latter statement will be introduced later.
Much of this last volume is devoted to recommendations of techni-
cal moment covering content and teaching technique. These are not
pertinent to our problem. Those which do apply to our study of
the case are quoted hereafter under the subheadings and paragraph
numbers as they appear in the book (pp. 16-20) .
Conclusions and Recommendations ov the Commission on Social Studies
8. Under the molding influence of socialized processes of living, drives of
technology and science, pressures of changing thought and policy, and disrupt-
ing impacts of social disaster there is a notable waning of the once widespread
popular faith in economic individualism ; and leaders in public affairs, supported
by a growing mass of the population, are demanding the introduction into
economy of ever wider measures of planning and control.
9. Cumulative evidence supports the conclusion that, in the United States
as in other countries, the age of individualism and laissez faire in economy
and government is closing and that a new age of collectivism is emerging.
10. As to the specific form which this "collectivism," this integration and inter-
dependence, is taking and will take in the future, the evidence at hand is by
no means clear or unequivocal. It may involve the limiting or supplanting of
private property by public property or it may entail the preservation of pri-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNI>ATK*NS 477
vate property, extended and distributed among the masses. Most likely, it
will issue from a process of experimentation and will represent a composite
of historic doctrines and social conceptions yet to appear. Almost certainly
it will involve a larger measure of compulsory as well as voluntary coopera-
tion of citizens in the conduct of the complex national economy, a corre-
sponding enlargement of the functions of government, and an increasing state
intervention m fundamental branches of economy previously left to the indi-
vidual discretion and initiative — a state intervention that in some instances
may be direct and mandatory and in others indirect and faqilitative. In any
event the commission is convinced by its interpretation of available empirical
data that the actually integrating economy of the present day is the forerun-
ner of a consciously integrated society in which individual economic actions
and individual property rights will be altered and abridged.
11. The emerging age is particularly an age of transition. It is marked by
numerous and severe tensions arising out of the conflict between the actual trend
toward integrated economy and society, on the one side, and the traditional prac-
tices, dispositions, ideas, and institutional arrangements inherited from the pass-
ing age of individualism, on the other. In all the recommendations that follow
the transitional character of the present epoch is recognized.
12. Underlying and illustrative of these tensions are privation in the midst of
plenty, violations of fiduciary trust, gross inequalities in income and wealth,
widespread racketeering and banditry, wasteful use of natural resources, un-
balanced distribution and organization of labor and leisure, the harnessing of
science to individualism in business enterprise, the artificiality of political bound-
aries and divisions, the subjection of public welfare to the egoism of private
interests, the maladjustment of production and consumption, persistent tenden-
cies toward economic instability, disproportionate growth of debt and property
claims in relation to production, deliberate destruction of goods and withdrawal
of efficiency from production, accelerating tempo of panics, crises, and depres-
sions attended by ever-wider destruction of capital and demoralization of labor,
struggles among nations for markets and raw materials leading to international
conflicts and wars.
13. If historical knowledge is any guide, these tensions, accompanied by oscil-
lations in popular opinion, public policy, and the fortunes of the struggle for
power, will continue until some approximate adjustment is made between social
thought, social practice, and economic realities, or until society, exhausted by the
conflict and at the end of its spiritual and inventive resources, sinks back into a
more primitive order of economy and life. Such is the long-run view of social
development in general, and of American life in particular, which must form the
background for any educational program designed to prepare either children or
adults for their coming trials, opportunities, and responsibilities.
Page 19:
D. CHOICES DEEMED POSSIBLE AND DESIRABLE
1. Within the limits of the broad trend toward social integration the possible
forms of economic and political life are many and varied, involving wide dif-
ferences in modes of distributing wealth, income, and cultural opportunity, em-
bracing various conceptions of the State and of the rights, duties, and privileges
of the ordinary citizen, and representing the most diverse ideals concerning the
•relations of sexes, classes, religions, nations, and races * * *
THE REDISTRIBUTION OF POWER
1. If the teacher is to achieve these conditions of improved status and thus
free the school from the domination of special interests and convert it into a
truly enlightening force in society, there must be a redistribution of power in the
general conduct of education — the board of education will have to be made more
representative, the administration of the school will have to be conceived more
broadly and the teaching profession as a whole will have to organize, develop a
theory of its social function and create certain instrumentalities indispensable
to the realization of its aims.
2. The ordinary board of education in the United States, with the exception
of the rural district board, is composed for the most part of business and pro-
fessional men; the ordinary rural district board is composed almost altogether
of landholders. In the former case the board is not fully representative of the
supporting population and thus tends to impose upon the school the social Ideas
4S720 — 54 — pt. 1 31
478 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
of a special class ; in both instances its membership is apt to be peculiarly rooted
in the economic individualism of the 19th century.
3. If the board of education is to support a school program conceived in terms
of the general welfare and adjusted to the needs of an epoch marked by tran-
sition to some form of socialized economy, it should include in its membership
adequate representation of points of view other than those of private business.
4. With the expansion of education and the growth of large school systems,
involving the coordination of the efforts of tens, hundreds and even thousands
of professional workers and the expenditure of vast sums of money on grounds,
buildings and equipment, the function of administration has become increas-
ingly important and indispensable.
Page 145 :
APPENDIX A NEXT STEPS
1. The commission has, for reasons already given, rejected the idea that there is
one unequivocal body of subject matter, one unequivocal organization of mate-
rials, and one unequivocal method of teaching which, when combined, will guar-
antee the realization in instruction of the broad purposes set forth above. It
was not instructed to provide a detailed syllabus and set of textbooks to be
imposed on the school system of the country. Had it been so instructed it would
have found the mandate incompatible with its fundamental conclusion that the
frame of reference is the primary consideration and that many methods of
organizing materials and teaching are possible and desirable within the accepted
frame.
2. However, the commission is mindful of the proper and practical question :
What are the next steps? It indicates, therefore, the lines along which attacks
can and will be made on the problem of applying its conclusions with respect to
instruction in the social sciences.
3. As often repeated, the first step is to awaken and consolidate leadership
around the philosophy and purpose of education herein expounded — leadership
among administrators, teachers, boards of trustees, college and normal school
presidents — thinkers and workers in every field of education and the social
sciences. Signs of such an awakening and consolidation of leadership are
already abundantly evident: in the resolutions on instruction in the social
sciences adopted in 1933 by the department of superintendence of the National
Education Association at Minneapolis and by the association itself at Chicago ;
in the activities of the United States Commissioner of Education during the past
few years ; and in almost every local or national meeting of representatives of
the teaching profession.
4. The American Historical Association, in cooperation with the National
Council on the Social Studies, has arranged to take over The Historical Outlook *
(a journal for social-science teachers), has appointed a board of editors chosen
in part from the members of this commission, and has selected for the post of
managing editor, W. G. Kimmel, who has been associated with this commission
as executive secretary for 5 years and is thoroughly conversant with its work
and its conclusions. The purpose of the Outlook under the new management will
be to supply current materials, to encourage experimentation in the organization
of materials, to stimulate thought and experimentation among teachers and
schools, to report projects and results of experimentation, and generally to fur-
nish as rapidly as possible various programs of instruction organized within the
frame of reference outlined by the commission.
5. The writers of textbooks may be expected to revamp and rewrite their old
works in accordance with this frame of reference and new writers in the field
of the social sciences will undoubtedly attack the central problem here con-
ceived, bringing varied talents and methods and arts to bear upon it. Thus
the evil effects of any stereotype may be avoided.
6. Makers of programs in the social sciences in cities, towns, and States
may be expected to evaluate the findings and conclusions of this report and to
recast existing syllabi and schemes of instruction in accordance with their
judgment respecting the new situation.
7. If the findings and conclusions of this commission are really pertinent to
the educational requirements of the age, then colleges and universities offer-
ing courses of instruction for teachers will review their current programs and
provide for prospective teachers courses of instruction in general harmony with
the commission's frame of reference.
* Hereafter to be called The Social Studies
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 479
8. The same may be said of special institutions for the training of teachers.
It is not too much to expect in the near future a decided shift in emphasis
from the mechanics and techniques of methodology to the content and func-
tion of courses in the social sciences, thus guaranteeing a supply of teachers
more competent to carry out the philosophy and purpose here presented.
9. A similar transfer of emphasis may he expected in the field of educational
journalism, resulting in a consideration, criticism, and application of the funda-
mental philosophy of education formulated in. this volume.
10. If the present report aids in bringing about a persistent concentration
of thought on the central issues, findings, and conclusions of the commission,
it will help to clear up the confusion now so prevalent in the educational
world and give direction to powers now wasted in formalistic debates on meth-
ods and techniques.
11. In fine, the commission has felt bound, by the terms of its instructions
and the nature of the subject entrusted to its consideration, to provide a frame
of reference- for the orientation of philosophy and purpose in education, rather
than a bill of minute specifications for guidance. In so doing, it is convinced
that unless the spirit is understood and appreciated any formulation of the
latter will hamper rather than facilitate the fulfillment of the commission's
offering.
It would seem that the nature of these conclusions and recommenda-
tions is expressed with sufficient clarity and force to need no further
interpretation from us. It will be important, however, to show how
these ideas have been put into operation and are in operation today
as far as it has proven possible of accomplishment. It is our plan
through the introduction of documented evidence from various
authoritative sources to show how these recommendations have been
channeled through the activities in education and government. While
the trails criss-cross and are somewhat devious we shall try as far as
is feasible to analyze the trend in education first and to follow with
a similar effort in government.
Before undertaking this, it should be of interest to quote from the
record to show the appraisal by the Carnegie Corp. itself of the prod-
uct for which they had granted the considerable sum of $340,000. We
find no word of criticism or dissent in the following statement which
appears on page 28 of the annual report of the president and the
treasurer of the Carnegie Corp. of New York for 1933-34.
The conclusions and recommendations of the commission on the social studies
appointed by the American Historical Association appeared in May, 1934.
That the findings were not unanimously supported within the commission itself,
and that they are already the subject of vigorous debate outside it, does not
detract from their importance, and both the educational world and the public
at large owe a debt of gratitude both to the association for having sponsored this
important and timely study in a field of peculiar difficulty, and to the distin-
guished men and women who served upon the commission. The complete report
of the committee will comprise 16 volumes, a list of which will be found in the
appendix, page 67.
A somewhat different and more descriptive appraisal of this report
is offered by Dr. Ernest Victor Hollis, in his book entitled, "Philan-
thropic Foundations and Higher Education." Doctor Hollis is Chief
of college administration in the United States Office of Education,
Washington, D. C.
The following statement is quoted from page 61 of this book :
Today they (the foundations) have a vital part in practically every type of
progressive educational experiment under way in America. Possibly there has
been no more radical and forward-looking study of the American scene than is
presented in the sixteen-volume report of the Social Studies Commission of the
American Historical Association which was begun in 1927 and very recently
completed. The report demands a radical change in many of the major premises
underlying our social, economic, and cultural life.
480 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Another comment of interest regarding this report is quoted from
"The Turning of the Tides", part II, by Paul W. Shafer, Member of
Congress, page 30. 2 This was published in 1953.
A strategic wedge was driven in 1934 following the conclusions and recommen-
dations of the American Historical Association's commission on social studies.
Its point of entry was adroitly chosen. The commission proposed to consoli-
date the traditional high school subjects of geography, economics, sociology, polit-
ical science, civics and history, into a single category designated as the social
studies. Here was the most strategic of all teaching areas for the advancement
of a particular philosophy.
Success in enlisting teachers in this field in the cause of a new social order
would have an influence out of all proportion to the number of teachers involved.
What this all meant was summed up by Prof. Harold J. Laski, philosopher of
British socialism. He stated :
"At bottom, and stripped of its carefully neutral phrases, the report is an edu-
cational program for a socialist America."
EVALUATION OF THE EVIDENCE
Before undertaking a more detailed analysis of the influences work-
ing in the educational world, we wish to say emphatically and to have
it understood clearly that our evidence is not directed toward nor does
it indict our large educational staff, the hundreds of thousands of
teachers and supervisors whose merit and loyalty are beyond all ques-
tion. Let no one overlook this.
We are differentiating between this widely distributed educational
staff and the top level centers of influence in which educational plans
and policies are formulated.
There is in every operating unit, be it factory, office, union, council,
or association a method or fashion of work that is determined by
policies originating at the top. Were it not so, the organization
would soon disintegrate. So it is in the world of education and
government.
Perhaps, as this pertains to the field of education, the principle
and its application can be well illustrated by quotation from some
observations by the Ford Foundation. These quotations, as will be
noted, emphasize the importance of concentrated effort for maximum
results.
From the Fund for Advancement of Education, annual report
1951-52, page 6:
In an effort to be useful at too many points in the whole system of education
it could easily fall into what an early officer of the Rockefeller Foundation
called "scatteration giving" and thus fail to be of any real value to education
anywhere. Given limited resources, selection was inevitable. Given a desire
to be of maortmum usefulness, concentration was essential.
Referring to a survey on military education (p. 24) :
This survey made clear that the effectiveness of educational work in any
military location depends very largely on the degree of importance which the
commanding officer attaches to it and the interest and competence of the officers
conducting it. It seemed clear, therefore, that the preparation of officers to
assume responsibility for education in the military services was the key to
effectiveness of orientation programs. The fund plans, therefore upon request
from the Office of Defense, to support pilot projects for introducing into the
programs of ROTC units substantial preparation for leadership in the kmd
of education appropriate in the military forces of a democracy.
1 See also Congressional Record, March 21, 1952.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 481
From the report on the Behavioral Sciences Division of the Ford
Foundation— June 1953 (p. 24) :
Accepting the diagnosis of a leading figure in the field — that "training of
a moderate number of first-rate people is in the present juncture far more
urgent than that of a large number of merely competent people." The division
took as a first step the development of plans for what came to be known as
the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences.
Page 28:
In sum, then, the Foundation's hope and expectation is significantly to
advance the behavioral sciences — to get farther faster — through the temporary
concentration at one place of the ablest scholars and the most promising
younger people studying together in the most effective way that the state of
the field now permits.
(Note. — All emphasis supplied.)
While we have noticed other references of similar nature and import
in various places, there should be sufficient to support our view that
the pattern is determined at the top. It is also obvious on slight
consideration that in education as in government, the most effective
megaphones and channels of communication are centralized in the
same places. These thoughts should be kept in mind in the evaluation
of the evidence as it will be presented.
There is another point for consideration that bears upon the
excerpts which will be quoted later. Criticism is frequently made
about distortion of meaning by lifting such quotations from context.
This is sometimes true. In this case a consistent effort has been made
to avoid such distortion and we believe we have succeeded. In any
event full reference as to source is given and anyone who wishes to
criticize may have access to the complete text if he wishes to be right
before he comments. Furthermore, the confirming similarities of so
many quotations from various sources should clearly mark the paths
they follow.
Attention should be called to still another significant factor in
this situation. It is the fact that most of the information submitted
in these quotations appears and is available only in professional publi-
cations whose circulation is largely confined to those engaged in these
professions. This results naturally in two things : One, the coordi-
nated effectiveness within the professional groups is increased; two,
relatively few of the citizenry outside these professional circles have
any means of knowing what is developing and therefore of organiz-
ing any protest against it. In fact much of the meaning of some
articles would be obscure to the average citizen because of the subtle
approach and highly technical vocabulary.
This closely channeled flow of information should also be a con-
cern of the trustees of the foundations. Men of unquestioned com-
petence and integrity must often be selected as trustees for their
proficiency and prestige in their chosen lines of work. They have
little time in their busy lives for studious attention to the develop-
ments in the highly professional fields bearing little direct relation
to their own responsibilities. If this be true, the problem posed should
be searched for a solution.
THE AGE OF TRANSITION — LAISSEZ PAIRE IS CLOSING
In proceeding with an analysis of the application of the conclu-
sions and recommendations of the Commission on Social Studies as
482 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
they specifically pertain to education, we wish to call attention to the
emphasis given to the alleged transitional character of the present
period. In addition to the previous quotations, the following
excerpts also tend to confirm these views.
Page 647 :
A dying laissez faire must be completely destroyed and all of us, including
the "owners" must be subjected to a large degree of social control. A large
section of our discussion group, accepting the conclusions of distinguished
students, maintain that in our fragile, interdependent society- the credit agencies,
the basic industries and utilities cannot be centrally planned and operated
under private ownership.
That is from Education for the New America, by Williard E.
Givens, in the proceedings of the 72d annual meeting of the National
Education Association.
Mr. Givens was executive secretary of the National Education
Association from 1935 to 1952. At the 79th annual convention of the
American Association of School Administrators held February 14-19,
1953, at Atlantic City, N. J., the annual American education award
was presented to Mr. Givens, "whose many contributions to the field
of education are without parallel."
Page 125 :
The days of little-restricted laissez faire, the days when government was
looked upon as a necessary evil — these have gone for a long time, perhaps
forever, although in the mutations of time one never knows what forms may
recur.
"On the Agenda of Democracy," by C. E. Merriam, vice chairman,
National Resources Planning Board, Harvard University Press, 1941.
EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP IN THE AGE OF TRANSITION
We find that the responsibilities of the leaders and teachers in the
world of education are especially emphasized during this age of transi-
tion, as demonstrated in the final report, 16th volume, of the Commis-
sion on Social Studies as previously quoted on page 15.
In the midf orties, the President appointed a Commission on Higher
Education. Their conclusions and recommendations were reported in
a series of six pamphlets in December' 1947. Mr. George F. Zook,
president of the American Council of Learned Societies, was chairman
of this Commission.
In the Commission's reports they gave credit to the following organ-
izations for aid received: American Council of Learned Societies,
American Council on Education, National Research Council, Social
Science Research Council, American Association of University Pro-
fessors,, and Association of Land Grant Colleges and Universities.
The following quotations are taken from the pages indicated in vol-
ume I of the Report of the President's Commission on Higher Edu-
cation :
Page 6 :
Education: Perhaps its most important role is to serve as an instrument of
social transition, and its responsibilities are defined in terms of the kind of
civilization society hopes to build.
Page 84 :
Higher education must be alert to anticipate new social and economic needs,
and to keep its programs of professional training in step with the requirements
of a changing and expanding cultural, social, and economic order.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 483
Page 85 :
Social forces have modified and are continuing to modify at an increasingly
rapid rate, the context within which graduate schools must function, and read-
justments of a fundamental nature are urgently necessary if these university
units are not to block rather than advance the progress of education— and,
through education, of the Nation.
With all the emphasis placed upon this age of transition and edu-
cation's important part in it as typified by the foregoing quotations,
and since we are deluged with the idea that change itself is progress,
a note of interest is struck by another thought. It is that perhaps
this agitation for and about change is only a temporary means to a
different end — one of unchanging stability when certain objectives are
reached.
As far in the past as 1918, the Intercollegiate Socialist for October-
November 1918 published an article entitled, "The Minimum of Edu-
cation," by Ellen Hayes. The ensuing quotation is the opening para-
graph in that article :
Assuming the surplus wealth secured to the public for social purposes, how can
a fraction of it be used educationally to promote and stabilize the common
good ; and to this end, what is the irreducible minimum of education which must
be guaranteed to every member of the national commonwealth ?
Volume I of the Keport of the President's Commission on Higher
Education also includes additional interesting comments :
Page 6:
The efforts of individual institutions, local communities, the several states,
the educational foundations and associations, the Federal Government will be
more effective if they are directed toward the same general ends.
Page 16 : .
PREPARATION FOR WORLD CITIZENSHIP
In speed of transportation and communication and in economic interdepend-
ence, the nations of the globe are already one world ; the task is to secure recog-
nition and acceptance of this oneness in the thinking of the people, as that
the concept of one world may be realized psychologically, socially and in good
time politically.
It is this task in particular that challenges our scholars and teachers to lead
the way toward a new way of thinking.
Page 20:
There is an urgent need for a program for world citizenship that can be
made a part of every person's general education.
Page 21:
It will take social science and social engineering to solve the problems of
human relations. Our people must learn to respect the need for special knowl-
edge and technical training in this field as they have come to defer to the expert
in physics, chemistry, medicine, and other sciences.
Page 22 :
The colleges and universities, the philanthropic foundations, and the Federal
Government should not be tempted by the prestige of natural science and its
immediately tangible results into giving it a disproportionate emphasis in
research budgets or in teaching programs. It is the peculiar responsibilty of
the colleges to train personnel and inaugurat extensive programs of research
in social science and technology. To the extent that they have neglected this
function in the past, they should concentrate upon it in the decades just ahead.
Page 23 :
Colleges must accelerate the normal slow rate of social change which the
educational system reflects ; we need to find ways quickly of making the under-
484 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
standing and vision of our most farsighted and sensitive citizens the common
possession of all our people.
Pages 38 and 39 :
Educational programs everywhere should be aimed at undermining and
eventually eliminating the attitudes that are responsible for discrimination
and segregation— at creating instead attitudes that will make education freely
available to all.
Page 91 :
The detached, perceptive scholar, is still sorely needed — in increasing num-
bers and in all disciplines. But if higher education is to discharge its social
obligations, scholars also are needed who have a passionate concern for human
betterment, for the improvement of social conditions, and of relations among
men. We need men in education who can apply at the point of social action
what the social scientist has discovered regarding the laws of human behavior.
Page 92 :
It will be a little short of tragic if provision for social research is not included
in the program of Federal support and organization planned under a National
Science Foundation. Certainly the destiny of mankind today rests as much with
the social sciences as with the natural sciences.
One of the members of the President's Commission on Higher Edu-
cation was Horace M. Kallen who for years has been active in the edu-
cational field.
In the issue of Progressive Education for January-February, 1934,
in an article called, Can We Be Saved by Indoctrination ? Mr. Kallen
says on the pages noted :
Page 55 :
I find, within the babel of plans and plots against the evils of our times, one
only which does not merely repeat the past but varies from it. This is a proposal
that the country's pedagogues shall undertake to establish themselves as the
country's saviors. It appears in two pamphlets. The first is a challenge to teach-
ers entitled, "Dare the Schools Build a New Social Order?" Its author is George
Counts. The second is, "A Call to the Teachers of the Nation."
Page 56 :
With an imagination unparalleled among the saviors of civilization, with a faith
stronger than every doubt and an earnestness overruling all irony, Mr. Counts
suggests that the Great Revolution might be better accomplished and the Great
Happiness more quickly established if the teachers rather than the proletarians
seized power.
Having taken power, the teachers must use it to attain the "central purpose" of
realizing the "American Dream," They must operate education as the instrument
of social regeneration. This consists of inculcating right doctrine.
The milder Call says :
Teachers cannot evade the responsibility of participating actively in the task of
reconstituting the democratic tradition and of thus working positively toward
a new society.
The references to Mr. George Counts in the foregoing excerpts natu-
rally bring to mind Teachers College of Columbia University and its
group of contemporary professors, John Dewey, W. H. Kilpatrick,
George Counts, and Harold Rugg, all identified actively for many
years with educational organizations and activities of one form or
another.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 485
One of the students who graduated from Teachers College is Nor-
man Woelf el. After attending State Normal School in Buffalo, N. T.,
he entered Teachers College of Columbia University where he received
his bachelor of science degree in 1923, his master of arts in 1924.
After further work in study and teaching at other institutions includ-
ing Johns Hopkins, he returned to Teachers College and in 1933, at
the mature age of 38 years, received his degree of doctor of philos-
ophy. His doctoral dissertation was entitled : "A critical review of
the social attitudes of 17 leaders in American education."
At this point we wish to make it emphatically clear that we know
of no grants from any* foundation in the prosecution of this work.
Other connections will be reviewed later that identify Mr. Woelfel
with educational activities in a similar field.
This doctoral thesis, of which a copy is on file in the Congressional
Library, was published as a book by the Columbia University Press
under the title, "Molders of the American Mind." At least three
printings were made which indicates a good circulation. It is based
upon a review of social attitudes of 17 leaders in American educa-
tion. The following excerpts are taken from the pages indicated.
The dedicatory page :
To the teachers of America, active sharers in the building of attitudes, may
they collectively choose a destiny which honors only productive labor and pro-
motes the ascendency of the common man over the forces that make possible
an economy of plenty.
Page 10:
The younger generation is on its own and the last thing that would interest
modern youth is the salvaging of the Christian tradition. The environmental
controls which technologists have achieved, and the operations by means of
which workers earn their livelihood, need no aid or sanction from God nor
any blessing from the church.
Page 26 :
The influence which may prove most effective in promoting the demise of
private business as the dominant force in American economic life is the modern
racketeer. His activities are constantly in the spotlight of public attention,
and the logic upon which he pursues them is the logic of competitive business.
He carries the main principles of the business life to their logical extreme and
demonstrates their essential absurdity. Like the businessman he is interested
in gain, and like the businessman he believes in doing the least to get the most,
in buying cheap and selling dear. Like the businessman he believes in attain-
ing a monopoly by cornering the market whenever possible. The chief differ-
ence between the racketeer and the businessman is that the businessman's
pursuits have about them an air of respectability given by customary usage and
established law. He may pursue them in the open, advertise them in the pub-
lic press and over the radio, whereas the racketeer must work undercover.
Page 240:
In the minds of the men who think experimentally, America is conceived as
having a destiny which bursts the all too obvious limitations of Christian
religious sanctions and of capitalistic profit economy.
Prom the vantage point of the present study, the following objectives for edu-
cators are suggested. They, in no sense, purport to be all-comprehensive or
final. They do, however, lay claim to be along the line of much needed strat-
egy if educational workers are to play any important part in the society which
is building in America.
486 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
1. The maturing of personal viewpoint by reading and discussion, by scrutiny
of contemporary civilization, and by self-examination.
2. A continuing effort to clarify the vision of an educator's function in Amer-
ican civilization. In what degree does he carry the responsibility for controlled
social evolution? To what extent is he more than a mere public servant engaged
in carrying out orders issued by executives ?
3. The blotting out of the "brass halo" which teachers have long suffered under.
This means a will not to be affected by the slushy epithets of public apologists
for existing social institutions and a will to assist youth constantly towards
ready discernment of apologetics in any form.
4. Immersion into the budding native culture by steady enlargement and culti-
vation of professional and nonprofessional cultural opportunities available
in the social environment. This is really the highest obligation of an intelligent
teacher, because the value of any form of specialized professional endeavor
can be gaged only by reference to the extent and depth of the individual's par-
ticipation in, and appreciation of, existing social life.
5. Active participation by educators and teachers in various organizations of
the lay public agitating for social reforms whose realization would be in har-
mony with evolving ideals of American society.
6. The thoroughgoing renovation of existing professional organizations of edu-
cators so that in aim and principle they shall be intelligently militant in criticism
of all vested interests in society and similarly militant in support of evolving
modern standards of value in all fields of human interest.
7. Amalgamation of existing professional educational organizations for the
purpose of united action on all questions of broad social import at anytime before
the public anywhere in the land.
8. Promotion of the spiritual solidarity of all classes of intellectuals in the
interest of enlightening and possibly of guiding inevitable future mass movements
within the population.
9. Active participation of individual educators and of professional organiza-
tions of educators in the gradually crystallizing public effort to create out of pre-
vailing chaos and confusion in economic, political, spiritual, ethical, and artistic
realms a culture which is under no continuing obligations to past American or
foreign cultural pattern.
10. A teacher-training program conceived in the light of the changing aims and
functions of education in contemporary America. This implies the critical re-
examination of all established precedents in teacher-training organization.
11. A system of school administration constructed under the guidance of ex-
perimental social philosophy with the major aim of meeting the professional
needs of teachers. This implies relegating the elaborate administrative tech-
nology modeled after business practice and capitalistic finance to the background
where it may be drawn upon when needed in reconstruction programs.
12. The attitude of creative inquiry to be clearly recognized as essential in
all people of the teaching profession. The trained specialists and the elaborate
scientific technology of educational research, as conceived at present, to be made
available as supplementary service agencies in the solution of the actual prob-
lems of teaching.
13. The incorporation of graduate and undergraduate schools of education into
a general plan of public education, so that their resources in experts and in ex-
perimental facilities may be used effectively in continuing educational recon-
struction.
14. A program of public elementary and secondary education organized in the
interest of collective ideals and emphasizing the attainment of economic equality
as fundamental to the detailed determination of more broadly cultural aims.
15. Centralized organization in public education to an extent which will not
only guarantee provision of the most valid knowledge together with adequate
facilities for incorporating it into educational practice in every local- community
throughout the country, but promote as well the construction of attitudes, in the
populace, conducive to enlightened reconstruction of social institutions.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 487
16. A program of public vocational, professional, and higher education inte-
grally organized in terms of a social order wherein all natural resources and the
entire industrial structure is controlled by governmental agencies and operated
for the equal benefit of all. This portends educational planning in terms of
broadly cultural and creative motives and the final disappearance of programs of
education based upon the motive of individual monetary success.
17. Gradual amalgamation of all cultural forces in community life, including
industry, radio, motion pictures, newspapers, libraries, art galleries and
museums, the theater, the opera, musical organizations, book publication, and the
sclrool itself into an educational program as wide and as continuous as life.
18. Such autonomy for every classroom teacher, from the nursery school
through the university as accords with true artistic integrity. This implies that
teachers shall be answerable for their professional conduct to their own profes-
sional organizations which, in turn, shall be fully responsible to the public.
19. The abolition of the present supervisory system in public education and
its replacement by higher professional qualifications for teachers and by public
teacher service bureaus equipped to continue on a voluntary basis the in-service
education of teachers.
20. Gradual abolition of specified grades, subjects, textbooks, testing, and
promotion schemes as conceived under the present administrative-supervisory
set-up in public education. The development of a series of flexible organiza-
tional schemes and teaching programs by local faculties under the guidance
and sanction of professional associations and of the lay public.
21. Domination of all specific teaching aims for an indefinite period by the
general aim of rendering the attitudes of all normal individuals toward all
the problems of life sufficiently tentative to allow for growth and change.
22. Determination of all directly functional teaching aims in and during the
educational process by reference to the needs and possibilities of pupils as
determined by professionally qualified and socially conscious teachers.
The value of these extended excerpts might be questioned in this
case were it not for the fact that so many of the suggestions conveyed
in the foregoing paragraphs have their counterparts on the other
side of the triangle in the field of governmental planning for the
Nation.
In the January-February issue of the magazine. Progressive Educa-
tion in 1934, there appeared an article called "The Educator, The
New Deal, and Revolution," by Normal Woelfel. On the pages noted,
the following statements appeared in this article.
Page 11:
The call now is for the utmost capitalization of the discontent manifest
among teachers for the benefit of revolutionary social goals. This means that
all available energies of radically inclined leaders within the profession should
be directed toward the building of a united radical front. Warm collectivistic
sentiment and intelligent vision, propagated in clever and undisturbing manner
by a few individual leaders, no longer suits the occasion.
I would like to pause to call attention again to the phrase "in
clever and undisturbing manner by a few individual leaders, no longer
suits the occasion."
Page 12 :
If we wish the intelligent utilization of the marvelous natural resources
and the superb productive machinery which America possesses, for all of the
people, with common privileges, and an equal chance to all for the realization
of exclusively human potentialities — that is possible, although we must not
blindly shrink from the fact that it may require some use of force against those
at present privileged.
488 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
I wish to state here that these quotations just given, as previously
said, are from the magazine Progressive Education, a publication of
the Progressive Education Association which has received at least
$4,258,000 from the foundations.
In October of 1934, the first issue of a new magazine appeared,
entitled, "The Social Frontier." It was described as "A Journal of
Educational Criticism and Reconstruction." George S. Counts was
the editor and Mordecai Grossman and Norman Woelfel were the
associate editors.
The first pages were devoted to editorials which were unsigned.
There follows hereafter a copy of the material appearing on the cover
page and after that excerpts from the editorials named on the pages
noted.
Quoting the cover page we have :
The Social Frontier — A Journal op Educational Criticism and
Reconstruction
1776
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that
they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among
these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (the Declaration of Inde-
pendence ) .
1934
The age of individualism and laissez faire in economy and government is
closing and a new age of collectivism is emerging (Report of the Commission on
Social Studies of the American Historical Association).
In this issue : John Dewey, Charles A. Beard, Henry P. Fairchild, Sidney Hook,
Goodwin Watson.
Volume I— October 1934— No. I— $2 a year
Now quoting from page 3, Orientation :
In a word, for the American people, the age of individualism in economy is
closing and an age of collectivism is opening. Here is the central and dominating
reality in the present epoch.
Page 5, Educating for Tomorrow :
To enable the school to participate in raising the level of American life the
educational profession must win meaningful academic freedom, not merely the
freedom for individuals to teach this or that, but the freedom of the teaching
profession to utilize education in shaping the society of tomorrow.
Mr. Hays. Mr. McNiece, I have a question right there. Does that
magazine still exist ?
Mr. MoNieoe. It ran for quite awhile, and the name of the asso-
ciation itself was changed subsequent to this. Then I was informed
only yesterday, and I haven't had time to look it up, it was converted
back to its original name. So far as the continuation of the magazine
itself is concerned, I would have to check that.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 489
Mr. Hays. Well, if you have time during the lunch hour, would
you check that ?
The reason I interrupted you, I wanted you to do that for this
afternoon.
Mr. McNiece. We will try to do that.
Now, on page 7, there is an editorial called The Ives Law :
On August 10 a 1934, Governor Lehman of New York signed the Ives bill. * * *
According to the provisions of the law, every professor, instructor, or teacher
employed in any school, college, or university in the State must subscribe to the
following oath or affirmation : "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will sup-
port the Constitution of the United States and the constitution of the State of
New York, and that I will faithfully discharge, according to the best of my
ability, the duties of the position to which I am now assigned."
The reaction of teachers to such a governmental measure is naturally one of
resentment.
Page 8, The Ives Law :
There is grave danger that the new law will have the effects desired by its
sponsors, not however, because of any restrictions inherent in the oath itself
but rather because of the traditional timidity and ignorance of teachers. Yet
forward-looking members of the profession can find in this oath a direct mandate
for broad participation in the alteration of the now existing pattern of American
society.
Quoting again from Educating for Tomorrow, page 7 :
The task of enlarging the role of education in shaping the future of our collec-
tive life cannot be accomplished by individual educators nor by individual
institutions. It is a task for an organized profession as a whole. It is a task
which the NEA might make its central project.
Page 7, Educating for Tomorrow :
We submit to the membership of the NEA that its role in the life of the
nation would be greatly enhanced if it identified itself with an ideal of social
living which alone can bring the social crisis to a happy resolution— a collecti-
vistic and classless society. We further submit that the effectiveness of the
NEA would be greatly increased if instead of looking for defenders of education
among the ranks of conservative groups, it would identify itself with the under-
privileged classes who are the real beneficiaries of public education and who
can find their adjustment only in a radically democratic social order.
It is interesting to note that Norman Woelfel, then an associate
editor of the Social Frontier, who is now professor of education at
Ohio State University, is now actively participating in the activities
of the National Education Association.
Mr. Hays. Just a moment, you say you are talking about Woelfel
now?
Mr. McNiece. Yes.
Mr. Hays. And he is at Ohio State and he is a member of the
NEA, too?
Mr. McNiece. According to the NEA booklet.
Mr. Hats. How subversive can you get?
Mr. McNiece. One of the departments of NEA is the Association
for Supervision and Curriculum Development. This association
recently issued its yearbook for 1953 under the title "Forces Affect-
490 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
ing American Education." Professor Woelfel was a member of the
supervising committee responsible for the creation of this work.
Under the caption Culture Affecting Education the following state-
ments appear, and this is in 1953 :
Page 27:
Teachers in our schools have an immediate responsibility to their students and
to the community at large to rethink their programs in terms of the necessity of
social adaptation to changing technology.
Page 27 :
We began our government with the rule of law — the Constitution. The federal
judicial system has become its special guardian. Over the years there has been
a gradual modification of the principle of property rights and of public welfare.
An illustration of a fundamental transition which is affecting our lives is the
modification of the old concept of the common law. The common law in America,
which is merely English law built up through decisions of the courts, has been
individualistic. It has stressed protection of property and freedom of contract.
Where the welfare of society has been concerned, the common law has been
assumed to be sufficient to effect this through the individual. The rationale has
been liberty rather than either equality or fraternity.
This trend toward a balance between the welfare of the individual and the
welfare of society is in conflict with earlier assumptions. It is a trend which
we cannot ignore. It presents fundamental problems for education in modern
society.
Pages 36-37 :
There are tensions and overt conflicts in our present society over the functions
and methods of education. Men who are established at the pinnacle of success in
the typical American conception can and sometimes do find themselves more
interested in shaping society according to their own wishes, through the public
schools, than in conforming to society's newer demands for free intelligence.
The very power of their positions makes them formidable foes of any concep-
tion of education for all the people that is in conflict with their special con-
victions.
Through the strength of our success patterns it is quite possible for men whose
lives are wholly unrelated to the process of education to come to power and to
assume the role of determining what should be taught and how it should be
taught. The professional educator whose business it is to know both the process
and the method is not always a match for such opposition. But we should not
forget that many other men, who are also at the pinnacle of success, are the firm-
est defenders of the public schools and the method of intelligence. In recent
years, the public schools have received excellent support from just such per-
sons. Throughout the years, such men have established foundations for the
advancement of education and culture.
Directly or indirectly, the NEA is identified with an interesting situ-
ation involving an article recently published by Look magazine. In
this issue of this magazine of March 9, 1954, an article by Robert M.
Hutchins was published under the title "Are Our Teachers Afraid to
Teach ?" The opening statements in this article are as follows :
Education is impossible in many parts of the United States today because free
inquiry and free discussion are impossible. In these communities, the teacher
of economics, history or political science cannot teach. Even the teacher of
literature must be careful. Didn't a member of Indiana's Text Book Commis-
sion call Robin Hood subversive?
The National Education Association studied no less than 522 school systems,
covering every section of the United States, and came to the conclusion that
American teachers today are reluctant to consider "controversial issues."
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 491
This article and the statement quoted above were of interest to us.
A letter was therefore written to the NEA asking for information
about the report on the 522 school systems. The letter in reply to our
request is quoted herewith, together with our letter which preceded it.
March 19, 1954.
Mr. Frank W. Hubbard,
Director of Research, National Education Association, Washington, D. C.
Dear Mb. Hubbard: In an article in Look magazine of March 9, 1954, Mr.
Robert M. Hutching refers to a survey made by your association.
He reports that this survey came to the conclusion that teachers of economics,
history and political sciences in 522 school systems, covering every section of
the United States, are reluctant to consider controversial issues in their teaching.
This statement suggests the possibility of a serious handicap to education.
We want to evaluate your report so that we may learn the nature of the fears
to which Mr. Hutchins refers in this article.
Tour report will offer us a welcome contribution to our understanding of
the nature of the services rendered by your tax exempt organization to edu-
cation.
With thanks for your attention,
Very truly yours,
NOBMAN DODD,
Research Director.
I will now quote the reply :
National Education Association of the United States,
Washington 6, D. 0., March %k, i954-
Mr. Norman Dodd,
Research Director, Special Committee to Investigate Tax Exempt Founda-
tions, House of Representatives,
Washington 25, D. C.
Dear Mr. Dodd : In reply to your letter of March 19, I am sending you a copy
of the report prepared by the NEA research division in June 1953 for the
NEA committee on tenure and academic freedom. This report has never been
printed or issued in any form other than the enclosed typewritten form.
So far as I know Mr. Hutchins did not have a copy of this typed memorandum,
altho he may have borrowed one from someone who received a copy. A few
typewritten copies have been sent to members of the committee on tenure and
academic freedom and to a few other individuals who have written asking
for copies. It is possible that Mr. Hutchins drew his information from the
newspaper stories which were issued from Miami Beach during the summer of
1953 as a result of a press conference on this report. At any rate, I am not
sure that Mr. Hutchins' conclusions would be exactly those of the NEA re-
search division or of the NEA committee on tenure and academic freedom.
Cordially yours,
Frank W. Hubbard,
Director, Research Division.
Inference from this letter seems reasonably clear. Careful reading
by the staff failed to disclose any basis for the conclusion reached by
Mr. Hutchins.
Eegardless of the letter quoted, the NEA had many reprints of
this article. The mere existence of these reprints suggests that they
must have been intended for distribution to interested parties.
Whether or not they have been or are being distributed, we do not
know.
"We also wonder how many educators would support the conclud-
ing line of Dr. Hutchins' article :
No country ever needed education more than ours does today.
492 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The Chairman. It is now noon. Did I understand you to say at
the beginning, Mr. Koch, there is another part to follow that is to be
presented this afternoon?
Mr. Koch. Will that other part be ready ?
Mr. McNiece. It is supposed to be ready this afternoon.
Mr. Hays. I would like to say, I think that we ought to examine
this one before we hear another 50-page report.
Mr. Koch. It can be treated in that fashion.
The Chairman. I think that would be the best way.
Mr. McNiece. There is no essential continuity to the two papers..
Mr. Hats. I have a short statement here, of one page, from Sena-
tor Douglas, which he has asked that we incorporate into the record
immediately following the testimony of Mr. Sargent's reference to
him, and I wonder if you would have any objection. If you like
I would read- it and it will only take a minute.
The Chairman. You can read it, by all means.
Mr. Hays. This statement of Senator Douglas, sent to me, says :
Forty years ago when I was a graduate student at Columbia University I
was a member and attended some meetings of the Intercollegiate Socialist
Society, organized to study social problems, but it was in no sense a political
action group. It had no connection with the Socialist Party, of which I have
never been a member. The only party to which I have ever belonged is the
Democratic Party. The society was purely a study group devoted to the
study of socialism and other current problems. I left this organization and
was not thereafter active in it.
The League for Industrial Democracy was an outgrowth of the Intercollegiate
Society and included many other non- Socialists like myself. I spoke and
was somewhat active at the League for Industrial Democracy study sessions
for a period.
From the early 1920's on, and after a brief period in the 1930's I had only
slight connection; with the league's study sessions. I became wholly inactive
when I was engaged in helping draft State and Federal legislation to meet the
pressing problems of the depression.
Both of these were bona-fide research and discussion groups in the best
American tradition. Both organizations included some of the finest persons
in the educational field at that time. Both organizations were constructive in
their purposes.
This dusting off of old and discredited charges is but another example of
Congress' need to pass a code of procedure for guidance of its investigations.
Signed "Paul H. Douglas."
The Chairman. I see no disadvantage in that going in the record
as far as I am concerned. We are glad to have it go in.
Mr. Hays. I would like to have it in the proper place so it would
have some meaning in the context.
The Chairman. Mr. Sargent, though, and some other interested
parties, sent or gathered, from my information, and I presume the
committee's, rather extensive quotations from Senator Douglas' book
The Coming of the New Party I believe it was entitled ; and I don't
know whether those should be included at that same place or not.
Mr. Hays. Well, I wouldn't want to say that they should be with-
out seeing them, and without having Senator Douglas check them
to see whether they are authentic or not.
The Chairman. That can be decided. They seem to be rather
pertinent in view of the discussion that came up.
The committee will stand adjourned until 2 :30 this afternoon.
(Thereupon, the committee recessed at 12 :15 p. m. ; to reconvene at
2 :30 p. m., the same day.)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 493
AFTER KECESS
( The hearing was resumed at 2 :40 p. m. )
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
TESTIMONY OF THOMAS M. McNIECE— Resumed
The Chairman. Mr. McNiece, the committee I am sure is appre-
ciative of the research, comprehensive research and the splendid
manner in which you have stated the results of your research, and
the impartial, temperate and nice way in which the characterizations
have been made.
My personal feeling is that it is a contribution to the subject which
we are investigating, and as is the case with all of these presentations
by members of the staff or other witnesses, it remains for the com-
mittee, in its final deliberations, after all of the hearings have been
completed, to evaluate and relate the testimony or information that
has been given.
But we are very greatly appreciative. And I want to commend
you on your efforts.
Now, we will proceed with the questioning.
Do you have any questions ?
Mr. Goodwin. I have no questions, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Mrs. Pfost, if you have some questions, Mr. Hays
is quite willing to yield to you for your questioning.
Mr. McNiece. If I may interject a remark. Mr. Hays asked a
question as to whether the magazine Progressive Education is still in
publication. The Congressional Library assures us that it is. And
they have in their possession the issue for March of 1954.
Mr. Koch. What is the present title of the magazine ?
Mr. McNiece. Progressive Education. There has been a shift in the
name of the publishers, back and forth, a little bit. The original vol-
ume from which we made our quotation says :
The Progressive Education Association, United States Section of the New Edu-
cation Fellowship, Washington, D. C.
I understand that the magazine is now published by the American
Education Fellowship, New York, N. Y., and there has been a shift
of names, back and forth; but I am told that the sponsorship has not
changed.
Mrs. Pfost. First of all, Mr. McNiece, I would like to ask you : We
were first given this report marked "Confidential" some week or so ago
and then a more recent one. Are you the author of this report ?
Mr. McNiece. Yes. That is the one I read this morning you are
referring to.
Mrs. Pfost. You are the author of the one that you read this
morning ?
Mr. McNiece. Yes, that is right.
Mrs. Pfost. In other words, the earlier one you were not the author
of. I notice they are quite identical.
Mr. McNiece. Oh, no, there is absolutely not a word changed. The
only reason for the second issue was that by mistake certain extracts
appeared twice.
Mrs. Pfost. There was repetition?
49720 — 54 — i>t. 1 32
494 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. McNiece. And in the new issue there is not a word changed
except the elimination of the repeated excerpts. That was a mere mis-
take in arranging the material for typing.
Mrs. Pfost. You did compile the original report yourself, every
word of it ?
Mr. McNiece. Every word, yes.
Mrs. Pfost. It is your own composition?
Mr. McNiece. That is right.
The Chairman. Do you mean that literally — every word ?
Mr. McNiece. Unless it was a typographical error.
Mr. Hats. Would you yield to me right there ?
Did any other members of the staff, either present members or people
who may have been members previously, help you at all with this, Mr.
McNiece ?
Mr. McNiece. None, no one.
The Chairman. I had understood myself that this was Mr.
McNiece's project, but I didn't know that he had written every
word of it.
Mr. McNiece. Of course, I didn't write the excerpts, you under-
stand.
The Chairman. Do you have any other questions ?
Mrs. Pfost. I have 2 or 3 little things here that I would like to ask
about.
On the old report, owing to the fact that I have had the old report
for a greater length of time, I have my marginal notes on the old
report. And on page 15 of the old report, which would be somewhere
near page 12 or thereabouts of the new report, support for this latter
statement, it is under the heading of the report of the Commission
on the Social Studies, conclusions and recommendations of the com-
mission, you say :
Support for this latter statement, will be introduced later.
Now, does that have to do with the new report that we have just
been handed ?
Mr. McNiece. I am still trying to find that.
Mr. Koch. It is on page 11.
Mr. McNiece. I might state the reason for the page differential
is that the first report was turned out in pica type and the second one
was turned out in elite type, and so it changed the page numbers.
Mrs. Pfost. I noticed that.
You say :
It is with this final volume of conclusions and recommendations that the
staff committee is concerned. It covers a tremendous field of recommenda-
tion and application actively in process as of this day. Support for this latter
statement will be introduced later.
Mr. McNiece. Yes.
Mrs. Pfost. When did you mean ?
Mr. McNiece. A part of that is in now, and I repeated that this
morning, in the subsequent quotations from the various magazines,
and from the quotations from some of the National Education Asso-
ciation publications, particularly Forces Affecting American Educa-
tion, and then some of the support will also appear in a later section
which, as I pointed out this morning, concerns the relationship as
shown on that chart between foundations and government.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 495
Mrs. Pfost. Now, I wanted to ask you, on these letters that you have
given here, Mr. McNiece, the Hubbard and the Dodd letters, just what
was your reason and what do you feel that those prove — those letters ?
Mr. McNiece. Well, the letters only prove that we were interested
in Mr. Hutchins' statement as it appeared in the article in Look Maga-
zine, and we were concerned, as Mr. Dodd expressed himself in the
letter, with the possible effect of a condition of that kind on education.
So we asked to see the report itself, and they have kindly sent it to
us and we have that. We have what Mr. Hubbard himself has assured
us is a typewritten copy of the report in the only form in which it was
•ever issued.
Mrs. Pfost. I see, thank you.
The Chairman. Mr. Hays has some questions.
Mr. Hats. Before we go into your statement, Mr. McNiece, would
you tell us what you have done before you came with the committee
to get some idea of your background ?
Mr. McNiece. Well, it is rather a long story.
Mr. Hays. Just generally, the last 10 years or so.
Mr. McNiece. Well, I might say that I received a BS degree in
electrical engineering from Case institute of Technology, that is a
long ways back, and later an EE degree.
Mr. Hays. Where is that? In Cleveland?
Mr. McNiece. In Cleveland, Ohio.
I made a few notes, perhaps it would be quickest, Mr. Hays — —
Mr. Hays. Just in your own words
Mr. McNiece. This runs over quite a period of years. And I had
administrative charge over electrical testing and research laboratory,
production, all phases including : production planning and schedules ;
plant accounting over approximately 25 factories, including timekeep-
ing, payrolls, storekeeping, monthly balance sheets and operating
reports; inventory control, monthly and annual budgets, and so forth;
sales accounting, market, advertising and sales analysis and budgetary
control ; security and investment analysis ; extended research in eco-
nomics, especially in field of business fluctuations; world-wide eco-
nomic analyses involving operating results, economic and market
characteristics in various principal countries.
Approximately 5 years in volunteer "on call" work with the De-
partment of Justice during and after World War I.
Civil Service commissioner in midwestern city.
Chairman of local school district committee including board of
education created to study and report on school situation with respect
to curriculum, construction and operating cost estimates and effect of
possible merger with adjoining school district.
Seminar speaker at Columbia, Cornell, New York and Princeton
Universities, and Stevens Institute of Technology.
Participant on programs of National Association of Cost Account-
ants, International Cost Accounting Conference, American Manage-
ment Association, United States Chamber of Commerce, Boston Ee-
tail Distribution Conference, American Statistical Association, Na-
tional Industrial Conference Board, American Mining Congress, and
others,
I have been a consultant on management problems.
Articles have been published in various magazines and journals in-
cluding among others :
496 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Proceedings of American Institute of Electrical Engineers ; Trans-
actions of American Society of Mechanical Engineers ; The American
Architect; Chemical and Metallurgical Engineering; The Harvard
Business Eeview; The American Mining Congress Journal; Sales
Management; Commercial and Financial Chronicle; Hardware Age;
and occasional papers and yearbooks of National Association of Cost
Accountants.
That is only a partial list of the publications. But it is enough to
indicate, I think, the field of work in which I have been engaged.
Mr. Hays. That is a very impressive background. But you don't
have or haven't had a great deal of experience in educational matters.
Mr. McNiece. Well, I have absorbed a lot over a long period of
years. I have worked a great deal in extra- curricula capacity on re-
search work, with professors from Cornell, and also in an intimate
work for a period of time in the study of money and inflation in coun-
tries all around the world, with a professor of long experience in the
University of Illinois, Columbia, Toronto, California, and he was con-
sultant and advisor to the Chicago Stock Exchange. I mention that
only because we were intimately connected with the production of sev-
eral written works, which I have not listed here.
Mr. Hays. Mr. McNiece, I am not trying to make any reflections
whatever upon your past affiliations, and certainly none should be im-
plied from any questions I ask. But your statement has been, it seems
to me, a rather serious series of charges or indictments, or whatever
you care to say, against American education in general and some
phases of it specifically.
There wasn't any hit or miss that you came to be in this job. Could
you tell us how you first happened or how did you become or get the
job with this committee and the title you have ?
Mr. McNiece. I see. I have known Mr. Dodd for quite a long
period of years. We had been affiliated informally in several bits of
work. As I understand it, and he could better explain this than I, but
as I understand it, when he was approached in connection with going
on this work, he called me to find out if I would be interested in under-
taking this work with him. I told him that I wished to consider it for
a moment.
Mr. Hays. Now, had you and Mr. Dodd, had you in previous years
found yourselves in agreement about some of the things that these
reports of yours have setout, and have you made any informal study
into this, or was this a brand new field ?
Mr. McNiece. I have been interested in this general field, let us say
broader than the field of education itself, for a great many years. The
interest arose during World War I.
I spent many, many hours in voluntary work "on call," as I have
stated, with the old American Protective League, which was organ-
ized under laws of Congress and operated under the Department of
Justice. They had chapters in all of the principal cities, if I may
call them that, of the country.
We operated under the orders of the local Department of Justice
agents and this was before FBI was formed. The local Department
of Justice agents in the Federal Building were the chief authority
under which we operated. We were assigned cases to investigate and
they were numbered, and typewritten orders on which we returned
written reports.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 497
I did a good deal of investigation work in that particular field. I
liave always been interested ever since I was — well, let us say, got
into that field of work, in problems of subversion. I have always
been interested in problems and methods of education.
I had two finite and definite offers to enter into the field. And
sometimes I have been sorry I didn't go into it. But I have been per-
sonally interested in the field of education and spent a good deal of
time with friends who have been.
Mr. Hats. Have you had any great informal interest in philosophy ?
Mr. McNiece, Not as a separate subject, no.
Mr. Hats. Just as it has been related ?
Mr. McNiece. That is right.
Mr. Hats. No particular philosopher has influenced your think-
ing?
Mr. McNiece. Not at all ; no, sir.
Mr. Hays. Just as a matter of curiosity, are you aware or are .you
familiar at all with the works of a French philosopher by the name
•of Fabian d'Olvit?
Mr. McNiece. I am not.
Mrs. Peost. On page 10, Mr. McNiece, of your report, you say
that —
Inasmuch as the term "public interest" will be used in this report from time
to time, it will be well to define it in the sense that it is used in this section
of the report of the staff committee. The same conception of the public interest
is used in the economic section of the staffs report.
Mr. McNiece. That is right.
Mrs. Peost. Now, is that this report that was just handed to us a
month ago, and is this the one to which you refer there ?
Mr. McNiece. That is right. There is also a repetition in there,
Mrs. Pfost, of the paragraph by Seymour Harris. And these were
written separately, at widely divergent times, and at the cost of repe-
tition, I have inserted that in both reports.
Mr. Hays. Now, Mr. McNiece, in other words, then, you came into
this picture through your previous friendship and association with
Mr. Dodd who had previously been hired ?
Mr. McNiece. And I was impelled to take it because of my long-
time interest in the general problem.
Mr. Hats. Understand that I am not insinuating that there is any-
thing wrong about it, but I am just trying to get some background ?
Mr. McNiece. I fully understand.
Mr. Hays. Because you and I know that we are not very well
acquainted and I may say to you that you have expressed some views
in here which if not at least radically different from mine are chal-
lenging, and I am trying to find out how you came to have them.
I want to say this : I had a series of questions which I had anno-
tated with your original script and I got the other one lately. But
I have tried to recorrelate my questions to the proper page.
Now if we find sometimes that along the way we are at the wrong
page, it will be only because I have made an error.
Mr. McNiece. I am very sorry that happened. I want to take
complete responsibility for that ; that is my fault.
Mr. Hays. I am just offering that by way of explanation. Ordi-
narily I want to start at the beginning of your statement and go
through it with the items that interest me. But by having a state-
498 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
ment, you see you consumed the entire morning, and whatever you
said in your statement has gone out unchallenged to the afternoon
papers, so that I am going to start at the back and ask you some-
thing that I think is important that the evening papers might want
to quote you on. I think it is important that we get both sides of
this since the press is covering it.
I want to talk to you a little bit about this Dr. Hutchins matter.
And I want to start with the very last sentence, or the last para-
graph in your statement, that is, on page 45, 1 guess, of the new copy.
You say :
We also wonder how many educators would support the concluding line of
Dr. Hutchins' article —
which you quote —
No country ever needed education more than ours does today.
I take it that you disagree with that statement ?
Mr.McNiECE. Yes.
Mr. Hats. Is that a fair assumption ?
Mr. McNiece. Yes, I think that is a fair assumption. It would
be, if I may modify my statement, it would be a pretty serious indict-
ment of education up to date, in all branches and forms, if that state-
ment were true. I am stating that as a matter of my own opinion.
Mr. Hays. Well now, that is fine. But I am going to try to-
develop a line here to see if I can't get you to agree with me that that
statement might well be a good statement.
Will you agree with me that the battle that we have with com-
munism is essentially a battle for men's minds, number ov*; and
number two, a battle for technical knowledge so that they cannot
surpass us ? '
Mr. MoNiece. Why certainly. I believe that the advocates ^i the
various forms of culture, including communism and socialism and
our own, all form what I consider to be normal evolution in thought
and education; it is a competitive struggle to win converts. I feel
we are all up against that.
Mr. Hays. Well, in other words, then I think you and I agree
generally that we are engaged in a great struggle for knowledge, and
the whole faith of the world may depend upon who wins that struggle,
whether we win it or whether our adversaries win it.
Would you -go that far with me ?
Mr. McNiece. Well, that is more or less a hypothetical situation.
Mr. Hays. I agree that it is.
Mr. McNiece. Anything that I could say would only be a raw
opinion, given off the cuff,~so to speak, without any material thought.
I do feel, and I think there was one quotation in here which I read
to that effect, that we are all going to be very greatly affected by this
struggle to which I see no end at the moment.
Mr. Hays. We are engaged in a race for atomic knowledge, among
other things.
■ Mr. McNiece. To me that is only an incidental feature. But to
that extent I would say yes.
Mr. Hays. Which would be a very serious feature, if we lose the
race.
Mr. McNieoe. It could be. But so could germ warfare.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 499
Mr, Hats. Those are two related fields. And they have a bearing
on the future of this Nation.
Mr. McNiece. Yes.
Mr. Hays. Now, do you have any idea how many men have been
rejected by the Selective Service because of educational disqualifica-
tions?
Mr. MgNiece. No; I do not. I should because at one time some-
where or other I read a statement, but I don't know how authoritative
it was, and I don't remember it.
Mr. Hays. Well, I don't have the exact figures at my fingertips.
But, as I recall it, it is a very significant percentage.
I have seen numerous articles about it. It seems to me that perhaps
it might run up to 20 percent, although I am more or less guessing
at that figure. But it seems to me that it was rather a significant
percentage.
Mr. McNiece. Probably, and again this is an expression of opinion,
partly as an engineer, but probably the requirements for education, as
distinguished from intelligence, are a little higher today at least in
the Army viewpoint than they were in the time of World War I.
Mr. Hays. I don't think that there is any doubt about that. But
I think it is significant that the Army has found that it requires a
rather minimum amount of education to take a fellow in, but even
so it has found that there is a significant number of people who don't
have that minimum.
Mr. McNiece. Well, my impression has been that they are calling
for very high standards of education in order to supply the technical
knowledge required now for all of the instruments involved in mech-
anized warfare.
Mr. Hays. I agree with that thoroughly. You can't get by as an
illiterate in modern technical warfare, and you have to have some
knowledge of the 3 R's in order to just be able to operate some of
these complicated weapons, read the instructions, directions, and so on.
Mr. McNiece. Yes. -
Mr. Hays. Well, the thing I am driving at, I am wondering if you
are not putting a critical interpretation on Dr. Hutchins' statement.
Perhaps it is possible that he meant in this struggle that we are
engaged in for survival that it is imperative that we have a well-
educated country if we are going to survive.
Do you think that there is that possible connotation to be put on
what he said ?
Mr. McNiece. I wouldn't care to theorize on what he meant. I was
just giving my interpretation of what he said, and I would hesitate
to hazard a guess or an estimate as to what really went on in his mind,
other than what I infer from this article.
Mr. Hays. Well, you mentioned yourself the fact that a member
of the Indiana Textbook Commission called Robin Hood a subversive.
And I ought to ask you first if that was one
Mr. McNiece. That was a quotation.
Mr. Hays. I know it was. But you woudn't agree with that, would
you, or would you not ?
Mr. McNiece. No, I wouldn't.
Mr. Hays. You and I can say, then; we agree that we don't think
Robin Hood was a Communist.
Mr. McNiece. I think so.
500 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
You knew, did you, that a case in court, I think in New York, had
been thrown out in the last few weeks, where an application was made
to bar the teaching of David Copperfield and the Merchant of Venice ?
Mr. Hats. I have read something in the paper about that, yes, sir.
Mr. McNiece. And the courts threw that out.
Mr. Hats. But don't you think it is rather a serious matter when
a member of the highest commission on education in 1 of the 48 States
comes out with a statement like that? To me that was just slightly
more than appalling to think that someone would say that.
Mr. McNiece. Well, I think that I would agree with you. I was
inclined, and I saw nothing but a newspaper article about it, and
my own inclination was to assume that it was more or less facetious.
I knew no history of it other than what I read in a short newspaper
article. I couldn't conceive of taking an attitude like that myself.
Mr. Hats. I read quite a number of articles, since Indiana is a
neighboring State to mine, and I got the definite impression this lady
wasn't being facetious at all, or didn't intend to be. She was serious
about it.
Now, then, what do you think, or how do you think, a teacher in
the Indiana schools might feel about it if he or she were confronted
with the business of textbooks with a mention of Robin Hood ? Don't
you think that they would be inclined to tread a little gently there?
Mr. McNiece. Well perhaps if they fitted the characteristic that
Norman Woelfel said of timidity and ignorance. I don't know. I
don't believe a courageous teacher, the type that we would like to
have in our schools, according to my own impression, would have any
such fear as that.
Mr. Hats. Well now let us go down the list to Los Angeles. Do
you think a teacher there would have any reluctance at all to men-
tion UNESCO, or do you think they would have a tendency just
to forget that and skirt clear around it in view of what has happened
there ?
Mr. McNiece. According to my conception of a good teacher, they
would have no hesitation in teaching objectively. I don't believe
that it is possible to educate people as they should be educated with-
out teaching the pertinent factors with respect to UNESCO, or any
other of the controversial subjects. I say they ought to be taught
objectively.
Mr. Hats. I want to say to you that you and I can agree 100 per-
cent. But there are a lot of people in the teaching profession,
unfortunately, who have to have that check every month, in order
to eat. Some of them have families, and some of them don't want to
jeopardize their livelihood by getting into any controversial subjects ;
so it seems to me that it is more than possible that in a case where
you have a red-hot issue like that was in Los Angeles they just refrain.
Now, I could give you some examples from my own experience of
what I hope was a courageous teacher.
I talked about social security back in 1935, and I got into quite
a squabble with the school board because they said I was teaching
socialism by even mentioning it.
I don't want to burden the record, but I have here two volumes
of the Congressional Record of the 74th Congress, running from March
29 to April 16 and from April 17 to May 4, which are largely taken
up with the debates on social security. I might tell you that fre-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 501
quently in those debates you can hear the term "socialism," and
"socialistic," and "a scheme to wreck America," and my good friend
Congressman Rich, whom both of you remember very well, even has
a famous speech in there "Where are we going to get the money,"
saying that it would bankrupt the country.
And I mentioned in my American Government classes that the
Congress was debating this. Students expressed themselves about it.
And I guess I said I thought it was a good thing, so I was called in in
front of the school board about it.
Now, I went right ahead and I said what I thought anyway. Per-
haps that is the reason I am here today, instead of teaching school.
I don't know.
You will agree that a lot of times it would be the better part of valor
if the teacher didn't say anything in a situation like we have in Los
Angeles, wouldn't you, or some other situation ?
Mr. McNiece. I would say it would depend upon the teacher's
temperament. I wouldn't admire a teacher who would feel that he
was circumscribed in an effort to teach honestly by fear of public
opinion. I believe that a good teacher can satisfy the public on a
question of that kind. That is purely a theoretical assumption.
Mr. Hats. But can they satisfy these people who have a tendency
to tend to other people's business, who are always rushing in and
raising issues ■
Mr. McNiece. I couldn't speak for them.
Mr. Hays. Where issues don't exist, you see ?
Mr. McNiece. I coudn't speak for them.
Mr. Hays. But that thing pervades, doesn't it, and Dr. Hutchins
mentions that in his article. He even goes so far as to say that 20
colleges and universities are cooperating with State and congressional
investigating groups in a blacklisting program.
Now, I don't know exactly what that would be.
Mr. McNiece. I wouldn't either.
Mr. Hays. But it seems to me he quotes one of the Members of the
Senate as his source of that. It seems to me that that would put a.
good deal of fear in a teacher to say anything controversial, wouldn't
it, if you thought that you might be blacklisted secretly and anony-
mously?
Mr. McNiece. It is hard for me to answer that, because _
Mr. Hays. Let me ask you this, then, just why was this article by
Dr. Hutchins mentioned in your report at all ?
Mr. McNiece. It was mentioned particularly, and if you will asso-
ciate it with the rest of my testimony you will see, as an adjunct or a
feature of NEA.
Here we have in this communication from Mr. Frank W. Hubbard,,
director of the research division, a copy of a letter in which he has
suggested that he is not sure that Mr. Hutchins' conclusions would
be exactly those of NEA Research Division or of the NEA Committee
on Tenure and Academic Freedom. That is the group of teachers for
whom this study was made or in whose interest this study was made.
Now, it would seem odd to me that if, in NEA circles of that level,,
there was doubt about the wisdom or the logic of a conclusion of Dr.
Hutchins, they would have hesitated a bit about preparing a large pile>
I saw them myself, and I don't know how many there were, but I saw
a stack at least that high [indicating] on their shelves personally.
502 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
That was the reason I brought the item up.
Mr. Hats. Do you have any concrete evidence to prove that they,
the NEA, prepared that, and does it say on there it was prepared by
them?
Mr. McNiece. No; but I found it on their shelves, personally.
Mr, Hats. Now let me point this out to you, Mr. McNiece. If you
would go down and search through my office, I believe you can find one
of those in my shelves.
Mr. MoNiece. But would I find a pile that high?
Mr. Hats. No, because Look magazine only sent me one. But it
seems conceivable to me, since the article had a good deal of reference
to the people that the NEA membership are composed of, they might
have sent them a pile of it. I don't know where they got them, but I
wonder.
Mr. McNiece. I wonder why they keep them in stock and offered
me one if they didn't intend them for distribution ?
Mr. Hats. Did you ask them for one ?
Mr. McNiece. No. I said I wanted material that was indicative of
material they were distributing. And I have quite a few samples of
their literature. They were very decent and very cooperative. I
mean this is no criticism, this part of it is no criticism of NEA at all.
Mr. Hats. Do you think they shouldn't have distributed this article ?
Mr. McNiece. I don't know that they did. I said in my testimony
I was not familiar with the fact as to whether or not they had distrib-
uted it. And I said that very clearly.
Mr. Hats. Then exactly what, Mr. McNiece, is at issue here, the
fact that they had these in their possession ?
Mr. McNiece. Yes.
Mr. Hats. And you think that that is bad %
Mr. McNiece. Yes, and if it should be decided that they were dis-
tributed. I feel that, if it was not in accordance with the conclusions
of their body, it is very questionable as to whether they should retain
either as a gift or a purchase a large supply of these and be willing to
hand them out.
Mr. Hats. What about Look magazine ? It distributed them much
more widely than the NEA. Do you intend to imply criticism of
them?
Mr. McNiece. We are not involved in a study of a magazine and
I haven't given any thought to that at all.
I don't even know what Look magazine's policies are, because I don't
follow it closely.
Mr. Hats. I suppose that it presents both sides of any controversial
question. What I am driving at : Are we getting into a position that
somebody around here is setting themselves up as a censor?
The Chairman. Would the gentleman yield there?
The thing that impressed me, when you read this exchange of letters
between Mr. Dodd and Mr. Hubbard, was that Mr. Hubbard's letter
would indicate that Dr. Hutchins' conclusions in that article were
not based upon the findings of the study which the NEA made. The
article itself purported to be that.
In the concluding paragraph of Mr. Hubbard's letter, he said :
At any rate, I am not sure that Mr. Hutchins' conclusions would be exactly
those of the NEA Research Division or of the NEA Committee on Tenure and
Academic Freedom — -
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 503
■which is, I assume, the committee that made the study.
Mr. McNiece. Yes.
The Chairman. I may have gotten the wrong conception of your
purpose in putting the letters in, but it was my thought that you put
the letters in to indicate that the NEA had not exacly disavowed but
had not accepted the conclusions of Dr. Hutchins, as being the con-
clusions of the NEA committee that had made the study.
Mr. McNiece. That is exactly right, Mr. Chairman. And then
the secondary thought was that regardless of that inference, which I
have mentioned here, they were in possession of this. I call it a stack,
because I saw it, of reprints of this article, and the presumption is
that they were there for a purpose. Otherwise, they would have been
thrown away.
I stated very clearly that I did not know positively whether these
had been placed in circulation or not, but I do know positively that
one of them was handed to me without specific request.
Mr. Hats. Well, Mr. McNiece, you have hinged this whole business
about the NEA and Dr. Hutchins on one sentence, as I get it, and he
says in paragraph 2 of Look magazine :
The National Education Association studied no less than 522 school systems,
■covering every section of the United States, and came to the conclusion that
American teachers today are reluctant to consider "controversial issues."
Now that is all that he says about the NEA report that I have been
able to find in a very quick sketching over of this. I may have missed
something.
Now, that apparently is a statement that the NEA can either testify
one way or the other about what conclusions they came to. But you
•can't indict the NEA because Dr. Hutchins said that, can you?
Mr. McNiece. No.
Mr. Hats. But you do indict them because they had a stack of this
in their possession ?
Mr. McNiece. No, that isn't the point.
The subject of this study, as turned out by NEA, is the handling of
controversial issues in the local school system.
Now, that is the study. And there is the copy of it in typewritten
iform. That was produced by the Research Division of NEA.
Mr. Hats. I am at a disadvantage of not having seen that so I
can't question you about it. But let me ask you another question
along that line.
You are probably familiar with certain laws in certain States that
are commonly known as teacher-tenure laws.
Mr. McNiece. Yes. I am not specifically or statistically, but I
know what that means and that there are many of them.
Mr. Hats. What do they imply to you ? What is the meaning of
them?
Mr. McNiece. They simply mean in accordance — and I have a
volume somewhere, not with me — but they simply imply that accord-
ing to provisions in individual State laws the tenure of office is more
or less guaranteed during a term of good behavior.
Mr. Hats. That is right.
In other words, they prevent a school board from firing some teacher
because they don't like the fiancee of that teacher, or because they didn't
like the fact that the teacher said he thought social security might be a.
good thing.
504 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. McNiece. Firing them without just cause, yes.
Mr. Hats. Why do you think those laws came about ? Do you think
some legislature just passed them because they ran out of something
to pass and wanted to pass a law ? Or do you think that there was a
necessity for it ?
Mr. McNiece. There are two probable and possible answers to that.
Either one or both of which might apply to different States under dif-
ferent circumstances.
One is that there were positive injustices that happened or were
carried out.
The other is the same kind of fear that you are speaking of on the
very controversial issues, the fear that something of that kind might
happen.
And the teachers' lobbies, which are very, very strong in some States
have had such measures introduced for their protection against pos-
sible contingencies.
Mr. Hays. Well now, of course, that is all in the realm of conjec-
ture, and that is all we can deal with there, except for one specific
instance, which I will tell you about.
I happen to have introduced such a bill in the Ohio Senate in 1941.
And it happens to be a law out there ; it happened that it passed that
year. The National Education Association nor the Ohio Education
Association nor any other education association asked me to introduce
the bill. I did it because of my own personal experiences in the
educational field.
The Ohio Education Association did get behind the bill. There were
some letters written no doubt to other members of the legislature and
there was some testimony given before committees. And the bill in
some modified amended, slightly amended, form became law, a bill not
identical with the one I introduced, but having the main provisions.
It was introduced for the very reason back then in 1941 that Dr.
Hutchins is talking about now. It was in order that no one, as I saw it r
could channel, circumscribe and squeeze the education system of
America into their own pattern as it is done in Russia today and as it
was being done then in Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy.
You wouldn't say that Dr. Hutchins wouldn't have a right to put
his opinions in writing, would you ?
Mr. McNiece. Definitely not.
Mr. Hats. But you do say that the NEA, if his opinions happen to
appeal to them, that they shouldn't make it available to their members
who hadn't happened to see them ?
Mr. McNiece. I am inclined to question the judgment and not the
right.
The Chairman. Would you permit another interruption along the
same line as my other observation ?
Again, if I summarize in my mind correctly, following up my other
observation, the part of the statement of Dr. Hutchins' article which
you question the judgment of the NEA in circulating is where Dr.
Hutchins in his article says that —
The National Education Association studied no less than 522 school systems,
covering every section of the United States, and came to the conclusion that
Anierican teachers today are reluctant to consider "controversial issues."
That is, he put himself in a position of speaking for the National
Education Association and giving its conclusion of the studies which
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 505
"were made ; whereas, Br. Hubbard says that he is not stating the con-
clusions of the committee that made the study. That is just the way
I interpret it and perhaps I am wrong.
Mr. Hays. He says, 'I am not sure Mr. Hutchin's conclusions would
be exactly those of the NEA." It seems to me that that is pretty care-
ful language. I don't know what it means.
The Chairman. That is correct.
Mr. Hats. I would like to know what the NEA found out in their
;study. I think it might be very illuminating.
The Chairman. For my own information, with reference to the
"Teacher Tenure Act, my going back to my earlier experience which of
■course is sometime ago, I felt one thing that encouraged the teachers
in advocating the Teacher Tenure Act was to make sure that political
■considerations when administrations, whether municipal, county, or
State, changed that their positions wouldn't be affected by the vicissi-
tudes of politics.
I had always felt that that was one of the compelling reasons that
■advanced the cause of the Teacher Tenure Act.
Mr. McNiece. Yes.
The Chairman. I am sure it was down home.
Mr. Hats. What did you say again was the cause of it ?
The Chairman. That in the earlier days teachers were regarded
as patronage in the same sense of the word or probably in a lesser
degree, but in a similar sense, to other municipal, county or state
•employees. Then, as the cause of education advanced, the political
angle began to recede but sometimes the teachers were apprehensive
of political considerations entering into the employment of teachers
or the dismissal of teachers in order to make particular dismissal in
certain categories in order to make available vacancies for political
friends when the county, municipal or state administration changed.
Therefore, they encouraged, out of those political reasons, the enact-
ment of teacher tenure acts.
Mr. Hats. I think certainly that has
The Chairman. More than the other things.
Mr. Hays. It has an affect on it. It wasn't political politics, as
such ; they never entered into it very much in Ohio, since I remember
the educational system. But there certainly was that fear that for
political or other reasons occasionally a board member would want to
push one of his friends into the school system.
The Chairman. I don't think it really enters into it very much
today. But in former years I think it did enter into it a great deal.
Mr. Hays. Now, going back to your start of your statement, on
pages 1, 2, and 3. You say that you are not criticizing change as
such in the very first page.
Mr. McNiece. That is right.
Mr. Hats. Then in that same page, almost that same sentence, you
say that the pattern is one of evolving collectivitism. What do you
mean by that ?
Mr. McNiece. The trend toward socialism, w T hich I have shown
immediately thereafter in the form of several definitions from quali-
fied investigators or members of parties.
Mr. Hays. Do you consider social security socialism — unemploy-
ment insurance, and old-age pension — I will be specific, do you con-
sider those socialism?
506 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. McNiece. They are socialistic in nature. Old-age pensions
are something for which an actuarial basis exists, in the same form
of statistical computation as is made by insurance actuaries for life
insurance.
There is absolutely no basis whatever for unemployment insurance.
I have raised a question about the use of the term. As insurance, men
tell me it is a misnomer. There is no actuarial basis for it. If you had
an actuarial basis for unemployment, you would have the best little
business forecaster that could possibly be developed; We have no
such thing.
Mr. Hays. Then would you advocate, Mr. McNiece, that we do
away with unemployment insurance ?
Mr. McNiece. I wouldn't go that far.
Mr. Hays, That might be a very unpopular thing to advocate, inas-
much as only eight people in the House voted against broadening the
whole social security thing.
Mr. MoNiece. I understand that. I might possibly, and I would
hesitate for political or any other reasons to advocate its elimination,
particularly at this time, but I will go so far as to say that if a depres-
sion of sufficient magnitude hit us it might eliminate us.
Mr. Hays. Unemployment insurance would ?
Mr. McNiece. Yes. The senate of the State of Ohio, a matter of
15 or 20 years ago when this agitation for unemployment insurance
first came up, employed some outside consultants whose names I have
forgotten. I was familiar with it at the time but I have forgotten it.
Together with the senate committee, they explored this whole field
of unemployment insurance. In a nutshell they came to this conclu-
sion that, if a business depression of serious magnitude developed, the
only possible source of money with which to meet the large and cata-
clysmic demands for payments would be the printing press.
All of the money that is set up of course goes into the general fund
and the Government spends it and puts tickets in the drawer. If and
when the time comes to pay unemployment insurance or unemploy-
ment dole, if the reserve inventory of paper money is not sufficient
to meet the demand, they have to start the printing presses.
Mr. Hays. We are getting into a discussion of economics here,
aren't we ?
Mr. McNiece. Economics and finance. I am only mentioning here
what the committee of the Ohio State Senate said.
Mr. Hays . I realize I started it.
Mr. McNiece. But I would like to observe that we are both safe
no matter what comes out of this.
The Chairman. Would the gentleman yield for another observa-
tion? And I apologize.
But as I summarized in my mind the effect of the more pertinent
quotations which you gave, they went toward establishing or setting
up a system of economy that would do away with free enterprise. It
was finally summarized by Harold Laski, in his summary of the report
of the American Historical Association's Commission on Social
Studies, when he said :
At bottom, and stripped of its carefully neutral phrases, the report is an edu-
cational program for a Socialist America.
Mr. Hays. Now, we will just hop right over to page 21, Mr. Chair-
man, and go from there. I could hardly wait to get there anyway.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 507
Now, then, to bring in Mr. Laski, that is an interesting thing.
Now, Mr. McNiece, do you agree that Mr. Laski has been correct in
his various analyses about politics and economics down over the years?
Mr. McNiece. I am not sufficiently familiar with his writings to be
able to give a qualified answer to that, Mr. Hays.
Mr. Hays. You don't know whether you approve of them generally
or disapprove?
Mr. McNiece. In a newspaper sense, and years ago he died, I think
in 1945, or 1946, or around there, in a newspaper sense I saw, when he
would make some of his numerous trips over here, or statements, that
I would disagree with.
Mr. Hays. Most of his ideas, let me say, if you are not familiar with
him, died before he did. Now, the question occurs to me, you wouldn't
want to endorse his whole political philosophy, and how is it you quote
this one quotation on page 21 ?
Mr. McNiece. At the very bottom of page 21.
Mr. Hays. And you take out there three little lines, and in fact a
very short sentence, and you quote that as though that were gospel
truth.
Mr. McNiece. I am quoting that from The Turning of the Tides,
part 2, the author of which is Paul W. Shafer, Member of Congress,
and I believe from Michigan.
Mr. Hays. Since you bring in our good friend Paul Shafer, is there
another author to that book?
Mr. McNiece. There are, I think, three parts, and this is the part
which he authored.
Mr. Hays. Who are the other authors?
Mr. McNiece. I don't remember.
Mr. Hays. I thought that he had a coauthor on that.
Mr. McNiece. I think that there are two coauthors.
Mr. Hays. I don't want to accuse Paul of guilt by association but
it might be interesting if we knew who the other fellow is. If these
hearings don't teach me anything else, they are going to teach me
never to write a book.
Mr. McNiece. Part 1 by John Howland Snow, and part 2, I am
quoting, is by Paul W. Shafer, Member of Congress from Michigan
since 1937. The original text was delivered in the House of Represen-
tatives on March 21, 1952. Then this book, I was thinking it was in 3
parts, but it is in 4 parts, and parts 3 and 4 are again by J. Howland
Snow, and you were correct in mentioning a coauthor.
Mr. Hays. I won't go into that, but anybody who is interested can
find out about him. So you take this one quotation from this book
of Mr. Shafer's, and of course you don't know why he took it, but
anyway we get this quotation quoted as though it were gospel truth,
but I think that we could probably agree if you and I studied Laski,
that we wouldn't subscribe to practically anything he ever said.
Mr. McNiece. I don't insert this in any different sense than all of
the other quotations are inserted. I have tried, Mr. Hays, to avoid
at this stage of the game, conclusions of my own. These, as nearly
as I could make them, are factual statements and my own statements
are merely introductory. That is, introductory to those quotations.
Mr. Hays. You do intend to convey, don't you, Mr. McNiece, from
your statement, the idea that there has been some sort of a plot to
change the whole concept of the social sciences, or something to that
effect?
508 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. McNiece. I start out by quoting Mr. Seymour E. Harris, who
suggests that thought himself. As I pointed out, this study is an
initial staff report, on this phase. A second section will follow the
triangle down along the right-hand side, and finally we will evolve
some sort of final conclusions out of the whole study.
Mr. Hays. Let me ask you this question: Did you have to work
very hard to find these quotations ? You must have had to do a good
deal of searching to build this case.
Mr. McNiece. I will say, "Yes."
Mr. Hats. That is the answer I hoped you would give, Mr. McNiece.
Now, on page 6 you mention or you set out here some of these founda-
tions, and the number of individuals with leftist records, or affilia-
tions. Now, I don't know exactly what you mean by that, but we will
say for the purposes of the point here, that they are people that are
very undesirable, and never should have gotten grants. Would you
agree with that ?
Mr. McNiece. I didn't introduce in my thought the word "undesir-
able". My purpose in using that phrase was to indicate from the record
first that they had been cited according to the record, as belonging
to leftist affiliations ; and second, that the foundation representatives,
whoever were testifying, in response to Mr. Keel's questions, admitted
these facts in connection with this number of grants.
I simply took this record from the history of the hearings, and not
the final report, you understand, but the hearings of the Cox
committee.
Mr. Hats. This may seem an irrelevant question, but it will have
some bearing. What do you think of Ivory soap? Do you think
that is a fair product ?
Mr. McNiece. I use it once in a while.
Mr. Hays. You set forth that the Eockefeller Foundation has 26
bad grants, and I happen to have information that the Rockefeller
Foundation has made 40,000 grants and I have done a little quick
mental arithmetic here, and Ivory soap only claims to be 99 and 44
one-hundredths percent pure and the Rockefeller Foundation, accord-
ing to your own testimony, is 99 and 85 one-hundredths percent pure ;
and they are purer than Ivory soap.
Mr. McNiece. That is your testimony and mine together. I think
the testimony at the time of the Cox committee showed some 29,000-
plus grants, and not 40,000, by the Rockefeller Foundation, and any-
how, as I pointed out— —
Mr. Hays. Even if it is only 29,000, and I think my figure is more
near accurate, they are still better than 99 percent pure.
Mr. McNiece. That isn't the point I have tried to make clear.
Mr. Hays. The point, let me ask you this before you go on, and I
don't mean to interrupt you. But would this be a fair assumption :
If the Rockefeller Foundation came in here and said, "Yes, we frankly
admit that we have made 26 bad grants," or 56, or whatever the num-
ber is — and I am using the number 26 because it appears in the testi-
mony — "and we are sorry we did it, and had we known then what
we know now, we wouldn't have done it"; do you think the Rocke-
feller Foundation ought to be pilloried because out of 40,000 grants
it has made 26 which somebody says are suspect? And I will go
along and agree with you that they are.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 509
Mr. McNiece. I have not in any case, in any line in this book, at-
tempted to pillory any foundation. I am merely reporting facts, as
they occur.
Mr. Hays. I want to make it clear that that word is just a word that
occurred to me, and let us say that then they ought to be criticized.
I don't want to put any words in your mouth, or make any implica-
tions that wouldn't be right. Do you think it is quite fair to pick out
these 26, and "sure it is bad, and we hope they never do it again," but
don't you think we might be casting an unfair reflection on Rockefeller
by stressing the 26 and forgetting the 40 thousand less 26 others, or
36,974?
Mr. McNiece. I don't think so, Mr. Hays, and this was not drawn
up with any such thought in mind. I am not so much interested in
the history of the past, as I am of evolving some kind of plan of care
for the future. I really believe that some unknown proportion of these
grants were made undoubtedly before we had any record of leftist
affiliations, so called, and citations from the various governmental
boards.
I have been sufficiently familiar with the progress of that work
through the years to believe that a goodly number of these were made
before there was any record that could be consulted. I am not offer-
ing this as a point of criticism, but evidence that caution should be
exercised, and I have said "at this time we are not concerned with the
question as to whether or not the foundations knew or could have found
out about the questionable affiliations of these grantees before the
grants were made. The fact is that the funds were given to these
people. This is the important point of interest to us."
Mr. Hays. I grant you it is an important point of interest.
Mr. McNiece. And it has an exploding and growing and expanding
force through the years.
Mr. Hays. You think it has a growing force ?
Mr. McNiece. Why, of course, as these men continue to expound
their theories.
Mr. Hays. Well, now, Mr. McNiece, 26 out of 40 thousand couldn't
have a very explosive force ; what about the other 39,974 ? What are
they going to do, just fizzle out? And aren't they going to be fire-
crackers that go off or are they duds ?
Mr. McNiece. I am not talking about 46 out of 40 thousand ; I am
talking about this number of men, 95 people on the loose, that are free
to expound these theories, many of them to growing youths whose
experience hasn't been sufficient to give them judgment to weigh.
Mr. Hays. Well, now we are going into where I would like to get.
You say these men are on the loose, and you say their theories are bad.
And, of course, we are talking now in sort of an Einstein's theory of
relativity, because I don't know who they are; and you talk about
socialism and we have got to try to define it and we got into the field
of economics which we could stay here from now to doomsday and per-
haps never come up with any final conclusion that either you, I, or any-
body else in the room could agree on.
So just where are we ? We have had changes in this country, surely,
and we had a depression. And out of that depression came a demand
of the people in a democracy for change, and to try to improve and to
try to pass some social legislation which would at least if not prevent
the same hardships and effects, minimize them in the future.
49720— 54— pt. 1 33
510 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Now, are we taking the position that that is bad, and if so w T hat are
we going to do about it ?
Mr. McNiece. At this point particularly, I am simply offering
what evidence I can find on the subjects which I have investigated
on the assumption that this evidence would be used by the committee
of the House in formulating its conclusions. I did not, at least at this
point of the game, assume that I am supposed to suggest conclusions.
Mr. Hays. Don't you think that your report, if anybody read it and
took it seriously, would certainly suggest certain conclusions?
Mr. McNiece. I think the weight of the evidence might suggest
them, but I am not suggesting the conclusions at least until I get
through with the presentation.
Mr. Hats. But you admitted a little bit ago, didn't you, that you
had to work pretty hard to come up with some of these quotations.
Mr. McNiece. I have had to work hard to read all, and find all of
this varied assemblages of books and pamphlets.
The Chairman. May I interrupt here? There is quoted here the
list of people of subversive character that was mentioned before the
Cox committee, which you mentioned incidentally. But I didn't
understand or I wasn't impressed that that was your major theme, it
was more or less incidental. I understood that you were discussing
primarily the grants that had been made to some citizens and organi-
zation of different types, who in turn had used the money to make
these studies and reach conclusions you felt might very well be in
conflict with our usual concept of this.
For instance, on page 13, just to quote one of them :
Underlying and illustrative of these tensions are privation in the midst of
plenty, violations of fiduciary trust, gross inequalities in income and wealth,
widespread racketeering and banditry, wasteful use of natural resources, unbal-
anced distribution and organization of labor and leisure, the harnessing of
science to individualism in business enterprise —
and so forth.
You quoted the results of the studies for which these donations or
contributions from the various foundations had been used, and you
were putting that before us for the consideration of the committee.
As I saw it, the mere fact that you threw in and quoted the number
of subversives who had received grants was more or less incidental
to your major theme.
Mr. McNiece. That is absolutely right, Mr. Reece, I also made a
statement distinguishing between small and large contributions.
Now, in connection with the hearings of the Cox committee, in
naming these 95 individuals my only thought was that that fell into
the category of miscellaneous small grants that had been made, and
the large grants which to me are far more important, which takes up
the mam part and the real burden of this testimony, were through the
intellectual and other organizations indicated on that chart. That is
the major point of emphasis.
Mr. Hats. Well, Mr. McNiece, if you had worked as hard as you
worked on this, and I have inside information that you did work
very hard, to find good things that the foundations have done, don't
you think you could have come up with a far more impressive volume
and a far more liberal number of citations and so on and so forth?
Mr. McNiece. I haven't any doubt of that.
Mr. Hats. In other words, you did try to put into this report all
of the bad things they have done.
I TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS * 51 1
Mr. McNiece. No ; not all of the bad things.
Mr. Hays. Most of the bad things.
Mr. McNiece. Mr. Hays, from my point of view, 2 bad eggs spoil
an omelet made of 12. We are looking for the cause of the bad ones.
We want to eliminate those and attempt, if possible, to point out
certain things, at least which I individually believe have gone on with-
out the knowledge of trustees and which I have tried to point out.
That the trustees of busy foundations, or busy men
Mr. Hats. You say 2 bad eggs will spoil an omelet of 12. I sup-
pose 2 would also spoil an omelet of 16 ?
Mr. McNiece. From my point of view ; yes.
Mr. Hats. I think we both know what we are talking about. I
hope you are not spoiled. Now we have heard a good deal of talk
here about changing the social outlook from the usual concept. Now
we can go for a long time debating about interpretations, and I sup-
pose that you will agree with me that the social legislation of America
has considerably changed in the past 2 decades; wouldn't you?
Mr. McNiece. Oh, definitely.
Mr. Hats. From the usual concept, we will say, of 1932 ?
Mr. McNiece. Yes.
Mr. Hays. To 1952 or 1954 ?
Mr. McNiece. Yes.
Mr. Hays. You wouldn't want to go back to 1932 ; would you ? . . .
Mr. McNiece. I might wish to selectively, but I wouldn't want to
eliminate "selectively."
Mr. Hats. Well, in other words what you are saying is if you want
to go back by yourself, you will go but you don't want to take the rest
of us with you.
Mr. McNiece. Only if you wanted to go along, I believe in freedom
choice.
Mr. Hats. Let me say to you that I will make my position clear :
I don't want to go along.
Now, I am serious about something here and I am wondering, per-
haps, if there is something the matter with me. I come from a long
line of Republicans and some of them held pretty prominent offices
in Ohio, and by all of the normal force of events I would have teen
a Republican, and I thought I was one up to about 1929 or 1930.
And then I began to do some thinking, and I suppose this environ-
ment that I was in — what are we going to call Ohio State? A bad
environment or a good one? You are on record as saying it is all
right.
The Chairman. Ohio is all right.
Mr. Hats. How about Senator Bricker's university ?
The Chairman. So far as I know, it is all right.
Mr. Hats. Perhaps the environment had something to do with it,,
but suddenly I began to have a different political and social view-
point. I have to plead guilty to being for bank deposit insurance,
and social security, unemployment insurance, and old-age pensions,
and all of those things. At that time people were saying they were
socialistic.
Now, do you say they are still socialistic today or not ?
Mr. McNiece. Well, I would say that they are socialistic in trend,
but you don't have to travel all of the way to the end objectives of
socialism just because you take a few features out of it. ,
512 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
I have heard the statement made many times in the past that our
whole educational system in this country is socialistic. But I wouldn't
advocate doing away with our educational system.
Mr. Hays. In other words, then, in effect you are admitting here
in testimony that some parts of socialism might have been all right,
is that right ?
Mr. McNiece. No, I haven't admitted that.
Mr. Hays. Didn't you say to take the best parts of it ?
Mr. McNiece. I might if I were thinking of it in that connection,
but I haven't thought of it in that connection.
Mr. Hays. Then, in other words, what I am driving at, Mr. McNiece,
when you toss around— and I am not pointing a finger at you any more
than perhaps at myself, or other members of the committee — the word
"socialism," it could have as many different meanings as there are
people in this room, couldn't it ?
Mr. McNiece, Well, I have talked with a few Socialists, and I have
read a bit of their discussions, and I would say that they differ — and
by "they" I mean Socialists — they differ as much in their party as
Democrats and Republicans differ in their individual parties, and there
isn't any one particular line of reasoning and thought on which all
members of the socialists or anyone else agree.
Mr. Hays. Is there anything in the Socialist Party that would pre-
vent a socialist from being a good loyal American ?
Mr. McNiece. I would say not of the type, let us say, of Norman
Thomas.
Mr. Hays. You agree with President Eisenhower, that he is a good,
loyal American, and he said so the other day according to the news-
papers, because I was a little surprised. I got the impression from
being around here 6 years that something was wrong with him. I don't
know Mr. Thomas.
Mr. McNiece. I don't know him either, but I wouldn't assail him
on the basis of lack of knowledge.
Mr. Hays. I don't mean to impugn him at all, but I am wondering
if you and I can come to any kind of an agreement on that.
The Chairman. Would you permit an interruption ?
Mr. Hays. Would you let me finish my thought and then I will be
glad to.
What I am driving at is this: Because a. man is a socialist or calls
himself a socialist is that any reason why he couldn't be a loyal Amer-
ican ? You see some people down here— I will try tc explain what I
am driving at — some people say socialists and communists are one and
the same and I have always been led to believe that they aren't. Some
people tried to give the term "socialists" a dirty connotation, and I
am wondering if it has that in the public's mind ? I am wondering
if that is justified ?
Mr. McNiece. I would say unquestionably from my own observa-
tion and experience that some socialist objectives, to use your word,
have a dirty connotation. My own feeling is that a Communist might
be defined as a Socialist in a hurry.
Until the Communists came into this country more or less officially
in 1919 there was a very close affiliation between the Socialists and
the IWW — the International Workers of the World. The Commu-
nists, when they did come into the country, alined themselves very
closely with the Socialist Party. They were not divorced until grad-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 515
ually, several years later. Tractenburg, who was named by Mr.
Budenz under oath as one of the active Communist leaders in this coun-
try, appointed to the committee to infiltrate or penetrate our cultural
associations here, including foundations, was originally a member
of the Socialist Party in this country. It is so recorded in the pub-
lications of the International Socialist League. I have seen the
names there myself .
Now, there are others, and other members prominent in the Socialist
Party in those earlier days who divorced themselves from the party
and joined the Communist circles when the Communists became active
in this particular country.
Mr. Hays. But you don't differentiate between the two except one
of them is in a bigger hurry than the other one.
Mr. McNiece. Again, I would say I would have to make an addi-
tional differentiation, just as I would between different groups in the
Republican or Democratic Parties.
There are some Socialists who wish to go the full distance insofar
as complete public control of all productive facilities are concerned.
They have identical objectives with the Communists except they are
going to be a litle more patient and instead of attaining those objectives
by revolutionary methods, are willing to battle for a long time through
the ballot box.
Only recently Norman Thomas has said that we have gone further
on the road, toward our objectives, or toward socialism, I have forgot-
ten the exact quotation, "than I would have dreamed possible a few
years ago without Socialist victories at the polls."
Mr. Hays. Now, then, we had a social security bill passed here this
week, and everybody but 8 Members of the House voted for it. Are
all of us — and I am one of them, and I don't know about the other
members of the committee — is every one of us who voted for that
except the 8, are we Socialists ?
Mr. McNieoe. I would certainly not define a Socialist by any such
pretext as that, definitely not.
The Chairman. Would you permit an interruption, with the Con-
gressman's permission ?
Without characterizing Mr. Thomas, whom I have known for 35
years, and for whom personally I have a very high regard because
certainly he is honest in presenting his position, and there is no decep-
tion about where he stands
Mr. Hays. Are you not afraid of being investigated for saying that %
The Chairman. But he is a Socialist. I am not a Socialist my-
self, whatever else I might be, that is something I am not. And
here, as I get it, is the heart of socialism. We talk about various
pieces of legislation that might in some degree impinge upon or
advance the authority of the Government in some degree over the
people and, of course, practically every governmental action does that
to a degree, and might to that extent be characterized in a degree of
socialism. .
But in this conclusion of the Commission on Social Studies, on
page 12, it sets out there what I consider to be pretty much the heart
of socialism :
There is a notable waning of the once widespread popular faith in economic
individualism; and leaders in public affairs, supported by a growing mass of
the population, are demanding the introduction into economy of ever wider meas-
ures of planning and control * * *
514 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
* * * the age of individualism is closing, and that a new age of collectivism
is emerging.
As to the specific form which this "collectivism" is taking and will take in
the future, the evidence at hand is by no means clear or unequivocal. It may
involve the limiting or supplanting of private property by public property or it
may entail the preservation of private property extended and distributed among
the masses * * * and will represent a composite of historic doctrines and social
conceptions yet to appear.
Socialism here is indicating its final accomplishment will either do
away with private property, or, in legal phraseology "entail"
the preservation of private propertj 3 ' — extending and distributing
it among the masses. Now, that is characterizing socialism in the
sense of the word in which I have felt it exists, and that is embodied
in the conclusions of one of these studies that was foundation-
financed.
Mr. McNiece. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Mr. Hats. You, I hope, facetiously accused me of diversionary tac-
tics, and now that is all right. You are sort of getting diversionary
here with me and going from place to place, but that is all right, I
will just divert with you, and let us go over to that.
The Chairman. I am just trying to keep things pointed up.
Mr. Hays. That is a difference of opinion, isn't it? I will divert
and go over to page 12 with you.
Now Mr. McNiece, in the conclusions and recommendations of the
Commission on Social Studies, you cite this as their conclusions. Did
the whole membership of this Commission sign this report, or did any-
body sign it, or do you know ?
Mr. McNiece. No, I think I mentioned that in here somewhere.
There were 14 members of the original board. Nobody resigned from
it. Out of the 14, 10 signed the final report, and 4 did not sign it.
They did not offer any dissident statement, and nobody knows why
that was done. I have covered that in the next section, where I get
into the planning end of it.
Mr. Hats. Was the then superintendent of the schools of the Dis-
trict of Columbia among the members of that commission ?
Mr. McNiece. He was among the members of the commission that
refused to sign, or did not sign at any rate.
Another one was Charles E. Merriam, to whom I devote considerable
attention in the next section of this report, and another one was Ed-
mund E. Day, now deceased. Merriam also is deceased. Edmund
Day was president of Cornell University. I have forgotten, but I
may be able to find it here, the fourth member. It is Ernest Home.
From the record itself, Frank A. Balleau, who was formerly Super-
intendent of Schools here in the District of Columbia, and Edmund E.
Day, and Ernest Home, and Charles E. Merriam declined to sign.
Mr. Hays. Now, then, going on to page 12, I want to quote again
one sentence there, and I would like to ask you to take a mental jump
back 20 years to 19S4:
The leaders in public affairs supported by a growing mass of the population
are demanding the introduction into the economy of ever wider measures of
planning and control.
Do you think that that statement has any validity or not, histori-
cally?
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 515
Mr. McNiece. I am inclined to believe that it does have a historical
basis.
Mr. Hays. I think so, too. Now, where were we before we got
pointed up here?
The Chairman. While he is searching his records, some reference
was made a while ago about getting in a hurry. I was looking through
your testimony to find one of these reports where they used it. They
were speaking about one method of educating the children, and ulti-
mately getting the great masses educated in this collectivist type of
thinking, and somebody said that they were too slow and they were
in a hurry, and that was the phrase I was looking for.
Mr. Hats. Now going back to page 6, you listed these 95 individuals,
and you say that —
these grants were made to professors, authors, lecturers, and educational groups
and so forth, all virtually without exception were included within educational
circles. It should be obvious that with the passage of time, the activity of this
many people and organizations —
and I assume you mean all 95 of them
Mr. McNiece. That is right. "$
Mr. Hats (reading).
dedicated to spreading the word in the educational field would have an influ-
ence out of all measurable proportion to the relative value and number of grants.
How many people would you say would be in the educational field,
Mr. McNiece?
Mr. McNiece. Are you talking about the
Mr. Hays. You used the term, and I don't know.
Mr. McNiece. I am asking you what you mean by people in the
educational field, do you mean all of the teachers of the country; is
that right?
Mr. Hays. I would think so, yes, and superintendents.
Mr, McNiece. I would think the NEA estimate is approximately
500,000 teachers in the schools.
Mr. Hays. Wouldn't you agree with me, Mr. McNiece, that that is
a sort of an insult to the intelligence of 500,000 teachers, to say that 95
people can influence them in some sort of collectivist trend?
Mr. McNiece. No, I wouldn't say it was an insult to them at all,
because those 95 people, more or less, are not spending their time solely
in trying to influence teachers. They are also spending their time at
their own working levels, wherever they may be. I have pointed
out in another section here somewhere, that it is from the hard core of
policymaking levels that these things come, and I quoted evidence
to show that that thought in one form or one word or another is recog-
nized in the educational field. That is, to get further faster ; I think
that phrase was used in one of the Ford Foundations' reports
The Chairman. That is what I was looking for.
Mr. McNiece. Yes, it is necessary to concentrate
Mr. Hays. Now, Mr. McNiece, wouldn't you say that down through
the years, the American people, the teachers and the whole American
public have had hundreds and thousands and tens of thousands of
ideas put before them, since the inception of this Republic ; the Popu-
lists and the Greenbacks and the Know-Nothings, and the political
philosophies without end, and you certainly wouldn't, or would you,
argue that in this plot psychosis theory that you seem to set forth, that
516 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
you believe the majority of Americans can't be trusted to make an in-
telligent choice from all of these ideas that are put out ? That they are
going to be sort of herded like sheep into something that they don't
want to go into ?
Mr. McNiece. I cannot be sure of this statement because it falls
into the class of hearsay, but I have been told that there is a very
large proportion of the teachers in the public schools of the United
States who are greatly opposed to this effort, let me say, of the cen-
tral core toward collectivist teaching. I have even been told that a
large number of them would rally, if they had the opportunity, around
another influence.
Now, as I have told you, it is hearsay on my part.
Mr. Hats. What influence are you talking about ?
Mr. McNiece. I am talking about
Mr. Hats. Is it NEA ? Are you talking about an influence now ?
Let us name names, and is this influence the NEA or what is it ?
Mr. McNiece. I am not naming names, except in the form of asso-
ciations, out of which these movements are developing. There they
are, in that central block of rectangles, suspended from the founda-
tions, and then they have spread out through the whole web or fabric
of the institution, into government and also into education.
Mr. Hats. What has spread out ?
Mr. McNiece. This collectivist influence that we are talking about,
that is the main theme of this report.
Mr. Hats. Well, now, just exactly, can you define this collectivist
influence for us, and that is another term that is tossed about here.
Mr. McNiece. I think it is defined by the excerpts themselves, and
the educators themselves have used it. If I look through this book ■
The Chairman. Does this have effect on page 40, Education for
Tomorrow :
We submit to the membership of the NEA that its roll in life of the Nation
would be greatly enhanced if it identified itself with an ideal of social living,
which alone can bring the social crisis to a happy resolution, a collectivistic
and classless society.
Mr. Hats. Now we are going over to page 40.
The Chairman. I thought that kind of pointed up there.
Mr. McNiece. Page 23 is the one that you were looking for.
Mr. Hats. He was quoting from page 40, and let us settle this page
40 deal first. And now what is this from on page 40, Mr. McNiece?
Could you tell us what that is ?
Mr. McNiece. Yes, that is from the editorial, it appears almost
exactly the center of the page, page 7, Educating for Tomorrow. That
is from the Social Frontier, a journal of educational criticism and
reconstruction.
Mr. Hats. What do these names, Charles A. Beard, Henry P. Fair-
child, and John Dewey, and Sidney Hook and Goodwin Watson have
to do with the whole ball of wax ?
Mr. McNiece. I quoted from the title page of the magazine.
Mr. Hats. And they are associated with it, and thereby if this
is bad, they are involved ; is that right ?
Mr. McNiece. I didn't want to give only part of the page, and I
even gave the price of $2 a year.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Wormser, could we get you to take the stand for
about a minute right here ?
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 517
The Chairman. Just a minute.
Mr. Hats. I have some questions right along that.
The Chairman. Mr. Wormser is not a witness and the committee
will decide whether he shall be called or not. I don't want to proceed
in such a fashion. We don't want to follow
Mr. Hats. I will ask him the question without taking the stand.
The Chairman. We don't want to follow the procedure of some of
the other committees of just yanking anybody that happens to be
around, before the committee as a witness. We want an orderly pres-
entation here, and it might very well be that Mr. Wormser should in
due time be qualified, and testify as a witness, but at this period at
least he is our counsel.
Mr. Hats. Well, let me say, Mr. Eeece, he is your counsel.
The Chairman. He is the committee's counsel.
Mr. Hats, And I have no objection to you calling him the com-
mittee's counsel, but I will state light here in public that I don't have
any private line that I can pick up the phone and without even dialing
a number have it ring down there and get Mr. Wormser whenever
I want him. And so if he is a committee counsel, the minority ought
to have that same setup, oughtn't they ?
Will you answer a couple of questions for me, Mr. Wormser, with-
out being under oath, and I think that you are an honorable man.
Mr. Wormser. Thank you.
Mr. Hats. And let me say, Mr. Chairman, that you are the one who
wanted everybody sworn here in the beginning and I was only trying
to play your game according to your rules.
The Chairman. If he is going to testify, I want him sworn, too.
Mr. Hats. Let me ask you this, this Sidney Hook— and I don't know
him, do you know him ?
Mr. Wormser. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hats. Do you think he is a Communist ?
Mr. Wormser. I have no idea. I don't think he is.
Mr. Hats. Did you consult with him at all about how to run this
investigation ?
Mr. Wormser. No, I had a conference with him and two other
professors at New York University at the request of Dean McGee of
the School of General Education.
Mr. Hats. About this Reece committee investigation?
Mr. Wormser. One aspect of it, one particular aspect of it. Which
I would be very glad to discuss with you if you would wish.
Mr. Hats. Did he give you any specific advice that we could find
useful here?
Mr. Wormser. Well, yes; I suppose he did. The particular thing
that I was interested in was the criticism that the foundations had
overemphasized empiricism. I discussed that with Dean McGee, and
with Chancellor Held, of New York University. Subsequently, Dean
McGee was the dean of the faculty on the periphery of which I have
a position and suggested it might be interesting to talk to three of
his professors. Sidney Hook was one, and I have forgotten the names
of the other two.
We had a very interesting informal discussion on empiricism, in
the course of which I learned a great deal.
518 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hats. Now, then, let me ask you this: Do you think Sidney
Hook's name being associated with John Dewey here is any reflection
on Mr. Hook?
Mr. Wormser. Well
Mr. Hats. Apparently, I get it he is one of the authors of this
thing, of this horrible thing Mr. Reece is reading from.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Beard talked to me at Columbia, and I had
the highest respect for him, and Sidney Hook spoke on the same plat-
form that I spoke in my hometown of California a week apart, and
I respected very much what he had to say. I have no personal criti-
cism of Professor Hook at all, and I like the man. I know very little
about his points of view.
Mr. Hats. I am glad to hear you approve of Mr. Beard, Professor
Beard. In other words, just the fact that here are their names and
associated with these bad ideas, they are still pretty nice people.
Mr. Wormser. Are you asking me the question? I was devoted
to Professor Beard and that was no characterization of his beliefs.
The Chairman. You don't agree with all of his beliefs ?
Mr. Wormser. I certainly do not.
Mr. Hats. I am glad to hear you say that. I would hate to think
that you would agree with all of anybody's beliefs. That is the
whole crux of this hearing : Are we trying to sit here and say that
we are going to decide what people believe in or not ?
The Chairman. Certainly not. I will come on the stand myself
on that point.
Mr. Hats. I may ask you to take the stand before we are through.
The Chairman. Since I referred to getting somewhere in a hurry,
I found the quotation.
Mr. Hats. What page are we going to now ?
The Chairman. Back on page 23. It is in reference to the report
of the behavioral sciences division of the Ford Foundation, published
last year. [Reading:]
In sum then, the foundation's hopes and expectations significantly to advance
the behavioral sciences — to get further faster, through the temporary concen-
tration at one place of the ablest scholars and the most promising young people
studying together in the most effective way that the state of the field now
permits.
Mr. Hats. Is that bad?
The Chairman. It is the concentration angle of it.
Mr. Hays. We are going to get Ohio State to be a subversive or-
ganization yet, because I had a coach out in track there and it was
his slogan to get the further faster. I used to run the half-mile, and
he didn't think I got far enough fast enough. You know something,
I think the Ford Foundation or whoever did this stole that phrase,
anyway, because I think that that thing goes back — to get there
"fustest with the mostest" — which I have always thought was a pretty
good sound, military concept.
The Chairman. Just to get there first helps a lot.
Mr. Hats. What I want to know now, is that there isn't anything
wrong with getting further faster, is there ?
The Chairman. It depends on which direction you are traveling.
Mr. Hats. Well, now, I think that points up a very interesting
thing and without bringing politics into this hearing, and it hasn't
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 519
come in yet, I know, if we get there faster in November than you do,
that is going to be bad from your point of view, isn J t it?
The Chairman. It wouldn't be very gratifying. In one of my
speeches, if I remember correctly, one time I used the phrase, "It is
not the length of the step that counts in life, it is the direction," and
so that is what I am interested in.
All we are trying to do, in making this study, is to find out the
direction and not the speed with which this movement, without char-
acterizing it, may be advancing.
Mr. Hays. Well the whole thing, doesn't it boil down, Mr. Chair-
man, to a sort of debate about what is for the public welfare? Some
of these people, Mr. Wormser has testified here informally giving his
opinion that Professors Hook and Beard are pretty nice people. You
don't think that they are subversive %
Mr. Wormser. I didn't say that I agreed with their opinions, Mr.
Hays.
Mr. Hays. I understand that, but do you agree they have a right
to have their opinions ?
Mr. Wormser. Of course.
Mr. Hays. Since we are pointing this up, 1 don't see any point in
trying to go page by page, and we will hop in wherever we feel like
it, let us look at page 12. We were talking about that a little while
ago, weren't we ? I believe we agreed that that sentence I read that—
the leaders in public affairs supported by the growing mass of the population,
are demanding the introduction into the economy of ever wider measures of
planning and control—
and you agreed that that was pretty sound.
Mr. McNiece. That the leaders are, or were ; yes.
Mr. Hays. Mr. McNiece, if these conclusions here which you have
cited, and which some of the group didn't sign, if they are the honest
conclusions of the people who did sign it, and you and I may not
agree with it, certainly I don't agree with everything in there, and as
a matter of fact in retrospect, looking back 20 years I might not agree
with a great deal of it — but is there anything wrong with their saying
it?
Mr. McNiece. Anything wrong with what?
Mr. Hays. With saying this is their conclusions in 1934 ?
Mr. McNiece. Again I question the judgment of men who are rep-
resented, and especially in the Carnegie appraisal afterward, as lead-
ers in their field. I certainly question them, even under the stress of
chaotic conditions, many of which thoughtful people, based on prece-
dent and analysis, would know were temporary. It would assume
we were entering into an age of transition.
Mr. Hays. In other words, you are questioning their judgment in
saying this.
Mr. McNiece. But not their right to say it.
Mr. Hays. That is right. Well, now, then, what would you have
teachers and people in the educational field do, just remain silent and
not express any opinions about anything ?
Mr. McNiece. That isn't inferred in any of the testimony I have
given.
Mr. Hays. Well, the inference is — in fact there is more than in infer-
ence — you are questioning their judgment in saying this, and now
520 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
-I am asking you first what is wrong with it. Then you said that you
thought it was bad judgment, but you didn't question their right. So
It seems to me that the question automatically follows "What would
you have them do ?" Anybody who makes a statement about anything
runs a risk 20 years later of having someone look at it in retrospect and
say, "Boy, what a lousy prophet he was."
You wouldn't have everybody keep still for fear they would look
bad 20 years hence ?
Mr. McNiECE. Your statements are very categorical statements. I
think we have to admit that in the verbatim transcript. Some other
groups refer to the period, and to these policies, as experimental, but
as we get further and further down the line to the working level, we
find that these so-called experimental ideas are being impressed on the
great mass of the population through both Government and education.
Mr. Hats. Could I finish ? I have about two more related questions
here, if you don't mind.
Now, Mr. McNiece, a lot of things that people said in 1934 have
been proved wrong by the years, and the years have a way of taking
toll of ideas as well as individuals. A lot of those things have been
proven wrong. You have gone back and based a good deal of this
document on things 20 years or more ago.
I am wondering if perhaps the New Deal and the Fair Deal, which
has been mentioned here, contrary to what it has been accused of,
hasn't killed a lot of this business that you are talking about, because
a lot of it is less evident now than it was in 1934 or else you would
have cited now instead of 1934, wouldn't you ?
Mr. McNiece. We have brought virtually all of these flows — if I
may use the word in that sense — up to date in what I expect to be
the final version of my participation in this. In other words the
economic report will indicate that the same trend is more or less con-
tinuing, the trend which starts back in 1934.
Mr. Hays. Let me say to you, and I will not ask you any more ques-
tions, Mr. Reece and I have agreed that it is probably time to adjourn
for today, that perhaps you ought to change the title of that next one
before you bring it in, because when you put the word "economics"
in it you begin to cast some doubts on it right off, don't you ?
It reminds me of the story a little bit, about when I went back to this
university that has been mentioned here a few times, this summer, or
early spring — it was along in April or March. I hadn't been out to
Columbus for a long time and I was asking about various professors
that I had remembered when I was there. Some of them were dead
and one I particularly asked about whom I won't mention, an eco-
nomics professor, and I said to this friend of mine "Whatever hap-
pened to him?" And he said "Well you won't believe it, but he is
still around and he is still teaching economics."
And I said "Well that is amazing," because it has been longer than
I like to think, and he seemed like an old man then, and he said "Well,
the most amazing thing is that he is giving the same 10 questions in
final examinations that he gave when you were here."
And I said "Well, the boys ought to be getting pretty good grades
in economics, better than I did, because they have had a good many
years to learn the answers to the questions."
And he said, "That is just the point; the old cuss has changed the
answer every year."
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 521
The Chairman. The committee will meet tomorrow through the
courtesy of Mr. Hays' committee, at the Banking and Currency Com-
mittee room, 1031, in the New House Office Building. That will be
at 10 o'clock.
(Whereupon, at 4 : 30 p. m. the hearing was recessed to reconvene
at 10 a. m. Friday, June 4, 1954.)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
PEIDAY, JtrNE 4, 1954
House of Representatives,
Special Committee To Investigate
Tax-Exempt Foundations,
Washington, D. G.
The special committee met at 10 a. m., pursuant to recess, in room
1301, New House Office Building, Hon. Carrol Reece (chairman of
the special committee) presiding.
Present : Representatives Reece, Goodwin, Hays, and Pf ost.
Also Present : Rene A. Wormser, general counsel; Arnold T. Koch,
associate counsel; Norman Dodd, research director; Kathryn Casey,
legal analyst; John Marshall, chief clerk.
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
Mr. Wolcott is out of town ; Mr. Goodwin had to stop by the Ways
and Means Committee for a minute, but will be here in a very short
time. I think we might as well proceed.
Would you be sworn, Dr. Rowe. Do you solemnly swear the testi-
mony you are about to give in this proceeding shall be the truth, the
whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God ?
Dr. Rowe. I do.
TESTIMONY OP DAVID NELSON HOWE, YALE UNIVERSITY,
NEW HAVEN, CONN.
Mr. Wormser. Would you state your name and address for the
record?
Dr. Rowe. David Nelson Rowe, business address, Yale University,
New Haven, Conn. ; home address, Hamden, Conn. Do you want the
street number, and so on ?
Mr. Wormser. I think that is enough.
I have some notes of biographical material on Professor Rowe.
Would you correct me if I make an error in reciting your accom-
plishments?
Dr. Rowe. Yes.
Mr. Wormser. Professor Rowe was born in China. He got an
A. B. degree at Princeton, an M. A. at the University of Southern
California, Ph. D. at Chicago. He was a fellow at the University of
Chicago from 1933 to 1935 ; a fellow of the Rockefeller Foundation
from 1937 to 1938. He held a postwar fellowship from the Rocke-
feller Foundation in 1948-49. He received an honorary M. A. degree
from Yale University in 1950.
He lectured at Princeton from 1938 to 1943. He was successively
assistant professor and associate professor and full professor at Yale
523
524 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
in Political Science. He has been research associate at the Institute of
International Studies from 1943 to 1951, a director of the Staff Officers
School for Asiatic Studies from 1945 to 1946; a director of under-
graduate and graduate studies, from 1946 to 1948 ; director of grad-
uate studies on Asia, 1949-51; associate in Government at Barnard
College, Columbia, 1945-46 ; lecturer at the National War College in
1947-48 and 1950 ; member of the Yale Executive Committee on Inter-
national Relations, 1950 to the present time. Doctor of studies on
human resources, 1951-53.
Dr. Rowe. Pardon me; that is Director.
Mr. Woemser. Director. He taught summer school at the Univer-
sity of Chicago in 1935; at the University of Michigan in 1947. He
was research analyst. Special Defense Group, Department of Justice,
in 1941 ; Special Assistant to the Director of the Bureau of Research
and Analysis, OSS, 1941-42.
Dr. Rowe. Pardon me; that is Bureau of Research and Analysis.
Mr. Woemser. Consultant at the Library of Congress, 1943. Mem-
ber of the war and peace study project, Council on Foreign Relations,
1943-45. A member of the International Secretariat, United Nations
Conference on International Organization at San Francisco in 1945.
Special consultant to the United States Information Service, United
States Consulate, Shanghai, 1948. Consultant to the United States
Air Force in 1950-52. Consultant to the Stanford Research Institute
in 1951-52.
I have no record of your waitings, Professor Rowe. Would you
state those in summary?
Dr. Rowe. I don't know that I can state them all, sir, but I will try
to remember the chief items. The book published under the auspices
of the Yale Institute of International Studies in 1944, entitled, "China
Among 'the Powers" ; a book of which I am coauthor, entitled "Ameri-
can Constitutional History," which was published, I believe, in 1933.
I may be a little off on that date. A book which I edited for the Yale
Press, entitled, "Journey to the Missouri," which was published in the
summer of 1950.
Those are the chief works. Then there are probably 20 or so articles
published in various journals which center about the two general fields.
One is Far Eastern Affairs, and the other is Public Opinion and
Propaganda Studies. Some of the studies on Far Eastern affairs are
in the field of public opinion and propaganda, so I bring these two
things together here.
Other studies in the Far Eastern field, and articles involve consti-
tutional matters, matters of foreign policy, international relations, and
so forth. I can provide the committee with a detailed list of all these
publications if you are interested.
Mr. Wormser. I don't think that is necessary. I think I can safely
state, Mr. Chairman, that Professor Rowe is one of the country's very
outstanding experts on the Far East.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Wormser, just one further question at this point
to further qualify Dr. Rowe.
Professor, you said you are in the Department of Political Science;
is that right?
Dr. Rowe. That is correct.
Mr. Hays. Could you give me some idea ; I assume that is divided
into different phases. Just what are some of the courses that you
conduct ?
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 525
Dr. Rowe. My work in political science by now is limited entirely
to a field we might call government and politics of the Far East. .A$,
of my teaching is comprehended within that field.
Mr. Hays. Thank you. That is what I wanted to know. ^
The Chairman. You have a very impressive record of accomplish-
ments for a young man, Dr. Rowe.
Dr. Rowe. Thank you for both saying that it is a real accomplish^
ment and also for using the word "young." That is a very happy word
these days. ,'>
The Chairman. Mr. Wormser, what is your desire as to the method
of procedure?
Dr. Rowe. Before we go, may I make one insertion in my bio-
graphy, which I think has relevance? It was mentioned that I had
a fellowship from the Rockefeller Foundation in 1937-38, and other
grants, at least one of which was mentioned, but I think it should be
mentioned that from 1935 to 1937 I was a fellow in humanities at
Harvard under a General Education Board fellowship. This was a,
2-year business, and I think it is rather important to get that in the
record also in the biography.
Mr. Wormser. Professor, in view of these associations with founda-
tions, I think you might make clear to the committee initially your
position about foundations. I understand from what you told me last
night that you consider that your own career was somewhat built on
foundation assistance. m
Dr. Rowe. There is no question about that at all. I would like 1 to
make a rather forthright statement here that for me to repudiate
foundations would be to repudiate myself. I am a product of founda-
tion help. If you don't mind my using a figure of speech, lama
graduate of the old foundation college. As a loyal alumnus I still
reserve the right to criticize, and I think that as a loyal alumnus criticn
isms would probably be welcomed in the spirit in which they are given
which I hope is a constructive one.
But my entire career in the Far Eastern field has been made possible
by foundation assistance. This has to do with the efforts of founda-
tions through various other organizations, but in my case always
direct foundation help to fill up some of the big obvious loopholes in
the American educational system. ■
One of these obviously 20 years ago was in the Far Eastern field.
When I say this great deficit in American education existed 20 yeats
ago, all you have to remember is that today the number of university
centers in this country at which you can find full-scale programs of
Far Eastern studies does not number over about 10 or a dozen. So
we still have a long way to go.
This thing was kicked off — the initial impetus was provided by
people in foundations and the Council of Learned Societies, and other
organizations who in assessing American education decided that this
was one of the great areas which ought to be provided for. r.
I can go on and talk about this experience at considerable length.
I want to add only one more thing here, subject, of course, to any
questions you have. At the outset this job was conceived by founda-
tions in terms of a personnel training program. It always seemed
to me that the foundations were on absolutely sound ground in think-
ing of the problem that way. I have somewhat different feelings about
some of the activities of foundations today in which I feel they have
49720— 54— pt. 1 34
526 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
turned away from the fundamentals — some of them, at least — of per-
sonnel training to programs of sponsoring research.
Here is where the foundations, I think, have gotten into some of
their most serious difficulties, and made what I at least consider to
be some of their more serious errors.
Some of the foundations have started turning back to the old ap-
proach. The Ford people, for example, have initiated 2 or 3 years
ago a very large program of personnel training for the purpose of
feeding these people into the research and teaching and scholarly work
that must be done in this field if we are ever to really understand the
Far East and preserve our national interest in respect to it. But other
foundations have decided to place the major emphasis upon sponsor-
ship and promotion of research. Here I think is where some of the
great problems arise.
I just wanted to make that clear at the outset.
Mr. Hats. Right there, Professor, could we just elaborate on that
a little bit? You say that you think they made a mistake in concen-
tratingon research.
Dr. Rowe. Could I correct that ?
Mr. Hats. Yes.
Dr. Rowe. I don't say they made a mistake in concentrating in re-:
search, so much as I say that it is in respect to these research programs
sponsored by and financed by the foundations that some of the biggest
mistakes have been made.
Mr. Hats. Could you be specific and mention a couple ?
Dr. Rowe. I would say that the big error of the foundations along
this line has been to try to project into the universities what I term
the so-called cooperative, or group method of research. This gets us
onto rather technical grounds. Here I want to put in the parentheti-
cal statement that, and that applies to all of my testimony, namely,
that I am here giving expression to my own individual opinions. I
don't speak for any organization. I certainly don't speak for my uni-
versity, let alone for all of my colleagues in the university, among
whom I am sure will be found many people who will disagree with
much that I say. *
Mr. Hats. That is an interesting statement. I don't want to inter-
rupt your thought, but I would like to develop these things as we go
and since you don't have a script, I believe you will agree that is
about the only way we can do it. I am not interrupting you in any
antagonistic fashion.
Dr. Rowe. Any way you want to conduct it.
Mr. Hats. In other words, at Yale University, where you are now
situated, there is a great divergence of opinion on these fundamental
matters.
Dr. Rowe. I am sure there must be.
Mr. Hats. It has not happened that the foundations or anybody else
have been able to channel the thinking down one narrow channel.
T>r. Rowe. This has not happened, but that does not mean that
efforts are not constantly being made. That is the point I wish to
make.
Mr. Hats. I had an idea that you might make a point from having
read some of your previous testimony. What I would like to get at
is this. You say that an attempt has been made. Can you give us
any specific examples ?
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 527
Dr. Rowe. Yes ; I definitely can. The effort to influence the content
of area programs at Yale has been made by at least one foundation
that I know of, namely, the Carnegie Corporation. I can't give you the
precise date of this, but I would Judge it was in about 1947. I think
that isn't too much to say that this incident is rather typical of some
types of foundation activity that are going on today. I don't pretend
to know how constant they are or how general they are around the
country.
This involved an effort on the part of the Carnegie Corporation
through one of its representatives by the name of John Gardner, I be-
lieve, to influence the administration of Yale to eliminate the work we
were doing in the far-eastern field and to concentrate our work on the
southeast Asian field. This was a rather surprising suggestion. Yale
has a long tradition of interest in the Far East. You may have heard
of the organization known as Yale in China.
At the time this suggestion was made, we were spending a con-
siderable sum of money each year on faculty salaries for teaching and
research in the far-eastern field.
Mr. Hays. What year was this, sir?
Dr. Rowe. I think it was about 1947. I can't give you the precise
date.
Mr. Hays. Just so we get some idea.
Dr. Rqwe. Yes. This had to do with the desire on the part of Yale
to develop and expand its work in the southeast Asian field, where
again we had important work for a number of years. We have had
some eminent people in the southeast Asian field for years in the past.
In this connection, the visit of Mr. Gardner to the university was
undertaken, I believe* at that time the dean of Yale College Was in
charge of the whole foreign area program, and I was working directly
under him as director of graduate and undergraduate studies as the
biography indicated. We were rather shocked at Mr. Gardner's
suggestion that we drop all our work on the Far East and concentrate
on southeast Asia.
The dean questioned Mr. Gardner as to why this suggestion was
being made. In the general conversation that followed— I got this
second hand from the dean, because. I was not present then— the phi-
losophy of the foundations alpmg this line was brought out. They
look upon their funds or tend to look upon their funds as being
expendable with the greatest possible economy. That is natural.
They look upon the resources in these fields where the people are few
and far between as scarce, which is correct, and they are interested
in integrating and coordinating the study of these subjects in this
country. Therefore, the suggestion that we cut out far-eastern studies
seemed to be based on a notion on their part that no one university
should attempt to cover too many different fields at one time.
The practical obstacles in the way of following the suggestion made
by Mr. Gardner at that time were pretty clear. There were quite a
few of the members of the staff on the far-eastern studies at that time
who were already on permanent faculty tenure at Yale and could
hardly have been moved around at the volition of the university, even
if it had wanted to do it. The investment in library resources and
other fixed items o,f that kind was very large. The suggestion that
we just liquidate all this in order to concentrate on southeast Asian
studies, even though it was accompanied by a suggestion that if this
528 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
kind of a policy was adopted, the Carnegie Corp. would be willing to
subsidize pretty heavily the development of southeast Asian studies,
was met by aflat refusal on the part of the university administration.
Subsequently the dean asked me to write the initial memorandum
for submission to the Carnegie Corp. on the basis of which, without
acceding to their suggestion that we eliminate far eastern studies
from our curriculum, that we wanted to expand our southeast Asian
studies with their funds.
They subsequently did give us a grant for this purpose, and they
have given a second grant. I don't know precisely what the amounts,
were in either case.
The only reason for my giving you this incident in somewhat detail
is to indicate what I consider to be a real tendency in foundations
today — in some foundations, not all — to adopt a function of trying
to rationalize higher education and research in this country along the
lines of the greatest so-called efficiency. I used the word "so-called"
there designedly, because in my view, the notion that educational and
research and scholarly efficiency can be produced this way in a demo-
cratic society is unacceptable. It seems to me that in a democratic
society we have to strive for the greatest possible varigation and
differentiation as between universities along these lines, and the sug-
gestion that any one university should more or less monopolize one
field or any few universities monopolize one field, and give the other
fields to others to do likewise with, it is personally repugnant to me.
It does not jibe with my notion of academic freedom in the kind of
democratic society that I believe in.
Mr. Hays. Professor, right there, research itself is oftentimes rather
wasteful, isn't it? Just by the very components of research. You
go up a lot of blind alleys at times before you come out with an ulti-
mate project.
Dr. Rowe. You have to define there what you mean by wasteful.
Mr. Hays. You don't always come out w T ith a concrete result every
time you make an attempt. You have to make some false starts, and
you back up and go down another street, so to speak.
Dr. Rowe. This is in the nature of an experimental method and
approach. You know one thing about research is that it is not always
aimed at so-called concrete results. I don't feel it should.
Mr. Hays. But it is aimed at producing something, a definition or
a fact.
Dr. Rowe. That is one of the most difficult things to get agreement
on, as to what the objectives of research should be. The easiest, quick-
est way to get massive results is to engage in fact-finding for fact-
finding's sake, or the mass accumulation of facts for the sake of
accumulating facts. This produces stuff that is big and heavy in
your hand, but I don't think it is any more valuable, to put it mildly,
than the kind of research that allows a scholar the time for reflection
and contemplation, out of w T hich come many of the ideas and thoughts
which alone can make valid framework for analyzing the great masses
of data that may be accumulated, many times by people who don't
have much capacity for effective thinking or for theory or don't have
much inclination for that kind of thing.
Mr. Hays. I am inclined to agree with you. We are not in disagree-
ment there. I will put it this way. The kind of research you approve
Tax-exempt foundations 529
of is also the kind of research that perhaps would bring out a good
many varied shades of opinion ; would it not?
Dr. Rowe. In my field, which is the field of political science — and
I don't like the term "political science," because there is not much
science in it
Mr. Hats. And very little relation to politics ; wouldn't you agree ?
Dr. Rowe. No, I wouldn't agree with that for a moment. I think
it has a very high degree of relation to politics. Certainly the field
T have something to do with has.
Mr. Hays. I will qualify that by saying practical politics.
Dr. Rowe. I am not a judge of practical politics. All I know is
that in the field I specialize in, practically everything I deal with is
so highly controversial, of course, I have to face all the time the fact
that politics largely deals with opinions, and the so-called objective
facts to which you can get agreement are relatively insignificant both
in number and in meaning.
Mr. Hats. For instance, and I think this would have some direct
relationship on what we are trying to develop here, there is a con-
siderable difference of opinion right now apparently about what to
■do in Indochina. I believe you made recommendations on that pre-
viously ; have you not ?
Dr. Rowe. Two years ago, of course, as my testimony before the
McCarran committee investigating the Institute of Pacific Rela-
tions shows, I anticipated the emergency in Indochina, and argued
that any realistic and heavy intervention there by the Chinese Com-
munists should be met first with an advance warning that if it took
place we would meet such intervention with everything necessary, in-
cluding our own forces, and second, that we should actively prepare
for such intervention in advance to back up our threat or position on
possible Chinese intervention.
Mr. Hays. You did predict, I believe, that if a cease-fire were ob-
tained in Korea, that the conflict would immediately widen in Indo-
china or spread there.
Dr. Rowe. That is correct. That was 2 years ago March.
The Chairman. Would you permit an interruption? At the time
the truce was signed in Korea, for my own satisfaction — not that
I anticipate it would have a very wide effect — I put a statement in the
record that would be the effect of it. What I can't understand is why
any advised authority was not so impressed at the time.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Chairman, let me say that is one thing you and I
must agree pretty thoroughly on because I am on record with al-
most identically the same statement. So Professor, you have here a
very rare specimen in political science of you, the chairman and I
agreeing.
Dr. Rowe. I don't know, Mr. Hays, whether I would agree that
agreement is quite rare, but let us not argue that point.
Mr. Hays. It has been in this committee, I will put it that way.
Dr. Rowe. You have the advantage over me. I have not been
here before.
Mr. Koch. May this be a new trend ?
Mr. Wormsee. May I ask you, Professor, whether that incident
at Yale involved the Carnegie Corporation or the Carnegie Endow-
ment?
Dr. Rowe. I think it was the corporation. I believe that is correct.
530 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Wormser. May I go on?
Mr. Hats. Yes.
Mr. Wobmser. As long as you are on that subject, Professor, I
wonder if you would be willing to discuss the grant you mentioned
to me last night. I think it was a quarter of a million dollars for a
group study which seemed to be somewhat fallible.
Dr. Rowe. You are probably referring to the Rockefeller Founda-
tion support of a group study at the University of Washington, at
Seattle. I don't believe they ever made a single grant of $250,000,
but I think the sum of their grants probably came to that much. This
was a grant for the purpose of group research on the Taiping Rebel-
lion, which was a rebellion which took place in China during the
middle of the 19th century, about the same time as the Civil War was
raging in this country. The importance of this rebellion can be seen
from the fact that historians estimate that 20 million persons lost
their lives either in the fighting as a result of disease, epidemics,
destruction, and so forth, that raged up and down China from south
to north during that period of 12 to 14 years, I think. The Taiping
Rebellion has long interested historians, and it is worthy of a great
deal of study. Here we get into a rather interesting conflict, it seems
to me, between the attitudes of foundations on the scarcity of per-
sonnel and human resources in the far eastern field on the one hand,
and their willingness to financially support a tremendously narrow
focus of interest in research on the other hand.
There are a large number of highly controversial questions of
method involved here. The question of how to conduct research.
There is valid room for experimentation on these matters. But the
least that can be said about the University of Washington project
is that it was a rather drastic, in my view, experiment in the use of
the so-called collective-research project, in which the individuals
counted for a good deal less than the team. The team was put
together and people blocked out areas of subject-matter, as I have
understood it, and areas of data and evidence and worked on these,
and their results were pooled in the shape of card files of detailed
information on this episode in Chinese history, the idea being that
out of this kind of a team pick and shovel approach, you get a lot
of facts together, and out of these facts will be brought forth a series
of monographic studies.
There is room for this kind of thing, but I always thought they
went a little bit far with it, because I understood — and I beg to be
corrected if I am wrong on this, I have never had any official con-
nection with this project — I understood that they even integrated
into their Taiping Rebellion studies the work of their doctoral candi-
dates, so that people in Chinese history, for example, were brought
in there and given support to write theses on some aspect of the
Taiping Rebellion.
I thought that in view of the scarcity of human resources and the
need for general training on Far Eastern matters, that this was focus-
ing it down pretty firm. It is a wonderful project from the point
of view of research. If you believe in gadgetry, this had all the
gadgets you will ever want to find. If you believe that the best way
to promote research is to pick out highly trained and able people and
set them free in a general field, like Chinese studies, to follow their
own interests wherever they may lead them, then you see this is the
TAX-EXEMPT . FOUNDATIONS 531
very opposite of that kind of thing. It does achieve a certain kind
of mechanical efficiency, it seems to me, at the expense of inhibiting
the kind of thing that Mr. Hays was talking about, namely, the free-
dom of the individual to go down any number of blind alleys he wants
to go down in the free pursuit of his curiosity, in the interests of
honestly trying to come up with important things.
Mr. Hays. Professor, I believe you used the word "experiment"
in connection with this study. This is rather a radical departure from
the traditional method of research. Did you mean to say that this
was an experiment with this new type to see how it worked out?
Dr. Rowe. I don't know how they conceived of it from that point of
view.
Mr. Hats. Did they comment on it themselves, as to what they
thought its value had been ? Did anyone at the University of Wash-
ington do that ?
Dr. Rowe. They are not through with it.
Mr. Hays. They are still working on it?
Dr. Rowe. Yes. It is a monumental business.
Mr. Wormser. May I interject this question, Mr. Hays, which I
think might illuminate the whole area. There has been testimony,
Professor, to the effect that the foundations have overemphasized
empiricism and that their research grants have been overwhelminly
directed toward empirical research. Is this perhaps an example of
that approach ?
Dr. Rowe. It certainly is an example of really massive attacks on
evidence, by teams of people that emphasize the gathering of tre-
mendous quantities of facts. Whether they propose after this to
advance into the field of generalization and basic analysis on the basis
of all this factual material is something that I have no knowledge of,
and I think you would have to know the answer to that before you
could comment justifiably on just what kind of research this is in the
framework of your question.
Mr. Wormser. You think there has been such an overemphasis on
empiricism?
Dr. Rowe. Are you talking generally ?
Mr. Wormser. Yes.
Dr. Rowe. It would be very difficult for me to answer that question
vis-a-vis all research sponsored by or supported by all foundations be-
cause I just don't have the knowledge necessary to make that kind of a
comment. Taking it outside of the field of foundation support, I do
think in my own field for example, the general field of political
science, there has been an overemphasis upon empirical research at the
expense of theoretically oriented thinking and analysis. There is a
tremendous emphasis upon the census type of thing in political science.
Statistics are coming into greater and greater importance. Whereas,
this is of course always a valid tool for research workers, the emphasis
here tends to detract from the kind of fundamental thinking about
great issues and about values which characterize the work of earlier
students of politics in the United States, such as for instance, Presi-
dent Wilson, and people of that kind. Those studies, of course, were
rooted in history and rooted in law. To the extent that political
scientists have tried to divorce themselves from historical and legal
study, and from historical and legal background in their study, they
have tended to become very pointed fact-gatherers, census-takers and
532 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
the business of arguing about great issues has been played down to this
extent.
Of course, it is much easier and much simpler for political scientists
to justify their existence on the basis of a mass production of factual
materials than it is for them to justify their existence as great thlBkers,
because fact-gatherers are a dime a dozen and people who can think
are hard to find. This is a comment on the fallibility of human
nature. After all, political scientists are human beings.
Mr. Hats. Professor, is what you are saying, in other words, that
thinkers could not get the products of their thinking across because
the people would not be able to comprehend and they can compre-
hend statistics?
Dr. Rowe. No ; I don't mean to imply that. I mean to say that
ideas and concepts and values are far more important, it seems to me,
than much of the indisputable, completely noncontroversial factual
material that political scientists seem to occupy themselves with so
much in the present day.
Mr. Hats. That leads me to a very interesting question, and that is
this : In view of what you say — and I am inclined ,to agree with you
that ideas have a great deal of value — what would be your comment
on what seems to be a tendency in this country to hold a person re-
sponsible if they have an idea that does not work out? Something
like in Russia, if you have a new idea there, and you try it out and it
doesn't work perfectly, you are liquidated. There seems to be a ten-
dency here that you better not have any new ideas. If you do, they
better work perfectly or you are in trouble. Do you see that at all ?
Dr. Rowe. I don't feel the pressure along that line as strongly as
some of my colleagues seem to feel it, in spite of the fact that I have
been in the minority in many of my own opinions. I feel this can be
discussed in several different areas.
In the field of government, for example, I can express an opinion
as an outsider who has never held public office. It has always seemed
to me that in a democracy, anybody who is bold enough to take public
office has got to have a thick skin. That is one of the attributes of
people who are going to be a success in government in a democracy.
Mr. Hays. I think we can agree on that without any question.
Dr. Rowe. That refers to everybody. I am not only talking about
legislative people. I am talking about policy making people and
people in the State Department.
Mr. Haxs. Cabinet officers.
Dr. Rowe. When they are complained about bitterly for having led
us into error, they seem to feel that these complaints are unjustifiable.
Maybe they are incorrect, but the are justifiable. The public has a
right to kick anytime it feels like it.
In the academic and intellectual field, there is another possible area
here. In the academic field, of course, we have what is known as
academic tenure or faculty tenure. After they get permanent tenure
in a university, providing they don't stray off the beaten path too far
from an ethical point of view, people can say almost anything they
want. I have never felt that any of my colleagues should be afraid to
express their opinions on any subject, as long as they stay within the
bounds of good taste and ordinary common decency. Nobody in the
world is going to be able to do anything to them. This is fact and
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 533
not fiction. It is not fancy. Their degree of security is put there
to be exploited in this way.
Now, of course, some of the people that complain most bitterly about
the invasion of academic privilege along ,that line are those who in-
dulge themselves in invading it. What, for instance, is a professor to
think when people with money come along and tell his university that
what he is doing there is useless and ought to be liquidated, because it
is being done much better some place else ?
We hear a lot of the use of the word 'conformity" nowadays, that
congressional investigations are trying to induce conformity. The
inducement of conformity by the use of power is as old as the human
race, and I doubt if it is going to be ended in a short time. But one of
the purposes of having academic institutions which are on a private
basis is to maximize the security of individuals who will refuse to
knuckle under to the pressures of money or opinion or anything of that
kind. This problem is always going to be with us, because anybody
that has money wants to use it, and he wants to use it to advance what
he considers to be his interests. In doing so, he is bound to come up
against contrary opinions of people who don't have that much money
and that much power and whose only security lies in our system, where-
by academic personnel are given security in tenure, no matter what
their opinions are within the framework of public acceptability and
security, to say what they w^ant and do what they please, without being
integrated by anybody.
Mr. Wokmsek. Professor, this committee in some of the newspapers
has been criticized in just that area. It has been said that it tended
to promote conformity and exercise thought control or censorships.
That of course is far from its intention.
I wonder if I gather from your remarks correctly you think that
the foundations to some extent have tended to do just that ?
Dr. Kowe. I would say that there are examples of foundations try-
ing to engage in controlling the course of academic research and teach-
ing by the use of their funds. As to whether this is a general tendency
in all foundations, I would be very much surprised if that were so.
But if this committee can illuminate any and all cases in which the
power of foundations, which is immense, has been used in such a way
as to impinge upon the complete freedom of the intellectual community
to do what it wants in its own area, I should think it would be render-
ing a tremendous public service.
I am not prejudicing the result. I don't know whether you are
going to prove any of this or not. But the investigation of this sub-
ject is to me not only highly justifiable, but it is highly desirable in an
age when we are confronted all around in the environment in which we
live with illustrations of how great power can be concentrated and
used to prevent the normal amount of differentiation and variation
from individual to individual, university to university and college to
college. The totalitarian societies, of course, have none of this freedom
in the intellectual field.
Mr. Hays. Eight there, Professor, I agree with you that at any time
this committee can point up any abuse, it should do so. But don't you
think that the committee should also in its evaluation and summing up
of this say — we had the figure yesterday of 26 instances, one of the
staff members said, of the foundations having gone astray. There was
534 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
some disagreement about the number of grants, but it was somewhere
between thirty and forty thousand. Don't you think the committee
ought to point out that in using the figure 40,000, which I think is
probably correct, that in 39,974 cases, there has been no fault found?
Dr. Rowb. It seems to me that comes out of the statistics. It
seems to me also, however, that if you are really interested in this
subject of possible misuse of foundation funds, you have to concentrate
very heavily on studying the total net effect of the 40 cases. You can't
just say that the comparison is 40 out of 40,000. This is a use of
statistics that I would think would be rather unsound. What you
have to do is to try to study the total impact of the cases where they
did go wrong, with every indication, it seems to me, that you are not
interested in being destructive. You are interested in a constructive,
helpful analysis. If it takes an investigation of this kind just to
publicize the times and places and cases when foundations have gone
astray — and it would not have been done otherwise — then I think
everything you do, even if you find only 40 cases, is justified.
Mr. Hays. You said earlier in your testimony that you are more or
less a product of foundations yourself.
Dr. Rowe. That is right.
Mr. Hays. Do you suppose it would be possible to find somebody
who thinks that in producing the kind of thing that you represent that
the foundations have made a mistake ?
Dr. Rowe. I am positive you can find people like that.
Mr. Hays. You see, the ground we are on here in setting ourselves up
to decide what mistakes the foundations have made and what they are.
Dr. Rowe. I see you have a difficult task. I see that the so-called
purely statistical approach to this task is not going to get you any
place.
Mr. Hays. And being fallible, our conclusions, even if unanimous,
might be subject to some revision.
Dr. Rowe. I am sure the Supreme Court is even criticized for its
unanimous decisions as we all know. But any time such criticism
ends in this country, then I take it there won't have been any congres-
sional committees for some time in the past.
Mr. Hays. Let me say to you I am not advocating the ceasing of
criticism or differences of opinion. As a matter of fact, that is what I
like more than anything. I have enjoyed being on this committee
because of the differences of opinion. But I don't want this commit-
tee or any committee of Congress to set itself up to say that there shall
be no differences of opinion.
Dr. Rowe. My knowledge of congressional committees, of course, is
very limited, but I have not had brought to my attention yet — you may
be able to tell me some — cases where committees of Congress have
set themselves up as the final law of the land. I do find a great deal
of criticism of congressional investigations among my colleagues on
the ground that these investigations are undesirable. Some of them
say they are going so far as to infringe completely upon the power of
the executive. There are many objections to them. But it seems to
me that the control in this case is very obvious and very clear. If
these committees are committees of Congress, they are in the final
analysis subject to political control. They are subject to the control
of the public. If the public makes up its mind that Congress is making
mistakes, it may take a good deal of time for this to develop and have
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 535
its effect, but I have no doubt about what the ultimate outcome
would be.
The Chairman. Any reference to this statistical data raises some
question in my mind whether we may not be falling into the error
of empirical research. As I understand it, 39 cases to which he
referred
Mr. Hats. Twenty-six.
The Chairman. The cases to which he referred were just a few of
the many grantees about whom some question has arisen as a result
of studies that were made. These were the Communists who had
received grants. That did not indicate at all, that over the course
of history, there might not have been others among the 40,000 that
were questionable. The committee did not try to make that finding
and avoided the error of which my colleague speaks. Neither did it
take into consideration questionable grants that had been made to
organizations where the overall effect might have been subject to
question. I understand that was included by Mr. McNiece, the staff
member that presented it yesterday, simply to make a side reference
to the fact that the committee found grants had been made to 40
Communists, and even one of them might have caused — I am not
saying that it did — but the effect of the grant in one case might have
been very far-reaching.
I was impressed by one thing that you said earlier, if you will just
permit this observation, that one of the purposes we hope will flow
from the work of this committee when the criticisms are finally eval-
uated, is to call these things to the attention of the foundations them-
selves in the hope that the foundations will correct any errors that
might have been made.
Dr. Rowe. Yes. Could I comment on that briefly, and make a few
other comments that are connected with this ? I am fully in agree-
ment with the notion that — picking a figure out of the air — 2 or 3
grants that are made to wrong people can have a tremendous effect
in undoing much of the good that is made by the rest of the 40,000.
Again it is not a matter of every grant being equal in significance.
You can't evaluate them in terms of how many dollars were involved.
A small grant made to a person in a critical position where he is
going to make a wrong move, and implement the matter, can negate
hundreds and thousands of grants made to people who are out on the
fringes, the outskirts of positions of power and influence where the
impact of everything they do that may be good will not be directly
felt in policy areas.
Another interesting feature of that is that grants to organizations,
it seems to me, have to be very carefully taken into account when
you are talking about the total number of grants. I don't quite under-
stand here whether the grants to organizations were included in this
total figure.
The Chairman. They were not. These are grants to individuals.
Dr. Rowe. Of the grants to organizations I can only give you the
best example that I know of. Those that involved, for instance, the
Institute of Pacific Relations. I don't know what the sum total of the
money was. It came from Rockefeller and Carnegie and from private
contributions.
Mr. Wormser. I believe it was something over $3 million.
536 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Dr. Rowe. $3 million. The grants to the Institute of Pacific Rela-
tions, it seems to me, helped to implement a lot of people who did
not, in my opinion, have the best interests of the United States at
heart.
Here I want to talk about another item. It seems to me we make a
mistake in talking about identifying Communists as grantees on the
one hand, non- Communists as grantees on the other hand. In much
of the activity that has to do with identification of Communist activ-
ity in the United States, it has seemed to me that we are going off on
the wrong track when we limit ourselves to efforts to identify overt
Communists, or let us say organizational Communists, people who
carry a card or who can be positively identified as members of an
organization subject to organized discipline. For every one of those
that you fail to identify, and it seems to me we even fail to identify
most of those, there are a thousand people who could not possibly be
identified as such, because they have never had any kind of organiza-
tional affiliation, but among those people are many people who ad-
vance the interests of world communism, in spite of the fact that they
are not subject to discipline and do not belong to any organization.
So here again I think your categories, statistically, have to be refined
somewhat. Here, of course, you get into this area of opinion. What
constitutes an individual who is attempting to advance the interests
of world communism?
This is a very controversial subject, but if we are ever to deal with
the problem of Communist influence in this country, or ever to deal
with the problem of preserving our security against the world Com-
munist conspiracy, this is the critical area. The people who can be
trailed and tagged by the FBI are a very, very small minority. They
occupy a very powerful position and a potentially important one, but
the people who do the important work are unidentifiable, and if I
were planning to infiltrate the United States, I would see to it that
they were unidentifiable.
Here it seems to me you have to set up an entirely different category
than the two categories of Communists on the one side, and other
people on the other side.
Mr. Hays. Right there, I will give you a specific example of some-
thing that occurred yesterday. On my desk came a newsletter. It
made the flat statement that if the President were to ask Congress for
permission to use troops if he found it necessary in Indochina, h&
would not get 25 votes. Would you say those people were advancing
the cause of world communism ?
Dr. Rowe. The people that refuse to send troops to Indochina ?
Mr. Hats. Either they or the people who put out the letter.
Dr. Rowe. In my opinion I would say that the combating of world
communism today demands western intervention in much stronger
force, and if this means giving United States troops, so be it.
The Chairman. If I may be permitted to make one observation, I
didn't see the newsletter, because it didn't come to my desk, though I
think I know the one to which Mr. Hays might be referring. I think
it represents the expression of somebody that does not know anything
about what the situation is up here on the Hill.
Mr. Hats. Would you want to make a prediction, Mr. Chairman,
that the President could get the permission of Congress to send troops
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 537
If he asked for it ? We might make a prediction here, and the future
events might prove one of us to be right or wrong.
The Chairman. I am not going to make a prediction.
Mr. Hats. I didn't think you would.
The Chairman. I think, as the situation develops, the people and
the Members of the Congress on both sides of the aisle are going
to have great confidence in any recommendation the President makes
when all the facts are assembled, and the conditions are known,
ior the security of the United States. We can't predict what might
happen until the President gets in a position of making a statement.
Mr. Hays. That is a very n@ble statement, but when you analyze it,
it says nothing.
The Chairman. There can't be anything said until the President
decides.
Mr. Hays. The doctor said something very definite. As far as he
lias a right to say it, and he may be right
The Chairman. I think there cannot be anything very definite to
say on that until the President is ready to make a recommendation and
give his reason for such a recommendation. When that is done, my
own feeling is that his recommendation will carry great weight on
both sides of the aisle.
Mr. Hays. I understood that he had done a little checking here and
he found he was not in a very good position up here. I heard that in
the cloakroom.
Going back to this IPB, professor, would you tell us when you were
in that organization and when you left it?
Dr. Rowe. I left it in early 1950. I believe I joined it about 1939
or 1940. Let me see. I think the precise year I joined it is to be found
in my testimony before the McCarran committee.
Mr. Hays. Approximately.
Dr. Rowe. It is around 1939.
Mr. Hays. You left in 1950?
Dr. Rowe. Yes, that is right.
Mr. Hays. Do you have any information as to whether or not any
foundation contributed anything to that organization after 1950 ?
Dr. Rowe. I understood that the Rockefeller Foundation was still
contributing money to the IPR after 1950. I believe that«all founda-
tions have cut their help off from the IPR as of last fall, which is 1953.
Mr. Hays. I have some figures here, and they were furnished to me.
I can't vouch for their authenticity. Perhaps you can help. I have
here that from 1926 to 1943, this organization was given a total of
$1,429,878; 1944-45, $36,000; 1946, $258,000, and the years 1947 to and
including 1950, $160,481; and that final grant was made in an effort
to salvage the IPR under the leadership of Dr. Lyman Wilbur, former
president of Stanford University ; and applications for further grants
in 1950 and subsequently have been refused.
Dr. Rowe. Is this speaking for all foundations ?
Mr. Hays. This is the Rockefeller Foundation.
Dr. Rowe. Of course, you have to take Carnegie into account, as
they contributed to it. I can't confirm those figures one way or
another.
The Chairman. At any rate, the great damage that the IPR had
done, if it did do damage, was accomplished prior to 1950, would you
not sav ?
538 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Dr. Rowe. I would say that certainly a great deal of damage was
accomplished prior to the beginning of the Korean war in the summer
of 1950.
The Chairman. Insofar as the studies and the activities of those
associated with the IPR were responsible or had influence in connec-
tion with the policies that resulted in strengthening the position of
the Communists in China immediately following the World War, they
accomplished possibly the greatest damage that was experienced in
any period.
Dr. Rowe. I would say the most important efforts along this line
were during the Pacific war, and during the period after the Pacific
war from 1946 — let me see — 1945, when it ended, through 1948, because
by that time the policy had become stabilized, it seems to me, as a
policy of no more help to prevent a Communist-Chinese takeover in
China. It seemed to me that the general weight of the Institute of
Pacific Relations was thrown on that side of the scale, both during
and immediately after the Pacific war.
Mr. Hats. Doctor, didn't you hold some sort of rather executive
position in that ?
Dr. Rowe. I never held an executive position in the IPR.
Mr. Hays. You were on the board of trustees?
Dr. Rowe. I was on the board of trustees from 1947 to 1950, when
I resigned.
Mr. Hays. Is there any significance — I am not going to debate with
you the fact that I think the IPR, too, did damage — but is there any
significance to the fact that when you retired, or approximately the
time you left it, that the Rockefeller money was cut off?
Dr. Rowe. I don't know what the significance is. Maybe they had
come to the same conclusion I had by that time. It is possible, but
I can't prove it one way or another.
Mr. Hays. Did you communicate your beliefs about it any time
prior to the time you left it to any of these people who were financ-
ing it?
Dr. Rowe. I can't give you the precise date, but I did have one
conversation with a foundation executive — this was Mr. Roger Evans,
who was then and still is in the Social Science Division of the Rocke-
feller Foundation which were giving money to the IPR — in which
I told him of my fears and suspicions regarding the IPR, and regard-
ing the uses to which the money was being put. I can't date that
conversation. I don't know whether it was before I got out or after
I got out. But I did very definitely indicate to him my view of the
nature of the organization, and the extent to which I thought im-
portant posts in the organization's executive personnel had been taken
over by people who were highly sympathetic to the Communist point
of view. Whether this influenced him in any direct way or the foun-
dation in any direct way, I could not possibly prove one way or
another. But I did make my views known.
I was not the only one. Professor George Taylor of the University
of Washington, and Dr. Karl Wittfogel, who was both at Washing-
ton and Columbia then, spoke out in this way. This was during the
period which I believe you characterized as a period of trying to
salvage or save the IPR under the leadership of new people. But you
see, in this connection, the board of trustees of the IPR had very little
control over the day-to-day operation. I don't know whether this
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 539
is characteristic of all boards or all organizations, but I felt, and I
testified previously to this effect, that the IPR was essentially con-
trolled by a very small group of people who were sometimes an official
executive committee, or otherwise an informal one, who ran things
pretty much as they would and who commented to the foundation's
own personnel and problems of the kind I was talking to Evans about
in exactly the opposite way.
Now, at this point I want to emphasize that nobody ever brought out
on this matter the facts and conclusions that were brought out by
the McCarran committee, and I don't think they ever would have
been brought out without the McCarran committee's investigation.
If I ever saw a case where a committee of Congress was justified
and necessary and desirable, and where its results were good, I think
this is one case.
Mr. Hays. Now, Professor, I will agree with that generally speak-
ing that the thing needed investigation, but all of us, I think, will
admit that hindsight is better than foresight. I am interested in this.
When you resigned from the IPR in 1950, if I had been there and
apparently knew as much about it as you indicate you know now, I
would have resigned with a good deal of publicity and a blast at them,
and said, "Look, I think this thing stinks, and I am getting out." How
did you do it?
Dr. Rowe. I got out with a letter which was probably altogether too
polite. I am ready to admit this.
Mr. Hats. Understand, I am not trying to pillory you.
Dr. Rowe. Your question, you see, is a very significant and very im-
portant one.
Mr. Hats. Yes.
Dr. Rowe, It has to do with the business of how you can produce
a maximum effect along lines of issues, and still produce at the same
time a viable degree of personal security. This is definitely involved,
I am not talking about physical security. I am talking about the posi-
tion in the profession of anybody who would come out at that time,
unsupported by anybody else practically, and openly accuse these
people of the things which they have been accused of since, by me as
well as others, and under the protection of a congressional committee.
I would not have dared to do it otherwise.
_ In commenting that way, I think I am giving-an accurate indica-
tion of the extent of the power and- influence of the organization with-
out which it could not have done as much damage as it did.
Mr. Hays. I won't criticize you for that, Professor, but you have
inadvertently made a very telling point that I was trying to make
yesterday when I was questioning someone, if there is such a fear
among the teachers and the professors, the executives of our school
system, about speaking out. You have just now testified definitely
there was, because your future security was at stake, isn't that right?
Dr. Rowe. Yes, that is right. I am pointing out another thing
which I think needs to be emphasized, namely, that congressional in-
vestigations do not always infringe upon personal security. In many
cases they add to it and protect it. That is why I commented that the
McCarran committee investigation gave an opportunity for all of this
to be brought out by people who could do it under conditions which
they could not have enjoyed without the privilege of that forum to
talk before. Don't get me wrong. I am not implying that the re-
540 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
suits of this kind of testimony are always happy for people who tes-
tify. You still can be made to feel all kinds of difficulties, and re-
prisals can always be taken against you because of your opinions, but
I think the time has come for a little balance to be restored, as to who
it is who infringes on other people's freedom of opinion.
I read in the papers that the congressional committees are the only
ones that are doing it, whereas, we all know it is an age-old practice,
and will be going on long after these particular committees are out of
existence. I want to redress the balance a little and put in a plea for
the idea that a congressional committee properly conducted is a
preserver of individual security, and not an infringer thereupon.
Mr. Wormser. Professor, you were not worried about what Yala
University would do to you. You were worrying about libel suits.
Dr. Rowe. Yes, that was definitely the case. I suppose I went too
far along that line when I talked to Mr. Evans in private, because
some of the things I told Mr. Evans, if uttered publicly, could easily
have brought on suits for libel, because I mentioned names.
The Chairman. It would have been impossible for the IPR story
to have been unfolded in all of its completeness insofar as it has been
unfolded except by a congressional committee.
Dr. Rowe. Or some investigation of similar nature.
The Chairman. That is right.
Dr. Rowe. That is right.
The Chairman. And insofar as there may be similar, although less
far-reaching, evils existing, which are surrounded by foundation
grants, it seems to me that it is very difficult for those things to be
developed and uncovered except by congressional committees. That
was what was in the mind of the chairman in proposing a further
study. I was about to ask you a question which you answered, that
is, whether the members of the board of the IPR, many of whom or
some of whom were good men — and I think many of whom were— —
Dr. Rowe. I would say most were.
The Chairman. Most were good and well meaning men, but they
were not in a position to devote the time necessary to understand the
details of all the ramifications of the activities of the IPR. Then
we all have one human weakness, which is a tendency to have
confidence in those who are thrown in close contact with us until our
suspicions are violently aroused in some way. As I saw the danger
there and in other organizations, it is the designing individuals, those
who are undesirable, insinuate, not necessarily themselves, but their
fellow travelers — using that in a very broad sense — into positions of
influence for the very purpose of adopting policies and promulgating
policies under the authority of the board.
Although, as the figures read off here indicate, a very small, relatively
very, very small part of foundation grants went to the IPR, it is a
striking example of an instance where the relative grants were so small
and only constitute a flyspeck, have had a great influence in bringing
us to this present perilous position which has developed in the Far East
and is threatening the security and the freedom of the whole world.
Dr. Rowe. That is right. I would like to add this regarding the
IPR and regarding the problem of Far Eastern policy. You remem-
ber some of my earlier remarks about the state of Far Eastern studies
in the United States 20 or 30 years ago, how I said there was practi-
cally none of it; how some of the foundations started to finance the
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 541
building up and training of personnel. It seems to me this kind of
thing has to be taken into account in evaluating foundation grants,
namely, that the area of ignorance in the United States about Far
Eastern matters was so great that here was the strategic place in
which to strike at the security of the United States by people inter-
ested in imperilling our security and fostering the aims of world
communism. They would naturally not pick the area in which
we have the greatest intellectual capacities and in which we have the
greatest capacities for defense. They would pick the area of greatest
public ignorance, with the greatest difficulty of defending against the
tactics of their attack, and so these people naturally poured into Far
Eastern studies and exploited this area as the area in which they could
promote the interests of world communism most successfully in the
general ignorance and blindness of the American people.:
So that it is not only quantitative evaluation that counts; it is not
only the numbers of grants or the amounts of grants; it is the areas itx>
which the grants are given that are significant. Here, you$e.e, it serins
to me, it takes a great deal of subject matter know-how— quite aparfe,
from dollars and cents— people and their affiliations or lack thereof,;
to evaluate the impact on this country of any given foundation
grant, I don't care whether it is $50 or $5 million. It is a quali*
tative matter, not a quantitative matter. Here is where judgment
comes in and where the greatest possibility of disagreements and.
controversies lies. But where it seems to me if you are going to do
an evaluating job on foundation activities you are going to have to
make, up your mind with the best help you can find just what the
meaning of the grants was.
The Chairman. I am not sure about the year, but up until the
late #f orties, the IPR had an excellent standing, did it not? I am
not sure what year it was, but perhaps up to the mid-forties.
Dr. Rowe. The IPR had excellent standing in educational circles,
in governmental circles, and intellectual circles up until the late for-
ties. That is an accurate statement.
The Chairman". We can well understand how those in the admin-
istration placed great confidence in the recommendations of the rep-
resentatives and the findings of the IPR.
Dr. Rowe. That is correct.
The Chairman. And the advice of the individuals associated with
the IPB.
Dr. Rowe. That is right, because they were known all over the
country. Remember, they were one part of an international organi-
zation. They were known all over the country as the outstanding
center in the United States for Far Eastern research and study.
The Chairman. Now we know that some of the keymen on the
working and operating levels, who developed the policies that were
finally promulgated, were following the line of the Communists.
Dr. Rowe. That is correct.
Mr. Hats. I am interested right there in this kind of what seems
to me a lame excuse that you spread over this board of trustees. I
happen to be a member of the board of directors of a financial insti-
tution 1 , and I feel sure if we were lax enough to let the financial insti-
tution go bankrupt that somebody would hold us responsible. No-
bodyiwould come in and say the board of directors are nice guys, but
4&7M--54— pt. 1—35
542 TAX-EJXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
they are too busy to know what happens to this $2 million. Who were
these — —
Dr. Rowe. Would you like me to comment on that statement ?
Mr. Hats. I would like you to comment on it, and name the board
of trustees who were too busy to know what is going on.
The Chairman. Off the record.
(Discussion off the record.)
Dr. Rowe. Would you allow me to comment on this problem and
try to make a differentiation between the kind of thing you have
sketched and the situation here, and the kind of problem we were tip
against in the IPR ?
Mr. Hays. I want you to do that, and that is exactly what I am
trying to bring out. I want you to bring out your opinions about all
of these things, and I am not trying to hamper you in any questions
I ask you. It is merely to clear up something I think I might fiot be
clear on.
Dr. Rowe. I understand that perfectly well. I would have the
greatest respect for the ability of either of you gentlemen or others
that I know to read a bank balance sheet and to tell the difference
between red ink and black ink. As you say, that is your business.
You are on the board of directors; you have to know. But I would
like to know whether you would have equal confidence in your
ability at all times as a member of a board of directors to be able to
?oint the finger at the fellow that is putting his fingers on the till,
"ou can't do that, so you bond these people. You bond them against
losses, and you protect yourself, and the bank, and you have a system
for doing that.
You don't have a system like that in the intellectual world. You
try to work one up and I will be the first to adopt it. I will say this.
You are never going to be able to spot such people, who operate down
in the levels an organization, from away up high where the directors
sit, because they don't know what the people are doing, they can't
possibly supervise them directly. This is left to the executive people-
If the executive people know what they are doing — I testified before
the McCarran committee that I was present once at a board of direc-
tors' meeting of the IPR at which they were discussing the ap-
pointment of a new executive secretary, and I had to sit there in the
board and hear the executive committee members refuse to divulge
the names of the candidates they were thinking about in the presence
of the board of directors, and they got away with it.
Mr. Hats. What did you do about that?
Dr. Rowe. What could I do. I was practically a minority of one.
The board upheld their decision not to do this. It was not too long
after that as I remember it that I resigned from the board. They had
a monopoly and they were bringing people like me in for purposes
of setting up a front, and I hope, giving a different kind of coloring
to the membership of the board.
Mr. Wormser. How often did that board meet, Professor ?
Dr. Rowe. I don't think I ever was called in there more than once
a year, and you would spend a couple of hours, and that is all.
Mr. Koch. Did the men come from all over the United States on
that board?
Dr. Rowe. The last meeting I attended the members from Califor-
nia were not present. There was a member there from Oregon.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 643
Mr. Koch. But was the membership of the board spread over the
United States ?
Dr. Rowe. Yes, it was, and those people could not always attend.
The Chairman. You touched on a rather important thing, and I
don't know to what extent this committee can develop the information.
I, for one, have been curious, and in saying this I am not criticizing
the foundation that happens to be involved, because I think it might
nave happened to any foundation or foundations, and I am not criti-
cizing anybody at the top; but I would be interested in knowing how
the appointment of Alger Hiss originated. Not how it was finally
made, but, in the first instance, who became interested in it. I would
just like to see it followed on through until the board did approve it.
I don't know whether there is any way of getting at it or not.
Dr. Eowe. Are you referring to his appointment, I believe, as a
member of the board ?
The Chairman. No ; as president of Carnegie Endowment.
Dr, Rowe. T don't know anything about that, sir.
The Chairman. No; I am not asking you. I just think it would
be an important case study.
Dr. Rowe. Yes.
Mr. HayS. Mr. Chairman, if I may interrupt, I would suggest that
perhaps the best person to subpena in to testify about that would be
Mr. John Foster Dulles, the Secretary of State, He perhaps could
tell us if you want to pursue the inquiry. I would go along with you.
The Chairman. I nave no idea that Mr. Dulles is in a position to
have that information. As Dr. Rowe indicated in the case to which
he referred, the basic work was done well in advance and the prepara-
tion was made, and it finally came to a head when it got to the board.
Mr. Hays. I understood he proposed him.
Doctor, I want to pursue this a little further and again let me say
I am not trying to point the finger at you in the Way you resigned.
You did resign and you said in your testimony "At the time of my
resignation, I pled too many organizations and too many things to
do and got out on that basis." I am concerned, in view of the criticism
of foundations for the lack of ability on the part of the board of trus-
tees of any foundation to not make a grant that is not right, because
we are saying here that the trustees of the IPR were too busy to know
what is going on. I don't think that is right. I don't think a man
ought to take a job on the board of trustees like that unless he is going
to sacrifice the time necessary to have at least a fundamental idea of
what the organization is doing.
Dr. Rowe. I would have been perfectly willing to sacrifice the time
necessary to get full information and participate in policy decisions.
One of the things that motivated me was the fact that you could spend
the time — I could — but you could not get the facts and information or
get in the inside circles. I submit to you that taking 3 years to find
that out in an organization of the complexity of the TPR Was not an
unconscionably long period of time.
Mr. Hays. I am not criticizing.
Dr. Rowe. That is the period of time I was a member of the board.
I reached my conclusion with deliberation. I did not want to get
right out at the end of the very first or second year. I want to make
another thing clear. I got out of the IPR before any of the public
attention was focused on the thing. This was prior to the first Latti-
|544 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
more investigation, for instance, when the attention began to be
focused on the IPR. That is all I can say about it. I don't believe I
am a member of any boards of that kind at the present time. I have
enough to keep myself busy.
Mr. Hats. I was not trying to imply that I had any idea of criticism
of you as a trustee.
Dr. Rowe. It is perfectly all right and a justifiable observation.
Mr. Hats. I do say as two people who look at a problem we might
have different ways of doing things. I am not going to put myself in
the position of saying that from your viewpoint, knowing your life,
you had done the wrong thing. I would have done it differently,
perhaps with disastrous results ; I don't know. Suffice it to say, you
say you did get out in 1950. If I were to criticize at all, my only
criticism would be that it seems to me you got out in such a way that
you didn't call enough attention to the thing, and perhaps ought to
call it as we look on the complexity of it now.
Dr. Rowe. You probably will be willing to admit that there was
an effort made subsequently to make up for omissions of this kind
on my part,
Mr. Hats. Yes.
Mr. Wormser. I would like to develop a variety of this same sub-
ject, Mr. Hays. I think I can express the Professor's opinion from
my discussion last night, but I would like him to develop it, that the
IPR incident illustrates what may be a weakness in foundation oper-
ation in view of the fact that trustees cannot themselves adequately
handle the fiduciary duty of these responsibilities for these trust funds.
They have the tendency to use other organizations to which they vir-
tually turn over that responsibility.
In the case of the IPR, they invested heavily in that organization as
a research group, and so forth. I think the Professors opinion is,
and I would like him to state it himself, that it would be far better
if foundations wanting that kind of research turned to the universi-
ties and colleges and made them the grants instead. I think he has an
idea that there would be far greater protection both in the mechanism
of universities and selection of executive personnel.
Would you develop that, Professor ?
Dr. Rowe. Yes, sir. There has, of course, been a mixed method on
the part of IPR. You get a very interesting carrying down the line
of the funds and the projects. Foundations will give funds to organi-
zations like IPR. Some of this money for research purposes will be
directly handled by the IPR. Young people, scholars, will be brought
into the organization to do specific jobs for the organization. How-
ever, they will also go to universities and ask universities as they did
once in our case to provide, so to speak, hospitality for one of the men
that they want to have perform a research function under guidance
and direction, subsidized by IPR, which money from Rockefeller
Foundation in this case. Then they will do other things. For in-
stance, the IPR organization will give money to the university per-
sonnel themselves directly for either research or publication purposes.
So there are all kinds of ways and manners of doing this. I would
submit that in much of this procedure the choice of personnel, the
passing on their qualifications, the framing of projects, and the guid-
ance of the researchers in the process of carrying out projects, is not
adequately provided for by these organizations, such as the Institute
of Pacific Relations was and still is today.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 545
In the case of universities, where appointments are made, the uni-
versities' faculties are people of long standing, they may be good,
bad, or indifferent, but the organization and the procedures of appoint-
ment and approval thereof are sufficiently complex and involve suffi-
cient safeguards to cut the errors down considerably below the errors
that are possible and probable without these forms of supervision and
sanction.
^ It seems to me that the foundations in giving funds to organiza-
tions such as the Institute of Pacific Relations are in general on rather
weaker ground than if they give funds to established organizations
for research purposes in which the criteria for the appointment of
people, for their promotions, for their advancements and things of
that kind have been worked out over a long period of time.
The informality of the arrangements in. the IPR was one of the
things that I have always wondered at. To make it possible for so few
people to have so much power and influence in determining who got
funds for what purpose and determining what kind of projects they
worked on and how these projects were supervised seemed to me to be
very lax. Of course, toward the end the money that IPR got was heav-
ily given to publications. They would subsidize the publication of
works that were produced by research workers in universities and
other such organizations, as well as their own people. This seemed to
me to be getting away a little bit from the evils of the previous, system
in which they were directly involved in the research function. But
it still put a tremendous lot of power in the hands of a very few
people, since they went all over the United States, looking over the
products of research in the far eastern field, and deciding which of
these they would subsidize and which they would not.
This is not to say for a moment that the foundations have not
given funds directly to universities. Of course they have. I suppose
they have given far more funds for research purposes directly to uni-
versities than to organizations such as the IPR. But it seems to me,
and you can, of course, consider the source here— I am a member of
a university community — it seems to me logical to say that in those
communities you get better safeguards as to quality and personnel
than you can get in any such organization as the Institute of Pacific
Relations, set up to a heavy extent for research purposes outside of
academic communities.
Mr. Hats. Could I interrogate you for just a minute on that sub-
ject*? Do you have any people working under your direction who are
working on foundation grants, fellowships, or anything of the kind?
Dr. Rowe. We would have to define a little more clearly before I
answer it. I will define it as I go along in answering. If I don't
cover what you are after, you can check me. I have no research per-
sonnel working under my direction on foundation grants.
Mr. Hats. Are there any at Yale working under somebody's direc-
tion? There have been in the past, have there not ?
Mr. Rowe. We had, for instance, from the Rockefeller Foundation
at one time a young Chinese who had finished his doctor's degree at
the University of Pittsburgh, James T. C. Liu, who was given a Rocke-
feller grant through the university. That is, the money was put in
the hands of the treasurer of Yale to be paid to him to work under
the supervision of a committee of the faculty of which I was chair-
man, and two other faculty members were members, to work this thesis
546 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
up into an enlarged study for publication purposes. Is that the kind
of thing you are thinking of ? I have none of this at the present time.
Mr. Hats. You had a fellowship yourself from Rockefeller?
Br. Rowe. Yes.
Mr, Hats. Where did you use that ? Was it at some university ?
Dr. Rowe. I had a fellowship for 2 years from the General Educa-
tion Board, as a General Education Board fellow in humanities at
Harvard, for the study of Japanese and Chinese language and litera-
ture for 2 years.
Mr. Hats. Do they give such fellowships in the field of sociology
and political science ?
Dr. Rowe. I suppose they do. But I don't know that they do that.
Mr. Hats. What I am getting at is this : Suppose they do give one
similar to yours and give a number of them, and, as you say, there
certainly would be more chance of supervising them at a university,
and I am in agreement completely with you; here is the question I
want to get at: They give these grants and 1 or 2 people that they give
them to, sometimes subsequently 10 or 15 years later turn out
what is commonly known as left wingers or fellow travelers; would
you say that the foundation ought to be held accountable for those
people ? How could they tell in advance ?
Dr. Rowe. It is a risk you take, of course. I should think that
here you get back to your bank. Any bank is going to make some
bad loans.
Mr. Hats. That is right.
Dr. Rowe. The question of whether the man in charge of the oper-
ation of the bank is a good man to have there is something that can
only be developed on this basis over a period of time, I suppose.
Mr. Hats. In other words, if they hold their bad loans.
Dr. Rowe. Down to a percentage.
Mr. Hats. Or in the case of a foundation their bad grants to a
minimum ; we can't expect them to be perfect, can we ?
Dr. Rowe. That is perfectly clear.
Mr. Hats. We can point out their mistakes, but we should not say
we should never have made them. That is too much to expect.
Dr. Rowe. I would judge so. Of course, you are going to find some
people in the United States that will tell you it was a mistake they gave
me one.
Mr. Hats. I think we brought that out before. I am not going to
take that position.
Dr. Rowe. I was not pushing you on this.
(Discussion off the record. )
Mr. Hats. I am wondering about Chiang Kai-shek.
Dr. Rowe. I don't believe if you scrutinize all my writings and
listened to all my lectures at Yale for the last 5 years you have ever
heard me say that.
Mr. Hats. All right, that is good.
Dr. Rowe. If you will allow me to go on from this a little bit,
I will develop this.
Mr. Hats. Sure.
Dr. Rowe. I have never been an advocate of allowing Chiang Kai-
shek to fight communism by himself. I am interested in our helping
him fight communism, and I think with United States help that
is another matter. The question of who is helping who is always
subject to evaluation.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 547
Mr. Hats. Gould you give us any idea of about how much help it
would take to have Chiang do anything at this point ?
Dr. Rowe. I don't think there is any possibility as of the present
time. of the forces on Formosa making a successful invasion of the
mainland "without massive allied help. I think this is impossible.
Mr. Hays. The reason I brought it up — and it is a matter of water
.over the dam, I really don't care much about it — but in the last cam-
paign my opponent made the charge that I, among others, had by
just being in Congress apparently restrained Chiang from doing any-
thing, and if he got down here he was going to turn him loose, and
things were going to happen. I have always had the opinion that
to do that he would have had to have "massive," and I would like to
put that word in quotes for emphasis, help from us in order to win
any kind of victory in China.
Dr. Kowe. You mean going back from Formosa ?
Mr. Hats. Yes, or staying there when he was there.
Dr. Bowe. Staying in China?
Mr. Hats. Yes.
Dr. Eowe. There I disagree with you flatly. I am on record on
that. You can find this in writing in my articles. I am on record as
believing that the time to resist the expansion of communism in
China and its takeover was in 1947 at the time when we had seem-
ingly decided in our Government that we were going to cry "a plague
on both your houses." At that point, as my testimony before the
McCarran Committee indicated, it was perfectly possible in my opin-
ion for the United States with a minor investment of men, money
and material, compared to what we have put into Korea since then,
to have prevented the Chinese Communist takeover on the mainland.
This, opinion of mine was confirmed by conversation with the rank-
ing American general in China in 1948, when he told me that with
10,000 American personnel — and this again is all in the record of the
McCarran committee testimony— .he could see to it that all of the
.•equipment that Chiang could ever use to prevent the Communists
from coming down into China could be made effective in its use. The
amount of money required would have been piddling compared to
what we have spent in Korea in a war we would not have had to
fight if we had intervened in 1947. This is again
Mr. Goodwin. Mr. Chairman, have I come into the wrong hearing?
Mr. Hats. This has some connection. It got in by the Dack door
ofthelPB.
Doctor, let me say this, and there is no use debating this question,
because in the first place, we are fighting a hypothetical war which
didn't happen, and in the second place, I believe you might even
agree with me that frequently generals make statements that subse-
quently prove that they were a little off base.
I remember very definitely the morning the Korean thing started ;
I was walking right across the street here with two other members
of the House, and making the statement we are in a war, and they
said, "No, we are not in a war. They are just going to send in the
Navy and Air Force."
Dr. Eowe. That is what they said at first.
* Mr. Hats. I made a small wager with them that the ground troops
would be in before 10 days passed because the Air Force is a fine
548 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
force, and I have had some experience with them, but they have once
or twice or maybe three times bitten off more than they could chew.
The Air Force alone up to now has not been able to win a war. It
did not win the one in Korea, a little narrow peninsula. If this gen-
eral said what he could have done with 10,000 troops is one thing,
and doing it is something else.
Dr. Rowe. That is perfectly clear. I only cited the general's
opinion.
Mr. Hays. I understand that.
Dr. Rowe. I am of course no general either, amateur or professional.
It is worthy to mention what he was talking about when he talked
of 10,000 men. He was not talking about a coherent combat unit of
10,000 men, or anything like that. He was talking about what Gen-
eral Wedemeyer did in China during the Pacific war, when he put 1
and 2 men at a time into the Chinese Army down at the company
level with the purpose of seeing to it, as I say, that the weapons of
war that the United States distributed were efficiently used, and with
a minimum of wastage and misuse. That is what General Barr was
talking about in our conversation.
The Chairman. Do you have any other questions ?
Mr. Wormser. Yes ; I do. I would like to get on another subject,
which one of your previous remarks introduced. We were discussing
the undesirability perhaps of using intermediate organizations like
IPR. Would your comments apply also, and perhaps you might
discuss this general area, to what we have referred to at times as
clearing house organizations? We have talked about a certain inter-
locking or close relationship between the foundations and interme-
diate organizations, like the Social Science Research Council, and the
American Learned Societies. I would like you to comment on that,
Professor, as well as whether you think the resulting concentration
of power through this interlock is a desirable thing or not.
Dr. Rowe. I suppose the proof of it is in what comes out of it. My
feeling is that here is another very clear evidence of the difficulty for
the foundations in making policy regarding the expenditure of their
funds. The Social Science Research Council handles social science
matters. They will give a large lump sum of money to these people.
Then the Social Science Research Council has to set up the operations
of screening of applications, screening of candidates, supervision of
operations and evaluation of results and all that. This costs the foun-
dations something, because part of the money they put in has to go
for these administrative purposes. But the foundation doesn't want
to do it itself. The Social Science Research Council being supposedly
a specialized agency simply, it seems to me, relieves the foundation
of this to the extent that the foundation gives large sums of money to
the Social Science Research Council.
What the council does is the responsibility of the foundation, it
seems to me, to a very great extent. There is no use trying to blink
at that fact in any way, shape, or form. I suppose there is no ideal
solution to the problem of the application of expertness to the super-
vision of the expenditure of money by big foundations. This is why
some foundations £0 in for rather narrow kinds of specialization.
They will do one kind of thing and not another. The General Edu-
cation Board is an example of what I am talking about, because their
work has been rather narrowly oriented, certainly during the last
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 549
decade or two. But the big foundations in general spread themselves
over the landscape.
The Ford Foundation is the latest and greatest. The Ford Founda-
tion is even going in for general public education, although I under-
stand this emphasis is decreasing some in the last year or two. But
when they first began they were very much interested in general adult
education through all kinds of media, radio, conferences, great book
seminars all over the country. We had 2 or 3 of them in our imme-
diate area in Connecticut, all financed by the Ford Foundation.
The job of running an extension course for universities is a big job.
When you start doing this all over the United States, I should think
it would be almost impossible to supervise it adequately. If I am
right about the tendency in recent years, it might be that this is a
conclusion they have reached on the matter, if they are cutting down.
I would not know what has guided their policy along this line.
There is inevitably, going to be this problem, that as knowledge and
as research become more specialized and more technical, and the prob-
lem of deciding what you want to do research wise becomes more
difficult, the foundations that have big money to spend are just up
against a tremendous policy problem. How do they operate, and how
can they possibly guarantee the maximum effectiveness and efficiency
in their operations in the light of the objectives which they profess
and which underly their whole activity ?
Mr. Woemser. Does it impress you as socially desirable that the
large foundations should concentrate a certain large part of their
operations in the social sciences in one group or association of groups,
like the Social Science Eesearch Council, the American Learned
Societies, and others ?
Dr. Rowe. I suppose the theory behind this is that these organiza-
tions, like the Social Science Research Council, are truly representa-
tive of social science all over the United States. I suppose that is
the only possible theoretical justification for this kind of policy. I
don't know.
Mr. Wormsbr. The question we have, Professor, in that connection
is whether that type of concentration, even though it might be efficient
mechanically, is desirable insofar as it militates against the com-
petitive factor, which is sort of intrinsic in our society.
Dr. Rowe. There is no question but what an organization like the
Social Science Research Council has a tremendous amount of power.
This power which it exerts, it exerts very heavily on educational msti-
tutions and their personnel, because when you get down to it, _who
is it that does research in social science? It is educational institutions,
because they have the faculties in the various fields, like political
science, economics, anthropology, sociology, geography and so on.
That is where the people are. To understand the importance of this
function, all you have to realize is that advancement and promotion
and survival in the academic field depend upon research and the results
and the publication thereof. Here you have, you see, outside organi-
zations influencing the course of the careers of personnel in universities
through their control of funds which can liberate these people from
teaching duties, for example, and making it possible for them to
publish more than their competitors.
This, therefore, means that there is a tremendous responsibility here
to apportion their awards in a just way— in such a way as takes into
550 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
account the differences of approach and the differences of opinion in
these fields; the theoretical differences from one school to another-
The possibility exists that at all times in any of these organizations
that the people in charge thereof become convinced that there is one
way to do a job in the social science field, and that only this way will
get their support.
If and when that time comes — I don't know whether it is here or
ever will come — then you will have a combination in restraint of trade
within the limits of public acceptability that may have very deleterious
effects upon our intellectual community.
The Chairman. Mr. Wormser, it is now noon. It is evident or it
appears evident that we will be unable to complete with Dr. Rowe
before the noon recess. How long do you estimate it will take?
Mr. Wormser. I have only one further subject that he could testify
on. If we take 10 or 15 minutes he will be through. He would like
to finish this morning, if he can.
Dr. Rowe. I would not like to limit the committee in any way. I
would stay this afternoon if you wish.
Mr. Hats. Doctor, we have been spending a good many hours this
morning, and we have no desire to drag it into the afternoon if We
can finish shortly. I would like to finish if we can.
The Chairman. Very well, then.
Mr. Wormser. As an extension of just what you have been talking
about, Professor, is it your opinion that there has been a result already
from the power of these foundations to control or affect resea¥«h/par-
ticularly in their associations together in some sort of what you might
loosely call an interlock, and the use of these intermediate organiza-
tions? Has that resulted in some sort of political slanting in your
opinion? I want to be a little more precise than that, and refer to
the term which has been used quite frequently in social science litera-
ture of "social engineering." There seems to be a tendency to develop
a caste of social scientists who apparently deem themselves qualified to
tell people what is good for them, and to engineer changes in 'our
social status. Would you comment on that?
Dr. Rowe. Here, of course, you are getting into a problem of what
is the cause and what is the effect. I am not quite clear as to whether
the activities of the foundations along this line are the result of the
development of social science in the United States over the last 40
or 50 years, or whether the development of social science in the United
States over the last 40 or 50 years along such lines has been primarily
the result or even heavily the result of foundation initiative.
I would be inclined to the former of these two views, but I ! don't
think you can completely disentangle these two things. I think that
the development of the social sciences in this country in the last 40 or
50 years has been very heavily influenced, in my opinion, by ideas im-
ported from abroad, which have been connected with, if not originated
m, socialistic mentality, and to say this is to simply say that it is normal
in social science to accept today a great deal of economic determinism,
to accept a great deal of emphasis upon empirical research over
and against basic thinking and the advancement of theory, and to
accept a lot of ideas about the position of the social scientist in the
society that seem to me rather alien to the American tradition.
It must be, I think, kept in mind that the theory of social engineer-
ing is closely related to the notion of the elite which we find dominant
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 551
in Marxism, the notion that a few people are those who hold the
tradition and who have the expertness and that these people «an
engineer the people as a whole into a better way of living, whether they
like it or want it or not. It is their duty to lead them forcibly so to
ispeak in this direction.
That is all tied up with the conviction of the Marxists that they
seem to have, rather that they do have, a perfect social science. This
is one of the main tenets of Marxism, that they have a social science
which is perfect; it not only explains all the past history, but it will
lead to the complete victory of the socialist state on a worldwide basis.
I am not maintaining that my colleagues are all dyed in the wool
along this line, but there is such a thing as infection. I think some of
these ideas have infected us, and have gotten over into a much more
influential place in our thinking than many of us understand or real-
ize. The complete respectability of some of the basic ideas I have been
talking about in the framework of American intellectual life can be
seen when you ask yourself the question, "When I was in college,' what
was I taught about the economic interpretation of history, the frontier
interpretation of American history, the economic basis of the Ameri-
can Constitution, and things of this kind ?"
This is the entering wedge for the economic analysis of social prob-
lems which is related to economic determinism, which is the very heart
and soul of the Marxist ideology. When we reflect on the extent to
which these ideas have become accepted in the American intellectual
community, I think we ought to be a bit alarmed, and be a bit hesitant
about the direction in which we are going.
For my own purposes, I would much rather complicate the analysis
of social phenomena by insisting that at all times there are at least
three different kinds of components that have to be taken into account.
There is not only the basic economic thing. We all recognize its im-
Sortance. But there are what I call political factors. These have to
o with the fundamental presuppositions people have about the
values that they consider important and desirable. These can be just
as well related to abstract and to absolute truth, which we are all try-
ing to search for in our own way, as they can be to economic forma-
tion and predetermination, if I make myself clear. Along with this
you have to take into account the power element in the military field.
If you throw all these things in together, I think it rather tends to
scramble the analysis and reduce it from its stark simplicity, as it is
embodied in the doctrines of communism, into something which is
much harder to handle and much more difficult arid complicated,
but is a good deal closer to the truth.
I make this rather long statement only because the subject is ex-
tremely complicated. I know I can't discuss it adequately here, and I
don't pretend to try, but I am trying to introduce a few of the things
which give me the feeling that in our academic community as a whole
we have gone down the road in the direction of the dominance of an
intellectual elite. We have gone down the road in the direction of
economic determination of everything, throwing abstract values out
of the window.
Mr. Woemser. Moral relativity.
Dr. Bo we. Moral relativism is implicit. It is not important whether
it is right or wrong in abstract terms. It is only when it works and
who works and things of that kind. This is the evil of the sin of
552 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
social science in this country which can only be redressed by adequate
emphasis on humanistic studies, and even there you have to be ex-
tremely careful about how you do it in order to get the maximum effect
out of it.
Maybe I am getting too far here into educational theory and getting
away from your question.
Mr. Hays. Could I ask a question ?
Mr. Wormser. Please, yes.
Mr. Hays. You talk about a social-science elite. If you wanted a
doctor, you would want an expert.
Dr. Rowe. Sure.
Mr. Hays. A lawyer, you would want a good one.
Dr. Eowb. "Who is it that says who the expert is in the medical
field ? The first thing the doctor comes up against is a board of exam-
iners set up by the State or by some public authority without which
he cannot even get a license to practice, let alone get any patients.
Mr. Hays. How do you get to be a political science professor?
Dr. Rowe. That is the point I am trying to make. There are no
such supervisions or checks. Maybe it would be more dangerous to
have them than not to have them. But we have at least to face up to
the problems raised by the fact that the intellectual community, the
academic community, for example, insists on an absolute minimum
of public sanctions as far as their work is concerned. This leads us
into these areas that I have been talking about.
Mr. Wormser. That is all.
Mr. Hays. I have one further question back on the IPR again. I
asked for the names of the trustees and we got off on some other sub-
ject. I will ask you specifically, was Senator Ferguson one of them
at one time ?
Dr. Rowe. I could not say. I don't recognize his name as being a
member of the board. But I could not swear to it.
Mr. Hays. Could you supply me with the names of the members of
the IPR board for 1950 or 1949 or some given year ?
The Chairman. If it is just as agreeable, the staff can do that.
Mr. Wormser. I am sure we have it.
Dr. Rowe. That would be easy to work up, I should think. That
would be no problem.
Mr. Hays. We can put it in the record at this point.
(The list referred to follows :)
National Officers and Trustees, American Institute of Pacific Relations
officers
Chairman : Ray Lyman Wilbur
Vice Chairmen : Raymond B. Allen, Arthur H. Dean, Walter F. Dillingham,
Gordon Robert Sproul
Treasurer: Donald B. Straus
Executive Secretary : Clayton Lane
Assistant Treasurer : Tillie G. Shahn
Assistant Secretary : Katrine R. C. Greene
BOARD of trustees
Edward W. Allen, attorney, Allen, Froude, Hilen & De Garmo, Seattle
Raymond B. Allen, president, University of Washington, Seattle
J. Ballard Atherton, vice president, Mutual Telephone Co., Honolulu
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 553
Joseph W. BfiUantine; the Brookings Institution, Washington, D. C.
Edward W. Beltz, geologist, Standard- Vacuum Oil Co., New. YorK.
Knight Biggerstaff, chairman, department of far eastern studies, Cornell Uni*
versity.
Hugh Borton, East Asian Institute, Columbia University, New York.
Stuart P. Brock, department of research and education, Congress of Industrial
Organizations, Washington, D. C.
H. Clifford BrOwn, vice president, Chicago Bridge & Iron Co., New York.
Lincoln C. Brownell, assistant to the president, American Bank Note Co., New
• York..; ,
George T. Cameron, publisher, San Francisco Chronicle.
Edward C. Carter, provost, New School for Social Research, New York.
Joseph P. Chamberlain, professor of public law, Columbia University, New York.
Dwight L. Clarke, president, Occidental Life Insurance Co. of California, Los
Angeles.
Charles F. Clise, president, Washington Securities Co., Seattle.
Arthur G. Coons, president, Occidental College, Los Angeles.
George B. Cressey, chairman, department of geography, Syracuse University.
Arthur H. Dean, partner, Sullivan & Cromwell, New York.
Walter F. Dillingham, president, Oahu Railway & Land Co., Honolulu.
Brooks Emeny, president, Foreign Policy Association, New York.
Rupert Emerson, professor of government, Harvard University.
John K. Fairbank, professor of history, Harvard University.
G, W. Fisher, executive vice president, Bishop Trust Co., Ltd., Honolulu.
Richard E. Fuller, director, Seattle Art Museum.
Charles K. Gamble, director, Standard-Vacuum Oil Co., New York.
Martha A. Gerbode, trustee, World Affairs Council of Northern California, San
Francisco.
L. Carrington Goodrich, department of Chinese and Japanese, Columbia Uni-
versity, New York.
O. C. Hansen, Frazar & Hansen Import-Export Co., San Francisco.
W. R. Herod, president, International General Electric Co., New York.
John R. Hersey, author, Men on Bataan; Into the Valley; Bell for Adano;
Hiroshima.
William L. Holland, secretary general, Institute of Pacific Relations.
Raymond Kennedy, professor of sociology, Yale University, New Haven.
Benjamin H. Kizer, attorney, Graves, Kizer & Graves, Spokane.
Daniel E. Koshland, vice president, Levi Strauss & Co., San Francisco.
Clayton Lane, executive secretary, American IPR, New York.
Lewis A. Lapham, president, American Hawaiian Steamship Co.
Owen Lattimore, director, Walter Hines Page school of international relations,
Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore.
Herbert S. Little, attorney, Little, Leader, LeSourd & Palmer, Seattle.
William W. Lockwood, assistant director, Woodrow Wilson school of public
and international affairs, Princeton University.
Boyd A. Martin, professor of political science, University of Idaho, Moscow,
Idaho.
Charles E. Martin, professor of political science, University of Washington,
Seattle.
Rene A. May, president, Getz Bros., exporters, San Francisco.
Frank A. Midkiff, trustee, Bernice P. Bishop estate, Kamehameha Schools, and
Punahou School, Honolulu.
Donald M. Nelson, Electronized Chemical Corp., Los Angeles.
Emmet O'Neal, attorney, Washington, D. S., United States Ambassador to the
Philippines.
David N. Rowe, associate professor of international relations, Yale University,
New Haven.
James H. Shoemaker, chairman, department of economies and business, Uni-
versity of Hawaii, Honolulu.
Gregg M. Sinclair, president, University of Hawaii, Honolulu.
Robert Gordon Sproul, president, University of California.
Donald B. Straus, Management-Employee Relations, Inc. New York.
George E. Taylor, director, far eastern institute, University of Washington,
Seattle.
Donald G. Tewksbury, professor of comparative education, Teachers College,
Columbia University, New York.
554 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Sumner Welles, writer and commentator. Former Under Secretary of State,
Lynn T. White, Jr., president, Mills Collge, Oakland, Calif.
Brayton Wilbur, president, Wilbur-Ellis Co., San Francisco.
Kay Lyman Wilbur, chancellor, Stanford University, California.
Heaton L. Wrenn, attorney, Anderson, Wrenn & Jenfea, Honolulu.
Louise L. Wright, director, Chicago Council on Foreign Kelations.
The Chairman. The committee will stand adjourned until Tues-
day morning at 10 o'clock in this same room.
(Thereupon, at 12 :15 p. m., a recess was taken until Tuesday, June
8, 1954, at 10 a.m.)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 1954
House of Representatives,
Special Commmittee To Investigate
Tax Exempt Foundations,
Washington^ D. G.
The special committee met at 10 : 15 a. m., pursuant to recess, in room
804, Old House Office Building, Hon. Carroll Reece (chairman .of the
special committee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Reece, Goodwin, Hays, and Pfost.
Also present: Rene A. Wormser, general counsel; Arnold T. Koch,
associate counsel ; Norman Dodd, research director ; Kathryn Casey,
legal analyst; John Marshall, chief clerk.
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
Who is the witness this morning?
Mr. Wormser. Professor Colegrove.
The Chairman. Professor, we have the practice of swearing all wit-
nesses, if you do not mind. Do you solemnly swear the evidence you
give iii this case shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth, so help you God?
Hfe Colegrove. I do.
Mr. Wormser. Will you state your name and address for the record,
pleasej, Professor ?
TESTIMONY OF PROP. KENNETH COLEGROVE, EVANSTON, ILL.
Dr. Colegrove. My name is Kenneth Colegrove, and my address
is 721 Foster Street, Evanston, 111.
Mr, Wormser. You are temporarily in New York on some assign-
ment at Queens College, Professor?
Dr. Colegrove. Yes; I have been teaching in Queens College this
year. ;?
Mr. Wormser. You are, as I understand, retired as a professor of
political science at Northwestern University?
Dr. Colegrove. Yes ; at Northwestern University we automatically
retire at age of 65.
Mr. Wormser. Would you give us briefly your academic career,
Professor?
Dr. Colegrove. I took my A. B. degree at the State University of
Iowa and later took my Ph. D. degree, doctor of .philosophy, at Har-
vard. I have taught at Mount Holyoke College, Syracuse University,
and for 30 years I taught at Northwestern University.
Mr. Wormser. Do you have any honorary degrees?
555
556 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Dr. Colegrove. Yes : I have the honorary degree of doctor of let-
ters at Columbia University. President Nicholas Murray Butler con-
ferred that degree on me after I had written a book on the Senate and
the Treatymaking Power. He wrote me at that time saying he had
already expected to write that book himself, but the trustees had never
allowed him to resign so that he could write the book. His trustees
offered me a degree, and, of course, you never turn down a degree
from Columbia University.
Mr. Wormser. What other books have you written, Professor?
Dr. Colegrove. I have written books on International Control of
Aviation ; Militarism in Japan ; and the American Senate and the
Treaty -Making Power. I think I am remembered most for my 20 or
30 articles in the American Political Science Review and in the Ameri-
can Journal of international Law upon Japanese Government and
Politics, and Asiatic Diplomacy.
! Mr . WoRjjCSER. Now, Professor, what positions of any consequence
nave you had in any of the learned societies ? ^
Dr. Colegrove. I was secretary- treasurer of the American Political
Science Association — -that is the professional society of political
science teachers in the United States— for 10 or 11 years, from 1937
to 1948. And I have been a delegate from the Amercan Political
Science Association to the American Council of Learned Societies.
The American Political Science Association is a constituent society
of the American Council of Learned Societies.
Mr. Wormser. As I recall, you were at one time on the executive
commmittee of the American Society of International Law?
Dr. Colegrove. Oh, yes; I have several times served on the execu-
tive committee of the American Society of International Law.
Mr. Wormser. What Government posts have you held, Professor?
Dr. Colegrove. Well, I have been consultant during the war to the
Office of Strategic Services. I have been a consultant for the Depart-
ment of Labor. I have been a consultant for the State Department.
And I served with General MacArthur in Tokyo immediately after
the war in the Office of SCAP, or the Office of the Supreme Com-
mander for the Allied Powers, in Japan.
Mr. Wormser. As an adviser in political science or some aspect of
that?
Dr. Colegrove. Yes; as an adviser on constitutional questions.
Mr. Wormser. Have you any other comment you wish to make,
Professor, before we start? I understand you have no statement:
I had intended to have a copy of the questions you had asked me
to put to you prepared for the committee, but something went wrong
in the office, and we have only 2 or 3 copies available.
Is there anything you wish to add before I begin ?
Dr. Colegrove. Mr. Counsel, I must say that I am a somewhat
reluctant witness this morning. My reluctance stems from the fact
that there is a feeling, I think, on the part of many people, that wit-
nesses regarding the foundations may be overcritical, may wish
to smear the character of the officers of the foundations. I must say
that my acquaintance with the officers makes me think that they are
men of the greatest integrity, men of the greatest competence. I highly
respect them. Some of my students are officers in the foundations.
Then, in another aspect, I think sometimes witness before con-
gressional committees are rather roughly treated by the newspapers ;
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 557
sometimes the very best newspapers misquote them. And that is a
little unfortunate, I think.
Again, I must say that since being asked to testify before this com-
mittee, I have not had an opportunity to go back to my home in Evans-
ton, which is right north of Chicago, to check up on some data I prob-
ably ought to have before I testify here, but I understand you wish
me only to speak of the philosophical background or such aspects as
I really have witnessed ; and perhaps I can trust my memory for these.
I am glad to come before the committee, aside from that reluctance,
because I think it is the duty of every citizen, and particularly pro-
fessors, to assist Congress in its functions of investigation. It is our
duty to do so, just as much as it is the duty of young men to serve
in the Army, even give their lives for their country in the Army, or the
duty of citizens to vote, or the duty of citizens" to pay taxes. And
citizens- also have the duty to testify before congressional committees.
Mr. Wokmser. Well, Professor, you did testify at one time before
the McCarran committee in the IPE hearings. Would you give
lis some brief resume of the purpose of your appearance in that
hearing and any comments that you think may be of interest ?
Dr. Colegrove. Mr. Counsei, I did testify before the McCarran
Subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee of the Senate on internal
security laws regarding my knowledge of the I. P. E. and other
phases they were investigating. I think what struck your eye in that
testimony was a part of my testimony where I said I could not under-
stand why it was that the Eockef eller Foundation continued its very
large grants to the Institute of Pacific Relations long after it had
received information which proved to be very reliable information
that the IPE had been taken over by Communists, pro-Communists,
or fellow travelers, and had become a propaganda society, and also an
organization which was very effective in selecting personnel for the
Government. The information that something was wrong with the
IPE began to come into our heads about 1942 or 1943. I was among
those naive professors who thought that the IPE was doing a
great service. And it was. It started out as really a magnificent
research organization. But it undoubtedly was captured by subver-
sive elements about 1938 and 1939 and 1940, but we didn't wake up until
1942 or 1943. At that time I resigned from the editorial board of
Amerasia which had a connection with IPE.
By 1945, we were convinced that something was very wrong; and
my testimony was connected with that point.
Mr. Wormser. Was that before the Kohlberg disclosures ?
Dr. Colegrove. No ; that was the time the Kohlberg proposals were
made. And what I couldn't understand later on was when Alfred
Kohlberg was able to get the consent of one of the very high officers
in the Rockefeller Foundation to investigate why the foundation would
not make an investigation of the IPE. The investigation was never
made, and the Eockef eller Foundation continued to give very large
grants to the Institute of Pacific Eelations even after that.
Eepresentative Hays. What year was that ?
Dr. Colegrove. That was 1945. That was comparatively early, you
see. The grants went on until, I think, about 1950 or thereabouts.
Of course, the Rockefeller Foundation now admits that it was a
mistake, and perhaps the officers feel that bygones ought to be bygones
and no further investigation should be carried on. But it seems to
49720—54 — pt. 1 36
558 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
me, in the interest of American people, and in the interest of scholar-
ship in the United States, and in the interest of scholars like myself,
that we may never be misled again, that we ought to have the whole
story of why the Rockefeller Foundation failed to make the inves-
tigation in 1945.
Representative Hats. Did you, as a member of that group, ask the
Rockefeller Foundation to make an investigation ?
Dr. Colegrove. No. I was not an officer of the Rockefeller Foun-
dation. I was simply what you call a member.
Mr.WoRMSER. You mean of the IPR, Professor?
Dr. Colegrove. I mean of the IPR. The membership was very
loose. Anyone who subscribed to their publications was a member.
They called us members. We thought of ourselves merely as sub-
scribers.
I protested to Mr. Dennett in 1945 — I think that is the date; it is
in the McCarran subcommittee hearings — regarding the activities of
Mr. Edward Carter. I had discovered that he was pressuring the
State Department to throw over Chiang Kai-shek. I protested very
vigorously at that time, and I think my protests came to nothing at all.
Representative Hats. Now, did you say that the first notice that
the foundation had of, as I believe you termed it, the subversiveness
of the IPR, was about 1943 ?
Dr. Colegrove. No. The first that I knew of it were the charges
made by Alfred Kohlberg. I resigned from Amerasia in 1943 be-
cause or a difference of opinion between myself and Mr. Philip Jaffe,
who was the editor in chief, and who later was implicated in the tak-
ing of documents surreptitiously from the State Department.
Representative Hats. What I am trying to do, Professor, is to find
out for the purposes of checking the record of grants, about when you
people became aware of this, about when it trickled down to you that
there was something wrong there.
Could you give us a year for that ?
Dr. Colegrove. Yes. I was aware of a very unfortunate situation
in Amerasia by 1942 and 1943. My eyes were not opened until that
time. I suspected, of course, the IPR. I was not an officer of the
Institute of Pacific Relations.
Representative Pfost. When did you resign from Amerasia, Pro-
fessor?
Dr. Colegrove. In 1943, and it was at that time
Representative Pfost. And it was at that time that you became sus-
picious?
Dr. Colegrove. I became suspicious in 1942 and finally resigned
in May of 1943. I am speaking from memory. I haven't looked at
my notes.
Representative Pfost. Were you aware of the fact that the Rocke-
feller Foundation reduced their grants considerably in the year 1944
to the IPR?
Dr. Colegrove. Yes, there was a reduction of grants made.
Representative Pfost. Because of some talk that perhaps they were
off on the wrong track ?
Dr. Colegrove. Undoubtedly that had some influence. But I was
not an officer of Rockefeller Foundation or of the IPR, and did not
understand the reasons on the inside.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 559
Representative Hats. The figures we have, Professor, show that for
the 2 years, 1944 and 1945, they only got $36,000. That would seem to
indicate that someone in Rockefeller became aware of the thing you
did about the same time. Then our figures show from 1946 to 1950,
they were given a total of about $400,000, mainly because the Rocke-
feller Foundation wanted to try to reorganize the thing under the
leadership of Dr. Wilbur,Dr. Ray Lyman Wilbur, after they had
gotten rid of Carter and Field. I am not asking you, of course, to
say the figures are accurate, but does that generally correspond with
what you know about the situation?
Dr. Colegrove. Yes; that is the situation as I understand it.
Mr. Wormser. Professor, no investigation, so far as you know, was
made by Rockefeller or Carnegie of the IPR situation, nor for that
matter was one made by the IPR itself ?
Dr, Colegrove. I hoped, as a result of Mr. Kohlberg's charges, that
the Rockefeller Foundation itself would investigate, instead of ask-
ing the IPR to conduct a self -investigation.
The Chairman. To whom was Kohlberg's request for an investiga-
tion made, Professor?
Dr. Colegrove. It was made to Joseph Willits, an official of the
Rockefeller Foundation, one of the outstanding men, a man of great
integrity, and a man of competence and scholarship. I have great
respect for Joseph Willits, and he must have had a good reason for
not investigating. But that reason, it seems to me, ought to be told
to the American people.
Representative Hats. Just exactly what did Mr. Kohlberg say in
his report ? I get a letter about every week or two from him, most
of which I throw in the wastebasket.
I read a few of them. But they seemed to me to be a little bit off
the beam, and perhaps these people felt the same way about him. Is
he considered a reputable authority that you would pay attention to?
Maybe I have been misjudging him.
Dr. Colegrove. Well, I have a great deal of respect for Mr. Kohl-
berg. He sends out these very voluminous letters. Some of them are
full of charges he makes against people that I think it is not neces-
sary to make. But he also has a vast amount of information. I find
these letters he sends sometimes very useful. Again, Mr. Kohlberg
had been in China frequently during the war and had been shocked at
his observation of what some of the officers of the State Department
were doing, particularly connected with the whole episode of Gen.
Patrick Hurley.
Mr. Wormser. Professor, these charges were thoroughly substan-
tiated, weren't they ?
Dr. Colegrove. Oh, yes. All of the charges of Mr. Kohlberg were
examined by the McCarran subcommittee, and I think in a unanimous
report the McCarran subcommittee indicated that all of the charges
of Mr. Kohlberg were proved true.
Representative Hats. I am not discussing that. The point I am
trying to get straight in my own mind is that he has a habit of crying
"Wolf" pretty frequently, and every time he cries it, obviously it
hasn't been documented. He could have been right at that time, and
perhaps was for all I know.
Dr. Colegrove. Well, I may say, I always found him accurate in
his statements, and certainly this time when he cried, "Wolf, wolf,"
there was a wolf.
560 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Representative Hats. I see. This was the beginning %
Dr. Colegrove. And he has been crying "Wolf, wolf," justifiably
ever since then, without effect — I suppose because it has been repeti-
tious. The charges at the time corresponded with what I was thinking
myself with reference to the IPR.
Representative Hats. Just briefly what were these charges ? That
Field and Carter were not right ? Just what did he say, if you can
remember the highlights of it ?
Dr. Colegrove. Briefly, the charges were these : They were ex-
panded, of course, in the McCarran subcommittee. But, briefly, they
were to the effect that the IPR, instead of being a research institution
and engaged only in research, had branched out into propaganda, into
the selection of personnel for service in Government and into policy-
making even in the State Department. In other words, supporting a
policy that was very much against Chiang Kai-shek, very much
against the Chinese Nationalists, and aimed at overthrow of Chiang
Kai-shek, of the Kuomintang, and destruction of the Nationalist
Party in China.
The Chairman". Based upon your experience and observations, to
what extent is it your opinion that the IPR did exercise a substantial
if not controlling influence in the selection of personnel not only in
the Far East but those assignments in the State Department that had
to do with the Far East and ultimately the policies that were adopted
in the Far East ?
Dr. Colegrove. Mr. Chairman, I would rather testify only with
regard to things I have seen with my own eyes. I will take one case
with reference to the selection of personnel for General MacArthur's
headquarters in Japan.
The IPR had become extremely influential with the State Depart-
ment and with some other branches of Government. I must say that
no one knows better than you and your committee that the se!ectioi»
of personnel is one of the headaches of Government. The selection
of expert personnel is one of the headaches of Government. The
American Political Science Association was often called upon to fur-
nish suggestions of experts in the field of political science.
During the war, when I was secretary -treasurer, we frequently had
requests, which we complied with, by giving a list of personnel and
giving something about the personnel so that they could select some-
one among the dozen or two dozen names that we would submit.
In 1945, as secretary of the Political Science Association, I sub-
mitted a list of names of experts for the army of occupation in Japan,
and for the army of occupation in Germany. It was a list of political
scientists who would be helpful on the Government side. I didn*t put
my own name on the list at all, but in January of 1946, I had a tele-
gram from General Hilldring saying that General MacArthur had
asked for my services in Japan.
I came down to Washington to be processed and briefed, and I was
surprised to find in the Pentagon that the recommendations that the
American Political Science Association had made in the matter of
personnel had not been accepted. I had a great deal of trouble in
getting from the Chief of the Civil Affairs Division in the Army this
list. He passed me off to his deputy, and his deputy passed me off
finally to a very excellent young colonel. From him I received the list.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 561
I was shocked when I saw the list, because there were none of the
recommendations that we had made.
I took that list over to an old friend of mine who had served as
Chief of the Far Eastern Division in OSS (Office of Strategic Serv-
ices) . . His name is Charles Burton Fahs, a very outstanding specialist
in Japan and a man of great integrity. And I remember that Charles
Burton Fahs was astonished by the character of the names that had
been recommended.
We checked those names off. Some of them were known to us to
be Communists, many of them pro-Communists or fellow travelers.
They were extremely leftist.
I went back to the Pentagon to protest against a number of these
people, and to my amazement I found that they had all been invited,
and they had all accepted, and some of them were already on their
way to Japan.
I wanted to find out where the list came from, and I was told that
the list had come from the Institute of Pacific Relations.
And so General MacArthur, who had very little control over the
personnel that was sent to Japan at this time for civil affairs, prac-
tically no control, had to receive a large group of very leftist and some
of them Communist advisers in the field of political science.
Well, does that illustrate what you want, Mr. Chairman, by refer-
ence to the influence in the selection of personnel?
I might just add this, on the slightly humorous side: During the
war we had the National Roster, which you probably remember. I
think they are trying to improve that and make it a great machine
for selection of personnel. We used to say that the theory was that
you get the names of a hundred thousand scientists all over the United
States, social scientists, natural scientists, and so on. You put their
names on cards. You put their competence on cards. You put their
experience on cards. You put it in the machine. Then when some
organ of Government wants an expert in this or that, all you have to
do is to press two or three buttons, and out comes a card w T ith the name
of a perfect expert, just the one you want for the assigment. But
nobody knows better than your committee that it will be a long time
before such a machine is invented and used.
Representative Hats. I have a pertinent question right here, pro-
fessor. Did General MacArthur take any pertinent advice from any
of his -advisers about anything?
Dr. Colegrove. Well, these advisers who came out, particularly the
leftists, were immediately spotted by MacArthur's G-2, General Wil-
loughby. We used to say that General Willoughby could tell a Com-
munist a hundred miles away.
Representative Hats. He is the same fellow, though, who couldn't
spot them at China when they poured through at the Yalu River.
Wasn't that the one?
Dr. Colegeove. That was out of the jurisdiction of Willoughby.
Representative Hats. I thought he was the G-2 head man.
Dr. Colegrove. He was G-2 for General MacArthur.
Representative Hats. I understood that somebody gave MacArthur
advice that there were no Communists up there.
Dr. Colegrove. Oh, no. I have seen the reports that Willoughby
made. Willoughby was telling MacArthur in 1946 and 1947 and 1948
that the Communists were going to attack South Korea in June.
562 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Representative Hats. Well, who advised him about that famous,
"We will be home by Christmas, boys," statement?
Dr. Colegrove. That is something that we would like to find out, too.
How that statement was made.
You see, the jurisdiction of General MacArthur over Korea came
to an end in 1948. The State Department took over. The Army was
out completely. And it really was not General Willoughby's business
to investigate North Korea. But you know General Willoughby. He
would investigate everything under the sun. And his reports were
always pessimistic reports to General MacArthur.
I might say this with reference to the personnel and with reference
to the question you asked about advice.
Luckily, hi this case, the subversives that came out to Tokyo were
very soon discovered by General Willoughby. And, of course, Gen-
eral MacArthur's staff was decidedly anti-Communist, very much op-
posed to that kind of adviser and the kind of advice that they would
give. General MacArthur takes advice, of course, but it is only on
the highest level. There was a tight little ring of generals around
General MacArthur. They consisted of General Willoughby, the
G-2 ; General Courtney Whitney, a remarkably competent man, head
of the Government Section; General Marquat, who was head of the
economic Section; there was a very able professor from Stanford
University who was head of National Resources; there was Colonel
Carpenter, head of the Legal Section, and two or three others. And
none of the Communists who got out to Japan had any other chance
in operations than to do research work and reporting. General Mac-
Arthur would meet once or twice a day with the upper echelon of his
office, and the policy was entirely made by them. I may say that many
of the facts that they used in persuading General MacArthur to do
this or that were facts dug out by the researchers in the Government
Section or the Economic Section, but the policy-making in Japan was
quite different, I think, from the policy-making in the army of occupa-
tion in Germany. It was on the highest level. None of these subver-
sives got a chance at all in policymaking.
I do think that there was just one point where they did damage,
that was in their contact with the Japanese people, a contact which
MacArthur couldn't control.
I think there were some unfortunate contacts between these leftists
and the Japanese people.
Representative Hays. I was going to ask you a question about some-
thing you said. You seemed to leave an implication by the way you
stated it. Perhaps you didn't mean to, and I want to clear that up.
You said it was quite different from Germany. None of the sub-
versives had a chance to make policy.
Did you mean to imply that some of the subversives did make policy
in Germany?
Dr. Colegrove. No. What I meant to say was that the policy-
making went down into a lower level in the army of occupation in
Germany.
I was trying to indicate where policy was made in General Mac-
Arthur's staff. It was only on the very highest level, with a group
of officers he trusted, who were competent, hard-headed, very realistic
officers.
The Chairman. Since General MacArthur has been referred to, it
happens that I have known him for a great many years and knew him
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 563
as a captaiii when I was in the 42d Division. I believe he was a cap-
tain. And I have known him over the years since, not intimately,
but I have had a very good opportunity to observe him.
• Dr. Coueorove. I know he thinks highly of you.
:' The Chairman. Thank you. I am pleased to know that. I have
been impressed that General MacArthur has a great capacity to ad-
vise with subordinates, advisers of all types, and then assemble in his
own thinking the information given him, classified and adopted as
his own. I mean expressed his own views; but his views being based
upon the advice and information that he has received. Is my estimate
of him somewhat justified?
Dr. Colegbove. Oh, wholly justified. I think you have sized Gen-
eral MacArthur up very accurately. He is a constant reader. He
reads documents late into the night. He is a constant reader of his-
tory and of government works. General MacArthur would have
made one of our outstanding historians if he had ever gone into the
profession of history rather than that of a professional soldier.
Representative Hats. I think Hollywood lost a great man there,
too.
Dr. Colegeove. I went to Japan a little prejudiced against General
MacArthur, having been in Washington continuously. I was bowled
over by appreciation of his efficiency and his ability to lead. I must
say he handled the Eussian situation well, when the Russians wanted
to send an army of occupation into Japan. They wanted to occupy
Hokkaido and northern Hondo, which would be easy for them to chop
off by aggression. General MacArthur avoided that by assigning
them way down to Kyushu in the south, and of course the Russians
didn't want to go there, where they would be hemmed in by the Amer-
icans and the British. So they didn't occupy any part of Japan.
That was a great advantage, because there was only one army of
occupation really, that of General MacArthur. I think you could say
General MacArthur was the first high-ranking officer who got tough
with Soviet Russia after the war. And you might say it begins with
the speech which Courtney Whitney made before the Allied Council
in March, the first part of March 1946, when Russia behaved in a
very impertinent, insolent way to the United States, demanding infor-
mation, and criticizing policies of the occupation which were really
democratic policies. General MacArthur, through Gen. Courtney
Whitney, made a resounding reply to the Russians that kept them
quiet for quite a while.
I must say that episode rang a bell all through the official life of the
United States. James F. Byrnes heard it. He was then Secretary
of State, and shortly after that, in the Council of Foreign Ministers
in London, he began to take a tougher stand against the Russians.
By the time Jimmy Byrnes left the Secretaryship of State, he was
following a rather strong policy against Soviet Russia.
Representative Hats. I just have one other question.
You have mentioned several times, Professor, these subversives
who went out to Tokyo. Would you like to name them for the com-
mittee, who they were ? ,
Dr. Colegrove. I would rather not, Mr. Hays. They are all named
in the McCarran subcommittee report. I haven't got that list with
me. I have a list in my library in Evanston, but I haven't been able
to fly to Evanston to consult it. I wouldn't want to trust my memory
564 TAX-EXEMPT ' FOUNDATIONS
upon that. But I can say this : Every one is named in the report of
the McCarran subcommittee.
Mr. Wormser. Professor, I would like to ask you this : Do you think
the IPR incident is an example of the danger involved in founda-
tions financing outside research organizations which don't have, let's
say, an academic standing for research, instead of perhaps doing it
through universities ? Would you comment on that ?
Dr. Colegrove. Well, Mr. Wormser, everything in life is dangerous,
and I think the answer could be that they can be a powerful help, a
great assistance to the Government, and at the same time, of course,
they can be very unfortunate. Of course, it depends upon the character
of the organization.
Now, here was the Institute of Pacific Relations, supposed to be a
research organization, which had been captured by subversives. And
yet it was actually furnishing names of personnel to fairly important
officers within the Government.
Mr. Wormser. If the organizations wanted to have that kind of
research done, wouldn't it have been far safer and sounder to do it
through the universities, who, after all, have a certain discipline and
a certain check on research and what not ?
Dr. Colegrove. Oh, yes. I would agree with that. I think the uni-
versities are much more sound and much more safe than most of the
operating societies. But, of course, a university is a local concern.
Let me say, the American Political Science Association might be help-
ful in the selection of personnel, because we are supposed to know all
the political scientists in the United States better than the Govern-
ment does. And our advice ought to be worth something.
Representative Hats. You could get in a position, there, Professor,
couldn't you, where you would have people saying, "Well, now, let's
not give any to that university or this one, because they are not safe."
And bringing in all different shades of opinion, you could have that
same problem arise there, couldn't you ?
Dr. Colegrove. Admittedly. That might well be true. Every sys-
tem is more or less dangerous in one sense, and every system has some
elements of help.
Mr. Wormser. Professor, would you comment on the general area
of the dependence of the academician on foundation grants?
Dr. Colegrove. Yes. Today a professor of political science who
wants to conduct certain research that is costly is in a rather difficult
position unless he gets a grant from a foundation or through an oper-
ating society, like the American Council of Learned Societies, or
through his university, based upon a grant from a foundation. And
that means, of course, ultimately, the foundations pass upon the kind
of research which shall be done, particularly with reference to the
subjects of research which should be undertaken.
Personally, I have been more or less a lone wolf in my research.
I suppose, you can divide professors into categories. There are pro-
fessors who would rather work alone as a one-man project on a subject
that interests them deeply. Others want to investigate, let's say,
certain phases cooperatively.
If you are in a cooperative research project, you are doing one sec-
tion. You may not know what the other man is doing in the other
section. You finally have to get together and have things parceled
out. Probably the greatest books in the world were written by the
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 565
"lone wolf" philosophers who work alone, like Immanuel Kant, in his
study, and who has received practically no assistance from anyone.
You have the difference there between Plato and Aristotle. Plato was
a philosopher who paced the walk, the peripatetic school. His students
listened to him carefully. He didn't do much listening himself.
Take Aristotle, on the other hand, Aristotle, in writing his book
called Politics, investigated 158 constitutions. Now, he didn't do all
that himself. Aristotle must have had quite a considerable research
staff or group of devoted pupils. That is cooperative research. Aris-
totle had evidently a large research group working with him. So you
find two kinds of professors, the ones who would like to engage in
cooperative research and others who would like to make a study that
they control entirely themselves and do all the work themselves.
Mr. Woemser. They are all dependent on foundation grants in the
last analysis, though ?
Dr. Colegrove. Oh, yes. Now most of it depends upon foundation
grants.
Mr. Woemser. Does that result in a situation, Professor, where the
academicians are somewhat reluctant to criticize the foundations 2
Dr. Colegrove. Oh, yes, you don't like to bite the hand that feeds
you. It is not quite civilized to do that. There is that tendency. And,
of course, there is a tendency almost to fawn on the man who gets
you the research project. I have tremendous respect, let us say, for
one of the men in my own profession who had a great deal to do with
the granting of research funds. That was Prof. Charles E. Merriam
of the University of Chicago, one of the greatest of our political scien-
tists, and a man of the greatest integrity. I remember a conversation
I had with Professor Merriam in Paris, when he came out to Europe
to investigate the Laura Spellman Eockefeller Fund, which was in
the process of being changed at that time.
I remember a conversation in a Paris restaurant at that time, I
think, the Cafe Majeure, in which Professor Merriam said, "Money
is power, and for the last few years I have been dealing with more
power than a professor should ever have in his hands." He said, "I
am nothing else than a Louis XIV academic agent." Somebody sit-
ting next to him said, "Well, Professor Merriam, not Louis XIV.
You had better say Oliver Cromwell."
And Merriam said, "Call me any name you want. I have too much
power in my hands."
Well, Merriam controlled a large part of the research that was doled
out by the Social Science Research Council, and I think that he was
extremely able in his selections. But I do think there is the tendency,
in the case of a great man like Merriam, for the younger men to get m
almost a fawning position with reference to them.
Now, I don't mean young men running to help him on with his coat
or to pick up his papers or to carry his valise down to the depot. I
mean something more subtle than that. I don't mean even laughing
at his jokes or getting students to come into his classes. I mean some-
thing quite a little bit more subtle than that. Perhaps I can best
explain myself by giving one incident with reference to the American
Political Science Association.
We hold an annual convention every year, in which we have round-
tables and sessions where pertinent questions are discussed, and pro-
fessors and experts lead the discussion. As secretary of the American
566 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Political Science Association, I used to assist in developing these pro-
grams. And I noticed that there was tremendous competition among
the heads of roundtables to get Professor Merriam to appear on the
roundtable, or Prof. Charles A. Beard, who is a remarkable scholar.
The competition was terrific. Merriam and Beard were very generous.
They generally accepted those invitations. But from the standpoint
of managing the society, it was very clear that having Merriam and
Beard upon too many roundtables cut off a lot of the younger men that
ought to have participated. So we put through a rule that no member
of the Political Science Association should appear at any roundtable
more than two times each year. That caused quite a little bitterness
among various chairmen of roundtables who were trying to build good
programs.
I remember one man who was a chairman and who bitterly de-
nounced me saying, "You have ruined my chance to get a social science
research grant, because you have cut me off from getting better
acquainted with Professor Merriam. You have not been fair to me."
I didn't realize how chairmen of roundtables, professors themselves,
were bidding for Professor Merriam not only oecause of his talents
but because of his control of so much money for the Social Science
Research Council.
Representative Hats. Professor, if I were to grant everything you
say to be true, and I am not going to dispute it with you, you are
just talking about a rather human tendency there, aren't you, that
could be applied to most anything? Not only heads of foundations,
but I can give you a little example in politics. When they have a big
picnic or something out in my district, if the chairman of the picnic
is uninhibited, he snoots for the President, knowing he isn't going to
get him. Then he tries for the Governor, and if the Governor is tied
up, then they try for the Congressman, and if he is not available, they
will settle for the sheriff or somebody else, you see. But they just
come down the line. It happens over and over and over again. I
don't know what you are going to do about it. I don't believe even
the law would stop it.
Dr. Colegrove. Both of these items, the one you have described^
and the one I have, are right out of human events, aren't they, human
nature ? It is there, and of course it will operate.
Representative Hays. And, of course, Professor Merriam's pro-
found observation about "Money is power," I don't think was quite
original with him.
Dr. Colegrove. Oh, no.
Representative Hays. It is a thing that we have known back since
the time of maybe this Pharaoh they are digging out now.
Dr. Colegrove. The Stone Age, probably, when money was in the
form of stone.
Representative Hays. And that is another thing we just have to
muddle along with and deal with as best we can.
Dr. Colegrove. I think we should realize that we have these human
aspects to deal with and they can't be ignored.
Representative Hays. That is right. I agree with you.
Mr. Wormser. I asked the question, Mr. Hays, to bring out the
point, if it is true, that there is a reluctance on the part of academicians
who are dependent on grants, to criticize the foundations.
Representative Hays. I realize that, Mr. Wormser, and I am sure
that Dr. Colegrove has his opinion about that, and I am sure he
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 567
believes in it. But I have enough letters from people, from professors
of political science, sociology, and so on, who say they have never
fotten a grant, and some say they have gotten a grant, who will testify,
am willing to concede that with some people that would be a point
that would be well taken, but I don't think you can apply it like a
blanket over everybody. Do you agree with that, Doctor ?
Dr. Colegrove. Oh, no, you can't generalize completely. That is
quite true.
Representative Hays. Because there are some people— we had one
here last week who admitted he was a foundation baby. Yet he came
in and criticized the foundations. So there are people who will criti-
cize if they think the criticism is justified, no matter what. You have
got to assume that there is enough integrity in the country that people
will do that. Don't you agree?
Dr. Colegrove. Yes. I will agree wholly with that.
I must say that some people think there is considerable paternalism
and pontification on the part of the grantors. My own experience has
been that the officers of the foundations have leaned over backwards
not to pontificate or to assert their opinions too greatly.
I recall one case where it seemed to me that there was a little "lec-
turing" done, to use a mild term, by a foundation. I don't resent it,
but I know Prof. Frederic A. Ogg very greatly resented it. The
American Political Science Association established a committee on
the study of American legislatures, and particularly Congress. A
very able young political scientist was made head of that committee.
His name was Dr. George Galloway. And the officers of the committee
were directed to go out and find $50,000 to carry on this investigation
of Congress. So Prof essor Ogg and myself had that task. We went
to the Rockefeller Foundation. Joseph Willits turned us down, I
think probably correctly. Then we tried the Carnegie Foundation tor
the Advancement of Teaching, and a remarkably fine scholar was head
of that. It was near his retirement. He was Dr. Walter Jessup. I
think he listened to us with a little impatience, and at the end of it he
gave us a lecture that was nearly twice the length of our presentation
of the case, in which he berated us rather strongly for not teaching
with conviction. He chose me as a horrible example. He used to be
president of the State University of Iowa, and knew my father very
well, who was a president of a small Iowa college. And Dr. Jessup at
that time said that he felt the<small colleges were doing a much better
job than the great universities, because teachers were teaching with
conviction.
He used as an example of lack of teaching with conviction the fact
that we didn't treat the Constitution of the United States like Robert
Browning treated the old square yellow book, in The Ring and the
Book. I couldn't quite remember his words after Ogg and I left.
Ogg was quite incensed. He went back to his hotel. I went over to
the public library, on 42d Street in New York, and looked up "The
Ring and the Book," just to find out what President Jessup meant.
You probably remember the poem from your school days. I had f or-
fotten it. But in talking about the old book, 200 years old, which
essup compared with the Constitution of the United States, Brown-
ing says : "You see this old square book ? I toss in air and catch again*
swirl by crumpled vellum covers, pure crude thought secreted from
men's minds when hearts beat hard, blood ran high, 200 years ago."
568 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Well, I think that is what President Jessup meant with reference
to the Constitution of the United States. It was pure solid thought,
and we, political scientists, weren't teaching that Constitution with
very much conviction.
I was sorry to say, however, that President Jessup didn't carry out
as fully as I think he should have carried out the giving of help to the
small colleges and not concentrating the research grants in the operat-
ing societies, who practically ignored the small colleges. And I think
you realize, in Ohio, which is full of small colleges, that there is more
of genuine American tradition taught in those small colleges than
in most of our large universities.
Representative Hats. I might as well get in a plug for Ohio here
and say it has more colleges than any State in the Union.
The Chairman. Not to be left out entirely, my congressional dis-
trict has seven colleges in it.
Mr. Goodwin. Without attempting to make any odious compari-
son with the sovereign State of Ohio or the sovereign State of Ten-
nessee, let me say that on the authority of the Federal Office of Edu-
cation, I find that in Massachusetts there are 72 institutions of learn-
ing of college grade. As a matter of fact, it is often said back home
that if and when our textiles should all go down to Tennessee or points
south and if we should lose our other industrial establishments,
never having had any agriculture compared with the Middle West,
all that would be left for Massachusetts would be our summer resorts,
the Berkshires, Cape Cod, and the North Shore, and our colleges and
educational institutions.
Dr. Colegrove. I might say that I happen to be one of the trustees
of a small college in Iowa, Upper Iowa University. We have only
four buildings ; a library, a girls' dormitory ; a physics hall, and a
gymnasium. The science building burned down the other day. It
was proposed that we apply to some foundation to get the money to
rebuild this hall. And, of course, we knew that it would be absolutely
impossible to get assistance for that university, that small university.
The Chairman. When the foundations come on, that is one ques-
tion I expect to ask, not as a criticism, but in order to get the explana-
tion: Why have the foundations changed the policy which has done
so much good in the past and, I think, has built up so much goodwill
for the foundations ? The policy has been changed to veer away from
that type of expenditure to other types that some people think are
open to greater question. But I won't ask you, of course, to comment
on that, because you are not in a position to do so.
In referring to Mr. Jessup, are you referring to Jessup, senior, or
junior ?
Dr. Colegrove. No, President Walter Jessup.
The Chairman. Walter Jessup ?
Dr. Colegrove. Walter Jessup, who formerly was president of the
State University of Iowa.
You know, Mr. Chairman, I might follow through on one other
aspect, because it does show the operations of a professional society
like the American Political Science Association.
All the foundations turned us down on this study of Congress. But
we did find the money.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 569
Mr. DeWitt Wallace, editor of the Reader's Digest, gave us $5,000
one year and $5,000 the second year. And we conducted our research,
a study of Congress, on that very much reduced budget.
I am of the opinion that we sometimes spend too much on research.
The Political Science Association made this study on less than $10,000.
I might say this, that our study impressed Congress so much, espe-
cially Senator LaFollette and Representative Mike Monroney, that
on the basis of this study they called hearings and drafted a bill for
the reorganization of Congress, which I think most of us believe has
been a very helpful piece of legislation.
I might just add this, also, that the committee under Dr. Galloway
advised the Congress that the salaries of Congressmen ought to be
raised in both Houses to $25,000, The Congressmen themselves didn't
have the courage to go that high. It shows probably that political
scientists have more courage than Congressmen.
Representative Hays. Talking about this Reorganization Act, you
know, Congress is composed of human beings, too, and they are just
about as hard to make laws for, I guess, as the average American.
Do you recall one of the significant things about that was the elim-
ination of a great number of committees ?
Dr. Colegeove. Yes. That was one of the recommendations.
Representative Hats. Of course, what they did was that they elim-
inated committees and every committee created 7 or 8 subcommittees,
so we wind up with more committees than we had before.
Mr. Wormser. Professor, do you see a strong tendency in the social
sciences, and research particularly, for high centralization, resulting
in a sort of a concentration of power ? .
Would you comment on that, please ?
Dr. Colegrove. Yes. It is much more convenient for the founda-
tions to deal with the operating societies if they are located in New
York or Washington, such as, for instance, the American Council of
Learned Societies, or the Social Science Research Council. The large
foundations who give most of the money are, of course, in New York. I
think there has been a tendency on the part of most of the founda-
tions to hope or expect that the professional societies will move down
to Washington. And that has been the case with the society that I have
been connected with so long. I am no longer the secretary of the
society, that is the American Political Science Association.
I think there is no question that the foundations wanted us to come
to Washington. And shortly after I resigned, the American Political
Science Association did move its headquarters to the Capital.
Representative Hats. You don't see anything sinister in that, do
you? It is just a matter of convenience, isn't it ?
Dr. Colegrove. Well, it is a matter of convenience for the founda-
tions, I think. I would prefer this : The American Political Science
Association is an association of teachers of political science. They are
located all over the United States. I felt, as secretary, that I owed
an obligation to every member who taught, whether it was in a large
university or in a very small, little college of two or three hundred
students. And our headquarters had generally been in Evanston or
in Ann Arbor, right in the center of the United States. And we tried
to have our annual conventions held as near the center of the United
570 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
States as possible. We also tried to keep the dues down to $5. When
the association was moved to Washington, the dues went up to $10.
And you know that is more than a lot of professors in small colleges
can afford. In a large city, $10 isn't so much, but in a small town,
professors who are getting only $1,500 or $1,800 a year ; or $2,000—
they are lucky if they get $2,000 or $3,000 — that is too high a fee for
annual dues. So I see both unfortunate and fortunate aspects of
the location in Washington.
Mr. Wormser. Professor, my question wasn't directed solely at
the geographical aspect. I meant also to include the concentration
in effort; that is, the tendency for the foundations to direct their
research through intermediate organizations, like the Social Science
Research Council and the Council of Learned Societies, and so forth.
Do you see that tendency ?
Dr. Colegrove. Yes, of course there is that tendency. It follows
from human nature, of course. There is more day-to-day conversation
and consultation between the officers of the professional societies and
the officers of the operating societies, like the American Council of
Learned Societies, and the officers of the foundations.
I think that the officers of the professional societies are extremely
good listeners and follow pretty carefully the advice that is given
them by the foundation officers.
Mr. Wormser. Professor, we have had some testimony to the effect
that there has been this conscious concentration of research direction,
mainly through what we have referred to as the clearinghouse or-
ganizations, and also to the effect that the Government now spends
on the aggregate in social research more than all the foundations put
together, and that this government research has also come more or
less quite substantially under the direction of these same groups.
Would you comment on that, and add to your comments your concep-
tion of whether that is a desirable factor or a desirable development,
this high concentration of direction in one group, however well quali-
fied?
Dr. Colegrove. Well, I think the present danger, Mr. Wormser,
in that respect, is due to the fact — because the concentration is ap-
parent — the danger is partly due to the fact that the foundations
nave been demanding and giving grants for research that is more
particularly slanted toward the left than toward the right. That
seems to be the tendency of the times. You can't say what is the
reason our research has been so much leftist research at the present
time. You can't blame the foundations for it. It goes along with the
spirit of the times.
Do the foundations merely follow the spirit of the times, or do they
contribute very much to the spirit of the times ?
Was Plato a product of a great civilization, or was later Greek
civilization a product of Plato and Aristotle ?
The causes and effects are so completely mixed up.
But there has been a tendency, I think, on the part of the founda-
tions to select subjects, promote subjects, which are somewhat leftist.
Representative Hats. Right there, what do you mean by "leftist" ?
Dr. Colegrove. Well, you know, President Roosevelt used to say,
"You will find me just a little left of center."
I suppose you will have to take half a compass in this. The middle
of the road is center. Then toward the left, of course, is from center
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 571
toward radicalism. Toward the right is from center to ultracon-
servatism.
Representative Hats. Or you could use a comparable term to radi-
calism, "reactionaryism" ?
Dr. Colegkove. Yes, reactionaryism would be a very good word for
the other extreme, a very good word. It is extremely hard to say why
that swing occurs.
The Chairman. Since I am sometimes referred to as a reactionary,
I would like to have your definition of a "reactionary. "
Dr. Colegrove. Terms like these have to be used in the sense of a
relative comparison.
The Chairman. You need not reply to that.
Mr. Goodwin. Wasn't it Calvin Coolidge who said, I think, in a
message to the Massachusetts Legislature : "Don't hesitate to be as re-
actionary as the multiplication table"? Doesn't that form the basis
for a pretty good definition of reaction ?
Dr. Colegrove. The multiplication table never changes. It is a
fact. We all accept it.
The Chairman. I am not sure that I am fully in accord with your
statement about the spirit of the time being leftist so far as the great
masses of the American people are concerned.
Representative Hays. I am not, either. I don't like that term. I
would rather he would use "liberal." .
The Chairman. It is my evaluation of the American people that
they are very sound in their thinking, and they are very apprehensive
about some of the movements which you probably have in mind as
being leftist, and when they are given an opportunity to express them-
selves I think they will usually express themselves. I think the Amer-
ican people are certainly not left of center, the majority of them. They
try to stay in the center.
Representative Hays. Well, of course, you will have to decide what
left of center is. As I have pointed out many, many times, social secur-
ity was considered pretty leftist when it was first advocated. So was
bank deposit insurance considered very leftist, if you want to use that
term. But now not even a reactionary advocates doing away with it.
The Chairman. We ought not to get off into this. But, again, as a
"reactionary," I was in favor of Federal deposit insurance before there
ever was any Federal deposit insurance, and I was very much for it
when it was adopted, so I don't think that is a fair example, nor am
I sure that social security is. But, anyway, that is aside from the
question, so I think it is best not to get into it.
Dr. Colegrove. The comment of Mr. Hays seems to be correct that
movements go back and forth. Whether you accept the pendulum
theory of history or whether you accept the cyclical theory of going
around in circles that Plato and Aristotle used, or whether you take
the spiral theory of the Marxians, there is constant change. And
words change, too. The term "liberal" is an extremely hard word to
deal with. It has to be put in a historical context. We might consider
the Liberal Party of England, which was, you might say, the left
side of English parliamentary history, for a hundred years, as against
the conservative side with Gladstone on one side and Disraeli on the
other. The Liberal Party today would probably be considered very
reactionary, because they believed in laissez faire. They believed in
no interference by government.
572 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Representative Hats. Even a more striking example, it seems to
me — perhaps you will agree— is the present Conservative Party in
England. By our standards, the Conservative Party would be ; consid-
erably to the left of center, wouldn't it?
Dr. Colegrove. Yes, by our standards.
Representative Hays. But it still calls itself the Conservative Party.
Dr. Colegrove. Yes, it still calls itself the Conservative Party. And
the party that Premier Yoshida presides over in Japan, the Jiyuto, is
the Japanese translation for "liberal," and it is one of the most con-
servative parties in the whole world.
Representative Hats. That points up very succinctly the difficulty
we have in denning the terms we use here every day.
Mr. Goodwin. Is that not also true in trying to define eyen "cen-
ter"? Roosevelt said he was a little to the left of center, which raised
some suspicion in my mind as to what he meant by center.
Dr. Colegrove. I suppose the only definition is "middle of the road
at the time." And it is not the same road every year. But "middle
of the road" is the approximation.
The Chairman. When I was down home driving a wagon to town
and walking on foot, I always found the middle of the road kind of
hard to travel. It usually had rocks in it. So I had to get over on
one side or the other j ust a little bit.
Mr. Wormser. Professor, could I focus this discussion in this way :
Has there been a tendency among the foundations, and in this concen-
tration of power generally, to believe that conservatism is against
progress ? Might that explain the rationale of grants toward the left
rather than to the conservatives ?
Dr. Colegrove. There is a tendency, I think, in the faculties of our.
colleges and universities which I suppose is the spirit of the times —
and times change — to think that the conservative is opposed to 4 prog-
ress, that it is the great obstacle to progress. And research that comes
up with conservative results they would say is bad research.
This often happens. I have actually heard very distinguished pro-
fessors say, with reference to certain other professors, "He is not a
liberal. He is opposed to Soviet Russia." Now, that, of course, is a
very unfortunate use of the term "liberal." But for years and years
there has been a tendency in the American classroom — you may have
noted it in Columbia University — to think that intellectualism and
liberalism or radicalism were synonymous ; but if a person was con-
servative, like Edmund Burke, he was not an intellectual. That has
been a rather unfortunate aspect, it seems to me, with reference to
teaching in universities.
I would like, if I may, to say one word regarding the students of
these professors. Universities swing back and forth, in this direction.
There was one man who founded the graduate school of Columbia
University. His name was John W. Burgess. He was one of the
greatest political scientists the world has ever seen. His work called
Political Science and Comparative Law practically bowled over the
profession. He founded political science in the United States. He
was one of the most conservative of men, one of the most conservative
scholars, and he stood at the top of his profession in the eighties and
nineties and the first decade of this century.
Among his students were some outstanding conservatists. He was
a conservative professor and turned out a lot of conservative students.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 573
Chief Justice Stone was one of his students. Nicholas Murray But-
ler was one of his students.
On the other hand, he turned out quite a number of students, prob-
ably just as many, who were what we would call liberal, or left of
center. One was Professor Merriam himself. Another one was
Charles A. Beard, a distinguished scholar. And most people don't
realize it, but Franklin D. Roosevelt was one of his students. We
know at Hyde Park there is evidence that in all his career at Colum-
bia University, Roosevelt took notes in only one course; he didn't pay
any attention to any of the others so far as note-taking was concerned.
He took very full and complete notes on Professor Burgess' lectures
on constitutional law.
Well, here was a very distinguished founder of a graduate faculty
of law and comparative government. He turned out all kinds of
students, on the right and on the left. I think Columbia University
has swung more and more to the left. Professor Burgess would not
be today considered quite as high in Columbia as he was back in the
eighties and nineties. You have that swing back and forth.
Now, I think probably John Dewey and his influence at Columbia
promoted that swing very considerably. The philosophy of experi-
mentalism contributed to it. And, of course, Beard, an able man,
went to England. There he met, of course, the very impressive move-
ment of the Fabian Society there, Sidney and Beatrice Webb, par-
ticularly. And Beard was one of the devoted students of Burgess.
Professor Beard brought back to the United States the doctrine of
the economic interpretation of history, which he got through the
Webbs and through the Fabians, and wrote his book called Economic
Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States, which fol-
lowed the Marxian thesis.
Professor Beard then taught at Columbia University and left
Columbia University because of a difference with President Butler
about 1918. But he exercised a great influence among the political
scientists and historians.
Toward the end of his life, he became much more conservative.
Professor Beard died a rather conservative professor.
I remember, when the spirit of the times of the American Political
Science Association was carrying the younger members along to left
of center, further left of center, Beard was the idol of our political
scientists. He was an eloquent person then. He seemed to be so
reasonable.
But when Beard changed, toward the end of his life, I remember
very distinctly in 1949, this fine old man gave his last address before
the American Political Science Association. And he was hissed. The
times had gone way beyond Charles A. Beard. In fact, he had gone
back a little along the path that he had traveled in his youth.
Mr. Wormser. He was hissed because he had turned toward con-
servatism, Professor ?
Dr. Colegrove. Apparently because he had become a little anti-
New Deal, and partly because he opposed bitterly the foreign policy
of the New Deal. He was bitterly opposed to it.
Professor Beard became the founder of what we call the revisionist
school in American history.
Mr. Hays. Well, that is an interesting thing. You say he opposed
the foreign policy of the New Deal. I have heard a good many
49720— 54— pt. 1 3T
574 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
charges that they did not have any, and I have sort of halfway agreed
with that. Just what do you mean by that ?
Dr. Colegrove. Professor Beard thought it was a matter of the
whim of the President of the United States at that time, that the
President Was interventionist ; and Beard thought he tried to drag
the United States into war.
Professor Beard became our outstanding isolationist, far more iso-
lationist than Senator Taft. I think it is incorrect to call Taft an
isolationist. Beard really became an isolationist.
Mr. Hats. That is what I wanted to know, whether that was what
you had reference to.
Mr. Wormser. Professor, the pragmatism movement which started
with James at Harvard, I assume had considerable influence in this
movement which turned a good deal of universities thinking to the
left? .
Dr. CoI/Egrove. Yes, the history of Harvard University in this field
is very much the same as Columbia University's. I think Columbia
University went further than Harvard did. Maybe Harvard is not
as wide awake as Columbia University is. Dr. A. Lawrence Lowell,
who was president of Harvard University for a considerable number
of years, was chairman of the department of government, and he was
quite as conservative as John W. Burgess was. He had a powerful
effect in England, too. His study of the English Constitution and
the English Government had great influence in England as well as
in the United States. In the eighties and nineties and at the turn of
the century, Harvard was extremely conservative in the social sciences,
just like Columbia.
Then I think on the philosophical side, the psychological side, Har-
vard went the same way as Columbia did. One of the leaders, of
course, was William James. And his book called Varieties of Reli-
gious Experience, I think, has undermined the religious convictions
and faith of thousands of young people in the United States.
You know, Mr. Wormser, with all the attacks that have been made
upon religion by certain scientists, by the empirical school, and right
at Columbia University and Harvard University, I think that we
are finding among scientists themselves a realization that science
doesn't have all the answers to reality ; that there are experiences of
religion, questions of religious faith, that may, after all, be just as
much a part of reality as the study of the stars or the study of atomic
energy, or anything else.
I see, so far as science is concerned, a move away from the complete
control of empirical thinking and a return to a little more rational
or a little more humanistic consideration for religious principles,
moral principles, and ethics.
Mr. Wormser. You do not think, then, that you social scientists
are capable of producing all the answers ?
Dr. Colegrove. Oh, absolutely not. No. No, we do not have all
the answers in social science. We are rather dangerous people to
trust implicitly.
Mr. Wormser. Would you comment somewhat, professor, on the
scientific method as related to the social sciences ? We have had some
testimony to the effect that they are not, strictly speaking, sciences
at all ; that you cannot translate the methods of the natural sciences
closely ino social areas.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 575
Dr. Co£egrove. Well, the scientific method, of course, is something
that various people define in various different ways. If you say the
scientific method is a method which will allow you to generalize only
upon facts or observation of phenomena which you can see, and prove
they exist through the senses, then, of course, the scientific method
is very much limited.
Mr. Wormser. You are referring there to Mr. Hays' favorite term
"empiricism."
Mr. Hays. Do not tag that term on me. I did not think it up. In
fact, it is not my favorite one.
Dr. Cowigrove. Well, in one sense that was the difference between
Aristotle and Plato ; Plato being more the armchair philosopher, the
idealist, and Aristotle, in many respects, the founder of the great
school of empiricism.
But the trouble is about going the limit in one direction and ignor-
ing the other side.
Mr. Wormser. Well, what is the other side, professor ?
Dr. Colegrove. As far as empiricism is concerned, it is holding too
completely to the technique of purely statistical method, of dealing
only with data which can be observed by the sensory organs, opposed
to evidence which can be treated by inference or by argument on
accepted principles, or building up assumptions that lead to accepted
principles.
Now, on the rational or idealistic side, the side, for instance, that
Immanuel Kant was dealing with, he tried to take into consideration
other aspects of civilization than those you can actually see and touch.
I refer to Kant's "categorical imperative," for instance, where he said
that what he was impressed by was the starry firmament above his head
and the moral law in man's breast. Now, the moral law comes from
reasoning. It may be a priori reasoning, but it comes from reasoning
and from faith, and from willingness to accept a religious or unex-
plainable part of our human existence. I think Kant struck the happy
medium when he speaks of the starry firmament above, which, of
course, can be empirical, and the moral law in every man's breast,
which, of course, is deeply religious.
Does that answer the point ?
Mr. Wormser. Yes ; it does. You made some analogy with Marx-
ian dialectics which was not too clear to me. Would you develop that
somewhat?
Dr. Colegeove. I think among us political scientists, a great many
of us tend to accept the pendulum theory — I am using these debatable
terms — that politics swings to the right and then you swing to the left.
You will find that American history will swing, over a period of 10,
20, or 30 years, to the right, and then swing, over a period of 10, 20,
30, or 40 years, to the left, and so on. That would be a pendulum
theory.
The cyclical theory of Aristotle, more or less of Toynbee, although
he doesn't admit it is cyclical, is that civilization goes in great cycles.
With Aristotle, the cycle was, so far as government was concerned,
progress from aristocracy to kingship, from kingship to a great dis-
aster, to mobocracy, and out of mobocracy to some kind of a democracy.
From democracy you sell out to the rich men, the oligarchy. Finally,
the brainy men, the aristocrats, come back, and finally you have the
king. You have swung around the circle. The spiral theory, which is
576 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Marxian, is also cyclical, of course. History advances ; you have the
struggle of the plebes and the patricians in Rome, the Roman Empire,
the passing to feudalism, which they call a form of slavery, the rise
of the bourgeoisie and the industrial age ; sweeping around in a cycle.
But it is a spiral. You are always landing one place, in the Marxian
theory. You are aiming right at the classless society, the dictatorship
of the proletariat and then the perfect Communist society.
Mr. Hats. Do you subscribe to any of those three theories, doctor ?
Dr. CoiiEGROVE. What is that?
Mr. Hats. Do you personally subscribe to any of those theories?
Dr. Colbgrove. I think there is something to every one of those
theories. You can assemble a lot of data that looks as if the pendulum
theory was right, that you swing from the right to the left, or from
radicalism to conservatism, and so on. And if you take Greek history,
Greek history followed the Aristotelian cycle several times.
Mr. Hats. You can almost document the history. Of course, when
you try to apply those theories to the future, that is when you run
into difficulty.
Dr. Colegrove. The only cue you can follow is that history repeats
itself. History follows somewhat the same pattern.
Mr. Wormser. Now, professor, do you think the foundations have
been in any way responsible for this general tendency in education
and research ? I cite a couple of notes you gave me on the failure to
emphasize American institutions as sound.
I think you referred to the emphasis being laid on what you call
the "pathology" in studies of the American Government, and little
attempt to find out what makes our government work as well as it does ;
a tendency rather to present what is as somewhat wrong and to look
for ways to change it to make it better, instead of how to find out what
makes it work so well. Could you tell me what this trend has pro-
duced and to what extent you think foundations are responsible for it?
Dr. Colegrove. I think foundations could hardly be said to have
been the originators of any such tendency, but they certainly have
promoted it.
Curiously enough, people are sometimes much more interested in
pathology, in disease, than they are interested in the healthy body.
Mr. Wormser. By "pathology," you meant the ailments in our
society ?
Dr. Colegrove. The ailments, yes. Or let us say the sore spots, slum
areas, rather than fine residential areas, and so on. I think there has
been unfortunately a tendency on the part of the foundations to pro-
mote research that is pathological in that respect, that is pointing out
the bad aspects of American government, American politics, Ameri-
can society, and so on, instead of emphasizing the good aspects. You
have that difference right in Charles A. Beard himself. His Economic
Interpretation of the United States is Marxian and pathological.
When he wrote The Republic, that is sound. He is dealing there with
the sound part of American Government.
Mr. Hays. Don't you think, Doctor, that again we are running into
the human variable, there, in this pathological approach? I mean,
we could use this committee as an example. It has been entirely "path-
ological" so far, pointing out the defects, you see. It is just like a
person going to the doctor, is it not? If you are sick, you go. If you
are well, you tend to forget about him. You do not need him, you
think.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 577
Dr. Colegrove. I would say that the better policy for the founda-
tions would be to try to encourage more study of the healthy portions
of American society rather than laying so much emphasis upon the
pathological aspects.
Mr. Hays. I agree with you. Personally, after 6 years in Wash-
ington, I would like to see them do a study on why the Government
works as well as it does.
Dr. Colegrove. That would be a profitable study.
Mr. Hays. It is a mystery to me.
Dr. Colegrove. That would be a profitable study. James Bryce
had something to say on that, too, years ago.
Mr. Wormser. Professor, would you say that in that area science,
in the sense that it is used by social scientists, has been used as a sort
of cloak for reform ; that there has been this conscious movement to
reform our society; and that that has sometimes taken a distinctly
radical trend ?
Dr. Colegrove. Yes. Undoubtedly. If you are going to study the
pathological aspects, the natural tendency of human nature — we are
getting back to human nature, of course — is to find out how to cure
it, how to alleviate it, and so on. And if the foundations contribute
overmuch to pathological studies, and not sufficiently to the studies
with reference to the soundness of our institutions, there would be
more conclusions on the pathological side than there would be con-
clusions on the sounder traditional side of American government,
American history, and so on. That would inevitably follow.
It seems to me sometimes the foundations have gone out of their
way to try to get a non- American solution for some of our patho-
logical aspects; as, for instance, when 'the Carnegie Corp. brought a
Swedish scholar over to the United States to study the social problem
in the South, the racial problem in the South. I think Gunnar Myrdal
was a rather unfortunate selection, or rather the promotion of his
conclusions was unfortunate. We were told that here was a wholly
objective foreign scholar who was going to study one of the difficult
problems of American life, namely the situation of the Negro. And
it was concluded that, of course, his method would be right, because
he had not lived in the United States a long time, he was not con-
nected with the race that he was studying, and he was a foreigner.
Dr. Myrdal was a Socialist, pretty far left, indeed extremely left.
He was not unprejudiced. He came over here with all the prejudices
of European Socialists. And the criticism that he makes of the
American Constitution, the criticism that he makes of the conserva-
tives of the United States, are bitter criticisms. He didn't have any
praise at all for the conservatives. He did praise what he called the
liberals. And he implied that it was the conservatives in the United
States who created the problem and who continued the difficulties
of any solution. I felt the foundations did a great disservice to
American scholarship in announcing his study as an objective non-
partisan study whose conclusions were wholly unbiased. It was air
most intellectual dishonesty.
Mr. Wormser. Professor, the term "social engineering" has become
rather widespread. We seem to find social scientists conceiving of
themselves as sort of an elite entitled by their peculiar qualifications
and by their presumed ability as scientists to solve human problems,
578 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
justified in telling the rest of us how we should organize ourselves
and what form our society should take.
Would you comment on that, on this social-engineering feature
which has arrived in the social sciences ?
Dr. Colegrove. That, of course, grows out of the overemphasis on
the constant need for reform. The assumption is that everything
needs reform, that unless you are reforming you are not progressing.
I think it is in large part due to the failure of the foundations, the
failure of many of the scholars they choose, to fully understand what
the principles of the American Constitution are, what the principles
of American tradition are. Some of them, I know, do not accept those
principles as sound. They even attack the principles. Of course, we
all know that the principles should be examined and reexamined. But
there is a tendency on the part of those who get grants from the foun-
dations to think that they must turn out something in the way of
reform ; not a study which does not suggest a definite reform but a
study more like Myrdal's study, The American Dilemma, which poses
a condition in which there must be reform.
Mr. Woemser. Does that tendency to insist on reform in turn tend
to attract the more radical type of scholar, with the result that grants
are made more generally to those considerably to the left ?
Dr. Colegrove. I think undoubtedly it does, especially in the coop-
erative research, where a large number of people cooperate or operate
together on one research project.
Mr. Hats. Professor, in specific example, I am thinking now that
over the weekend, I saw an article in one of the Ohio newspapers, of
one of our cities up there, one of our larger cities, in which they had
made a study of juvenile delinquency. It was merely a factual study
about what part of the city these cases came from. They had figures
from the court records to show that about 73 percent of them came
from a slum area of the city. Now, that, of course, is pathological, if
you are going, to study that. But then if you did study it, you would
pretty nearly have to come up with some kind of a recommendation
about how to alleviate it ; would you not ? You could not come up and
say the American tradition says we have slums, and we have always
had them, and it is a thing we cannot do anything about, so we are
going to have juvenile delinquency. You pretty near have to suggest
some kind of a reform, if the study is to be of any value ; do you not?
Dr. Colegrove. Oh, most certainly. And, of course, that is the kind
of reform that constantly has to be in operation. Because there is
always the tendency, in a large city, for districts tohecome depreciated
districts. Houses tumble down, or are not kept up, and the popula-
tion becomes very congested in such places. And there, of course,
crime thrives. I would say that not all of those studies are really
research ; those are investigations which should follow research prin-
ciples laid down. They are routine studies.
Mr. Hays. But you came up with this fact that we have these sta-
tistics. Now, then, your study from there would have to be concerned
with, "What are we going to do about them?" And there, of course,
you leave your facts more or less behind and go off into the realm
of theory inevitably.
Dr. C)olegrove. Yes. Those solutions are based on what has been
done in a great many other cities, and the achievements in those cities.
And in many respects, that would be routine. It is obvious that cities
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 579
need probably better inspection.. A large number of buildings need
to be torn down, reconstructed. How are you going to get the money
to tear them down? What sort of projects are going to take their
place? How are you going to get capital to go into the building of
better tenements ?
All of that is a routine study that has to be made constantly in the
cities if they are going to keep them clean, keep out crime, and make
decent places for people to live.
Mr. Wormser. Professor, back to this term "social engineering,"
again, is there not a certain presumption, or presumptuousness, on the
part of social scientists, to consider themselves a group of the elite who
are solely capable and should be given the sole opportunity to guide
us in our social development ? They exclude by inference, I suppose,
religious leaders and what you might call humanistic leaders. They
combine the tendency toward the self-generated social engineering
concept with a high concentration of power in that interlocking ar-
rangement of foundations and agencies,, and it seems to me you might
have something rather dangerous.
Dr. Colegrove. I think so. Very decisively. There is a sort of
arrogance in a large number of people, and the arrogance of scholar-
ship is in many cases a very irritating affair. But there is a tendency
of scholars to become arrogant, to be contemptuous of other people's
opinions.
Mr. Wormser. However able they are, Professor, you would not
think it would be socially sound for us to be governed or directed by
any group of elite, whoever they might be ?
Dr. Colegrove. No. And, of course, if a certain group considers
itself as the elite, as having all the answers to all the questions, as a
great many professors do
The Chairman'. The hour of noon has arrived, and I am wondering
how much time the professor will require.
Mr. Wormser. I think I can finish with him perhaps in 15 or 20
minutes. Or he would not mind coming back after lunch ?
You would not mind coming back after lunch, would you, Profes-
sor?
Dr. Colegrove. No, if that will suit the convenience of the com-
mittee.
The Chairman. The committee will stand in recess until 2 o'clock.
(Whereupon, at 12 : 05 p. m., a recess was taken until 2 p. m., this
same day.)
AFTERNOON SESSION
(The hearing was resumed at 2 p. m.)
The Chairman. Are you ready to proceed, Professor Colegrove ?
Dr. Colegrove. Yes.
Mr. Wormser. Professor Colegrove, I believe you wanted to make
a correction in relation to the recommendations made for technical
staff in MacArthur's headquarters ?
Dr. Colegrove. Mr. Counsel, not a correction. I probably didn't
get in the whole story.
I was not informed by General Hilldring, as to the source of the
recommendations. I later, however, was informed by General
Schulgen, the deputy for General Hilldring — Hilldring was Chief of
the Civil Affairs Division in the Department of the Army— that the
580 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
lists supplied to the Army, besides the American Political Associa-
tion list, which was never used, came from the IPR, the Institute of
Pacific Relations. A Colonel Rae, assistant to the deputy, informed
me that there were really two lists. One was from the Institute of
Pacific Relations, and the other from the American Council of Learned
Societies, and the selection had been made from those two lists.
Mr. Hays. Just as an interesting commentary, how did your name
get on the list, or was it on the list, or how. did you get into it ?
Dr. Colegrove. I don't know. I may have been on one of the other
lists. I just don't know. Evidently a selection had been made in
December and early January. I got a telegram from Major General
Hilldring about the 15th of January. I found later on that the selec-
tion had really been made back in December from the two lists. I
never saw the list, except the list that General Schulgen gave me of
the persons who had been appointed.
Mr. Hats. Were you the only one who shared your general views
on this group ? Did you stand alone, with all the rest of them left, or
what?
Dr. Colegrove. Oh, no. There were some very good names on the
list. I was disappointed that my list had not been used. I had Dr.
David Rowe and Dr. Harold Quigley on my list.
Mr. Hats. No, maybe you are not following exactly what I am
trying to find out, Professor. Of the people who were subsequently
chosen, was every one of the group, of this so-called left-wing group,
except you, or were there other people who shared your general views ?
Dr. Colegrove. There were some good level-headed experts who
were selected. Dr. Cyrus Peake, for instance, who is now in the
State Department, an excellent Chinese scholar, and also Japanese
scholar. He was on one of the lists. In fact, he was also on my list,
but I was given to understand my list was not used. Peake was one
of the best expert officers sent out.
Mr. Hats. The reason I question you along those lines : I got the
impression this morning, and I think it was generally left, that there
weren't any good people. And after all, this is your opinion of who
were good and who were bad. But I sort of got the impression there
weren't any good ones on the list. But of the group that went over,
there were some that you would approve of ?
Dr. Colegrove. Oh, decidedly. I gave the wrong impression then.
There were evidently some good men on that list who were selected.
I assume that their names were on 1 of the 2 lists for the IPR or the
American Council of Learned Societies.
I am just assuming that. But there were some very good men, top-
notch men.
Mr. Hays. Perhaps this morning we were a little too "pathological"
in our approach to it.
Dr. Colegrove. Perhaps. Perhaps I got*bogged down in pathology.
Mr. Wormser. Professor Colegrove, some of the critics of this com-
mittee have apparently conceived the idea that it wishes to impose
some sort of "thought control" on research or to promote conformity in
research, according to some theories of its* own. I think I can safely
say, as the committee's agent, that it unanimously hopes for the oppo-
site; that it hopes for the freest kind of intellectual competition.
Is it your feeling that this concentration of power which I have
mentioned, this sort of close working together of the foundations and
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 581
the clearinghouse agencies has, in itself, tended to impose a kind of
uniformity or conformity on research in the social sciences?
Dr. Colegrove. I think it has, Mr. Wormser. I think it has very
decidedly. And it may be largely due to the fact that 1 man, or 2 or
<1 men, have such great leadership that they are permitted to make the
selections as to the projects.
Now, for instance, at the University of Chicago, where many of
the projects were carried out, on the nomination of Professor Mer-
riam, obviously one man making the selections — I do not mean to say
he was the only man, but he was influential — would have a tendency
to create a uniformity, a conformity, that would be in the direction in
which that man was thinking. That could happen on the conservative
side as much as it could happen on the liberal side, of course.
I felt that Professor Merriam was always very sensitive to founda-
tion opinion. I remember one episode when I was on the University
of Chicago Eoundtable with Professor Merriam in 1944, 1 think, when
the subject of our discussion was the question of the soldier vote.
President Roosevelt at that time was interested in allowing the boys
in the Army to vote in the presidential election. In the course of our
discussion before the roundtable opened, I mentioned one point that
I wanted to bring up, and that was whether in the United States we
ought not to have an educational qualification for voting. Some
States have it, you know. Merriam thought that was a good point, but
Merriam was overruled by the officers of the University of Chicago
Roundtable, who said they did not want us to discuss that question;
that they were not interested, although Professor Merriam himself
raised that question with the officers. Merriam shrugged his shoulders
and said, "You see how we are down here." I felt a little disappointed
in Professor Merriam that he did not compel that discussion, since
they were having him on the radio as the head of that particular
discussion or series of discussions.
Mr. Wormsee. Well, Professor, let me put it this way : If founda-
tions acted independently in designing, let us say, and awarding grants
in research in the social sciences, or if they acted through individual
colleges and universities, would there not be more of what you might
call intellectual competition than if they appropriated a large part
of their funds in the research area through intermediate organizations
which have a tendency to control or direct the type of research \
Dr. Colegrove. Well, I think the universities are better equipped
to produce diversity and variety of investigations. That would nat-
urally follow, when you have large faculties, one man interested in a
psychological phase, another man interested in a philosophical phase,
or economics, and so on. If you have a large committee of the faculty,
I think you are more likely to spread the researches.
I want to tell you also one thing about the professor who wants to
be a "lone wolf" in conducting investigations all himself. There is
a good deal to be said for that kind of a study. Take Hobbe's Levia-
than, for instance, one of the books we think highly of. Take Locke's
famous Treatise on Civil Government. Both were "lone wolf" studies,
done by one man, Hobbes, or Locke, if? their own libraries. They
were not cooperative studies. Of course, way back in those days, you
had to have somebody finance the study, and lordly patrons con-
tributed, of course, to these researches.
582 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
But I would like to see more individual projects done by one man,
with maybe one assistant, if he wants an assistant. I think that would
spread research around more.
Then I would like to see the foundations sprinkle more of these
research projects around the small colleges. There is a wealth of
brains, a wealth of competence, in our small colleges and universities,
which does not have its share in research grants at the present time.
I would hope that the foundations would give much more attention to
what is going on in the small colleges. The tendency is to concentrate
this in the large universities, if they use the universities, or concen-
trate in the operating societies.
Mr. Hays. Now, Doctor, when you are talking about grants, ob-
viously I think you will have to agree with me that in the field, we
will say, of cancer research, there would not be much that you could
do with a grant in a small college. That would have to be concen-
trated in something like the New York Memorial Cancer Hospital,
or something of that type. So you are talking now — or if I am wrong,
correct me — about grants in the social science field, and sociology, and
those fields.
Dr. Colegrove. Yes, I am limiting my remarks to the social sciences.
But I can see even in cancer an opportunity for small studies by one
man. I know of one such study made by Prof. Harold T. Davis at
Northwestern University.
Mr. Hays. That is not exactly a small college.
Dr. Colegrove. No, but it was just a one-man study.
Mr. Hays. Yes, but I am speaking about the physical equipment
he might have to have that would not be available.
Dr. Colegrove. He did not need any physical equipment except a
food medical library, and, of course, Northwestern has one and the
fniversity of Chicago has one and the city of Chicago has several.
He did his work entirely in taking the results of research in cancer by
the greatest experts on the subject of cancer. He must have gone over
three or four thousand articles. Then he applied the statistical method
to the medical findings and by use of the statistical method, he reached
some remarkable conclusions which have, I think, made an important
impression upon cancer specialists over the entire United States if
not Europe.
Mr. Wormser. Professor, two university presidents told me that
they thought in principle it would be a good idea to distribute it
among the smaller colleges, but actually it was only in the larger
universities that you found the men competent to do research in
these various areas.
I think one partial answer to that is that in some of these empirical
studies no talent is required. They are more or less quantitative
studies, which a professor in a smaller college might be able to do
just as well as a university professor. What is your idea as to that?
Dr. Colegrove. I would agree with that. There are many small
colleges located near the center of a State where the professor— if he is
dealing with the area situation — could quite easily do a lot of traveling
just as well from a small college as from a large university ; I think
the foundations have not yet explored enough into the talent that can
be found in the small colleges.
Of course, there is a tendency for a young man in a small college
who gets a grant and thereby attracts attention to himself to be
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 583,
pulled into a university. Personally, I regret to see the small
colleges raided in this way by the great universities taking off the
faculties of these small colleges— teachers who are doing so much
good for the American people.
The Chairman. But there would be less likelihood of the so-called
raiding both of the faculty and the graduate students in the small
colleges if grants were more general and made available to the out-
standing faculty members and the outstanding students, don't you
think?
Dr. Colegrove. Oh, yes, quite true. Quite true. We have had a
number of universities that have raided small colleges almost to their
destruction. President Harper of the University of Chicago raided
Clark University, took pretty largely all of its talent to the Uni-
versity of Chicago. But that was before the foundations were greatly
operative ; and of course he did it by offering, on the one hand, re-
search facilities, and on the other hand, much higher salaries than
they were getting at Clark University.
Mr. Hats. There is just the point of the whole thing. You your-
self say that is before the foundations got into the picture. It hap-
pened. And it is the same thing that is happening to the one-room
school, the little red schoolhouse. Everybody likes to get nostalgic
about it in talking about it, but they are slowly disappearing, and I
do not think that the foundations have anything to do with that,
do they?
Dr. Colegrove. No, it is the better transportation system and the
better facilities offered to the pupils at the township schools.
Mr. Hats. It has only been in the last 10 years that you dared to
run for office if you had not been born in a log cabin and had not
gone to the little red schoolhouse.
The Chairman. I have met both requirements.
Mr. Wormser. Professor, I would like your comments on this sub-
ject, if you will. The trustees of these foundations have a distinct
fiduciary responsibility which they recognize, in principle, at least,
as the trustees of public funds. It seems to me the most important
trust function they have is to exercise judgment in connection with
the selection of grants and grantees. Does it not seem to you that to
a very large extent they have abandoned that trust function, that trust
duty, and have delegated the whole thing to other organizations ? That
in certain areas they have used these intermediate organizations to ful-
fill their judgment function for them, which they, as trustees, should
exercise ? Would you comment on that ?
Dr. Colegrove. I think that has very largely occurred. I do not
quite like to put it this way, but the trustees are in many cases just
window dressing to give popular confidence in the institution. In the
United States we think an institution needs a very distinguished board
of trustees ; and, of course, you know, from college experience, a great
many men are made trustees of a university because the university
expects them to make a large donation to the endowment fund or build
a building or something like that. And to offset a group of rich
trustees, you put on some trustees who have large reputations in the
literary worldor in other fields than merely finance.
Many of the trustees, I am afraid, have gotten into a very bad habit.
They are perfectly realistic. They know why they are put on the
584 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
board of trustees. And they are not as careful as they should be in
taking responsibility for the operation of those organizations.
I think the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, which
was set up under Elmu Root and President Nicholas Murray Butler
way back, I think, about 1908, had a board of trustees picked by Presi-
dent Butler, and I think Butler expected to get a great deal of advice
from those trustees.
But I do recall many years later President Butler told me that he
had to use very extraordinary methods to get his trustees to meet even
for the annual meeting.
Mr. Wormser. Then, in practice, they delegate their authority partly
to other organizations. Of course, where they do make their own
grants directly, they delegate enormously to their professional em-
ployees, the executives, who do not have the same trust responsibility
but are merely executives.
Dr. Colegrove. Yes, they delegate their authority in several direc-
tions. Trustees delegate their authority to the president of the foun-
dation. The president in large measure even delegates his authority
to the heads of departments. A president of one of these large funds
sometimes is a little hazy about what is happening in this division or
in that division. And in these heads of departments — let's say of the
Rockefeller Foundation, where you have the social sciences and
humanities — you will find a delegation of authority in the case of the
social sciences to the operating society, the Social Science Research
Council, and to the American Council of Learned Societies in the
case of the humanities. So you have a delegation of authority in two
directions there.
Mr. Wormser. So whether a foundation fulfills its obligation to
the public rests primarily on the selection of its employees and the
association with these intermediate groups. Is it your opinion, Pro-
fessor, that these employees — I don't mean in a derogatory sense to
say "employees", the officers of these organizations — are on the same
caliber as a whole, do they compare well with university executives or
those who would administer grants under university administration ?
Dr. Colegrove. Well, I think those of us in political science feel that
Joe Willits, who was a professor of the University of Pennsylvania
before he took the position that lie has at the present time, is an out-
standing scholar, a most competent administrator, a very good judge
of human nature. And yet he cannot give all of his attention to the
expenditure of these vast sums.
What applies, of course, to the Rockefeller Foundation applies
even more forcibly to the Ford Foundation, which is much larger.
Mr. Wormser. One witness, Professor Briggs, testified that in his
opinion there wasn't one single employee in the Ford Fund for the
Advancement of Education, from the top down to the bottom, who
had had enough experience in the areas in which they were operating
to make proper judgments. That does not sound very good for foun-
dation practices, if they select men as carelessly, let us say, as that. I
am trying to make a comparison with universities, because I am
interested particularly in the possibility that a better medium for
foundation largesse may be through the universities, instead of through
professional agencies.
Dr. Colegrove. Oh, quite true. I think it would require a larger
number of topnotcb administrators in the foundations to exercise more
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 585
critical judgment than can be exercised at the present time. Even
there, however, you would have to choose between universities ; and if
you are going to the small colleges, there is a case where you would
have to have many careful surveys and studies, and an acquaintance
with the personnel and faculties of those universities. Probably the
staffs of high-grade men, let us say men serving under Dr. WillitSj
ought to be a little higher caliber.
Mr. Hays. Professor, right there, no matter how a foundation
handed this money out, you would find somebody to say they did not
give it to the right people.
Dr. Colegrove. Oh, yes.
Mr. Hays. And if they gave it all to the small colleges, you could
undoubtedly set up a committee who would say that was a terrible
thing and they wasted money and were not getting results, and so on.
So all of this testimony is a matter of opinion, is it not? I mean, as
to this particular phase. Dr. Briggs says and you say that it should
not be done through these societies; that it should be done the other
wa y-
Dr. Colegrove. It is opinion based on our observations.
Mr. Hays. Yes.
Dr. Colegrove. My observations would be in a little different field
than Professor Briggs' observations would be. I would say, trying to
be cautious in what I do say, that based on my observation I think
the foundations have not given as careful a study to some of these
phases as I would like to see.
Mr. Hays. Well, now, you talked a little bit ago about the delega-
tion of authority. Do you have any specific ideas about what we could
do to remedy that, if that is bad? I mean how are you going to get
away from it?
Dr. Colegrove. Well, you cannot avoid delegation of authority, but a
good administrator has to know how to delegate. He has to choose
to whom he is going to delegate, and choose what powers he is going' to
delegate, and then finally he has to have his system of reviewing the
achievements of persons to whom power to make' decisions has been
delegated.
Mr. Wormser. May I interrupt to help Mr. Hays' question?
Mr. Hays. You are sure this is going to be helpful ?
Mr. Wormser. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hays has said that it seemed to him a trustee should not act as
a trustee of a foundation unless he was willing to give the time to it
that was necessary. It seemed to me that that was a very apt remark.
And I wonder if that is not the answer, that these men are so busy
with their own lives that although they are eminent they are not capa-
ble of being trustees of foundations. That is no criticism of them as
persons.
Dr. Colegrove. Yes ; undoubtedly many of the trustees would not
serve if they felt that they would be called upon to do much more
than go to the meetings, hear the reports, and sometimes not say a
single word. You would not have as brilliant, as lofty, as remarkable,
a collection of men as trustees if you required a little more respon-
sibility on their part. I would say, on the whole, the board of trustees
is too large. There are too many remarkable men, in New York and
elsewhere, who are trustees of more than one foundation. And 1 just
as we exercise in the American Political Science Association a "self-
586 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
denying ordinance" where no member of the association speaks
more than twice in an annual meeting, I would like to see these inter-
locking trusteeships more or less abolished. You cannot abolish them
by law, of course. You could abolish them by practice. So you would
reduce the size of the board of trustees and then expect more consider-
ation, more consultation, more advice, from the men who had accepted
this great responsibility.
Mr. Woemseb. Was that not your idea, Mr. Hays, that they should
be working directly ?
Mr. Hats. Oh, sure. Exactly.
Mr. Koch. Here is something that worries me. Suppose I had a
great big motor company or a steel mill or this and that, and they
Eicked me because they wanted, as you say, window dressing. The
rst thing that puzzles me is why they need window dressing in a
; foundation of this kind. If you are running a foundation where you
go to the people every year, like the Red Cross or the March of Dimes,
for money, then you want to impress the populace that there are big
names behind it. But here, where Mr. Ford or Mr. Carnegie or Mr.
Rockefeller plumps millions of dollars in the laps of the foundation,
, and they do not have to go to the public for 1 cent more, I always
wonder : why do they need big names in that case? And would it not
be better, instead or picking me, the head of a big steel mill, pick
somebody who was a little more familiar with the educational
field? Because I can see exactly what I would do if I were that for-
tunate head of a big steel mill. As soon as somebody said, "Let us
do something about education, or study this," if I were honest, I would
immediately say, "I do not know anything about it, so what do the
professors say ?" And the professors would immediately tell me what
they thought the trend of the times was, and I would say, "I will be
safe if I follow the trend of the times."
And it seems to me the dismal part of the testimony so far is that
there has been so much unanimity among the big foundations in fol-
lowing the supposed trend of the times. I would rather see one day
Rockefeller in this corner slugging it out with Ford Foundation in this
corner to try to argue a particular thing. Here we get into a depres-
sion, and we find out Professor Beard and Professor Muzzey have said
things they later veered away from, and yet all of the foundations
at that time may have put their money in the direction of that project,
pushing the pendulum along much farther than it probably should
have been pushed. And yet there was no foundation that said, "Well,
change may be necessary, but let us find out what is good about the
old order so that, when we decide on the change, we have at least heard
both sides." .
It seems to me there has not been that debate. And it may have
been because the big names probably said, "We don't really know much
about it ourselves. We will have to see what is the fad, what the ladies
are wearing in Paris today, or what the trend is in education." I
therefore wonder whether it would not be better to suggest that where
they do not need big names they get lesser names who can spend more
time and are a little bit more familiar with the subject matter. That,
unf ortunately, was an awfully long speech, but that has been worrying
me.
Dr. Colegkove. I think you have given an accurate picture of the
actual situation. The large number of famous names on the list of
trustees- is due to the old superstition that our institutions must be
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 587
headed by a famous group of men. And I will say frankly it is to
impress Congress as well as the American people; to impress public
opinion as fully as possible. It is an old superstition. It is not neces-
sary at all. With a group of 7 trustees, using 7 because it is an odd
number, I imagine most of these trustees if they were trustees of only
one other organization, maybe trustees of a church, would be able to
give more attention to their duties as trustees of foundations. They
could not pass on the responsibility.
Mr. Koch. Another element is this. Let us say during the depres-
sion 70 percent of the people were in favor of a change ; 30 percent
wanted to try out the old system a little while longer. All of them
paid additional taxes, because many tax-exempt foundations did not
have to pay taxes. I should think the 30 percent in the minority would
at least like to feel that at least 30 percent of the tax-exempt money
should be used to sell my kind of Americanism or my kind of economic
system. And yet if the foundations all followed the trend, the minor-
ity group does not have the benefit of that terrific money. Because —
I won't say the propaganda — but the education that they can sell is
something terrific. And yet the minority just does not have the benefit
of any _ of that money, even though they share the tax bill along with
the majority.
Mr. Hats. But you are arguing like the people who do not believe
in smallpox vaccine. Then we should just go along trying to get over
smallpox without it for a while longer.
Mr. Koch. No, I say if people pay money they ought to be able to
decide how they spend their money. In your case, nobody pays for
smallpox vaccine except those who get it. But in this case we have all
paid, because the foundations get tax exemption, those who are
entitled to it. And yet I do not get my share of the educational experi-
menting, because it so happens unfortunately that 55 percent of the
people seem to think that something else should be gone into.
Mr. Hays. But then you are arguing that you should keep on experi-
menting with something that it has been proved will not work, and I
think that is just a waste of time.
Mr. Koch. No, I do not argue that at all. I like to feel that both
sides are fully debated, so that when we decide on legislation we at
least know it has not gone in on default. Because these very leaders
of the early thirties, many of the big leaders themselves, who started
pushing away, have swung back a little. Now, if they had not been
given such a big push by the foundations at the beginning, maybe they
would not have gone so far as to require their coming back again. I
mean, it is just a matter of proportion that puzzles me a little bit,
whether at least some of the foundations should not see to it that both
sides are properly presented, so that we can more intelligently discard
the old system. And that is just one thing that puzzles me a little
bit about their method.
Mr. Hays. Perhaps some of their difficulty might come from the
fact that it is difficult to get someone to defend the point of view that
has become generally discredited.
Mr. Koch. That may be true. .
Mr. Hays. You have had a little difficulty right here in this com-
mittee. It is a little hard to get people to come in and testify in favor
of the case the staff set forth in their initial report. Because appar-
ently, with all due respect to Dr. Colegrove, and I am glad to have
588 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
his testimony, which has been very interesting, apparently a majority
of the opinion in the field is on the other side.
Mr. Koch. But you are happy that Professor Colegrove has pre-
sented his case.
Mr. Hays. Surely.
Mr. Koch. And in a number of cases the minority view has not even
been presented.
Mr. Hays. But the thing that I question, Mr. Koch, and I think
you and I both know what we are talking about, is the unusual way
we went at it. I only know of one previous instance where you ever
set forth a verdict and then had the trial, and that was in Alice in
Wonderland, or Through the Looking Glass. It was done that way
there.
Mr. Koch. From my point of view, and I am sure the general
counsel agrees, we felt it was obligatory to tell what were the criti-
cisms. I will tell you quite frankly when I was appointed associate
counsel, the ilrst thing I said was, "What is wrong with foundations ?"
And then when we started to ask questions we found certain things
professors and others criticized. We felt those things should be put
before the foundations so that they could come in and state whether or
not there was validity to those obj actions. We did not intend, surely,
to render a verdict, but just to say "This has been said about or against
foundation practices. Let us see whether there is any merit to it."
Mr. Hays. Doctor, I seem to have been impressed mainly in my
undergraduate days with the theory of the pendulum. And then you
mentioned the second one.
Dr. CoLEGitovis. The cycle theory.
Mr. Hays. We seem to be working on the cycle theory, because we
start out doing a pathological job here. I like that term. I am glad
we got that in here.
Mr. Koch. But you said we improved after the lunch hour.
Mr. Hays. Then we criticize the pathological approach in the
foundations, but by your own admission that is exactly what we
started out to do here.
Dr. Colegrove. I think on this one aspect we are looking at it from
the pendulum theory. If the foundations have gone too far in dissi-
pating their authority, you might try to swing the pendulum back
by trying to get the foundations to insist on more responsibility on
the part of their trustees. And I mean a responsibility such as Nich-
olas Murray Butler used in the beginning of the Carnegie Endowment
for International Peace, when President Root and later President
Butler would talk over with the trustees, the few that they could
get, a very detailed discussion of what Professor Shotwell was doing,
let us say, and bring Professor Shotwell in and let him explain. You
can do that with 2 or 3 trustees, just as you could with 20. They are
all there in the room. You would get a higher sense of responsibility
if there were, let us say, just seven trustees. Those men would have
to understand, "Well, here I have a responsibility. I will be at the
annual meeting, and I will be at each quarterly meeting." The proj-
ects could be reviewed, the propositions taken up, by the trustees
themselves. It would be very curious to have minutes of some of the
foundation trustees' meetings these days — I have not seen them re-
cently — to see how little there is of that actual discussion' or disagree-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 589
ment over the content of projects and the selection of personnel for
the projects and the selection of the projects themselves.
Mr. Hats. Professor, right there, that sounds very good, and I
think perhaps you have a very good idea. But then we come to the
difficult part of the application.
With a foundation as large as some of these are, and dispensing
as much money as they have and making as many grants as they do,
it is something like breaking up the New York Yankees. That seems
to be the o?ily alternative. Or, "Let us do away with big corpora-
tions." Because, obviously, the president of the United States Steel
Co. cannot know everything that is going on, and neither can his
board of trustees.
So I am inclined to go along a hundred percent with your general
idea, but the practical aspect of it is what I find difficult, how you
are going to do it. If you can give us any light on that, I would be
very receptive to hearing about it.
Dr. Colegrove. Well, it gets back to what you were mentioning
this morning, Mr. Hays, with regard to human nature. We cannot
get rid of human nature, and these human problems all come up when
you want to push the pendulum back.
Let us say the Rockefeller Corp. reduced its trustees to 5 or 7.
Would you be able to find 5 or 7 great outstanding men in New York
or around the country who would be willing to accept that responsi-
bility?
Mr. Hays. That is a question, of course, that is an imponderable,
and I don't know whether anyone can answer it. We have had con-
flicting testimony. There have been 11 days up to date, and I
cannot remember exactly who said what, or what page it is on, but
there was testimony in here to the effect that these foundations had
too many nonentities in them. Now we hear that they have too many
names that do not give enough time. So it is almost a case of being
damned whatever they do, as I see it. And I do not know how they
are going to escape one criticism or the other. Both of them have a
certain validity, don't you think ?
Dr. Colegrove. I think most of the trustees of the foundations are.
excellent men, with great reputations, who have made contributions
to industry, to science, to literature, and so on.
But you have there the practical question that they have dodged
their responsibility.
I must say whether you can get 5 or 7 men who would be willing
to take all that responsibility themselves is something we could not
answer until it is tried. I would like to see it tried as an experiment.
The Chairman. Do you have some more questions, Mr. Wormser ?
Mr. Wormser. Yes, I do.
Professor, to your knowledge, have these foundations or their oper-
ating agencies to any extent engaged in direct political activity them-
selves ?
Dr. Colegrove. I think, generally speaking, the foundations have
not engaged in any direct political activities. The operating societies
have, and, of course, some of the learned societies have engaged in
political activities.
I want to talk about only the things I know of myself. I will take
one example, with the American Council of Learned Societies. Last
summer, when the position as Librarian of Congress became vacant,
49720 — 54 — pt. 1 38
590 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
there were a few of us who felt that Prof. Eeed West, of George Wash-
ington University, was an excellent recommendation for this vacant
position. And we persuaded Senator Taft to look into the possibility
of sponsoring Prof. Eeed West. I must say that I was acting only as
a citizen. I have no connection with the American Political Science
Association at the present time, other than being a member. I am not
an officer of it. Quite a number of persons supported West and ar-
ranged a dossier on Professor West for Senator Taft. Taft became
persuaded that West was just the man for the position of Librarian
of Congress.
• I understand that Senator Taft made up his mind on this while he
was in the hospital, the last time he went to the hospital. The last
telephone call he made, from the hospital to the White House, was
asking the President to support Professor West.
My understanding is that the President said that if it was all right
with the Hill he would, or someone said it for the President. And
Senator Knowland, Senator Styles Bridges, and, I believe, the Speak-
er, Speaker Martin, all agreed to recommend West. Shortly after
that, Senator Taft died. It was the last political act he took.
We found, however, those of us who were supporting Professor
West, that some of the operating societies had moved in, like the Amer-
ican Council of Learned Societies, also the American Library Asso-
ciation, and the Social Science Research Council, trying to persuade
Governor Adams and the White House that they should be allowed
to name a group of persons from whom the White House would select
the recommendation for the nomination of Librarian of Congress. It
was a quite interesting little battle, and the few political scientists
who engaged, trying to get West into the post, were defeated, and the
man supported by the American Council of Learned Societies and the
American Library Association and the Social Science Research Coun-
cil finally got the appointment.
Now, as a member of a professional society, I felt it was not quite
in keeping for the American Council of Learned Societies to engage
in this political activity.
Mr. Hays. Well, did they do it as a body, or did they do it as indi-
viduals, as you were doing promoting the other fellow ?
Dr. Colegrove. Well, it was a little more eubtle than that. It was
the officers that did it, the paid officers located here in Washington,
D. C. The American Council of Learned Societies is composed of 23
or 24 societies. The American Political Science Association is one.
At the last meeting of the American Council of Learned Societies,
which was in February — I am a delegate to the American Council of
Learned Societies — I protested what had been done, but I didn't get
very far with the protest, because it had already been accomplished.
Mr. Hats. Doctor, if you had been an officer, as you were at one
time, of the American Political Science Association, would you have
felt it incumbent upon you to refrain from pushing the candidacy of
Mr. West because you were an officer of that society?
Dr. Couegrove. I think in that particular case, yes, because the Li-
brarian of Congress is in a rather strategic and important position.
When I advised governmental agencies, it was with reference to ex-
perts for particular tasks to be performed. Now, the Library of
Congress includes the Legislative Reference Service, which does a
great many things for Congress.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 591
Mr. Hats. None of which many Congressmen feel they do very
well. Let me put that in the record.
Dr. Colegrove. Well, there are all sorts of opinions about it.
Mr. Hats. That is mine. In fact, not to interrupt you, it might be
said that the Appropriations Committee felt the same way, because
they cut their appropriations the other day, and one of the members
said at lunch the other day that you were never able to get anything
from the Legislative Reference Service if you called them except the
book, which you could have gone over and gotten, and then you would
have to look up the passages anyway.
Dr. Colegrove. I think it would be much better if the Legislative
Reference Service was a separate organization from the Library, com-
pletely under the control of Congress, and more actively under the
control of Congress. To attach it to the Library of Congress is com-
bining two functions, which more or less get in the way of each other.
Mr. Hats. I can sympathize with your point of view on losing this
appointment, but let me just say that rather than the American Coun-
cil of Learned Societies or anyone taking advantage of you, I think
fate played a dirty trick on you.
Dr. Coleghove. Oh, yes.
Mr. Hats. Because with all due respect to Senator Taft, and I hold
him in the utmost respect, and I collaborated with him, strange as it
may seem, on many legislative proposals here, there is nothing that
loses in influence any quicker than a politician who either dies or is
defeated for office. It ceases just as if it had been cut off right there.
I might point out to you, and this is interesting in passing, that I
had a little matter pending in one of the departments that I was very
much interested in, and sent it to Taft. Someone had gotten to him,
and it affected somebody in the State of Ohio, not in my district. And
they had sold him the idea that it should not go through. For 7
months it stayed dormant, and at 4 o'clock in the afternoon that he
died, the Department called me up and said, "The thing is going
through as you want it." So you see how quickly your influence goes.
That is what happened to you. And I will say in praise of the Sen-
ator that had he lived your client would probably have been the
Librarian today.
Dr. Colegrove. Undoubtedly. And those supporting Professor
West said as vigorously as they could that this was the dying wish
of Senator Taft. But, as you say, as soon as a man is dead
Mr. Hats. Those things all sound good in an eulogy, but they do not
go much further.
Dr. Colegrove. I do think, however, that you are bound to get a
little political influence on the part of an operating society which is
located right in Washington, D. C. Now, where the American Coun-
cil of Learned Societies, it seemed to me, was at fault, was in not
getting the permission of the constituent societies before engaging in
this political activity.
Mr. Hats. I have a question right there, Prof essor.
Here is a book called English for Turks. I want you to look at it
and see if you have ever seen anything like it. I am not going to
cross-examine you on it. I just want you to look at it for a minute
and look at the flyleaf, and, then I want to ask you. something about
that kind of a procedure. I have a similar volume here, English for
Indonesians.
592 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Dr. Colegrove. I might say that this represents the new process of
printing used by the American Council of Learned Societies, and they
really have made quite a contribution in that direction.
Mr. Hays. Yes. That book is put out under the auspices of the
American Council of Learned Societies, as is this one, and we have
another one over here on — I cannot read this language very well.
This is Korean.
Well, I would not know it unless somebody told me.
Now, would you consider these to be political acts ?
Dr. Colegrove. No. This is purely a literary project. I must say
that you can have a political use made of these textbooks. Let me
say that the American Council of Learned Societies has made a real
contribution with reference to the Arabian studies. And as you know,
our oil companies have sent a large number of American experts out
to Arabia.
Now, these experts are agents for a private company. It is
very obvious that if these experts can learn Arabic, they will do a
more efficient piece of work out there. Vice versa, oil companies have
a problem of getting the Turks and Arabians to speak English, trying
to get the experts to speak both Arabic and English and getting the
Arabs to speak English as well as their native language. This is not
political at all. This is a pure expert linguistic undertaking. It may
be motivated in the beginning, as to the money paid for it, by a
political purpose.
Mr. Hays. I understand the Government is paying for it, and that
is why I am asking ; because this society is working in close coopera-
tion with the Government. It is just conceivable to me that someone
could, off the cuff, say, "Well, they are engaging in politics. They are
even putting out language books for the Government and sending
them all over the world."
Dr. Colegrove. That statement would not be accurate. Because
Americans going abroad are not so good in languages, you know, we
need to learn foreign languages. And the American Council of
Learned Societies has done a great deal of good there.
Mr. Wormser. Could we get closer to the whole problem? Have
you seen in the work of the foundations any evidence of actual political
slanting?
Dr. Colegrove. From the foundations themselves \
Mr. Wormser. Yes.
Dr. Colegrove. Decidedly. The Carnegie Corporation, in select-
ing Professor Myrdal, of Sweden, to do the work on The American
Dilemma, was obviously slanting the problem of the South.
Mr. Hays. Now, right there, I do not know much about this Myrdal.
I know he wrote a book, and what was the title of it ?
Dr. Colegrove. The American Dilemma.
Mr. Hays. The American Dilemma. It just happened that at lunch
hour I was reading a newspaper, the morning paper, and I saw in
there some reference that the Supreme Court had cited this book in
arriving at its decision.
Now, do you mean to tell me that the Supreme Court is citing sub-
versive works here ?
Dr. Colegrove. I did not say it was subversive.
Mr. Hays. I want to get that straight.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 593
Dr. Coleghove. I think it was slanted. Just as an illustration, Pro-
fessor Myrdal, who was a left-wing Socialist, a very left-wing Social-
ist in Sweden, was very anticonservative, and he made unwarranted
attacks upon the American legal system, as too conservative, and at-
tacks upon the conservative groups in the United States. He prac-
tically indicated that a conservative is not an intellectual.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Justice Burton of Ohio is no leftist, and he appar-
ently went along with this decision, citing this book, and I am just
wondering if it is the unanimous opinion that this book was bad, or if
it is just an opinion that some people have, or if there is anybody be-
sides the Supreme Court that will endorseUie book. Let me ask it that
way.
Dr. Colegrove. I don't think that the Supreme Court in citing this
book endorsed it. They were using the book as evidence. And the
book has a lot of evidence. Its evidence is perfectly all right. There
is no question about it. I am criticizing the book on the ground that
it was held up to be an objective scientific study. And it contains
really "snide" remarks — I hate to use that remark — against the con-
servatives all over the United States, and especially the conservatives
in the South, remarks that would make Senator Byrd just wince.
Mr. Hats. I will take your word for it, Doctor. But that brings us
to a thing that has happened in this committee, and I would like to
get your opinion on it, just for the record. I think it might have some
value, some weight.
Do you not think that on any book that there has been controversy
about, you could probably take that book and pick a paragraph or a
sentence out of context here or there to prove either side of the con-
troversy that you wanted to ?
Dr. Colegrove. Yes. You can do that even with The Federalist.
But in this Myrdal book, it is the constant slurring of the conserva-
tives, right along the line.
Mr. Hats. Let me say I am not criticizing you, because you are
saying the whole tenor of the book you disagree with and do not like.
But the point I am making is that we have had people who come in
here before this committee and cite a paragraph in the book, and then
you read back another paragraph out of the same book, and they im-
mediately say, "I do not buy the whole book, but just this paragraph
that I agree with." That could happen very easily, could it not ?
Dr. Colegrove. Of course.
Mr. Hats. I compliment you for taking that approach. You say
you do not like the tenor of the whole book, and that certainly is your
right and your privilege, and you have every right to your opinion
on it. As I say, I am not in a position to argue with you on it, because
I have not read the book.
Dr. Colegrove. The difference between this book and The Federal-
ist, written by Hamilton, Jay, and Madison, was that The Federalist
did not pretend to be unprejudiced. They said, "We are for ratifying
this document as the Constitution of the United States." Hamilton
and Jay and Madison did not pretend to have any unbiased or unpar-
tisan approach.
Mr. Hats. And as to this book, you say_ it was advertised as being
unprejudiced, but in your opinion it was prejudiced ?
594 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Dr. Colegrove. Very prejudiced. It would be just as convincing to
appoint Professor Hayek to go over to Sweden to, let us say, make an
appraisal of the social-security system in Sweden. ,
Mr. Hats. You will have to enlighten me. Who is he ?
Dr. Colegrove. He is one of the strong defenders of laissez faire and
an opponent of economic planning. His book called, The Eoad to
Serfdom, is an argument that economic planning will inevitably lead to
destruction of civil liberties, creation of a dictatorship, and loss of our
freedoms.
Mr. Hats. I am interested in a person whose mind works like that.
Now, as I understand it, laissez faire, taken literally, would mean
to let the Government stay out and leave everything alone. What
would you have done in 1933 with 12 million unemployed and people
on the verge of starvation under a laissez faire system ?
The Chairman. I do not myself put that construction upon laissez
faire, so I do not think we can start out with assumptions that that
is what laissez faire means.
Mr. Hats. If you do not put that construction on it, you will have-
to have a qualified construction of what laissez faire means, because I
happen to know what it means, and it is one you cannot shade. It
means to let alone.
Dr. Colegrove. Dr. Hayek does not take the position regarding
laissez faire that the British liberals took in 1840, 1850, or 1860, which
was complete laissez faire.
Mr. Hats. He takes the position, then, that we will have laissez
faire, but we will have it in the modified form that Professor Hayek
thinks is necessary.
Dr. Colegrove. That would be correct.
Mr. Hats. Then, of course, you get back to the same old thing of
who is going to decide about how much laissez faire or how much
planning we are going to have. And then we get back into the same-
debate that we have been in for 20 or 30 years.
Dr. Colegrove. How far are you going on one side, or how far are
you going on the other side ; yes.
The Chairman - . Do you have anything further on the question of
foundations?
Mr. Wormser. I would like to cover just 1 or 2 more questions.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Chairman, I would like to interrupt right there and
say if you are implying that I am questioning Dr. Colegrove on some-
thing that is not on foundations I picked this name out
The Chairman. Oh, no. I did not.
Mr. Hats. I was just trying to develop the idea and get a little light
on who he is.
Dr. Colegrove. That is a very good point. I think it is well to keep
in mind that there are really no "liberals" today of the old English
school. They have moved with the trend of the times.
Mr. Hats. And no foundations moved them. The times caught up
with them and overran them; would you not say?
Dr. Colegrove. Of course, it is cause and effect again. Whatever
the foundations have done, of course, has been to promote the trend
this way or that way.
Mr. Hats. The whole question of whether the foundations promoted
the trend or the trend pushed the foundations is almost the old "which
came first?" argument, "the chicken or the egg?" is it not? And I
do not see how we can settle it.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 595
Dr. Colegrove. The only way to settle it is to get back on the pendu-
lum basis and see whether we have gone too far.
Mr. Wormsee. I would like a little briefing on what you mean by
slanting. Beading from your notes here, you mention an undue em-
phasis on internationalism and globalism, a submersion of the national
interest, Federal expansion at the expense of States rights, a passion
to build a new social order, and a drive at all levels of education to
make it a tool for social change.
Without going into too much detail, could you give me an answer
to that?
Mr. Hays. What page is that on?
Mr. Wormser. Page 5, question 16.
Dr. Colegrove. In my opinion, a great many of the staffs of the
foundations have gone way beyond Wendell Willkie with reference to
internationalism and globalism. Of course, Wendell Willkie is part of
this time, too. There is undoubtedly too much money put into studies
which support globalism and internationalism. You might say that
the other side has not been as fully developed as it should be.
Now, a great many of these other sides have been taken up, partly
in speeches in Congress. The little book that Bob Taft wrote the last
year he was alive with reference to American foreign policy was a very
helpful book. It was based upon considerable research in Mr. Taft's
office and was not supported by a foundation. But the foundations
these days have been supporting too few books like one book which they
supported some years ago by Charles A. Beard, called The National
Interest. That came out in the early thirties, supported, I believe, by
the Eockefeller Foundation. I am not too sure about that, but one
of the foundations supported it. That started a good deal of thinking
on the other side of the fence.
Mr. Wormser. Is there not a tendency of Americans to sacrifice the
national interest of our country in dealing with foreign affairs?
Dr. Colegrove. Professor Beard, even that early, felt that we had.
But you can name just a few books or studies on that view which
the foundations have supported.
Beard's thought was more or less this. I am talking about the
Beard of the last half of his life rather than the first part of his life,
when he was almost a Marxian. Beard thought that Churchill of
Great Britain or Briand of France were always thinking : What is the
best interest of Great Britain ? What is the best interest of France ? —
in all of the international conferences. But there is too frequently a
tendency of Americans not to think in international conferences on
foreign policy about the national interest of the United States. We
are thinking always of what is the interest of the whole world.
And that kind of thinking brings us to the point where we are
too likely to make sacrifices to accomplish this globalism which Eng-
land would not be willing to make under Churchill, or Attlee for that
matter, which Laniel would not be willing to make, or Bidault, or
whoever is Prime Minister of France. That is a very unfortunate
tendency. And I think there is a tendency toward slanting. It seems
to me the foundations should go out of their way at the present time
to promote more studies like Beard's famous book called The National
Interest.
Mr. Wormser. Then there has, Professor, been this tendency to
promote what you might call excessive federalism in derogation of
596 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
States' rights. Do you feel the foundations have promoted that con-
cept?
Dr. Colegrove. Yes. Very distinctly. And under Professor Mer-
riam particularly. Merriam felt that States were not more than
Provinces or soon would not be much more than Provinces. I know
that Professor Merriam used to annoy my neighbors up in Evanston.
Evanston is a suburb of Chicago, but it has never been incorporated
in Chicago. Merriam always had it in for Evanston, because it would
never go into Chicago. We felt, in Evanston, we had better schools,
we had better parks, we had better police, and we wanted to be an
entity by ourselves. Merriam could never forgive us for that. He
thought we ought to go into Chicago.
Well, that is probably a little off the subject, but the point I am
trying to make is that the kind of research Professor Merriam se-
lected, the kind of research he developed, was a research that looked
toward the submersion of the States under the National Government.
Mr. Hays. Now, Doctor, you do not object to going back to this
international theory. You will agree with me that in the age we live
in today you are going to have to have a certain amount of knowledge
of international affairs. You will agree with me, I think — I heard
you mention Paris a little bit ago- — that after these deliberations end
this afternoon, you and I could go up to New York this evening and
get the plane and be in the Cafe de la Paix or Maxine's for lunch
tomorrow.
Dr. Colegrove. That would be very pleasant.
Mr. Hats. Yes. I would rather do that than sit here. I want you
to know, if I seem to be a little nervous today, that the America left
without me yesterday. I am staying here for enlightenment. I feel
I am making a sacrifice. But all of that aside, we are only 12 hours
away from Paris or London.
Did you say you wish I had not sacrificed ?
Mr. Goodwin. I am sure you would not have had as good a time.
Mr. Hats. Well, that is debatable.
So the thing that you object to, as I follow you, is not that we have
a great and consuming interest in the world around us, but that we,
you feel, have not had along with that enough enlightened self-in-
terest, as somebody put it. Is that it ?
Dr. Colegeove. Yes. It is probably due to an attitude, which atti-
tude I think has been partly created or simulated by the foundations,
the attitude of accepting globalism, internationalism, without
seeing where the United States fits into the picture other than paying
the bills. Because, of course, European and Asiatic countries expect
us to open the pocketbook and pay the bills for all of these projects,
all of these compromises. If we have a compromise in Indochina, that
is going to cost the United States a lot of money. We can be sure
of that.
Mr. Hats. Of course, as I cited here the other day, the French
papers are carrying the story right now that the United States is
willing to fight in Indochina to its last dollar as long as France will
put up its last Frenchman. So there are two viewpoints on that, too.
Dr. Colgrove. They expect us to send our boys over to fight in the
rice paddies of Indochina. They have gone that far now. They used
to just expect us to give money. Now we have to give, besides equip-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 597
ment, the lives of our American boys to fight the hordes of Asia, which
is a great mistake.
Mr. Hats. Well, your friend, Dr. Rowe, who has the same general
viewpoint as you do, said flatly here on Friday that we ought to do
that very thing. He said 2 years ago we should have.
Dr. Colegrove. I think we ought to give Chiang Kai-shek and the
chinese forces on, Formosa help logistically, transport them to Indo-
china. We should transport some of the South Korean Army to Indo-
china and give them all the equipment, but not use American boys
to fight in Asia.
Mr. Hats. Of course, if you are going to give them all that equip-
ment, you had better transport someone who will fight, should you
not?
Dr. Colegrove. The Koreans showed they could fight, the South
Koreans did.
Mr. Hats. They did, too.
Mr. Wormser. I would like to interrupt with one final question of
Professor Colegrove. I think we have kept him an excessive period
of time.
I gather it is your opinion that the overindulgence in the empirical
method which you believe the foundations have been, let us say, guilty
of, has resulted in something in the way of a decline in morality, that
in the schools particularly, morality has taken a good beating, we
have had substituted for it what I believe is called moral relativity,
and that the foundations, if they fail, have failed perhaps primarily
in the direction of not having provided us with more leadership.
Dr. Colegrove. We certainly need more leadership on the ethical
and moral side. There is really no doubt about that in my mind.
And I would like to see the foundations help the American people in
that way. We need to create or develop in the United States more
leadership, not only in science, not only in empirical science, but also
on the moral and ethical side, rationalism, if you want to put it in
that sense.
Now, with all the money that the foundations have spent, they have
never developed an Abraham Lincoln. They have never developed an
Immanuel Kant. They have never developed a Thomas Jefferson.
They have never developed a James Madison. We need that kind of
leadership at the present time. I suspect that that leadership is going
to come from the small colleges, where a more sane attitude toward
American traditions, American morality and ethics, is taken than in
the large universities.
Mr. Hats. Doctor, do you mean to say that Abraham Lincoln is
underdeveloped? That maybe is an unfortunate term, but there are
probably more biographies here than in the case of any other Amer-
ican. I am guessing, but would you not say that is probably true ?
Dr. Colegrove. Oh, yes. He is the subject of a lot of good books.
Mr. Hats. But you think the foundations ought to make some
grants to write some more books ? Or on Thomas Jefferson ? I sus-
pect Thomas Jefferson would run a close third. Perhaps George
Washington would be second. And I am a great admirer of Jeffer-
son. I have probably 2&or 30 volumes on him myself.
Mr. Wormser. I do not think he meant that.
Mr. Hats. I am trying to find out what he meant.
598 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Wormser. I think he meant that there should be a greater
effort to produce men like that.
Mr. Hats. That gets into a very philosophical discussion. I am
interested, too. I would like to produce another Abraham Lincoln
out in my district, so that when I get done with the job I can have a
worthy successor.
Dr. Colegrove. Well, you can't say that is a task that foundations
could accomplish. But they have not developed the climate that pro-
duced an Abraham Lincoln. And I am thinking now of both sides of
the fence.
Abraham Lincoln is representative, you might say, of the deep
heritage of the United States. And Jefferson represented the deep
heritage of the United States.
Jefferson was a very cultured man, who went to Europe, read French
books and British books, but he was always thinking, again, in refer-
ence to the national interest, or in reference to the history of the
United States and whatever destiny the American people would have.
There is too little emphasis in our schools at the present time, in
spite of all these books, to the contributions of Jefferson, Washington,
and Lincoln to the history of the United States in relation to our
present situation.
The question is : Are our public schools, our universities, furnishing
the climate out of which can appear another Washington or another
Jefferson ?
I am afraid the climate is not very congenial for that.
Mr. Hats. Of course, leaving Jefferson aside, no university fur-
nished the climate for the other two. They made their own.
Dr. Colegrove. Yes. Maybe it is a task that the foundations can
never achieve. Maybe they can accomplish very little in that. But
I would like to see the foundations try.
Mr. Hats. The original idea I had when I started this series of
questions : You talk about the moral climate. Now, there is no argu-
ment but that we want to create as good a moral climate as we can.
But I am wondering how the foundations are going about this. If
they make a grant to some religious order, you can immediately see
what a hullabaloo that would cause. You would have somebody in-
fluencing them not only as to politics but dragging religion in and
trying to influence the religious attitude. And it seems to me that
they might be treading upon very delicate ground in that situation.
And again let me say with all deference to you that you have set forth
a very worthy objective in very general terms, but when we come to
specifically implementing that objective, I am at a loss as to how I
would go about it. If I were a foundation trustee, I would not know.
Would you ?
Dr. Colegrove. If you were a foundation trustee, Mr. Hays, you
would give your attention to it and try to have that problem studied.
Mr. Hats. But on this specific problem, I would be a little bit
afraid to give it to one group or another in the religious field. I
would be afraid to make a donation or a grant to train ministers, shall
I say, in the Presbyterian faith, without giving an equal grant to
every other religious faith, for fear someone would accuse me of
religious bias. And I just say from a practical standpoint we are
dealing with something that if there is any solution to it, I would like
to know about it.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 599
Dr. Colegrove. I would like to see more studies on the question of
what leadership is and the part that morality and ethics play in lead-
ership. I think the codes of political ethics that are springing up
over the United States are making some contribution in this way.
I do not know any of the foundations that are making a study of
these codes of political ethics.
Mr. Hays. One foundation was going to set up a fund to study
Congress. I understood, with the idea of suggesting some improve-
ments. And immediately that was met with a barrage of criticism.
Some people questioned: Who are these people that are going to
question the integrity and the sacredness of Congress ?
Personnally, it is to me a little bit like the old newspaper story of
the man biting the dog. I mean, Congressmen are investigating any-
body. I have no objection if somebody wants to investigate Congress.
But it caused a lot of criticism.
Dr. Colegrove. I think probably most of these studies should begin
at the grassroots.
The Chairman. My constituents have been investigating Congress
for a long time.
Mr. Hats. I, again, because of my great affection for the chairman,
will not comment on that either.
The Chairman. Are there any other questions ?
Mr. Goodwin. No question. I want to make a statement a little
later.
I want to make a brief statement, Mr. Chairman. After I have
made it, I will ask unanimous consent that it be placed in the record
of today's proceedings at the point in the morning session imme-
diately after reference to the number of institutions of learning in the
several States.
Mr. Hays. May I ask unanimous consent that in deference to our
-colleague from Massachusetts we have deleted the remark that came
along in there somewhere that the Harvard College was the second
most left to Columbia. I think we ought to just take that out, so that
there will not be any reflection on Massachusetts at all.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Professor Colegrove, for
your presentation today.
The committee is deeply appreciative of your generosity in coming
down here and giving us the benefit of your experience.
It is now 3 : 35. I question whether we ought to proceed any further.
Mr. Hays. I would like to agree with you, and I want to say that
if we are going to take up this monumental piece of empirical research,
T hope you can wait until morning. *
The Chairman. The committee will adjourn, then, until 10 o'clock
tomorrow morning in this same room.
(Whereupon, at 3:35 p. m., the hearing was adjourned until 10
a. m., Wednesday, June 9, 1954.)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 9, 1954
House obi Representatives,
Special Committee To Investigate
Tax-Exempt Foundations,
Washington, D. O.
The special committee met at 10 a. m., pursuant to recess, in room
304, House Office Building, Hon. Carroll Reece (chairman of the
special committee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Reece, Goodwin, Hays, and Pfost
Also present: Rene A. Wormser, general counsel; Arnold T. Koch,
associate counsel; Norman Dodd, research director; Kathryn Casey,
legal analyst ; John Marshall, chief clerk.
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
Mr. Koch.
Mr. Koch. Mr. McNiece would like to continue.
The Chairman. You may proceed. The oath is continuing during
the course of the proceedings.
Mr. Koch. That is right. May he continue reading his supplement
before we ask him questions, or would you rather ask him questions
with respect to his first installment ?
Mr. Hays. I have a few more questions I would like to ask. It seems
we have left enough things hanging in midair.
Mr. Koch. Very well.
TESTIMONY OF THOMAS M. McNIECE, ASSISTANT RESEARCH DIREC-
TOR, SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE TAX-EXEMPT
FOUNDATIONS— Resumed
Mr. Hats. On your first report, Mr. McNiece, on page 9, you talk,
near the bottom of the page, about centralized places, which seems to
imply that somebody had a motive or desire to plot this thing. Do
you have any specific evidence of that ?
Mr. McNiece. I don't at the moment find the item.
Mr. Hats. It is in the last paragraph down about the fifth line:
"It does, however, seem to confirm"
Mr. McNiece. I have it. The excerpts from the final report from
the American Council of Learned Societies, plus the evidence which
continues on through on the influence of the Social Science Research
Council and the American Council of Learned Societies in preparing
a directory, if I may call it that, of men qualified to advise Govern-
ment in its various fields. I take that as evidence of the flow of what
might be called a central or main stream of influence. I believe it is
in this next and short section of my report that I mention, merely as
601
602 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
factual evidence, the number of people from the field of social science
who are employed, at least in part, by Government today. That is,,
we have letters in which they advise us of the names of those people
and the fields of work in which they are occupied.
Mr. Hats. What do you read into that? The Government has
need apparently for these people. Where would you more logically
turn than to these societies who would have lists of people %
Mr. McNiece. I am not in any way questioning either the need or
the source, except as it comes from a firm and compact group of what
might be called, and has been referred to here, as the intellectual elite.
They might be defined by another term as the mental aristocrats. I
believe all of the testimony that has been given here, and without
any attempt on the part of any of us to tie in the testimony of the
various professors that have appeared here, seems to indicate the
same thing, that there is, let me call it, a preferred group which
is called upon for advice. It is a highly concentrated corps, I think
I used the term in my previous appearance on the stand.
Mr. Hays. If you were doing the calling, you would call upon the
best brains you could get, would you not ? You don't mean to put some
term of opprobrium by calling them the intellectual elite ?
Mr. McNiece. No, but neither would I know how to define best
brains. I would call on people in my judgment that would be fitted
for that. I am not doing the calling. The Government is doing that.
Mr. Hats. I understand that, but if you were doing the calling,
and you had to find somebody in a certain field, we will say social
science or for that matter any exact scientific field, how would you ga
about finding them ?
Mr. McNiece. The first thing I would do is to look into their back-
ground and training and find the particular types of views held or
expounded before I would do anything else. I take it here that Gov-
ernment does not do that, but relies upon the recommendations of the
very central group to which I have referred previously. That was
the very purpose of the $65,000 grant in total made by the Rockefeller
Foundation. That apparently is accepted as final by the Government.
I have to assume that. I do not know it. But that was the purpose
of organizing the list.
Mr. Hats. What was the purpose again in organizing the list?
Mr. McNtece. As I have stated previously, the purpose was to sup-
ply a list of individuals qualified in the judgment, and I don't say
this in a disparaging way, of the intellectual group from which this
list emanated.
Mr. Hays. Maybe I am being a little thick at this point, as the Irish
put it, but I don't see anything wrong with the Learned Society or
the Historical Association or the Society of American Chemists, or
anybody else furnishing a list of qualified people.
The Chairman". Would you permit an interjection there?
Mr. Hays. Yes.
The Chairman. We have in the United States the colleges and uni-
versities which, while large in number, are very accessible to be advised
about the requirements of Government. While there is nothing wrong
in asking one of the societies to furnish a list of names, as I see it, do
we not know from practical experience that when a council such as the
Council of Learned Societies is put in the position of furnishing a
list of scholars to advise the Government, that list will be pretty
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 60&
much the recommendation of the man who happens to be administra-
tive officer of the council that makes up and supplies the list. Insofar
as that is the case, that puts in the hands of one man a tremendous
influence. If he happens to be a man that has certain inclinations, he
is in a position to give very wide effect in those inclinations, if he is.
put in a position where he furnishes the list of the experts the Gov-
ernment calls into the service as advisers. That is the angle that I
see that becomes, to my mind, Mr. Hays, very important.
It is the concentration not only in one organization, but ultimately^
largely in the hands of one man.
Mr. Hays. Of course, theoretically that could happen, but if you.
want to carry that theoretical idea out to its ultimate conclusion, it
could happen in the university in the case of whoever is the executive-
officer there. Or if you want an even greater illustration of one man
picking and choosing, how about the President ? He has the power
to appoint literally thousands of people. Theoretically he does it
himself. But actually in practice, it is the culmination of a lot of
recommendations.
I would guess, without knowing and having any evidence offered
to the contrary, that in these various organizations they operate the
same way.
Do you have any evidence, Mr. McNiece, that one individual in the
American Council of Learned Societies is in control of this whole-
thing, or is it the thought of a group of men or officers ?
Mr. McNiece. It is both. By the time I have finished with my
testimony, I think the answer to your question should be a little more-
obvious, because we can take the end results and draw certain conclu-
sions from them.
I have said in the sentence immediately prior to the one you quoted :
In itself there should be no criticism of this objective.
In other words, I start out with that premise. It is the end results-
that cause us to raise some questions. We have not touched the end
results as yet as they affect this side of the triangle.
Mr. Hays. You are going to bring in some conclusive facts later
on of something bad in the end result? If you are, I will defer any
questioning along that line.
Mr. McNiece. All right. I had not expected to do it at this mo-
ment. As a matter of fact, I was not sure I would do it at all. But
here is a quotation which I might insert. It does not appear in any
of my studies.
When we see a lot of framed timbers, different proportions of which we ;
know have been gotten out at different times and places and by different work-
men, and when we see those timbers joined together and see that they exactly
make the frame of a house or a mill, all the tennons and mortises exactly fit-
ting, and all the length and proportions of the different pieces exactly adapted
to their respective places, and not a piece too many or too few, in such a case-
we find it impossible not to believe that all understood one another from the-
beginning and all worked upon a common plan or draft drawn up before the
first blow was struck..
That is from Abraham Lincoln in a talk made in 1858. It has been
certified to us by the Legislative Reference Division of the Congres-
sional Library which can give you further details on it if you are-
interested.
Mr. Hays. I assume you are saying now that you are comparing-
this to the framework of a building, and saying all these people who-
604 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
are furnished the Government by these different societies, their think-
ing dovetails and fits together perfectly.
Mr. McNiece. I hope to show you in the small manuscript portion
of this talk what we consider to be the predominating influence to
cover the listing of suggestions made which we have taken solely out
of governmental publications.
Mr. Hats. Mr. McNiece, don't you think the way to find that out,
instead of relying — and I am sure you are sincere — or something you
say is to call in some of these people and examine them and find out
if their thinking dovetails ?
We have a rather striking example here. You have had four pro-
fessors that you people have found in your months of research that
you thought would pretty well, I suppose, exemplify what you wanted
to bring out. I am finding no fault with that. But even those four —
I would assume they were pretty carefully selected— have testified
at variance on various things. Their thinking did not dovetail.
The Chairman. You did not intend to say, if I may interject, that
all the thinking dovetails. What you meant to say, I would assume,
is a preponderance.
Mr. McNiece. That is right.
The Chairman. If I may follow through on the observation I made,
about the concentration in one place of this power or authority or
however it might be described, to make recommendations for advisers
to the Government, on a very broad basis, I referred to the fact that
if it happened that the administrative officer of the society that
made the recommendation happened to be a man of certain inclina-
tions, it might become dangerous. If, for instance, that man hap-
pened to be one of a Fascist inclination, his disposition, of course,
would be to recommend people that represented his line of thinking,
with the result that we would get in the Government, unless they were
very carefully screened by the appointing authority, a preponderance
of people that had a Fascist type of thinking.
This administrative officer of one of these societies is a man that
has no public responsibility, not like the President or a Cabinet officer,
whom we know and who do have public responsibility. Nor, like the
president of a college, who is identified in the public mind, and to a very
large degree is held responsible not only by the board of trustees, but
particularly by the alumnae of the institution, as well as a very wide
segment of the public. That is quite different from some man that is
ensconced in the office of a learned society that is in a building down-
town here. At least I see a very wide difference. Insofar as there is
a disposition to concentrate into one or a few places — it probably
should not be described as authority to recommend— the privilege of
recommending people for Government consultants, I would have quite
a serious question in my mind about it.
Mr. Hays. Let me read to you a quotation I have found here and
see if you agree that it is along the line of some that you have read.
I will read it and then I will hand it to you if you want to look at it.
But all agree that there can be no question whatever that some remedy must
be found, and quickly found, for the misery and wretchedness which press so
heavily at the moment on a very large majority of the poor.
This was written some years ago, and not as of the present.
The ancient workmen's guilds were destroyed in the last century and no other
organization took their place. Public institutions and the laws have repudiated
the ancient religion. Hence by degrees it has come to pass that workingmen have
been given over, isolated and defenseless, to the callousness of employers and
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 605
the greed of unrestrained competition. And to this must he added the custom
of working by contract and the concentration of so many branches of trade in
the hands of a few individuals so that a small number of the very rich have
been able to lay upon the masses of the poor a yoke little better than slavery
itself.
What would you say about that? Do you want to look at it?
Mr. McNiece. I would like to see it.
The Chairman. All I can say is, while he is looking that over — and
that goes back to describing an individual — there is no Member of
Congress, nobody in this room, and but few people in Washington
who come from a family where they had greater difficulty rearing their
children than I did. What I want to preserve in this country is the
same economic circumstances that enabled my father who started
out with $100, a horse, and a sidesaddle, to rear a family of 13 chil-
dren, all of them graduated from high school, most of them graduated
from college, none of them probably very successful in material goods,
but all able to take their positions in society.
I am not quite sure what the economic forces and factors are that
enabled my father to do that, but whatever they are, insofar as I am
able to find them, I want to preserve them.
That is more or less my economic philosophy, and is pretty much
my guide. Whether I am a middle-of-the-roader, a liberal, a free-
wheeler, or a conservative, I think I have exactly the same thinking
that I had when my mother gave me the last $2 she had when I started
off to college, where I was able to make my own way. I do not think
my economic philosophy has changed any at all over all these years.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Chairman, I think we can all endorse that as a very
worthy objective, and I think perhaps some of us would even like to
expand so that even more people will be able to do that.
• The Chairman. I think that we have had a system where if a great
urge existed people had been able to do that to a degree that does
not prevail in any country on earth. That is why our people have
been carried farther and faster up the road of progress, and attained
the standard of living that has never been attained by any people
anywhere at any time.
Mr. Hays. If we are going to debate this a little bit and leave my
quotation alone, I might say to you that I think perhaps statistics
will show, if it not too empirical, that there are a bigger percentage
of boys and girls in America going to college today than ever before.
So perhaps the very thing that some of these witnesses have been con-
demning is the thing that is bringing about the conditions that both
you and I seem to want, Mr. Chairman.
Now, can we go back to my little quotation.
Mr. McNiece. I should be very glad to go back to this. My own
appraisal is that it is a purely emotional product without one word
or substance of proof. It might have been written — it is not dated —
100 or 125 years ago. I have no means of knowing that. But there
is a great deal of false emotional propaganda, if I may use the term,
put out from many quarters on such things as this. The National
Bureau of Economic Research in collaboration, I believe, with the
Department of the Census, every once in a while turns out an esti-
mate—I say every once in a while, because it is not annual— of the
total wealth of this country. That is wealth of all forms — stocks,
bonds, farms, buildings, everything. If we divide the estimate of
that total wealth by the population of the country, we find that if the
49720 — 54 — pt. 1—39
606 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
communistic or socialistic idea were fully realized with respect to the
disposition of capitalistic assets, that the individual share in that
would be somethng over $3,000. The family's share of the total wealth
of the country will be something less than a Congressman's salary for
1 year. That is not going to take anybody very far if the collectivistic
ideals are attained.
Mr. Hats. Would you say that would be tending toward that ulti-
mate objective, that little statement there, would it help to push it
along?
Mr. McNiece. This statement [indicating] ?
Mr. Hays. Yes.
Mr. McNiece. I would certainly assume that is what they are driv-
ing at when they talk about the concentration of wealth, concentra-
tion of many branches of trade in the hands of a few individuals.
That is scarcely in accord with our Government's own record on the
census of distribution and census of manufacturers.
Mr. Hats. Let me read your another one.
The Chairman. Has that quotation been identified yet ?
Mr. Hats. I will identify it in a minute.
Every effort must therefore be made that fathers of families receive a wage
sufficient to meet adequate ordinary domestic needs.
I would assume that the writer means the Government or somebody
to do that. I will let you look at this.
If in the present state of society this is not always feasible, social justice
demands that reforms be introduced without delay which will guarantee every
adult workingman just such a wage. In this connection we might utter a word
of praise for various systems devised and attempted in practice by which an
increased wage is paid in view of increased family burdens and a special pro-
vision made for special needs.
Would you call that socialistic ?
The Chairman. That sounds like the President.
Mr. Hays. It is not. I would not want to quote any of President
Hoover's remarks without identifying them.
The Chairman. With one change I would see no serious objection
to that.
Mr. Hays. Let Mr. McNiece say what he thinks.
The Chairman. If you put the word "opportunity" in front of one
of those adjectives.
Mr. McNiece. From my examination over a period of quite a num-
ber of years, I would say the workmen of the country are being paid
for the most part, particularly if it is in accordance with their pro-
ductive ability, in amounts perfectly ample to support their families.
The statistics indicate that. There have been many false statements
made, according to what I have read in the papers, by certain leaders
in the field of labor. The reason I say false statements is because they
have claimed that wages have not kept pace with the cost of living.
Wages have kept pace with the cost of living and more than that.
Years ago, in a conference at Williamstown, information was
brought out and testimony was introduced that after every depression,
within the period of statistics that were ample to support the con-
clusion, workmen emerged with a net gain in real wages. I do not
believe there is any doubt of that. That was brought out at that time.
I was not present, but I read the proceedings. There was no dissent
taken from the findings of the study of the man who presented it.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 607
We need to have a little more information of what is going on, and
factual information, and pay less attention to claims of leaders and
others who get a great deal of publicity, claims that are not supported
by the facts.
Mr. Hats. I have just one more, and these are all from the same
volume. I would like to comment specifically on this one:
For the effect of civil change and revolution has been to divide society into
two widely different castes. On the one side there is the party which holds the
power because it holds the wealth, which has in its grasp all labor and all trade,
which manipulates for its own benefit and purposes all the sources of supply
and which is powerfully represented in the councils of the state itself. On the
other side there is the needy and powerless multitude, sore and suffering, always
ready for disturbance. If working people can be encouraged to look forward to
obtaining a share in the land, the result will be that the gulf between vast
wealth and deep poverty will be bridged over, and the two orders will be brought
nearer together.
Mr. McNieoe. Commenting for a moment, before making a reading
of this, the share of the land reference reminds me very much of one
of the paragraphs quoted from the findings of the Committee on Social
Studies, as supported by the Carnegie Foundation and the American
Historical Association.
Mr. Hays. I gather you disapprove of that, is that right ?
Mr. McNiece. Because I disapprove of communistic and collec-
tivistic tendencies. All of these — I do not know your source — are
closely comparable to Communist literature that I have read. The
objectives cited parallel very closely communistic ideals or socialistic
ideals. If working people can be encouraged to look forward to obtain-
ing a share in the land — in the smaller areas — I should say rather —
in the areas of less concentrated population, I know from first-hand
information that it is the desire and the attained objective of many
workingmen to own their own properties.
I distinctly remember reading in the papers — that is my only
authority for it — that at one time some of the labor union leaders were
advising their workmen not to become property owners, because that
tended to stabilize them and make them more dependent on local con-
ditions. I don't know how you would reconcile the divergent points
of view.
Mr. Hays. If you are through with those, I would like to have them
back so I can identify them.
The first and last were from the encyclical of Pope Leo XIII on
labor. The middle was from the encyclical of Pope Pius XI.
You have given a very practical demonstration, Mr. McNiece, of the
danger of lifting a sentence or paragraph out of context, because you
have clearly labeled these as being in conformity with the communistic
literature that you have read.
Mr. McNiece. Yes, and I repeat that. I am not familiar with lit-
erature of the source you described, but I have been told that other
encyclicals have completely endorsed and defended, to use the phrase
which you have used a number of times, laissez f aire.
Mr. Hays. If you read the whole thing, they condemn very pro-
nouncedly socialism and communism. But the Popes both condemned
some of the conditions that were existing at that time. I don't think
you will disagree with me, and I am not a Catholic— I may say that —
that the Catholic Church has been one of the bulwarks against com-
munism in the world, and one of the organizations which has fought
against it as any organization I know of. So you would not want to
call the church communistic, would you ?
608 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. McNiece. I am not calling the church communistic. I am not
taking any part in a discussion of religion and the attributes of the
various groups.
Mr. Hats. Do you admit now that there is a danger in doing just
what has been done before this committee over and over again, that
the kind of evidence that has been offered, of lifting a paragraph out
and saying this proves a point does not necessarily prove anything?
Mr. McNiece. I tried to make my position very clear in my initial
statement on that particular point. I said the excerpts had been chosen
very carefully in an effort not to misrepresent context. I suggested
that all references were fully given and if anyone wished to question
the validity of the reference with respect to the points made, he could
consult the original source.
Mr. Hats. The only original source that I have had a chance to
consult and read almost in its entirety was the one which Mr. Sargent
quickly repudiated when I began to read some paragraphs he did not
like. One book he quoted.
Mr. McNiece. Which book is that?
Mr. Hats. Only Yesterday, in which he picked a paragraph out
and said this proved a point he wanted to make. He later said he
didn't buy the whole book. I think you were perhaps here at the time.
Mr. McNiece. I happened to be personally acquainted and a neigh-
bor of Frederick Lewis Allen, the author of that book, and I had a
number of discussions with him. It is not pertinent to this discussion
or this hearing or I would tell you some amusing features and things
that happened to him, from a first-hand discussion with him. That
was one of the first books he had written. He told me that he had
learned something and that was that he would have to be pretty careful
on any future books he wrote, because he made quite a number of
errors.
Mr. Hats. I would probably agree from scanning the book myself
that there is considerable error. Again that proves the point I am
trying to make, that you can't lift a paragraph out of context and
say this proves anything.
Mr. McNiece. In connection with that particular paragraph,
though, I happen to be able to offer again first-hand testimony, be-
cause I was stationed in Cleveland at that particular time, and I per-
sonally on orders attended a number of meetings of the type at which
conclusions which he mentioned were reached. I can tell you from
first-hand knowledge that the common discussion of those meetings
of that time was on the culmination of "the day." At that time, and
the time of which Frederick Lewis Allen wrote, it was the common
hope in those circles that very soon the day of revolution, similar to
what had very recently occurred in Eussia, would appear.
Mr. Hats. Were you sitting in on these plots ?
Mr. McNiece. Absolutely.
Mr. Hats. Were you in favor of revolution at that time ?
Mr. McNiece. Definitely not. I was there under orders emanating
from the Federal Building in Cleveland. One of the men even dis-
cussed with me the fact that certain leaders in the city of Toledo had
been marked to go down when the day came.
On the May Day parades, for which they had permission, that group
used to carry their little red banners on bamboo sticks as flag staffs.
One particular year they appeared with their little red banners on
indoor baseball bats, which was rather suggestive.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 609
Mr. Hays. That time came and went without any revolution, didn't
it, Mr. McNiece ?
Mr. McNiece. Of that type.
Mr. Hays. But you do think that there was an undesirable social
revolution of some kind or another %
Mr. McNiece. In process.
Mr. Hays. Still going on %
Mr. McNiece. Yes.
Mr. Hays. That leads me to a very interesting thing that we started
to pursue the other day. In fact, we touched on it a few times. In
the event of a serious depression in this country, and we all hope we
don't have one, but we have had them in the past, would you recom-
mend that the Government adopt a laissez-faire attitude and take
hands off and let the thing run its course ?
Mr. McNiece. No. I have covered that point in the last section of
my testimony, that is the economic and the Government interest.
Mr. Hays. What would you suggest that the Government do %
The Chairman. May I interject that it is going so far afield. We
are not outlining a pattern of conduct during the — —
Mr. Hays. No, but we are criticizing the conduct of the Govern-
ment, and I would like to have some alternatives.
The Chairman. I do not understand we are criticizing the Gov-
ernment.
Mr. Hays. Have you read this empirical document here?
The Chairman. There is no such intention. I don't think it makes
much difference to the Government what this committee or Mr. Mc-
Niece thinks of what should be done in the case of a depression in the
future.
Mr. Hays. In the third paragraph — if you don't mind jumping
ahead — he said :
Among these is the increasing participation of the Federal Government * * *
in subsidization of agriculture, scientific research, wage control, mortgage insur-
ance and other activities. Most, if not all, of these were politically conceived
and depression born. They represent new ventures in our Government activ-
ities.
As I read on, it is critical that the Government goes into that. Did
you mean to be critical ?
Mr. McNiece. Prior to that in this section which I have not read,
you will find the origin for the adoption of the suggestions by the gov-
ernment in those activities, and that is why they are mentioned in this
way from the section of the report you quoted.
Mr. Hays. You are saying that somebody sort of talked the Govern-
ment into this, and it would have been better if they had not done it.
Isn't that what you mean to imply ?
Mr. McNiece. Yes. I told you in the beginning, and it is recorded
in the early part of this investigative work, which is purely factual —
we emphasized the fact that we are drawing no conclusions — the
section of the report from which you are now quoting is getting into
the conclusions which we are arriving at as a result of the evidence,
all of which we have not yet presented.
The Chairman. Since we have gotten into this second report, I
have just talked to Mr. Hays, we might as well proceed with the second
phase of your report.
Mr. McNiece. I would like to make a short preliminary statement
before getting into the reading from this document. This statement
is as follows :
610 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Before beginning a discussion of the relationships between founda-
tions and government, it should be understood by all that we realize
that we are entering the sensitive area of political controversy. One
reason for mentioning this at this time is that we wish it to be under-
stood that we are limiting our analysis of the conditions as we shall
describe them, first to documented statements from the sources quoted
and second, in the economics section of the report to statistical infor-
mation available in the Government's own publications.
The economic facts seem to substantiate the conclusion that many
of the proposals advanced by the planners and deemed experimental
by some and questionable by others have been put into practice and
are a part of our everyday lives as we are now living them. Congres-
sional appropriations and governmental expenditures indicate this.
While these facts seem to speak for themselves, there are certain inter-
pretations which we shall make especially with reference to future
conditions if we choose to continue these collectivistic ventures.
In these conclusions we are taking no partisan political position, nor
do we wish to encourage or support any other attitude than this.
Our interest in these problems as they affect the state of the Nation
and its future far exceeds our interest in any form of political pref-
ferment.
Now, this section of the manuscript report is headed, "Relationships
Between Foundations and Government." It is particularly concerned
with the national and social planning.
Before proceeding with the submission of evidence bearing upon
the relationships between foundations and government, we wish to
make some comments by way of background as they pertain to na-
tional and social planning by government.
Three things should be obvious to anyone reasonably familiar with
the interlocking complexities of our production, distribution, service,
and financial problems in our economy :
(1) The successful correlation of all these activities would require
the complete control of all phases of our economic endeavors. Price
control, for example, cannot be effectively maintained without rig-
orous control of material supply and costs, wages, transportation, and
all other elements entering into final costs.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that these reports are very
long, and if Mr. McNiece is going to read all of them today, that is
about all we are going to get done. I have read them. I have some
questions I would like to ask about them. I would like to just have
them put in the record as is, and then go on with the questioning. I
think it would save a lot of time.
Mr. Koch. He was just going to read the shorter one.
Mr. Hats. Is he going to read the typewritten introduction of this?
Mr. Koch. No.
Mr. McNiece. I had expected to take selective manuscript reading.
It would be dull and deadly, and I would say completely impossible
to convey to anyone the message involved in that great series of, I
think, 20 statistical tables. I could not hope to do that by reading.
I had not expected to do that.
Mr. Koch. You intended to read only the mimeographed statement ?
Mr. McNiece. Yes, and certain conclusions and introduction ma-
terial from the Economic Report.
The Chairman. This is 19 pages.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 611
Mr. McNiece. That is all.
Mrs. Pfost. There is a lot of single spacing and tightly written
pages.
The Chairman. The quotations are single spaced. Had you ex-
pected to read the quotations in full ?
Mr. McNiece. I had intended to read the quotations in full. It is
immateri al to me .
The Chairman. Why don't you continue with the shorter form?
The other material is to be inserted in the record.
Mr. McNiece. That is right. There are certain things in these
quotations that I think from my point of view are very important
from the standpoint of Mr. Hays' questions.
The Chairman. Very well.
Mr. Hats. I have about 8 or 10 questions to this document, and I
was wondering if you have any objection in order to prevent the dis-
organized thing we have had in the past, and going some other day,
you could read them and answer all of my questions before noon?
Would you have any objection if I stopped you at the bottom of page
2 and asked a question right there while it is fresh in mind ?
The Chairman. What he had in mind, as I understood a while
ago, in the remainder of this brief form might be the basis for answers.
I have not read these quotations. I would rather like to hear them,
if I might, before the questioning. I think we would have time before
noon to conclude this and have the questioning also before noon, which
I would like to do.
Mr. McNiece. Yes, we could.
The Chairman. For my own information, I would rather like to
have it.
Mr. McNiece. It is very vital, Mr. Reece, to the questions which
Mr. Hays very properly asked. I would like at least to present those
that bear upon this idea of, let us say, a concentrated corps of influence.
It is involved here to a certain extent. It is involved in one of the
very first questions Mr. Hays asked me this morning. So I think it
would be better if we could at least go this far with it.
Mr. Hays. Read this whole thing?
Mr. McNiece. Yes, it is not going to take very long.
The Chairman. Very well.
Mr. McNiece. Otherwise, shortages, surpluses, and bottlenecks
would bob up continuously and everywhere.
(2) With the complexity due to the literally millions of points or
junctures where difficulties may arise, no man or centralized group of
men possess the knowledge or judgment that will equal the integrated
judgment of thousands of experienced men applied at the points where
and when troubles first develop.
At the time when increased complexity of national and interna-
tional affairs seem to make more governmental planning and control
necessary, the Government is actually becoming less and less able to
exercise rational and competent control over the multiplicity of details
essential to good planning. To be even superficially effective, it must
be completely autocratic. .
(3) Even though such centralized planning were physically pos-
sible, the net results would be a smaller and smaller percentage of
goods and services produced that would be available for those who
produce them. This would result from the increasing cost of the
612 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
governmental agencies and bureaus necessary to devise and maintain
control. Of course this would have to be met by increasing taxation.
That is the experience in Russia and it has been developing here for
some years as will be shown in the staff's economic report.
/ From the beginning, the Socialist programs have called for national
ownership and planning of productive facilities.
Such references are frequent and clear. Perhaps the following quo-
tation from Engels, friend and contemporary of Marx, may illustrate
the point.
The planless production of capitalist society capitulates before the planned
production of the invading Socialist society.
To emphasize the reiteration of this concept by a responsible body
of men in our own times and country, we may again refer to a para-
graph from the report of the Commission on Social Studies. After 5
years of deliberation they say (American Historical Association,
Committee on Social Studies, p. 16) :
Under the molding influence of socialized processes of living, drives of
technology and science, pressures of changing thought and policy, and disrupt-
ing impacts of economic disaster, there is a notable waning of the once wide-
spread popular faith in economic individualism ; and leaders in public affairs,
supported by a growing mass of the population, are demanding the introduction
into economy of ever wider measures of planning and control.
In what way has this expression of belief found its way into our
governmental activities %
In 1933, the National Planning Board was formed. How did it look
upon its task and what seem to be its final objectives ? These may be
indicated in part by the following extracts from its final report for
1933-34— National Planning Board, final report 1933-34, page 11 :
State and interstate planning is a lusty infant but the work is only beginning.
Advisory economic councils may be regarded as instrumentalities for stimu-
lating a coordinated view of national life and for developing mental attitudes
favorable to the principle of national planning.
Page 60 :
Finally, mention should be made of the fact that there are three great national
councils which contribute to research in the social sciences. The Council of
Learned Societies, the American Council on Education, and the Social Science
Research Council are important factors in the development of research and add
their activities to the body of scientific material available in any program of
national planning.
The Council of Learned Societies has promoted historical and general social
research.
The American Council on Education has recently sponsored an inquiry into
the relation of Federal, State, and local governments to the conduct of public
education. It has served as the organizing center for studies of materials of
instruction and problems of educational administration. It represents the educa-
tional organizations of the country and is active in promoting research in its
special field.
The Social Science Research Council, a committee of which prepared this
memorandum, is an organization engaged in planning research. It is true that
its object has not been to make social plans, but rather to plan research in the
social held. A decade of thought on planning activities through its committees,
distributed widely over the social sciences, has given it an experience, a back-
ground with regard to the idea of planning, that should be of value if it were
called on to aid in national planning. Furthermore, the members of the Social
Science Research Council, its staff, and the members of its committees are per-
haps more familiar than the members of any other organization with the per-
sonnel in the social sciences, with the research interests of social scientists, and
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 613
with the experience and capabilities of social science research workers in the
United States. The members of the council are familiar with the different bu-
reaus of research. The council has been concerned chiefly with the determina-
tion of the groups and persons with whom special types of research should be
placed. For this purpose it has set up committees, organized commissions, pro-
moted research, and sponsored the development of various research agencies and
interests. With its pivotal position among the social sciences, it could undoubted-
ly render valuable aid if called on to do so, in the formidable task of national
planning.
Page 66 :
It was after the Civil War that American economic life came to be dominated
by the philosophy of laissez faire and by the doctrines of rugged individualism.
But the economic and social evils of the period resulted in the development of
new planning attitudes tending to emphasize especially public control and
regulation.
Page 67:
Summing up the developments of these 125 years, one may say that insofar as
the subject here considered is concerned, they are important because they left
us a fourfold heritage :
First, to think in terms of an institutional framework which may be fashioned
in accordance with prepared plans ;
Second, a tendency to achieve results by compromise in which different lines
and policies are more or less reconciled ,*
Third, a tendency to stress in theory the part played in economic life by
individualism, while at the same time having recourse in practice to govern-
mental aid and to collective action when necessary ; and
Fourth, a continued social control applied to special areas of economic life.
Page 71 :
Such was the note already heard in America when during 1928-29 came the
first intimations of the 5-year plan, and the Western World began to be inter-
ested in the work and methods of the Gosplan in Moscow. The Russian expe-
rience was not embodied in any concrete way in American thinking, but it stim-
ulated the idea that we need to develop in an American plan out of our American
background.
The National Planning Board after furnishing its report in 1934
was discontinued.
The National Resources Committee was in existence from 1934 to
1939.
In 1939, the National Resources Planning Board was constituted, in
part with the same personnel. After a few years of deliberation, it
rendered its final report, from which the following verbatim and
continuous extract is quoted from page 3 :
The National Kesources Planning Board believes that it should be the declared
policy of the United States Government to promote and maintain a high level
of national production and consumption by all appropriate measures necessary
for this purpose. The Board further believes that it should be the declared
policy of the United States Government.
To underwrite full employment for the employables ;
To guarantee a job for every man released from the Armed Forces and the
war industries at the close of the war, with fair pay and working conditions ;
To guarantee and, when necessary, underwrite :
Equal access to security,
Equal access to education for all,
Equal access to health and nutrition for all, and
Wholesome housing conditions for all.
This policy grows directly out of the Board's statement concerning which
the President has said :
"All of the free peoples must plan, work, and fight together for the mainte-
nance and development of our freedoms and rights,"
614 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
THE FOUR FBEEDOMS
Freedom of speech and expression, freedom to worship, freedom from want,
and freedom from fear : and
A NEW BILL OF BIGHTS
1. The right to work, usefully and creatively through the productive years;
2. The right to fair pay, adequate to command the necessities and amenities
of life in exchange for work, ideas, thrift, and other socially valuable service.
Mr. Hays, Would you mind identifying where this came from ?
Mr. McNiece. Yes, sir. This is the final report of the National
Resources Planning Board.
Mr. Hats. All right.
Mr. MoNiece. (reading) :
3. The right to adequate food, clothing, shelter, and medical care ;
4. The right to security, with freedom from fear of old age, want, depen-
dency, sickness, unemployment, and accident ;
5. The right to live in a system of free enterprise, free from compulsory
labor, irresponsible private power, arbitrary public authority, and unregulated
monopolies ;
6. The right to come and go, to speak or to be silent, free from the spyings
of secret political police ;
7. The right to education, for work, for citizenship, and for personal growth
and happiness ; and
8. The right to equality before the law, with equal access to justice in fact ;
9. The right to rest, recreation, and adventure, the opportunity to enjoy
life and take part in an advancing civilization.
Plans for this purpose are supported and explained in this report. The pre-
vious publications of the Board, including National Resources Development
Report for 1942, transmitted to the Congress by the President on January 14,
1942, and a series of pamphlets (After Defense — What? After the War— Full
Employment, Postwar Planning, etc.), also provide background for this pro-
posal.
The plans just mentioned are incorporated in a series of points
under the following captions :
Page 13 : A. Plans for Private Enterprise.
Page 13 : B. Plans for Finance and Fiscal Policies.
Page 13 : C. Plans for Improvement of Physical Facilities.
Page 16 : D. Essential Safeguards of Democracy.
Under a caption, "Plans for Services and Security" are extensive
recommendations under the descriptive headings which follow:
Pages 16-17 :
A. Plans for Development of Service Activities. >
1. Equal access to education.
2. Health, nutrition, and medical care.
B. Plans for Underwriting Employment
C. Plans for Social Security
Still another basic caption appears as follows :
Pages 60-66 : Equal Access to Health :
I. Elimination of All Preventable Diseases and Disabilities.
II. Assurance of Proper Nutrition for All Our People.
III. Assurance of Adequate Health and Medical Care for All.
IV. Economical and Efficient Organization of Health Services
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 615
A statement of authorship of the section on Equal Access to Health
says that it was prepared under the direction of Assistant Director
Thomas C. Blaisdell, by Dr. Eveline M. Burns, of the Board's staff.
Dr. Burns is a graduate of the London School of Economics, which
has received grants from the Rockefeller Foundation totaling
$4,105,600.
The discussion and detailed recommendations in this final report
of the National Resources Planning Board are far too lengthy to be
incorporated in this study. Certainly, some of them seem reasonable
from the standpoint of our former governmental procedure but others
are sufficiently novel to warrant mention herein in order to clarify
the underl y ing ob j ectives in the fields mentioned.
PLANS FOB IMPROVEMENT OF PHYSICAL FACILITIES
We recommend for consideration : With private enterprise, through the Recon-
struction- Finance Corporation or possibly one or several Federal Development
Corporations and subsidiaries providing for participation of both public and
private investment and representation in management — particularly for urban
redevelopment, housing, transport terminal reorganization, and energy develop-
ment. Government should assist these joint efforts through such measures as :
(1) Government authority to clear obsolescent plant of various kinds, as, for
instance, we have done in the past through condemnation of unsanitary dwell-
ings, to remove the menace to health and competition with other or better
housing.
(2) Governmental authority to assemble properties for reorganization and
redevelopment — perhaps along the lines of previous grants of the power of
eminent domain to canal and railroad companies for the acquisition of rights-
of way.
HEALTH, NUTRITION, AND MEDICAL CARE
Assurance of adequate medical and health care for all, regardless of place of
residence or income status and on a basis that is consistent with the self respect
of the recipient, through :
(1) Federal appropriations to aid States and localities in developing a system
of regional and local hospitals and health centers covering all parts of the
country :
(2) Assurance of an adequate and well-distributed supply of physicians,
dentists, nurses, and other medical personnel.
PLANS FOR UNDERWRITING EMPLOYMENT
To guarantee the right to a job, activities in the provision of physical facilities
and service activities should be supplemented by :
(1) Formal acceptance by the Federal Government of responsibility for
insuring jobs at decent pay to all those able to work regardless of whether or
not they can pass a means test ;
(2) The preparation of plans and programs, in addition to those recommended
under public works (II-B-3), for all kinds of socially useful work other than
construction, arranged according to the variety of abilities and location of
persons seeking employment.*
1 From final report, NRPB, p. 13.
* Ibid., p. 17.
616 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Page 17 :
PLANS FOB SOCIAL SECURITY
Reorganization of the unemployment compensation laws to provide broad-
ened coverage, more nearly adequate payments, incorporating benefits to depend-
ents, payments of benefits for at least 26 weeks, and replacement of present
Federal-State system by a wholly Federal administrative organization and a
single national fund.
Creation of an adequate general public assistance system through Federal
financial aid for general relief available to the States on an equalizing basis
and accompanied by Federal standards.
Strengthening of the special public assistance programs to provide more ade-
quately for those in need, and a redistribution of Federal aid to correspond to
differences in needs and financial capacity among the States.
Page 69 :
EQUAL ACCESS TO EDUCATION
That equal access to general and specialized education be made available to
all youth of college and university age, according to -their abilities . and the
needs of society.
Page 70:
That adequate provision be made for the part-time education of adults through
expansion of services such as correspondence and class study, forums, educa-
tional broadcasting, and libraries and museums.
Page 71 :
That camp facilities be made available for all youth above the lower ele-
mentary grades, with work experience provided as a part of camp life.
Page 72:
That the services of the United States Office of Education and State depart-
ments of education be expanded and developed to provide adequate research
facilities and educational leadership to the Nation.
Page 73:
That inequality of the tax burden for education within and among the States
be reduced through the distribution of State and Federal funds on the basis
of need.
The quotations from the reports of the National Planning Board
and the National Resources Planning Board should suffice to show
how they have followed the lead of the Commission on Social Studies
and how completely they have embraced virtually all phases of our
economic life including education.
It will be of interest and significance to trace the progress of one
who was undoubtedly a leader in the evolution of this influence as it has
been set forth. In this case, we refer to Mr. Charles E. Merriam and
in so doing we wish to have it thoroughly understood that we are
casting no aspersions on his name or memory.
The following statement regarding the origin of the Social Science
Research Council is found in the annual report of that organization
for 1928-29.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 617
From page 39, appendix A:
In 1921, the American Political Science Association appointed a Committee on
Political Research, with Prof. Charles F. Merriam as chairman. The purpose
of this committee was to scrutinize the scope and method of research in the field
of government in order to obtain a clearer view of the actual situation and to
offer constructive suggestions.
In a preliminary report in December 1922, the following statement
appeared :
That a sounder empirical method of research had to be achieved in political
science if it were to assist in the development of a scientific political control.
Quoting further the report said:
As one of its major recommendations, the committee urged "the establish-
ment of a Social Science Research Council consisting of two members each from
economics, sociology, political science, and history, for the purpose of:
"(a) The development of research in the social studies.
" { & ) The establishment of a central clearing house for projects of social inves-
tigation.
"(c) The encouragement of the establishment of institutes for social-science
study, with funds adequate for the execution of various research projects and
publications, in the various fields of science."
The Social Science Eesearch Council was formed in 1923 and incor-
porated in 1924. Charles E. Merriam served as its president from
1924 to 1927. He was president of the American Political Science
Association during 1924 and 1925, a member of the Hoover Commis-
sion on Social Trends and of the President's Commission on Adminis-
trative Management from 1933 to 1943.
In 1926, a Committee of the American Historical Association made
a preliminary study and recommendation on the subject of social
studies in the schools. Mr. Merriam was a member of this committee
and later of the final commission on social studies whose report of May
1934 we have discussed at length.
In spite of his retention of membership, he with 3 others out of
the Committee of 14 members failed to sign the final report. Since
no dissenting report or advices are recorded, we can only guess at the
reason, In fairness to Mr. Merriam and from an examination of some
of his later writings on other matters, we are led to believe that he was
sufficiently opposed to the extreme revolutionary plans of Marxism
to disassociate himself from the more radical conclusions in this report.
Be that as it may, he retained his interest and activity in national
planning to the last. Following his connections with the American
Political Science Association, the Social Science Research Council,
and the American Historical Association, he was a member of the
National Planning Board in 1933-34; the National Resources Com-
mittee 1934-39 ; the National Resources Planning Board 1939^13 ; the
President's Committee on Administrative Management 1933-43 and
the United States Loyalty Review Board 1947-48.
Mr. Merriam is the author of a book published in 1941 by the Har-
vard University Press, entitled "On the Agenda of Democracy." This
book is composed of a series of lectures delivered by the author.
618 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The opening statement in the introduction follows (p. xiii) :
Foremost on the agenda of democracy is the reconsideration of the program
in the light of modern conditions. The old world is gone and will not return.
We face a new era, which searches all creeds, all forms, all programs of action,
and spares none. Reason and science have made basic changes that demand
readjustment at many points. * * *
One of the chief tasks confronting democracy is the development of a program
adequate to meet the changes of our time. * * *
Mr. Merriam defines planning as follows (p. 77) :
Planning is an organized effort to utilize social intelligence in the determina-
tion of national policies.
The ensuing extracts from the pages indicated throw additional
light on Mr. Merriam's views (pp. 86-87) :
From the organizational point of view the NRPB (National Resources Plan-
ning Board) is part of the Executive Office of the President. This includes the
White House Office, the Bureau of the Budget, the National Resources Planning
Board, the Office of Government Reports, the Liaison Office for Personnel Man-
agement, and the Office for Emergency Management. With the reference to other
Federal agencies outside of overhead management, the Board has endeavored to
encourage planning activities in the various departments of the Government.
There is now a Planning Division, specifically so-called, in the Department of
Agriculture.
There is one in the making (provided Congress gives an appropriation) in the
Federal Works Agency ; there is a general committee in the Department of the
Interior which is not called a planning committee but which may serve the same
purpose, and there are Planning Divisions in the War Department and in the
Navy Department. There are similar enterprises not labeled "planning" but
doing much the same work in a variety of other agencies, as, for example, in the
Treasury, in Commerce, in the Federal Reserve Board, and in other independent
agencies. The Board has endeavored to make a special connection with Federal
agencies through its various technical committees, dealing with particular topics
assigned by the President. These committees usually have representatives of
several Federal agencies, as, for example, the Committee on Long-Range Work
and Relief Policies.
The Board (National Resources Planning Board) has also dealt with private
agencies interested in planning. The most notable example is its Science Com-
mittee. Here groups were brought together that never came together before,
namely, the National Academy of Sciences, the Social Science Research Coun-
cil, the American Council of Learned Societies, and the American Council on
Education with its 27 constituent organizations. The members of the sci-
ence committee are designated by these four groups. These scientists have
undertaken with the United States Government some very important studies,
notably the study of population, the study of the social implications of tech-
nology, and the study of research as a national asset— research in the National
Government, in private industry, and ultimately in the various local govern-
ments.
- Pages 110-11:
As a student of planning, I see the possibility of adapting our national resources
to our national needs in peace as well as in war, in the development of national
productivity and higher standards of living as a part of the same program.
This is the bill of rights in modern terms.
Page 113:
It will be important to have a shelf of public work and projects ready for
use, if there is need, available to combat any wide tendency toward general
unemployment.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 619
In another book called the New Democracy and the New Despotism,
Mr. Merriam states (pp. 58-59) :
Out of the field of science and education emerged the body of inquiry, experi-
ment, and reflection known as social sciences. The developing range of knowl-
edge regarding the principles and techniques of social behavior tended to in-
crease human confidence in conscious social control. The tendency was not
merely to accept the environment as given, but to understand it, then to devise
appropriate methods and techniques for the guidance of social forces.
Page 148 :
My own preference is for a national planning board appointed by the Execu-
tive and responsible to him, serving on an indeterminate tenure. Such an organ-
ization might act as a long-time planning agency for the coordination of various
plans among departments or bureaus and for the elaboration of further lines
of long-time national policy in the larger sense of the term.
All in all, the long record of Mr. Merriam in his participation in
the general field of the social sciences and in the governmental opera-
tions, and the quoted excerpts from his writings should serve to iden-
tify him thoroughly with the policies and practices, the effects of which
are shown in the staff's report on economics and the public interest.
To emphasize the importance of the parts played by the specialists
from the field of education, it may be said that the staff has lists of
some of these consultants and advisers that total as follows : Depart-
ment of State, 42; Department of Denfense, 169.
Before taking up the report on economics and the public interest,
it will be well to take a moment or two to close the triangle of relation-
ships among foundations, education and Government by reference to
the United States Office of Education. It is the official center of con-
tact between the Government itself and the outside educational world.
In table 7 of the Economic Report, it is shown that from 1945 to
1952 inclusive, the Federal Government has expended the total sum
of $14,405,000,000 on education in its various forms. Much, if not all,
of this is under the jurisdiction of the United States Office of Educa-
tion.
As part of this vast project, the Office itself issues many good book-
lets on various phases of education and collects many valuable statis-
tics on cost, attendance, and other matters of interest in this domain.
Among the booklets issued by this agency are a few which may be
mentioned and identified.
They are :
The U. N. Declaration of Human Bights : A handbook for teachers, Federal
Security Agency, Bulletin 1951, No. 12, Office of Education.
How Children Learn About Human Rights : Place of subjects series, Bulletin
1951, No. 9, Federal Security Agency, Office of Education.
Higher Education in France : A handbook of information concerning curricula
available in each institution, Bulletin 1952, No. 6, Federal Security Agency, Office
of Education.
Education in Haiti : Bulletin 1948, No. 1, Federal Security Agency, United
States Office of Education.
This brief reference is purely factual and without appraisal or
comment.
It is made only as a matter of information for the consideration of
the committee when it considers the problems involved.
620 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
This is the conclusion of the report.
The Chairman. You are including the other parts in the record ?
Mr. McNiece. Yes, the economics report is separate and I had
hoped if the time were available we might read certain parts of that ,
but include the whole thing for the record, avoiding the complications
and confusion and time involved in reading a lot of statistics which
are of value only for study.
The Chairman. The Rockefeller Foundation has given a total in
excess of $4 million to the London School of Economics!
Mr. McNiece. That is right, according to the record, as we have
compiled it.
The Chairman. That is a lot of money. And the London School
of Economics is generally recognized as being liberal, with liberal in
quotations ?
Mr. McNiece. Yes.
The Chairman. Or by some people referred to as leftist. Having
attended the London School of Economics for a time, that accounts
for my leftist leanings.
Mr. Hays. I would say by the process we are going here that makes
you subversive. I don't really think you are, but you could certainly
imply that from some of the things. I am glad you brought that up,
because I had read this before, and I have listened carefully, and you
have put your finger on the only thing in this whole document that
has anything to do with foundations, that reference on page 9. The
rest is j ust airing somebody's political views.
Mr. McNiece. No.
The Chairman. No. The National Resources Planning Board, the
way it was set up, it did tie into the foundation funds, did it not?
Mr. McNiece. Certainly, through the American Historical Asso-
ciation, the Social Science Eesearch Council, the American Council
on Education, the aid of all of which is acknowledged in the official
reports of the National Resources Planning Board. It is stipulated by
them. That is a definite hookup with the foundations.
Mr. Hats. You say yourself they suggest that ; is that bad ?
Mr. McNiece. They have not the power of Congress to authorize
its adoption. They have gone as far as they can.
Mr. Hats. Now, you are getting some place? In other words, none
of this has any validity or authority unless Congress decides to imple-
ment it.
Mr. McNiece. I have suggested here in the preliminary statement
that the appropriations by Congress and the record of governmental
expenditures follow very closely the line of recommendations which
I just finished reading.
Mr. Hats. Are you saying that Congress has a bunch of nitwits
and dupes or just-been subversive, or what ?
Mr. McNiece. No; I am not saying any such thing, and it should
not be inferred from any remark I have made.
The Chairman. My knowledge is just to the contrary.
Mr. Hats. You seem to indicate that Congress was pushed into
this by the statement you just made, that their appropriations par-
alleled this and these people influenced them.
Mr. McNiece. Inferences are free to those who make them. I have
only stated the facts. I am making no inference beyond the state-
ment of facts.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 621
The Chairman. But the essential part of these recommendations
have never been touched by Congress. Take for instance on page 10 :
(2) Governmental authority to assemble properties for reorganization and
redevelopment — perhaps along the lines of previous grants of the power of
eminent domain to canal and railroad companies for the acquisition of rights-
of-way.
If that recommendation were implemented, it would give the Fed-
eral Government authority to move any industry into any other part
of the country.
Mr. McNiece. That is right.
The Chairman. At one time that recommendation was made to
Congress, incidentally. Congress has been, on the contrary, the one
to resist recommendations of this nature. That is as nationalistic
a recommendation as could possibly be made to the Federal Govern-
ment.
Mr. Hays. You read the second paragraph. Let us read the first
one:
Government authority to clear obsolescent plants of various kinds.
What about that? You have not heard any squawks from General
Motors, have you, about tax-amortization certificates where they got
a nice big fat donation from the taxpayers in order to clear out an
obsolescent plant so they could build a better one, and then it did not
cost them anything ?
The Chairman. The Government has not been given authority to
determine what plants are obsolescent and carry them out.
Mr, Hats. That is the only difference. They let them determine
it, and how much profit they will make. That seems to be all right.
The Chairman. That is entirely different.
Mr. Hats. It is not entirely different.
The Chairman. In my way of thinking.
Mr. Hats. Going back to page 9, and we are going to stick to this
in spite of all the diversions, that to me is the only relation this has
to foundations in any way, shape or form. You refer to a report pre-
pared by Dr. Eveline M. Burns, and then you hasten to add she is a
graduate of the London School of Economics, which has received
grants from the Rockefeller Foundation totaling $4,105,600. I want
to ask you specifically, does that mean you do not approve of this
report by Dr. Burns ?
J Mr. MoNiecb. I am reporting only on facts and not indicating
approval or disapproval of any of the facts which I am offering. My
approval or disapproval would be worthless in any appraisal of the
situation. I am only attempting to bring out the facts as we found
them.
Mr. Hats. Why bring in Dr. Burns? What does that have to do
with it, then?
Mr. MoNieoe. I thought it was clearly stated, "A statement of
authorship of the section on 'Equal access to health'." This is in the
report itself — says that it w T as prepared under the direction of Assist-
ant Director Thomas C. Blaisdell, by Dr. Eveline M. Burns, of the
Board's staff.
This is the acknowledgment of authorship in the report itself.
Mr. Hats. Do you mean to imply that the London School of Eco-
nomics is responsible for anything that any of its graduates ever wrote ?
Mr. McNiece. I don't imply any such thing.
49720— 54— pt. 1 40
622 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hats. Why put that in ? I am curious. She must have gone
to some other school.
Mr. McNiece. I have no control over other peoples' inferences. The
factual evidence is that Dr. Burns went to the London School of Eco-
nomics, she graduated from there and presumably she went there for
the purpose of absorbing some ideas. That is the purpose of education.
Mr. Hats. Do you know from what high school she graduated ?
Mr. McNiece. No.
Mr. Hats. Why not put that in ?
Mr. McNiece. She is English. That would expend more of the
Government's taxpayers' money. That would take some time.
Mr. Hats. Let us not worry about that. We have not up to this
time in this committee. It seems to me it is a valid assumption. The
only reason the London School of Economics was mentioned is because
it got a grant from the Kockefeller Foundation, and she went there,
and you had to tie it into the foundation.
Mr. McNiece. Of course it is a tie-in, the same as this flow of men
fostered and supported by foundation grants, without mentioning a
specific one; such things as some of the prior witnesses have testified
individually. Of course it has an influence.
Mr. Hats. That is what I wanted to get in, the fact that was brought
in in order to make a rather tenuous tie to the whole thing.
On page 2 you say that the methods used in bringing about changes
suggest a form of subversion.
Mr. McNiece. I don't find that on page 2.
Mr. Hats. No, I am sorry. That is in the economic report. Let
us go back. We don't want to get to that one yet.
At the bottom of page 2, you bring in Engels and Marx. Do you
do that to point out — first let me ask you this. Are you against plan-
ning?
Mr. McNiece. That is a very broad question, and I could only make
a purely hypothetical answer.
Mr. Hats. I will narrow it down. Are you against Government
planning? That takes away the broadness of the basis.
Mr. McNiece. Not sufficiently to permit me to make an answer. I
can make a qualified answer.
Mr. Hats. All right.
Mr. McNiece. I certainly don't object to, and I would rather criti-
cize any governmental department that did not attempt to plan its own
activities with reasonable care, but for any governmental department
or group of governmental departments to attempt to plan the pro-
cedure of national affairs, including production, distribution, finance,
not concerned directly with the Government's overriding control of
finance, I certainly disapprove of.
The Chairman. That is, you are opposed to a planned economy by
the Government.
Mr. McNiece. I disapprove of a planned economy, definitely. But
that has no relations to the planning of an individual department's
activities. They are very poorly managed if they don't do that.
Mr. Hats. Now, then, to go to a more narrow base yet and a more
specific example, what about the planning of an agency in the Gov-
ernment — I can't think of the exact title — that loans various political
subdivisions money to draw up plans for improvements, such as hos-
pitals, highways, schools, courthouses, rehabilitation of existing f acili-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 623
ties and so on, in case there ever comes a time when there needs to be
a program of public works. Do you disapprove of that ?
The Chairman. May I interject? Really I feel it is outside of
the purview of a member of the staff to give his opinions on such prob-
lems. He is presenting certain facts for the evaluation of the com-
mittee.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Chairman, he is presenting a political document.
If you are going to allow the staff to come in and present political
views purporting to be those of this committee, then I think the
committee has a right to explore them.
The Chairman. If he is interested in giving his opinion on govern-
mental problems of all kinds-
Mr. Hays. This is an indictment of planning.
The Chairman. He is at liberty to do so as far as I am concerned.
Mr. Hays. I think the question is very relevant and has direct bear-
ing on this report. I will admit the report does not have much bear-
ing on H. R. 217, but since it has been presented here, we might as
well question about the report. If you want to throw the whole thing
out and say it has no relationship to this investigation and say let us
forget it, I am willing to do that. But if we are going to put it in
the record, I think it ought to be explored a bit.
The Chairman. Yes. Anything connected with the report itself,
I think should be, but I referred only to asking him his personal views
on economic and governmental matters.
Mr. Hays. Maybe I can get the whole thing over in one question.
The Chairman. Good.
Mr. Hays. Would you answer this question, Mr. McNiece ? If you
will give me — maybe you won't give the answer I think you are going
to because I think I want it. It is really immaterial to me. It occurs
to me this : You are against planning that disagrees with what you
think is good for the country, and you are for planning that agrees
with what you think is all right. Could you answer that question
"Yes"?
Mr. McNiece. I don't know what you comprehend in that part of
your question that suggests my favorable attitude toward planning
that I think is good for the country. The question is rather broad and
general.
Mr. Hays. You don't want to say that you are against planning
altogether, do you ?
Mr. McNiece. It depends on the field in which it operates. If you
can specifically identify the field, then perhaps I can give you a "Yes"
or "No" answer.
Mr. Hays. Let me put it this way. You approve of planning in the
fields that you approve of and disapprove of it in the fields in which
you don't think the Government ought to plan, is that right ?
Mr. McNiece. I have no comment. That question again does not
permit of a "Yes" or "No" answer that has any real significance from
my particular standpoint.
Mr. Hays, Then perhaps you could just tell us what fields that you
do approve the Government planning in, and what ones you disap-
prove, because after all, this is more or less your opinion, isn't it?
Mr. McNiece. One man's opinion is another man's fact.
Mr. Koch. May I ask a question here ?
Mr. Hays. Sure.
624 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Koch. Isn't it true that the purpose of this report was not to
state your political view or our political view, but rather to show that
certain matters or certain things have occurred in our political life,
and you point out that the foundations urged that that be done ? Let
us assume, so that there will be no getting into argument, that what
they recommended was all right. Let us not get into that argument.
But say that they sparkplugged it and that the people in the Govern-
ment who, like everybody else, likes to go to experts to ask what do
you think about what planning should be done, have gone to those
5 or 6 associations and the question arises, Who are they to call the
signals when neither you nor I elect any of them ? There is that ques-
tion. If they advise political activity or political programs, there is a
serious question on the matter of good government. Who is this fourth
power? We have the congressional power, the legislature, the judi-
cial, and the executive. But might there be a fourth power here that
is not responsible to the people and not elected by the people ? Is not
that the point that really you wish to mention, and not your political
view?
Mr. McNiece. That is right.
Mr. Hays. Yes, but you have just come as close to proving that
point as it would be to sit here and say that because I attended Duke
University for one semester that university is responsible for anything
or everything I say in these hearings. That is just how close you have
come in this whole case to proving any connection whatsoever between
the foundations and what has happened in this country in the last
20 years.
As a matter of fact, some of our own witnesses, one of them yes-
terday very plainly said that he didn't know whether the foundations
had caused it or the foundations had been pushed along by the irre-
sistible force of the times, or words to that effect. I put it in a more
simple analogy and said, "In other words, Doctor, it is a question of
which came first, the chicken or the egg, and you don't know." And
he said he didn't.
Mr. McNiece. There is one thing to say about that. Effect does not
precede its cause.
Mr. Hats. What do you mean to imply by that?
Mr. McNiece. I mean to imply that we have documentation which
shows the gradual development of this movement in this country. I
might say that in no case in even the slightest detail were we associated
in any way, nor did we know the nature of the documented testimony
that was produced by Mr. Sargent.
Mr. Hats. If you are going to bring in Mr. Sargent, let me say as
far as Mr. Sargent is concerned, I will submit his testimony to any
impartial jury, and if you can find one valid thing in it that anywhere
remotely resembles the truth, I would like you to point it out to me.
I will go on to say this to you. I have made an analysis of Mr. Sar-
gent's testimony and over 600 times he mentioned names of people or
organizations which he implied were wrong, and he pretty well cov-
ered the waterfront.
Mr. McNtece. I heard the testimony.
Mr. Hats. If you don't want to take my word for it, I suggest you
read the editorial in the San Francisco Chronicle, a very, I might say,
conservative Republican newspaper, which says in effect that if this
committeee had taken the trouble to find out as much about Mr. Sar-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 625
gent as Calif ornians already knew, and about how his testimony that
he gave here had been discredited in California, they would not have
wasted 3 days listening to him.
Mr. McNiece. That was an editorial comment, wasn't it ?
Mr. Hats. That is right.
Mr. McNiece. That may answer its own question.
Mr. Hats. It answered it good enough for me.
Mr. McNiece. I have seen some editorials, one in particular from
California, that was quite the contrary.
Mr. Hats. I don't know what paper it is from, but I will put the
San.Francisco Chronicle as being a pretty reputable paper.
The Chairman. I don't think this is the time to either characterize
or evaluate Mr. Sargent's testimony.
Mr. Hats. I will promise that anything I have said today, Mr.
Chairman, will be mild to the evaluation I will give in the minority
report. That will be a printed document.
The Chairman. Do you have any questions ?
Mr. Koch. No, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Wormser. No, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Hats. I have a lot more questions, but frankly as far as I am
concerned, I don't think the thing has much relation to what we are
investigating, and I am willing to go ahead on to the next witness.
The Chairman. It is almost 12 o'clock. We will stand in recess
until 2 : 30 in this same room.
(Thereupon at 11 : 45 a. m., a recess was taken until 2 : 30 p. m., the
same day.)
after recess
Mr. Goodwin (presiding) . The hour to which the committee stands
recessed has arrived, and the committee will be in order. Mr.
Wormser.
Mr. Wormser. I think Mr. McNiece finished reading the supple-
mental report. He has this report, Economics and the Public Inter-
est, parts of which are narrative and parts of which are statistical.
Po you think it necessary to read any part of that, Mr. McNiece?
Mr. McNiece. I am perfectly willing to abide by the wishes of the
committee. Certainly it would be in my judgment useless, as well
as boring and time consuming, to attempt to read all the statistics
that are in these 20 tables or so that I have got in here.
I might state that the objective of the report is to follow up the
recommendations, as they were enumerated this morning, of the
National Planning Board, the National Resources Committee, and
the National Resources Planning Board, which lasted through about
a decade of time, from about 1933 to 1943, approximately. That was
all covered this morning. There were specific titles and captions
which I mentioned and followed by reading excerpts under each of
them at some length. The statistics in this economic report, which I
do not believe it is feasible in a hearing of this type to repeat, merely
bear out in caption and in the trend of expenditure — if I may so state
it — over the period of years, they support or agree with to a very, very
great extent the propositions and suggestions that were brought out
in this morning's manuscript which I read.
626 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Wormser. What are the sources of those statistics, Mr.
McNiece ?
Mr. McNiece. The sources of the statistics, I think I can say con-
clusively are governmental reports of one type or another. Most of
them are summarized in the large statistical annual put out by the
Government Printing Office, in which statistics are assembled from the
various executive departments, such as the Census Bureau, the Depart-
ment . of Labor, Department of Commerce, Treasury Department.
They affect virtually all phases of our operations. I think we have,
if you are interested in seeing it, a copy of the manual in the office
from which these statistics have been taken.
Mr. Goodwin. It is your belief that they should be made a part of
the record, is that right ?
Mr. McNiece. I think they should be made a part of the record.
Mr. Goodwin. In the absence of objection— —
Mr. Wormser. I think it was stated this morning they would be
made a part of the record.
Mr. Hays. I don't know whether they were or not, to tell you the
truth.
Mr. Goodwin. In the absence of an objection, the reading of the
statistics will be waived and it will be understood that they will
become a part of the record.
Mr. Wormser. This entire document, Mr. Goodwin, please.
Mr. Goodwin. That refers to the document.
Mr. Koch. The only remaining: question then is this. This morn-
ing Mr. McNiece thought it might be helpful for him to read only a
part of the script in that document, and I think he is now raising the
question whether even that is necessary. I think he would like to
have an expression from you two gentlemen whether you feel that
would be helpful or not.
Mr. Goodwin. Let us get an expression of the opinion of the wit-
ness whether he feels it would be helpful to have it read or made a
part of the record without reading.
Mr. McNiece. There are some things here which I thought this
morning it might be well to include perhaps in the reading of the rec-
ord, though I don't want to do it at any waste of time on the part of
any of us.
Mr. Hays. If this is going to be inserted in the record en bloc, there
is no point as I see it of reading sections into the record twice, unless
you want to emphasize them, and you can do that by just underscoring
them.
Mr. McNiece. I have no desire to get it into the record twice. It
is merely a matter of emphasis that might promote better examination
or cross-examination. I have no desire to prolong the reading of this
at all. Part of it, as I have said previously, definitely does not lend
itself to a narrative form.
Mr. Goodwin. Then in the absence of objection, the reading of the
material to which the witness is now referring will be waived with the
understanding it is made a part of the record. Is there objection ?
Mr. Hays. No.
Mr. Goodwin. The Chair hears none.
( The statement referred to follows : )
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 627
Preface
Over the past 50 years sweeping changes have occurred in this country in the
functions and activities of the Federal Government. Some of these changes are
to be expected as a result of increasing population, industrial, and commercial
growth and our greater participation in world affairs.
By no means have all of the changes resulted from the foregoing causes. On
the contrary other deviations have occurred which are totally unrelated to chang-
ing requirements of Government and which in fact have not been considered as
functions of Government under our Constitution and its enumerated powers.
Among these is the increasing participation of the Federal Government in edu-
cation, slum clearance, nutrition and health, power generation, subsidization of
agriculture, scientific research, wage control, mortgage insurance, and other activ-
ities. Most if not all of these were politically conceived and depression born.
They represent new ventures in our Federal Government's activities.
Most, if not all of these newer activities of Government are recommended in
one place or another in publications of socially minded committees of Govern-
ment and of reports by various educational groups, social science and others,
supported by foundation grants.
They are so foreign to the conception of our Government of enumerated pow-
ers as we have known it under the Constitution, that the departure has been
referred to as a "revolution" by one of its proponents who will be quoted later.
While the groundwork for these changes has been underway for a long time,
the real acceleration of progress toward these objectives began about 20 years
ago. Since then, the movement has grown apace with little or no sign of slow-
ing down.
The word "revolution" is commonly associated with a physical conflict or
development of some sort accompanied by publicity that marks its progress one
way or another. Not all revolutions are accomplished in this manner.
The lower the social stratum in which a revolution originates, the noisier
it is likely to be. On the contrary a revolution planned in higher circles by some
segment of people at policymaking levels may be very far advanced toward
successful accomplishment before the general public is aware of it.
A plan may be formulated with some objective in mind, agreement reached,
organization effected, and action begun initially with a minimum of publicity.
Such a program has been in progress in this country for years. Originally, the
thought of such a revolutionary change was probably confined to very few peo-
ple^the organizers of the movement. With the passage of time and under the
influence of the growing emphasis on the so-called social sciences, the Federal
Government began to push forward into areas of activity formerly occupied by
State and local government and private enterprise.
As an indication of this trend, a statement may be quoted from regional
planning, a report issued by the National Resources Committee in June 1938.
"More than 70 Federal agencies have found regional organization necessary
and there are over 108 different ways in which the country has been organized
for the efficient administration of Federal services."
Arrangements of this type facilitate the gradual expansion of governmental
action and control through executive directives as distinguished from specific
legislative authorization.
Much of this planning was done with the aid of social scientists in Govern-
ment employ and of outside individuals or groups with similar ideas and ob-
jectives. Many of these were directly or indirectly connected with educational
organizations who have and still are receiving very substantial aid from the
large foundations.
Some of these activities were undertaken under the guise of temporary aid
during depression but they have been continued on an increasing scale as will
be shown in the ensuing report.
Evidence indicates that a relatively large percentage of foundation giving
was originally in the form of grants to endowment funds of educational insti-
tutions. There has been a sizable shift in later years from grants for endow-
ment to grants for specific purposes or objectives but still through educational
channels.
As far as the economic influence on Government is concerned, the results
were manifested first through the planning agencies. The recommendations
made by these groups finally evolved into more or less routine matters in which
Congress is now asked to approve each year a series of appropriations to cover
the cost. These various classes of expenditures are listed and discussed in the
628 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
ensuing report. Charts are included at the end. In a number of cases, trends
are shown for the greater part of this century.
It should be understood that not everyone who has assisted in furthering these
objectives is guilty of conscious participation in questionable action. Those who
have studied these developments know that many well-meaning people have
been drawn into the activities without knowledge of understanding of the final
objectives. A well-organized central core of administrators with a large num-
ber of uninformed followers is standard practice in such organized effort.
Economics and the Public Interest
introduction
This report is made for the purpose of showing the nature and increasing costs
of governmental participation in economic and welfare activities of the Nation.
These were formerly considered as foreign to the responsibilities, particularly
of the Federal Government.
The nature of these recent activities is briefly described and data shown in
tables 1 to 8. The results are shown annually in these tables since 1948 in order
to indicate the generally increasing trends in recent years.
Tables 9 to 16 and charts 1 to 12, together with the accompanying data sheets
from which the charts are constructed, afford some measure, both volumetric
and financial, of the effect these activities have had on national debt, taxes, and
personal income of the people.
Finally, the conclusion is drawn that the financial integrity of the Nation
will be jeopardized by a continuation of the policies which may be ineffective
in the end as far as their stated objectives are concerned.
INDEX OF TABLES
Table 1. New permanent housing units started in nonfarm areas.
Table 2. Federal contracts awards for new construction.
Table 3. Federal food programs.
Table 4. Federal expenditures for promotion of public health.
Table 5. Federal expenditures for social security and health.
Table 6. Federal expenditures for vocational education.
Table 7. Federal educational expenditures.
Table 8. Federal funds allotted for education for school year 1951.
Table 9. Government civilian employees per 1,000 United States population.
Table 10. Government civilian employees versus other civilian employees.
Table 11. Departments and agencies in the executive branch.
Table 12. Ordinary Federal receipts and expenditures.
Table 13. Comparative increases in taxes and population — excluding social se-
curity taxes.
Table 14. National income versus total Federal, State and local taxes.
Table 15. National income and national debt per family.
Table 16. Comparative debt and income per family.
Table 17. Gross national product and national debt.
Table 18. Gross national product, Federal debt and disposable personal income.
Table 19. Percentage of gross national product — Personal versus governmental
purchases.
Table 20. Price decline 8 years after war.
REVOLUTION
In the 20 years between 1933 and 1953, the politicians, college professors, and
lawyers, with little help from business, wrought a revolution in the economic
policies of the United States. They repudiated laissez-faire. They saw the
simple fact that if capitalism were to survive, Government must take some
responsibility for developing the Nation's resources, putting a floor under spend-
ing, achieving a more equitable distribution of income and protecting the weak
against the strong. The price of continuing the free society was to be limited
intervention by Government. [Italics added.]
The foregoing statement is the opening paragraph in an article by a Harvard
professor (Seymour B. Harris, professor of economics, Harvard University in
the Progressive, December 1953) as printed in a recent issue of a magazine and
as included in the appendix of the Congressional Record of February 15, 1954.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 629
It is a very broad and emphatic statement. Numerically, the "politicans, college
professors, and lawyers" comprise a very minute percentage of the total popula-
tion of the country — a minute percentage of the people who, under the Constitu-
tion are responsible for effecting "revolutionary" changes in governmental prac-
tice. Certainly these changes as enumerated have never been submitted to nor
ratified as such by the people or their duly elected representatives.
Rvolution accomplished : How then could a departure so drastic as to be
called a "revolution" be accomplished?
Normally a revolution is not accomplished without a considerable measure of
publicity attained through fuss and fireworks that attend such efforts. In the
absence of such developments, it could only be achieved through carefully coor-
dinated effort by a relatively small group centered at policy making levels.
In connection with this latter throught, it is interesting to compare the state-
ment quoted in the first paragraph with the five points for Federal action
enumerated shortly hereafter.
Evidence of such changes in Federal policy, their direction and effect will
be submitted later, but it will be first in order to mention that the Federal Gov-
ernment is a government of enumerated powers. Certainly the powers enum-
erate do not mention the "development of the Nation's resources, putting a floor
under spending, achieving a more equitable distribution of income and pro-
tecting the weak against the strong." Neither has the Government itself prior
to the period mentioned in the opening paragraph, assumed such rights and
responsibilities.
These and other changes which have been effected are revolutionary. They
have been accomplished not openly but indirectly and without the full knowl-
edge and understanding of the people most affected.
Subversion: In fact, the methods used suggest a form of subversion. Sub-
version may be defined as the act of changing or overthrowing such things as
the form or purpose of government, religion, or morality by concealed or insidi-
ous methods that tend to undermine its supports or weaken its foundations.
Public interest: It may be said by the proponents of such procedure that
it is warranted by the "public interest." Public interest is difficult to define but
for the purpose of this study, we can probably do no better than to refer to
the preamble of the Constitution of the United States wherein it is stated that
the Constitution is established —
"in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic
tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and
secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity."
The last three words in the foregoing quotation impose a responsibility for
the future upon us of the present. A risk for the future is implicit in some
of the measures advanced for the advantage of the present and such measures
may be said to be subversive, un-American and contrary to the public interest.
To subvert or circumvent the Constitution or to change authorized procedure
under its provisions by other than the methods established by the Constitution
itself may with certainty be called un-American. The Constitution is not a
static or dead document. It has been amended with reasonable frequency and
can always be modified if a real need for change develops.
Methods of procedure: Mr. A. A. Berle, Jr., formerly Assistant Secretary
of State and one of the active proponents of increased governmental participa-
tion in economic life made the suggestion that the Federal Government supply
cash or credit for the following purposes after World War II (The New Phi-
losophy of Public Debt by Harold G. Moulton, the Brookings Institution, Wash-
ington, D. C).
(1) An urban reconstruction program.
(2) A program of public works along conventional lines.
(3) A program of rehousing on a very large scale.
(4) A program of nutrition for about 40 percent of our population.
(5) A program of public health.
Progress toward objectives : It will be informative to record a few measures
of progress toward the objectives that focus so sharply on paternalism and
socialism in government.
This Nation has attained a standard of living that is higher and more widely
distributed than that reached by any other nation in history. It has been
accomplished in a very short span of years as compared with the lives of other
nations and it is still increasing. Impatience and envy unrestrained may con-
ceivably wreck the future for the sake of the present. The possibilities of this
are indicated in factual evidence of today. The public interest will not be
served thereby.
630
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
(1) An urban reconstruction program : (e) A program of rehousing on a
very elaborate scale: It is difficult to differentiate clearly between items 1 and
3 and such data as are available will pertain largely to both.
Table 1. — New permanent housing units started in nonfarm areas publicly owned 1
Number
Period
Total
Average per
year
1935-39 .
87,000
224, 800
67,000
173,500
17,400
1940-44 ..-
44,960
1945-49 ,
13,400
1950-52 ..
57,833
Total
532,300
30,000
1 Data from Supplement to Economic Indicators.
Data are not available on the total value involved in this increasing scale of
public construction. Neither do the available data indicate the division of cost
between local, State, and Federal Governments.
On February 27, 1954, the Housing and Home Finance Agency reported that
there were 154 slum clearance projects underway in January 1954 compared
with 99 at the beginning of 1953. This is an increase of 56 percent in number
during the year. 1
These tabular statements should be sufficient to indicate planned action in
conformity with the suggestions involved in items 1 and 3. There are no data
available that show any such Federal activities prior to 1935.
(2) A program of public works along conventional lines : The following table
shows the value of Federal contracts awarded for new construction. It is not
possible from the information available to determine the real proportion of cost
furnished by the Federal Government. The fact that the work is covered by
Federal contracts suggests that Federal participation is an important percentage
of the total which also includes whatever proportion is furnished by owners,
whoever they may be.
Table 2. — Federal contract awards for new construction x
1935 $1, 478, 073, 000
1940 2, 316, 467, 000
1945 1,092,181,000
1948 1, 906, 466, 000
1949 $2, 174, 203, 000
1950 1 2, 805, 214, 000
1951 4, 201, 939, 000
1952 4, 420, 908, 000
Regardless of the degree of Federal participation in this work, the rising trend,
even in years of high economic output, is obvious.
A less pronounced trend but a large volume of expenditure is shown in the
following data.
Federal expenditures for public works 1
1952 (actual) $3, 116, 000, 000
1953 (estimate) 3,419, 000, 000
1 Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1953.
These data are sufficient to indicate the possibility, if not probability, of spend-
ing for public works on a grandiose scale. The fact that such spending would
be accelerated when economic activity and governmental income are low would
mean drastic increases in public debt which is now at extreme and dangerous
levels. It is significant that the debt has not been reduced but is increasing even
at the continuing high level of tax collections.
It is also well to remember that the cost of public works does not cease with
the completion of the works. On the contrary, increased a*id continuing costs
are sustained for operation and maintenance of the additional facilities. This
is not to condemn or disapprove of reasonable and required expenditures to meet
the normally growing needs of our increasing population.
1 New York Times, Feb. 28, 1©54.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
631
(4) A program of nutrition: The suggestion for a Federal program of nutri-
tion implied that about 40 percent of our population should be the beneficiaries
of such a plan. It is scarcely conceivable that any such proportion of our people
are or have been undernourished.
The Federal Government since 1936 has been participating in food distribution
to institutions and welfare cases as well as to school-lunch programs. From
1936 to 1952, inclusive, the cost of these programs has been as follows :
Table 3. — Federal food program 1
Institutional and welfare cases (direct distribution) $306, 090, 000
School-lunch programs (direct distribution) 290,330,000
School-lunch programs (indemnity plan) 498,909,000
Total ______ 1, 095, 329, 000
1 Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1953.
(5) A program of public health: It was announced by the United States Pub-
lic Health Service that in October 1952, the one-thousandth hospital had been
completed under the Hospital and Construction Act. Since 1946, the Federal
Government has contributed $500 million to this program. The Health Service
announced that it had 800 additional projects underway or planned as of 1952.
State and local governments have contributed about twice as much toward this
Work as the Federal Government.
The record of Federal budgetary expenditures for promotion of public health
shows the following expenditures for the years indicated.
Table 4
1945 $186, 000, 000
1946 173, 000, 000
1947 146, 000, 000
1948 130, 000, 000
1949 171, 000, 000
1950 242, 000, 000
1951 304, 000, 000
1952 328, 000, 000
Total 1, 689, 000, 000
At intervals, agitation is repeatedly renewed on the subject of publicly financed
medical care.
Benefits under the various forms of social insurance and public assistance pro-
grams are increasing rapidly from year to year. Total payments made by Fed-
eral and State Governments are indicated herewith.
Table 5.— Federal expenditures for social security and health 1 ( excluding ex-
penditures from promotion of public health as previously shown)
1945 $802, 000, 000
1946 821, 000, 000
1947 1, 117, 000, 000
1948 1, 667, 000, 000
1949 1, 672, 000, 000
1950 1, 900, 000, 000
1951 1, 992, 000, 000
1952 2, 163, 000, 000
1 Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1953 (p. 343).
Education : A program of Federal contributions to education was not included
in the five classifications just previously discussed. Such participation has oc-
curred and in some groups in rapidly increasing amounts.
Federal aid in vocational education includes expenditures in agricultural trade
and industrial pursuits and in home economics and to some extent has been
granted over a period of 30 years or more. The following totals apply to the
years indicated :
Table 6. — Federal expenditures for vocational education 1
1936 $9, 749, 000
1940 20, 004, 000
1944 19, 958, .000
1948 26, 200, 000
1950 26, 623, 000
1951 26, 685, 000
i Statistical Abstract of the United States. 1953 (p. 135).
Two other classes of educational expenditures are made by the Federal Govern-
ment, one the large payments for the education of veterans which is now decreas-
ing and the other much small but increasing expenditures for general education
and research. These data are shown herewith :
632
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Table 7. — Federal educational expenditures 1
[In millions]
Veterans'
education
General
purpose
Total
1945 ,
$158
85
66
65
75
123
115
171
$158-
1946 --
$351
2,122
2,506
2,703
2,596
1,943
1,326
436
1947 - -
2.188
1948 -
2,571
1949 - - -- --
2,778
1950 -
2,719
1951 -
2,058
1952 - - .,-
1,497
Total - -
13,547
858
14,405'
> Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1953 (p. 343).
Under the limitations of the law, the cost of veterans' education should con-
tinue to decline rapidly. If another war should ensue and the GI bill of rights
be taken as a precedent, the cost of veterans' education would become a tre-
mendous economic burden on the country. The former bill was passed without
any consideration of the capacity of the educational system to absorb the greatly
increased number of students. Chaotic conditions due to crowding existed in
many educational institutions.
Still another form of tabulation of educational funds made available by the
Federal Government is of interest. It pertains to funds allotted for 1951 and
includes those made available to agricultural experiment stations and Coopera-
tive Agricultural Extensions Service.
Table 8. — Federal funds allotted for education for school year 1951 1
Administered by;
Federal Security Agency $171, 720, 000
Department of Agriculture 161, 658, 000
Veterans' Administration 2, 120,216,000
Other 97, 049, 000
Total 2, 550, 643, 000
1 Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1953 (p. 137),
The trend of Federal educational expenditures, aside from those made for
veterans' education is unquestionably upward. That further increases are urged,
especially by those in the educational field, is illustrated by the following extract
from the discussion by Alvin H. Hansen, Professor of Political Economy, Harvard
University, before the meeting of the joint committee of the Senate and House
on the President's economic report. This meeting was held on February 18, 1954.
The quotation follows :
"There is no recognition of the fact, well known to everyone who has studied
State and local finance, that the poorer States which contain nearly half of our
children fall far short of decent educational standards ; yet they spend more on
education in relation to total income of their citizens than do the wealthier
States. For this situation there is no solution except Federal Aid."
General comments : The foregoing evidence and discussion have been pre-
sented in an effort to show why the statement of revolution accomplished seems
to be supported by the facts. That a continuation of the policies is probable
seems apparent from the statistical trends as presented.
Quite regardless of the real propriety of this great and revolutionary departure
from our former constitutional principles of government, a serious question
must be raised about its effect on the future life of the Nation. Most of these
new Federal objectives of expenditure have hitherto been accepted as lying with-
in the province of the State and local governments. It is of course absurd to
assume that aside from the printing press, the Federal Government has access
to any greater supply of funds than exists within the States themselves. And
yet greater funds are necessary when the Federal Government embarks upon
all of these security and welfare activities. Each new or increased channel of
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
633
expenditure calls for additional bureaucratic control without any diminution of
similar control by State and local governments. In fact, as will be shown the
very conditions of distribution imposed by the Federal Government are appar-
ently causing some similar increases in State and local governmental costs.
The tremendously high level of taxes and debt and the pressure for still higher
debt limits and greater expenditures should convince any thoughtful and under-
standing people that danger is in the offing, that the public interest is not being
well served, but on the contrary is being placed in jeopardy. Our obligation to
posterity is apparently submerged in our sea of current self-interest.
The following discussion, with the aid of data and charts will show in both
physical and financial terms the increasing burdens imposed on the populace by
these governmental policies originating during the past twenty years.
Civilian employees in Government : The ensuing table shows the drastic
increases in governmental civilian employes that have occurred since 1930. The
peak was encountered in 1946 from which time there was a gradual reduction
to 1948. Note the level of stability attained in 1948, 1949, and 1950 at 280 percent
of the 1930 figure.
Table 9.— -Government civilian employee per 1,000 United States population
Federal
State and
local
Total
Percentage of 1929
Federal
State and
local
Total
1930 -
5.0
8.2
25.5
14.1
14.1
13.8
16.0
16.6
16.2
21,3
243
22.4
25.8
26.5
27.1
26.7
26.9
27.2
26.3
32.5
46.8
39.9
40.6
40.9
42.7
43.5
43.4
102
168
520
288
288
282
327
339
331
102
117
108
124
127
130
128
129
131
102
127
1940.
1945
182
1948
155
1949.
158
159
1950
1951
165
1952
169
1963
169
Note that Federal civilian employees are now over three times as numerous
in proportion to the total population as they were in 1929 while State and
local employees are about one-third greater. For government as a whole, the
civilian employees per capita of total population have increased nearly 70 per-
cent over those of 1929.
These trends are shown graphically on charts 1 and 2 and the supporting
data as they exist for the period from 1900 to 1953 on the accompanying data
sheet 1.
Because governmental employees have no part in the production of eco-
nomic goods and on the contrary must be supported by those who do, it will
be informative to show the comparison between governmental civilian employees
and the nongovernmental labor force. This comparison is shown in table 10
herewith :
Table 10. — Government civilian employees versus other civilian employees
Total gov-
ernment
Other than
government
Government civilian em-
ployees per 100 other em-
ployees
Actual
Percent of
1929
1930
Millions
3.15
4.19
5. 97
5.99
6.37
6.63
6.67
Millions
46.1
51.4
47.9
.57.1
56.5
56.4
56.7
6.7
8.2
12.5
10.5
11.3
11.8
11.8
100
1940 -
122
1945-. - - -
187
1950. ~ -
157
1951-- - -
169
1950 ^ .
176
1953 -
176
634
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
These data show that as of 1953 there were virtually 12 Government employees
for every 100 other workers, excluding all military forces. The increase since
1930 has been 76 percent. From the economic standpoint a parasitic load of 12
employees for every 100 others is quite a burden to bear.
The military forces of the United States have purposely been omitted from
consideration in the two foregoing tables. It is of interest to note, however,
that the inclusion of these military forces for the years 1951 and 1952 respectively
would show 16,7 and 18.2 total governmental employees that must be supported
by each 100 other workers in the United States. Indeed a heavy load.
Trends for all years from 1929 to 1953 are shown on chart 3 and in the accom-
panying data sheet 2.
It should be noted that the trends for the years 1948-53 shown on charts 1, 2,
and 3 are continuations of the upward trends which began in the early 1930's
and show no indication of change. Here in physical rather than financial terms
is evidence of the "revolution" mentioned in the beginning of this report. This
observation will be confirmed by still another instance of expansion measured
by the increase in the number of departments and agencies in the executive
branch of the Federal Government. These data apply only to major groups and
not to their recognized subdivisions or components.
Table 11. — Departments and agencies in the executive branch
1926.
1927.
1928.
1929.
31
31
31
31
1930_
1940.
1950.
1951.
37
47
61
69
1952.
1953-
69
The data which follow will measure the increased operations in financial terms.
Federal receipts and expenditures : The ensuing as well as the foregoing
data are shown upon a per capita basis rather than in totals only as it is to be
expected that total expenditures and taxes will normally rise as the population
increases. An increase on a per capita basis calls for analysis and explanation.
In the following table a comparison is shown on both a total and a per capita
basis between Federal receipts and expenditures. The term "receipts" naturally
includes income from all forms of taxation including income, capital gains,
excises, customs, etc.
Table 12. — Ordinary Federal receipts and expenditures
In billions
Revenue
per
capita
Expenditures
Revenue
Expenditures
per
capita
1930
1940 -----
1945 -
1948 --
$4. 178
5.265
44. 762
42.211
38. 246
37. 045
48.143
62. 129
65. 218
$3. 440
9. 183
98.703
33. 791
40. 057
40. 167
44. 633
66. 145
74.607
$33. 90
40.00
320, 50
288. 00
256. 50
245. 00
311.80
396.00
410. 00
$27. 95
69.60
706. 80
231.00
1949
1950 -
268. 20
265. 00
1951
1952 — -
289. 00
421. 00
1953
466. 50
These data in per capital trends since 1900 are shown graphically on chart 4.
As in the prior tables, there is no evidence of a declining trend in the actual
data.
Federal, State, and local taxes : Further light is thrown on tax trends by com-
paring increases in population and taxes since 1930. This information is given
in table 13.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
635
Table 13. — Comparative increases in taxes and population excluding social
security taxes 1
[]
n millions]
Population
Federal
taxes
State and
local taxes
Percentage ol 1929
Population
Federal
taxes
State and
local taxes
1930 . .
123.1
131.8
139.6
146.6
149.1
151.1
154.4
157.0
159. 7
$3,517
4,921
40,989
37,636
35,590
34, 955
45, 984
59,535
62,656
$6,798
7,997
9,193
13, 342
14,790
15,914
17,554
101.2
108. 5
115.0
120.7
122.1
124.4
127.0
129.1
131.3
105.1
147.6
1,228.0
1,129.0
1, 066.
1, 049.
1, 378.
1,785.0
1, 878.
105.7
1940
124.4
1945
143. Q
1948 ....
207.5
1949
230.0
1950
247 5
1951....
273.0
1952
1953
1 Except portion used tor administrative social security costs.
Maximum activity in the Korean war occurred in 1952 and in World War II
in 1945. Despite the relatively smaller operation represented by the Korean
war, Federal taxes in 1952 were 45 percent greater than in 1945. In the mean-
time the Federal debt has not been decreased but is rising and pressure for
higher debt limit has not been removed. The reasons for some of this great
increase have been indicated in the prior tables.
Annual data including those shown in table 13 for the period from 1916 to
1951 are given in data sheet 3 and are shown graphically on chart 5. The strik-
ing comparison between the increases of Federal taxation and of State and
local taxation and of both in comparison with the increase of population justi-
fies some comment on the difference. Obviously State and local taxation by
1951 had increased 173 percent since 1929 while population has increased but
54 percent.
Federal taxation in the same time has increased 1,278 percent or nearly 13
times with no decrease in Federal debt and strong prospects of further increase.
The postwar trend merely continues that established before World War II,
although it is of course higher than it would have been had the war not occurred.
On the other hand tables 9 and 10 and charts 1, 2 and 3 indicate conclusively
that civilian employees in Government show an increasing trend, particularly in
the Federal Government since the early thirties. This measure is quite inde-;
pendent of continuing financial increases due to costs introduced by war.
It seems natural to assume that real "welfare" needs should be most apparent
in the localities where they exist and that State and local taxes would show
a responsive trend. The fact that such "on-the-spot" trends are but a fraction
of the Federal trends may indicate the correctness of the early statement that
the revolution "could only be achieved through carefully coordinated effort
by a relatively small group centered at policy making levels," a group possibly
composed of "politicians, college professors and lawyers" as quoted in the first
paragraph* The comparison also warrants the inference that local control
of spending and taxes is more effective than remote control which impairs both
knowledge and understanding.
Taxes as a percentage of national income: It will be of informative value
to show the trend of taxes as a percentage of national income which provides
the fund out of which taxes must be paid. The following table for the years
shown will indicate such percentage and the trend.
636
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Table 14. — National income versus total Federal, State, and local taxes in
billions by calendar years
National
income
Total taxes
Taxes as
percent of
income
1929
$87.4
75.0
81.3
182.7
223.5
216.3
250.6
278.4
$10. 30
9.77
16.95
52.52
58.10
54.93
67.75
84.66
11 8
1930 _
13
1940
20 9
1945
28 7
1948
26
1949
25 4
1950
28.2
1951 .
30 4
Taxes as a percent of national income increased from 11.8 in 1929 to 30.4 in
1951. In other words, the tax bite took 18.6 cents or 158 percent more out of
the income dollar in 1951 than it did in 1929, a prosperous though shaky year.
This is another illustration of the effect on private income caused by the ex-
panding activities of Government.
Government debt and national income : It might be expected that the increas-
ing percentage of national Income that is taken in taxes would result in some
reduction of the national debt. It is now 8% years since the close of World
War II. Taxes have been increasing but so has the debt which is now push-
ing through its legal ceiling. The difficulty in visualizing the relationships
between debt, income, and population when all are changing makes it advis-
able to express income and debt in terms of the population. This has been done
in the following table wherein both are expressed in terms of the family as
a unit because it has more personal significance than a per capita basis.
Table 15. — National income and national debt per family
National
income
(billions)
Number
families
(millions)
National
incomeper
family
Federal
debt per
family
1929 - - --
$87-4
75.0
81.3
182.7
223.5
216.3
240.6
278.4
291.6
3O6.0
29.40
29.90
34.95
37.50
40.72
42.11
43.47
44.56
45.46
47.50
$2,972
2,510
2,325
4,870
5,490
5,140
5,530
6,250
6,415
6,440
$576
1930 - - .--
542
1940
1,230
1945
6,900
1948 ---
6,200
1949
6,000
1950 - ---
5,930
1951
5,750
1952
5,700
1953 1 i - -
5,600
i Estimated.
National income per family increased 250 percent in current dollars while
the Federal debt per family increased 855 percent.
The foregoing data in decennial terms from 1900 to 1930 and in annual terms
from 1929 to 1953 are shown on data sheet 6 and income and debt per family
on chart 7.
The amount of debt overhanging a nation has a tremendous influence on that
nation's solvency and therefore its stability under impact caused either by eco-
nomic depression or additional forced expenditures to relieve depression or to
prosecute another war. It has been stated many times that we as a Nation were
in a vulnerable debt or credit condition when the collapse began in 1929. It will
therefore be interesting to compare the conditions of 1929 with those of the
present and of the time intervening.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
637
Again, the comparisons will be upon a per-family basis and will show the
changes in total private debt including corporate debt and total public debt
compared with national income per family. The data follow in the next table :
Table 16. — Comparative debt and income per family
Private
debt
Total public
and private
debt
National
income
per femily
1929 - -
$5, 500
5,380
3,700
3,755
4,975
4,985
5,670
6,230
$6,500
6,400
5,460
10,860
10,690
10,600
11,180
11,650
$2, 972
1930
2,510
1940 .-
2,325
1945 -
4,870
1948 - .- -
5,490
1949 -
5,140
5„53Q
6,250
1950- ... .
1951 - -
While the total debt per family has nearly doubled, national income has some-
what more than kept pace with it, The disturbing factor from the standpoint
of Federal financial stability is the fact that in the interval from 1929 to 1951,
the Federal proportion of the total debt has increased from 15 to 46.5 percent.
The foregoing data in annual terms from 1929 to 1951 are given in data sheet
7 while the trends of private debt and total debt are shown on chart 8.
Gross national product : It is contended by some that internal Federal debt is
of little importance and that no attempt should be made to place a ceiling upon
it. Rather is it argued that an increase in public debt will be a needed stimulant
to keep national production in step with our expanding population. It has also
been argued as a part of this philosophy that the only safeguarding thing to
watch is the ratio between national debt and gross national product and that
the ratio now existing will provide a safe guide in such control. It will be of
value to examine these factors in the light of these claims.
Gross national product may be defined as the total value of all goods and
services produced in a period of time and usually valued in terms of current
prices. It does not include allowances for capital consumption such as depletion,
depreciation, and certain other adjustments. Efforts have been made to compute
the value of gross national product at intervals over many years past. Gross
national product has been tabulated for each year since 1929. The comparative
data on gross national product and national debt are shown in table 17.
Table 17. — Gross national product and national debt values in billions
Gross na-
tional prod-
uct at cur-
rent prices
Federal debt
Gross na-
tional prod-
uct at 1929
prices i
1929 - -
$103. 8
90.9
101.4
215.2
259.0
258.2
286.8
329.8
348.0
= 366.0
$16.9
16.2
48.5
259.1
252.4
252.8
257.4
255.3
259.2
266.1
$103. 8
93 4
1930 _
1940
124
1945. -
205
1948 _' , „
184.6
186.0
205 2
1949 - •_
1950
1951 .
217
1952
223 5
1953 .
234
1 Consumer's prices.
1 Estimated.
49720 — 54 — pt. 1 41
638
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
At current prices, gross national product increased 252 percent between 192&
and 1953 but at constant prices the increase was 125 percent. In the same
interval Federal debt increased 1475 percent in current prices. It is this in-
crease in Federal debt which in this recent philosophy is of no practical sig-
nificance. The measure of control under this theory is the ratio between debt
and gross national product.
Data in the foregoing table are shown from 1900 to date in data sheet 8 —
trend values only for 1900 to 1920. This information is shown in chart form
on Chart 9. The dotted line shows what gross national product would have
been at constant prices, in this case at consumers' prices of 1929, a year of high-
level production. The lightly shaded area between the adjusted and unad-
justed values after 1943 shows the inflationary spread due to postwar rising
prices or in other words to the increased cost of living. A still greater area
of inflation must be expected if the dollar is weakened by increasing Federal
expenditures and debt.
Ratio of Federal debt to gross national product : Since, as has been previously
mentioned, the ratio between Federal debt and gross national product has been
suggested as an effective measure of control in the prevention of excessive debt,
it will be well to observe the values of this ratio for a period of time embracing
widely varying conditions in our national economy.
It will also be informative to show the effect of these policies of great Federal
expenditure and high taxes on citizens' personal income after taxes as it relates -
to gross national product. This latter division of income is known as dispos-
able personal income and together with its ratio to gross national product is
shown in the following table :
Table 18. — Gross national product, Federal delt and disposable personal income
[Values in billions of current dollars]
National
product
Federal
debt
Disposable
personal
income
Percent
Federal
debt, gross
national
product
Percent
disposable
personal
income,
gross
national
product
1929 -
$103. 8
90.9
101.4
215.2
259. C
258.2
286.8
329.8
348.0
366.0
$16.9
16.2
48.5
259.1
252.4
252,8
257.4
255. 3
259.2
266.1
$82.5
73.7
75.7
151.1
188.4
187.2
205.8
225.0
235.
250.0
16.3
17.8
47.8
120.5
97.5
97.9
89.8
77.5
74.5
72.7
79.4-
1930 -- -.-
81. »
1940
74.7
1945
70.2
1948 .... —
72.7"
1949 - -
72.5
1950 -
1951
76. T
68.2
1952
67.5
1953! -
68.3:
« Estimated.
It is apparent from the data that Federal debt increased from 16 percent
of gross national product in 1929 to 73 percent in 1953. In the same period'
the citizens' share of their own income available for their own purposes de-
clined from 79 to 68 percent of gross national product. This declining per-
centage of gross national product left to the consumer himself will be par-
ticularly noticeable when business volume declines to a more nearly normal
level. This sacrifice has been made without any reduction in the total debt
level. This is due largely to the Federal Government's increasing participation
in what might be termed extracurricular activities based upon the conception
of government defined in the Constitution and previously followed during our
unprecedented rise in economic status.
The data in table 18 are shown in extended form since 1900 in data sheet 9
and on chart 10. The chart clearly indicates the tremendous change that has
occurred in this ratio between Federal debt and gross national product. From
1900 to 1916 there was a steady decline in the ratio which averaged only 4,4
percent for the period. This means that the citizen was realizing a larger and
larger percentage of his earnings for his own needs and desires.
The effect of debt arising in World War I is apparent in the increased ratio f
but following the peak in 1921 there was a gradual decline to 16.3 percent in
1929 when the upward climb began again. Beginning in 1948, 3 years after the
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
639
end of World War II and 2 years before the Korean war, the Federal debt again
began to climb.
The decline in ratio since 1948 is caused entirely by the abnormally high output
of economic goods in terms of both volume and price and not by a decline in the
debt level. This distinction is important. Gross national product is the arith-
metical product of price multiplied by physical volume. Physical volume lately
has been abnormally high because extensive military rearmament has been
underway since World War II, not only for ourselves hut for other nations.
Physical volume was also increased by certain relief measures and military
aid for other countries and production to meet domestic demand deferred by
World War II. In addition, prices have risen 49 percent since 1945. The point
to be emphasized is that the physical volume of output for the period since 1940
has been abnormally high due to production for war and its waste and for demand
deferred from wartime. Without another war we cannot hope to maintain this
physical output regardless of what happens to prices and it should not be con-
sidered a function of Government to try it.
Disposable personal income : The citizen's reduced share of his own personal
income as a percentage of the goods and services he creates is also portrayed
on chart 10. The declining trend shown in table 18 is clearly denned on the
chart. The trend was even more sharply downward prior to 1943 when wartime
output increased greatly and to be continued, as previously mentioned, by renewed
abnormal production for military purposes and deferred civilian demand.
The larger the share of production and its value absorbed by Government,
the less the citizen has for his own choice of expenditures. The following data
are taken from the Economic Report of the President for 1954.
Table 19. — Percentage of gross national product, personal versus governmental
purchases
Year
Personal
consumption
expenditure
Total Gov-
ernment
purchases
1930
Percent
78.0
71.0
68.7
69.9
67.9
as. 1
62.7
62.6
Percent
10.1
12.3
14 1
1947 ..
1948... ._ ._ ._ .
1949
16 9
1960
14 6
1951___ __
19 1
1952 __ ..
22 3
1963 i
22.7
i Estimates.
Here indeed in the declining share of his own output that is allotted to him
is one result of the revolution at wort.
The extraordinary expenditures of Government beginning in the early thirties
are continuing with increasing volume.
Changes in post war policies : Changes in governmental policy with respect
to expanding participation in and control of our economic activities has been
repeatedly emphasized in this study. Further light on these policies and their
effect may be shown by reference to the long-term history of prices in this
country. On chart 11, the trend of wholesale commodity prices 2 in terms of
1910-14 as 100 percent are charted. Two outstanding features of this long-term
trend are obvious at once :
1. The great price peaks that occur as a result of war.
2. Even in annual terms there is no such thing as price stability or normal
prices.
A glance at the chart and consideration of the continuous change in the
price level should suggest the impossibility of price stabilization by the Gov-
ernment. Complete regulation of all things economic within the country and
complete insulation from all influences from without would be essential.
Manifestly this is impossible. The payment of subsidy, as in agriculture, is to
admit the impossibility of prioe control and to continue subsidy is to encourage
excess production and high governmental expenditure with its evil results.
2 Data for 1800-1933 from Gold and Prices by Warren and Pearson,
date derived from Statistics by U. S. Department of Labor.
Data for 1934 to
640 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Without war the great price peaks with their resultant periods of chaos would
not occur. With war, they may be temporarily distorted or deferred but the
effects of abnormal war conditions cannot be permanently averted. One of the
unavoidable features of war is that the cost must be paid in full in one way or
another. There is no relief from this.
The great price recessions following the War of 1812, the Civil War, and World
War I are typical of those which have occurred throughout history in other
countries after major wars. It has now been over 8 years since hostilities
ceased in World War II. Within 8 years following the close of hostilities in
the prior wars mentioned, price declines from the peak values were as follows :
Table 20. — Price declines 8 years after war
Percent
War of 1812 ', 42
Civil War 33
World War I :_ 35
World War II 3.7
The depreciation of the dollar in terms of gold in 1934 would prevent an
ultimate decline of prices to the low levels following earlier wars. The closer
price control in effect during World War II retarded the price increase and the
advent of the Korean war has helped to sustain if not to increase the latest price
peak.
Present policy seems to be to prevent any such decline as we. have sustained
after past wars. Painful and disturbing as they were, these past declines at
least resulted in paying much of the cost of the war in money of approximately
the same value as that which was borrowed for its prosecution, and that except
for the duration of the price peaks, those who depended upon fixed income for
their living expenses were not permanently deprived of much of their pur-
chasing power.
The new economic and debt policies seem to be designed in an effort to main-
tain productive activity and prices at or near the present plateau. The deluge
of complaints that flow forth when a small decline from the recent peak occurs
seems to indicate an unwillingness and lack of courage to face the responsibili-
ties for our actions. This tendency is not limited to any one class or group in
our citizenry. This softening of character is probably to be expected as a result
of the protective and paternalistic atitude and activities assumed by Govern-
ment in recent years. This may be due largely to an increased emphasis on
expediency rather than to a lessening of integrity, or it may be due to both. Be
that as it may, the continuation of the new philosophy will mean the retention
of high-debt levels, high governmental expenses, and a high cost of living. It
is important not only to balance the Federal budget but to balance it at a lower
level of cost. There is no margin of safety in the advent of a serious depression
or of a new war.
This is a most important point from the standpoint of public interest. In the
event of a depression, Government income will drop far more rapidly than the
volume of business declines. Government expenses will not decline but will
increase greatly if they, "remain a significant sustaining factor in the economy"
as stated in the President's Economic Report. This means additional deficit
financing of large magnitude and therefore increasing public debt to unman-
ageable proportions.
The possibility of this coming to pass is indicated by the National Resources
Planning Board in a pamphlet of its issue under the title, "Full Employment
Security — Building America," The Board asks:
1. What policies should determine the proportion of required Government
outlay which should be met by taxation and by borrowing?
2. What special methods of financing, such as non-interest-bearing notes, might
be used'?
What are the non-interest-bearing notes to which reference is made? This
is merely a euphonious term for paper money, a product of the printing press.
But this paper money is also a debt of the nation. The various denominations
of paper money are non-interest-bearing demand notes, payable by the Govern-
ment to the holders on demand by them. The phraseology on the notes indicates
this and the Supreme Court has so held :
In the case of Bank v. Supervisors (7 Wall., 31), Chief Justice Chase says:
"But on the other hand it is equally clear that these notes are obligations of
the United States. Their name imports obligations. Every one of them expresses
upon its face an engagement of the Nation to pay the bearer a certain sum. The
dollar note is an engagement to pay a dollar, and the dollar intended is the
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 641
coined dollar of the United States, a certain quantity in weight and fineness of
gold or silver, authenticated as such by the stamp of the Government. No other
dollars had before been recognized by the legislation of the National Govern-
ment as lawful money."
And in 12 Wallace, 560, Justice Bradley says :
"No one supposes that these Government certificates are never to be paid;
that the day of specie payments is never to return. And it matters not in what
form they are issues Through whatever changes they pass, their ultimate
destiny is to be paid."
In commenting upon these decisions Senator John Sherman said in the Senate
of the United States :
"Thus then, it is settled that this note is not a dollar but a debt due."
Aside from the fact that paper money outstanding is strictly speaking a debt
of the Nation, the importance of the non-interest-bearing note question raised by
the National Resources Planning Board lies in the threat of greatly increased
supply of paper money. The effect of such action if taken will be a renewed
stimulation of drastic inflation with all its evil results.
Based upon the most reliable data available s our margin of national solvency
is rather small. According to these figures the total debt of all forms, public
and private, in the United States was 86.5 percent of the total wealth, public
and private, in the country in 1944. Since 1944, prices have risen due to inflation,
generally from 40 to 50 percent.
In terms of current prices, this raises the value of national wealth. For this
reason and because the total debt of the country, public and private, increased
only about one-third as much as prices, the ratio of debt to wealth as of 1948|
had dropped to 63 percent. While later data are not available, the comparative
increases in prices and debt by the end of 1951 lead to the conclusion that this
ratio of debt to wealth may be somewhat higher at the present time. In 1929,
the debt-wealth ratio was 51 percent. In the interval from 1929 to 1948 the
ratio of Federal debt to national income (from which debt is paid) increased
from 4 to 32 percent. The influence of public debt on the integrity of money
values is far greater than the influence of private debt can possibly be.
If income goes down and debt goes up there will be a double adverse leverage
on the debt situation as measured by the ability to pay. If increased Federal
expenditures fail to work in stemming the depression, the situation will be loaded
with inflationary dynamite to the permanent detriment of all of us. The present
high level of prices is quite a springboard from which to take off.
Industrial production in the United States: Industrial activity is of over-
whelming importance in the economic life of the Nation. On chart 12 is shown
in graphic form a measure of this activity year by year since 1900. The smooth
line marked "calculated normal trend" was computed from two long series of
data and is based on the period from 1898 through 1940. The rising trend is
based on the increase in population from 1900 through 1953 and the annual rise
in productivity due to increased efficiency from 1898 to 1941. With this trend as
a starting point, the data made available monthly by the Cleveland Trust Co.
were used to compute the total production as shown. The Cleveland Trust Co.
is in no way responsible for the index values of total production as shown on the
chart. The dotted line shows the corresponding index as published by the Federal
Reserve Board.
Except for the war years, the agreement between these two series is close.
The disagreement during the war period is possibly due to the Inclusion by the
Federal Reserve Board of certain labor-hour data in computing physical output —
a method not followed by the Cleveland Trust Co.
The long-sustained upward progression in our productivity is a testimonial to
the industry and technical ability of our people. The increasing output in terms
of both efficiency and volume is the only source of our high and continued rise
in standard of living. It shows no abatement. The temporary interruptions we
call depressions are deviations from trends and are to be expected until we rec-
ognize their causes and if possible counteract them.
The significant part of the long-term trend at this time is from 1940 to date.
Since 1940, industrial output has been accelerated far beyond normal peacetime
requirements by the wasteful consumption and demand created by war. This
was followed by a resurgence of civilian demand composed of new and deferred
replacement needs. Before this was satisfied new military preparations were
resumed and the Korean war began.
8 See vol. 14 of Studies in Income and Wealth by National Bureau of Economic Research,
1951.
642 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Only with the stoppage of hostilities in that area has demand begun to slacken
although it is still fortified by continued production of munitions for war, some
of which we still supply to other countries. This sustained abnormal production
is evident on chart 12. Some of the more optimistic Interpretations of these
characteristics are inclined to consider that we have embarked upon a new and
steeper trend to be traced from the beginning of recovery in the thirties to the
present time.
Obviously, the assumption that this is a normal trend discounts completely
the abnormally low starting point at the bottom of the depression and the
causes for the sustained bulge previously mentioned. It also assumes an increase
in productive efficiency that is not warranted by the facts. For years, the annual
increase due to improving productivity has been approximately 3 percent.
An increase to 3.5 percent would mean an overall improvement of 17 percent
in productivity accomplished almost overnight. During the wartime portion of
this period great numbers of unskilled employees were engaged in productive
work and many overtime hours were also utilized. Both of these factors reduce
output per employee hour. Furthermore, the increasing practice of sharing the
work and of limitations of output by labor unions have tended to offset what
would otherwise mean further gains in productivity.
The reason for the discussion of this point is the emphasis placed on the con-
clusion that the level of output since 1940 is abnormal unless we assume that
war and preparation for war are normal and that the great deferred demand
for housing, clothing, automobiles, and other articles was nonexistent.
For the Government to attempt to offset a return to normal peacetime levels
of output is to force a return to deficit financing on such a scale as to endanger
seriously the present value of the dollar. Then would follow further increases
in the cost of living and to the extent that it would occur, a further repudiation
of public debt.
Conclusions: The 20-year record of expanding Federal expenditures for hous-
ing, slum clearance, public works, nutrition, public health, social security, edu-
cation, and agricultural support clearly outlines the course of Federal procedure.
The great and increasing expenditures for the purposes just listed have been
made not in a period of declining output or depression, but simultaneously with
and in further stimulation of the greatest output in our history. This undue
and unwise stimulation, when output was already high, will make a return to
normal conditions additionally hard to bear or to prevent if Federal expenditure
is used for this purpose. The designation of "welfare state" seems to be well
earned under the developments of recent years. Perhaps the philosophy behind
it might be summarized in a remark made by Justice William O. Douglas in a
speech made in Los Angeles in February 1949.
The sound direction of the countermovement to communism in the democ-
racies — is the creation of the human welfare state — the great political inven-
tion of the 20th century."
Of course, this is not an invention of the 20th century. It was, for example,
practiced by ancient Greece and Rome to their great disadvantage.
It would seem to be countering communism by surrendering to it, wherein
the state assumes the ascendancy over the individual and the responsibility for
his personal welfare and security. It would seem more courageous and forth-
right for the Government to cease the cultivation of clamoring minorities, for
those minorities to stop demanding special favor in their behalf and for the
Nation as a whole to maintain its integrity by its willingness to pay the cost
of its deeds and misdeeds. Public interest many times requires the suppression
of self-interest and under our Constitution requires the maintenance of the
Nation intact for posterity.
Early in this study, there were listed the five channels of increased Federal
expenditure which the proponents of the welfare activities of Government sug-
gested. In tables 1 to 8 are listed the growing expenditures of the Government
under these classifications. The viewpoint that these activities are not in
accordance with our constitutional provisions is supported in principle by the
following opinions of the Supreme Court Justices quoted :
"There can be no lawful tax which is not laid for a public purpose." (Justice
Miller, 20 Wallace 655 ; 1874) ; and again :
"Tax — as used in the Constitution, signifies an exaction for the support of the
Government. The word has never been thought to connote expropriation of
money from one group for the benefit of another." ( Justice Roberts, United
States v. Butler (297 US ; 1936) .)
It is the departure from these long-standing principles that in a large measure
is the "revolution" which its proponents are announcing and endorsing.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 643
Power travels with money. It is not feasible for the Federal Government
to assume the responsibility for collecting or printing money and for doling
it out to State and local governments and their citizens without imposing the
conditions upon which it will be spent. Thus by indirection Federal power will
grow and insidiously penetrate the areas reserved by the Constitution to the
States and their citizens.
Former Supreme Court Justice and Secretary of State James F. Byrnes, now
Governor of South Carolina has said :
We are going down the road to statism. Where we will wind up no one can
tell, but if some of the new programs should be adopted, there is danger that
the individual — whether farmer, worker, manufacturer, lawyer or doctor — will
soon be an economic slave pulling an oar in the galley of the state.
The increasing confiscation of income through the power to tax, confirms the
thought expressed by Mr. Byrnes. We are on the road and it runs downhill.
The evidence is strong.
Abraham Lincoln once expressed his convictions on this relationship in the
following words :
"The maintenance inviolate of the rights of the states, and especially the right
of each state to order and control its own domestic institutions, according to its
own judgment exclusively, is essential to- the balance of powers on which the
perfection and endurance of our political fabric depend."
The conviction persists that the increasing welfare activities in which the
Federal Government has been engaged for 20 years can only come to some such
end as previously suggested if they are continued. It also seems certain that
heavy Federal expenditures to counteract a depression will prove ineffective.
Those important industries whose decline leads us into a depression are the ones
whose expansion should take us out of it.
An increase in road building will not put idle automobile mechanics back to
work, nor will a rash of public building construction or alleviation of mortgage
terms send unemployed textile workers back to their spindles and looms. Pro-
posed governmental measures will not be successful because they do not strike at
the causes of the trouble they seek to cure. After all, these same things were
tried in the long depression of the thirties without success. Pump priming did
not pay.
There is no thought or conclusion to be derived from this study that Govern-
ment has no responsibility in meeting the extraordinary conditions imposed by
crises due to financial or other causes. In the "arsenal of weapons" as men-
tioned in the Economic Report of the President are certain responsibilities and
procedures available for use as the need may develop. Undoubtedly, the most
important of these, implicit even if not specifically mentioned, is the maintenance
of the integrity and value of our money and of our credit system. The ventures
into "revolutionary" and socialistic fields of expenditure and especially in ex-
panding volume to stem a depression will be hazardous to and in conflict with
this major responsibility.
These two conceptions are completely antagonistic especially because our tax
and debt levels are so high as to leave little or no margin of financial safety. Our
recurring "crises" have been utilized in accelerating the progress of the "revolu-
tion" which we are undergoing. A further depreciation of our currency value
would provide opportunity for additional acceleration in the same direction.
In The New Philosophy of Public Debt, Mr. Harold G. Moulton, president
of the Brookings Institution, says :
"The preservation of fiscal stability is indispensable to the maintenance of
monetary stability * * *. it is indispensable to the prevention of inflation with
its distorting effects on the price and wage structure, and thus to the mainte-
nance of social and political stability."
As someone has said, "What the government gives away, it takes away," and
this is true even if it comes from the printing presses.
Perhaps this study can be closed in no better manner than to quote from a
statement 4 by Mr. Dwight D. Eisenhower while president of Columbia University :
"I firmly believe that the army of persons who urge greater and greater cen-
tralization of authority and greater and greater dependence upon the Federal
Treasury are really more dangerous to our form of government than any external
threat that can possibly be arrayed against us."
4 Dwlslit D. Eisenhower, in letter to Ralph W. Gwtnn, dated Columbia University, New
York, June 7, 1949, in opposition to a general Federal-aid-to-education program. (Con-
gressional Record, 81st Cong., 1st sess., vol. 95, p. 14, p. A3690.)
644
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Index of Chabts
Chart 1. Government civilian employees per 1,000 United States population.
Chart 2. Index of Government civilian employees.
Chart 3. Total civilian employees of Government — Federal, State, and local.
Chart 4. Federal receipts and expenditures per capita.
Chart 5. Population compared with Federal, State, and local tax receipts.
Chart 6. Federal, State, and local taxes — cents per dollar of national income.
Chart 7. United States Federal debt per family versus national income per
family.
Chart 8. Total debt per family versus private debt per family.
Chart 9. Gross national product versus gross national debt.
Chart 10. Gross national debt and disposable personal income.
Chart 11. United States wholesale commodity prices in currency.
Chart 12. Industrial production in the United States.
Data Sheet 1, Chart 1
Government civilian employees
Federal
employees
per 1,000
population
State and
local
employees
per 1,000
population
'Total Gov-
ernment
employees
per 1,000
population
Federal
State and
local
Total
1901,...
} 3.3
} 3. 7
} 4 ' 2
} 41
} 41
} 4.0
} 4.6
4.6
} 4.3
} 8.8
6.5
5.5
5.1
4.9
4.9
4.9
4.8
4.7
4.8
4.9
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.7
6.4
7.0
7.0
6.9
7.4
8.2
10.8
16.6
23,2
24.2
25.5
19.1
15.0
14.1
14.1
13.8
16.0
16.6
16.2
1902
1903
1904
1905
1907
1908
1909
1910
1911...
1913
1915
1916
1918
1920
1921
1922
1923
.
1924
1925
1926
1927 _.
1928
1929..
20.8
21.3
21.8
21.4
20.6
20.9
21.4
23.3
22.7
23.5
23.6
24.3
24.9
24.3
23.2
22.6
22.4
23.7
26.0
25.8
26.5
27.1
26.7
26.9
27.2
25.7
26.3
26.8
26,4
25.6
26.6
27.8
30.0
29.7
30.4
31.0
32.5
35.7
40.9
46.4
46.8
46.8
42.8
40.0
39.9
40.6
40.9
42.7
43.5
43.4
100.0
102.0
102.0
102.0
102.0
116.4
130.6
142.9
142.9
141.0
151.0
167.5
220.5
339.0
473.5
494.0
520.0
390.0
306.2
288.0
288.0
281.8
326.5
339.0
330.8
100.0
102.4
104.8
102.8
99.1
100.5
102.8
112.0
109.1
112.9
113.4
116.8
119.6
116.8
111.5
108.6
107. 6
113.9
120.1
124.0
127.4
130.2
128.3
129.3
130.7
100.0
102.3
104. 2
102.7
99.4
103.5
108.1
116.6
115.5
117.5
120.6
126.5
138.9
159.1
180.5
182.0
182.0
166.5
155.6
155.2
158.0
159.1
166.2
169.2
168.8
1930
1931... . .
1932
1933
1934
1935...
1936
1937
1938
1939
1940
1941
1942 .....
1943 ..
1944____
1945
1946-
1947
1948
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
Note.— Indexes, 1929=100. Not charted.
Source: Data on governmental employment from Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1953.
employment, table 404, p. 379, State and local employment, table 424, p. 393.
Federal
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
645
646
TAX-EXEMPT FOUKDATIONS
Data Sheet 2, Chart 2 and Chaet 3
Government civilian employees compared with other civilian employees
In millions
Government
employees
per 100 other
employees
Total civilian
labor force
Total civilian
Government
employees
Labor force
other than
Government
Percent of
1929
1929 --
49.2
49.8
50.4
51.0
51.6
52.2
52.9
53.4
54.0
54.6
55.2
55.6
55.9
56.4
55.5
54.6
53.9
57.5
60.2
61.4
62.1
63.1
62.9
63.0
63.4
3.7
3.1
3.3
3.2
3.2
3.3
3.5
3.7
3.7
3.9
4.0
4.2
4.6
5.4
6.0
6.0
6.0
5.6
5.5
5.6
5.8
6.0
6.4
6.6
6.7
46.1
46.7
47.1
47.8
48.4
48.9
49.4
49.7
50.3
50.7
51.2
51.4
51.3
51.0
49.5
48.6
47.9
51.9
54.7
55.8
56.3
57.1
56.5
56.4
56.7
6.7
6.7
6.9
6.3
6.5
6.7
7.0
7.4
7.5
7.6
7.8
8.2
9.0
10.6
12.2
12.4
12.5
10.8
10.
10.1
10.4
10.5
11.3
11.8
11.8
100.0
1930
100.0
1931
103.
1932 .. . . -
94.0
1933
97.0
1934 ,
100.
1935 .. _
104.5
1936 . ....
110.4
1937
111.9
1938
113.4
1939
116.4
1940
122.4
1941
134,3
1942 ...
158.1
1943
182.0
1944
185.0
194S
186.5
1946
176.0
1947
149.2
1948
150.7
1949
155. 2
1950
156.6
1951
168.6
1952...
176.0
1953
176.0
Source: Total civilian and Government civilian employees from economic report of the President, 1954.
Total civilian! abor force, table G16, p. 184. Total Government civilian labor force table G21, p. 189.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
647
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
649
(&«{; "a JZ J-t CJ6 -73 -4o 4*. *Mi 'ft- -43 ^ S*. S4
650
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Data Sheet 3, Chart 4
Ordinary receipts and expenditures
Year
Population
Total Federal
revenue
Total Federal
expenditures
Total Federal
revenue per
capita
Total Federal
expenditures
per capita
1900 .-
Millions
70.
77.4
79.2
80.7
82.3
84.0
85.5
87.2
88.8
90.3
92.0
93.4
95.0
96.5
98.1
99.6
101.2
102.8
104.3
10a 8
107.2
108.8
110.4
111.9
113.5
115.0
116.6
118.2
119.8
121.6
123.1
124.0
124.8
125.6
128.4
127.3
128.1
128.8
129.8
130.9
131.8
133.2
134. 7
138.5
138.1
139.6
141.2
143,4
146.6
149.1
151.1
154,4
157.0
159.7
Billions
$0. 567
.588
.562
.562
. 541
.544
.595
.666
.602
.604
.676
.702
.693
.724
.735
.698
.783
1.124
4.180
4.654
6.704
5. 5S4
4.103
3.847
3. 884
3.607
3.908
4.128
4.038
4.036
4.178
3.176
1.924
2.021
3.064
3.730
4.068
4. 979
5.762
5.103
5.265
7.227
12. 696
22. 201
43. 892
44. 762
40.027
40.043
42. 211
38. 246
37. 045
48. 143
62. 129
65. 218
Billions
$0,521
.525
.485
.517
.584
.567
.570
.579
.659
.694
.694
.691
.690
.725
.735
.761
.742
2.086
13. 792
18. 952
6.142
4.469
3.196
3.245
2.946
2.464
3.030
3.002
3.071
3.322
3.440
3.577
4.659
4,623
6.694
6.521
8.493
7.756
6.938
8.966
9.183
13. 387
34. 187
79.622
95. 315
98. 703
60. 703
39. 289
33. 791
40.057
40.167
44.633
66. 145
74.607
$7.46
7.60
7.10
6.96
6.57
6.48
6.96
7.54
6.78
6.70
7.35
7.52
7.30
7.50
7.49
7.01
7.74
11.04
40.00
46.20
62. 50
51. 35
37.20
34.35
34.20
31.35
33.50
34.90
33.70
33.20
33.90
25.60
15.40
16.10
24.25
29.30
31.71
38.63
44.40
39.00
40.00
54.30
94.30
162. 60
317. 70
320. 50
283. 50
279.00
288.00
256. 50
245. 00
311.80
396. 00
410.00
$6.87
1901 . . _
6.79
1902 --- -
6.12
1903
6.45
1904 . . ' --
7.10
1905...
6.75
1906 .--
6.66
1917 -
6.64
1908
7.42
1909 .
7.69
1910 ._
7.54
1911 . _
7.40
1912 _
7.27
1913 -.- -
1914
7.51
7.60
1915 . . -
7.64
1916 —
7.33
1917- _
19.88
1918
132. 10
1919 _ _
179. 20
1920 -- - . - .
57. 30
1921 --.
41.00
1922
28.96
1923
29.00
1924
25.95
1925 _—
21.40
1926
25.84
1927 - -
25; 39
1928 -- -
25.33
1929 --- ---
27.30
1930 -- -_
27.95
1931 .
28.81
1932. -.- -.
37.30
1933 _ _
36.80
1934
52.90
1935 -
51.12
1936
66.30
1937 - - --
60.20
1938 -. _
53.40
1939
68.50
1940
69.60
1941
100. 40
1942 -. -
253. 80
1943.-
583. 50
1944
690. 00
1945 . -.- --
706. 80
1948 - -
430. 00
1947 —
274. 00
1948 --
231.00
1949 -- - -.
268. 20
1950 -. -. -
265. 00
1951 _ __
289. 00
1952 .„_■_
421. 00
1953-
466. 50
1930-35 Economic Almanac (1953-54) of the N. I. C. B., p. 517.
1936-52 Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1953, p. 337.
Expenditure data 1900-29 Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1930, p. 172.
1930-35 Economic Almanac (1953-54) of the N. I. C. B.
1935-52 Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1953, p. 340.
Source: Revenue data 1900-29 Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1929 p. 172.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
651
■«-
652
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Data Sheet 4, Chart 5
Year
Population
Federal
taxes
State and
local taxes
1929=100
Population
index
Federal tax
index
State and
local tax
Index
1916...
1917...
1918...
1919...
1920...
1921...
1922...
1923—
1924—
1925...
1923...
1927...
1925—
1929-.
1931...
1931...
1932...
193}—
1934—
1935...
1936—
1937—.
1938—
1939—
1940—
1941—
1942—.
1943—
1944....
1945—.
1946—
1947—
1948....
1949—
1950.-.
1951 —
1952....
1953—
MiUiom
101.2
102.8
104.3
105.8
107.2
108.8
110.4
111.9
113.5
115.0
116.6
118.2
119.8
121.6
123.1
124.0
124.8
125.6
126.4
127.3
128.1
128.8
129.8
130.9
131.8
133.2
134.7
136,5
138.1
139.6
141.2
143.4
146.6
149.1
151.1
154.4
157.0
159.7
Millions
$708
1, 015
3,352
4,482
5,689
4,917
3,554
3,052
3,207
2,974
3,215
3,345
3,201
3,337
3,517
2,739
1,813
1,805
2,910
3,557
3,856
4,771
5,452
4,813
4,921
6,889
12, 964
21,087
40,339
40,989
36, 285
35, 132
37,636
35,590
34, 955
45,984
59, 535
62, 656
Millions
$1, 935
1,923
2,309
2,923
3,476
3,895
4, 015
4,202
4,619
4,918
5,398
5,722
6,148'
6,431
6,798
6,583
6,358
5,715
5,881
6,185
6, 659
7,421
7,684
7,638
7,997
8,315
8,527
8,653
8,875
9,193
10,094
11, 554
13,342
14, 790
15, 914
17, 554
83.2
84.6
85.8
87.0
88.2
89.5
90.8
92.0
93.4
95.0
95.9
97.2
■ 98.5
100.0
101.2
102.2
102.7
103.4
104.0
104.8
105.4
103.0
105.9
107.6
108.5
109.5
110.9
112.4
113.6
115.0
116.3
117.9
120.7
122.1
124.4
127.0
129.1
131.3
21.2
30.8
100.5
134.5
170.6
147.5
106.6
91.4
96.1
89.1
96.4
100.3
96.0
100.0
105.4
82.0
54.3
54.1
87.2
106.6
115.6
143.1
163.5
144.4
147.6
206.7
389.0
632.0
1,210.0
1,228.0
1,088.0
1,054.0
1,129.0
1, 036.
1,049.0
1,378.0
1,785.0
1, 878.
30.1
29.9
35.9
45.5
54.0
60.6
62.4
65.4
71.8
76.5
83.9
89.0
95.6
100.0
105.7
102.4
98.8
88.9
91.5
96.2
103.5
115.5
119.5
118.7
124.4
129.3
132.6
134.6
138.0
143.0
157.0
179.7
207.5
230.0
247.5
273.0
Source: Tax revenue data from p. 516, Economic Almanac 1953-54, National Industrial Conference
Board. Excludes social security taxes except that portion used for administration of social security system.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
653
^gj^^p^^M^
8 SI S -11118 fit Is SS SsH SKsiSSis ssi
Steffi mlsS ; fflffisBS ; Siil§ll'
l^M^roffi;Sf sSslKiiillllii^ll ■
liilS ; i#liHfe^l8 Jsiwffisl U H'sis*
LJ:^^ : ijj^j£| = -"^^"^p-U=3^;^^^
s :Sffiffi:s*ffiSffil5w^ffiffi? ffpsi
5 : |5 ^ ^ HS ffi m ffi J it ^ ^ |4f m ^t tiH
hax mi ci : J-l [ 1 1 1 IM j|||l|n igiiiri^t g#H*rgiT l 'TtttTmt 1
1 If 11 If II 11 BiS 11 11 11 11 11 11 11
fflffll|5^^S
* ptlR Bli§* Jmffl mT I llTTTT fflf fm filfitt m
iapd|rol|ljl
mt it i fnf ~|Tr 1 1 1 nTTTlH" ^TttfMT 'HTT -tr* i-rff ij-Lj- -j-j 4 - if- ■r-TT Tjz^ixtt :
j x ^ -tajfan- || 1 ^^ jg Ig ^ ]S |p gj iS S
||$iffi^KKi : ffil^ffiffi§iB S^lsiS 1
itt itk 3£d; -^- ^ *aHH |k ftftrr ^rli tttt rtTTlT!T : Si I
noo|j|jj| ||j||
i|:|jffip[||||Wl : f^i lililliilllP^Pffi §^
l||gilSi||l§ltjli| : fel§|||j|lffiffi:|B
• MC^Hffig
PlIffiBteilH^gffiTTtiiffiSiffii-iiH
isaa^ggg
liliS-SSfflS'ffigjfSSffi^^H
f i SI H sh to 55SK : it :: rf Wt $S ffl Hffiai 1+1
^ :: issS SSs8 : 5f : H8 : SffflSMJH
$S:!!$STOt^ffli5B-i'ffit : S : l8i isl:ii:pfHi^ M
t30'Bg'||
Ji jjij: iitt rm : H ±l^|g|K: grift :'S+ 1 1 f '
ffi|lffiM : gS|'ffi SS ffi||[|MTW
iz«pg;ll
mttr |£-#i||i+f il+liSi WrT Wffi -+ff TrWwf TTR
isPpsBl l-fflg^^KH
)iwffi||gg
^■-^\\'-^~\^\\-ii^--^^k^ L -^- =I
4Mi:±}i:±ff: j^:ig:ttma - £T £g S± :jfl\ 11 IIIIIJUHillH Ifl
lowgggS
eOC::Sffigj
-■jjJ-r-^t-pitj^J;!- J-.-.^z^p^Jf^^zf^^^j:
SSS ;; iiSpSffif pBllliillll
s : lBBl
28oc:|Sl|
jij: j^+m : ^ttj :: |ttSftft tffiftTT TT :: TTTrrrT tltrTi
a. If 11 111
74liliSsS
"i^ ffl'ffHf tHttiii ini si si Is is? +i _ S|4}-44f +tf "^"llt
||||f||H
* #BtHErI
<£ &:3g|H;|
- .- £: 5^±fi 4ff- f^ f^fffp ^^% 1 1
ilBlffllli liifHH
30£:g^P||
; :££ 4ffi : ffiTTfTHTT : TNT^" iff
inlllllll
-.$# TiStttSfiffl iS : 3H flSTFS Hi BfiEE Ha f^lHI
locffii^:!
Sir's ^33 33^*9 8$ St II IS SSslaillS
-i . -^j-^^rf^|^ir]jYRIi!lliyTd
1316 ia
£0 K*. *4 24 -26 30 3Z -54 34
« « 1* 11 •** -»a *> ■**
49720— 54— pt. 1 42
654
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Data Sheet 5, Chart 6
National income and tax receipts
Tax receipts,
calendar years —
National
income,
billions
Total,
billions
Total per-
cent of
income
Tax receipts,
calendar years —
National
income,
billions
Total,
billions
Total per-
cent of
income
1929
$87.4
75.0
58.9
41.7
39.6
48.6
56.8
64.7
73.6
67.4
72.5
81.3
$10. 30
9.77
8.54
8.00
8.54
9.68
10.59
12.14
14. 57
14.20
14.58
16.95
11.8
13.0
14.5
17.0
21.6
19.9
18.7
18.8
19.8
21.1
20.1
20.9
1941
$103. 8
137.1
169.7
183.8
182.7
180.3
198.7
223.5
216.3
240.6
278.4
291.6
$24. 36
31.95
48.51
50.59
52.52
50.37
56. 39
58.10
54.93
67.75
84.56
23 5
1930
1942
23.3
1931
1943 _ .
28 6
1932
1944 -
27.5
1933
1945
28.7
1934
1946
27 9
1935
1947 _
28.4
1936
1948
26.0
1937 - -.-
1949
25 4
1938
1950 -
28.2
1939
1951
30.4
1940
1952
Source: National income, table G-7, Economic Report of the President, 1954.
Tax receipts, Department of Commerce via Facts and Figures on Government Finance. 1952-63, by the
'Tax Foundation. Table 90, p. 116.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
655
'-iHfl
WtftMtt^^
IIU ji [[111 Ml j TTTT Ml 11 1 [M tttttr
!; g : SI|
iillllllljll ttmjTHt tg tnntrrt HHI
Tf+:itt BIT
IP 818
.tttt : ttf ■ Tfl
- ±itt±tk± -it
^i^^
rn ' 'uv ' T
r |lj4 | |g jffi III- ± 4^T TTTT' TlTl 1 1 F TiT
fff- Irff-ff
ftt-fflf :g
: ^5f si^SSft w iHt llilLLni iiu
&Hgg
tiffing 5
Wt|B-
SIS 1
11^ ]_ . | - ■■ " — 1-, -J^^-
311+95 i
ESEEEip^ji ■ ffi ffff : *m5S iff
§111
^^5^j^^.
=4 '-afpE^-^HiU
piSiipiff jffi#iaif 3S Saa
IffiPSSffiffiS Hll
iB»i ! HpiSB : l
ff BE 83 mm §E gggJEBSff:^
"j-fSH ji^^l:
BlIIIlIIBiJ
* ISSi
1 Iee 11111 ; iHl B 11
Ig;
T^ffiS^ ; BBS PfTT ; lf
J EBii
BPffi : lHll ! ffi|
iEEE
]ffi|iIi|Bffifflffi;^ffiiffi^
o Wjp
B;BFr : 3i5Ki ; 6tBff ■ Si 5S
a BnttHft-
*• raffil-
** r i [ 1 1 1 it
illljllillli HHl
"E- ^^fUL:^ 4
s
- SH Eg SI si E5 §£ ; S3 glpift fS| 3£
Mi
ffiS|g^^m:|^gi Ig-ilg;
SB
^-p 1~ J ~|rtj — -Ft] ' -^*— j — — ^
i p|iiiimit
^; ^ ■ d i4r~ ; F= -
4^=4^'-" | — -"P j4i^— j-' '■
|y^^]4^5L^-t3
Sffijiitimn: jl Sgii If ||i|h|S||
^-^^.^i^^f:-
JS?l^ 3
S T'A. 34 ~& *?&
■w *n •*« ""• °s
656
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Data Sheet 6, Chaet 7
National
income,
billions
Number of
families,
millions
National
income per
family
Federal
debt per
family
Difference,
income over
debt
1900 - - —
$16.2
28.2
74.2
87.4
75.0
58.9
41.7
39.6
48.6
56.8
64.7
73.6
67.4
72.5
81.3
103.8
137.1
169.7
183.8
182.7
180.3
198.7
223.5
216. 3
240.6
278.4
291.6
1 306.
15.96
20.26
24.35
29.40
29.90
31. 24
31.67
32.16
32.56
33.09
33.55
34.00
34. 52
35.60
34.95
35. 85
36. 45
36.88
37.10
37.50
38.18
39. 14
40.72
42.11
43.47
44.56
45. 46
47. 50
Si, 015
1,392
3,045
2,972
2,510
1,885
1,317
1,232
1,493
1,718
1, 92.8
2,164
1,952
2,035
2,325
2,895
3,760
4,600
4,950
4,870
3,725
5,007
5,490
5,140
6,530
6,250
6, 415
6,440
$84
57
1,000
576
542
538
615
702
831
868
1,006
1, 072
1.076
1,135
1,230
1,365
1,990
3,710
5, 420
6,900
7,006
6,600
6,200
6,000
5,930
5,750
5,700
5,600
$931
1910 -- --
1,335
1920---
2,045
1929 - - -
1,396
1B30-. . .. __ -_ -._ -- .- - -- -. ..-
1,968
1931 -
1,347
1932 - -.-
702
1933 - -
530
1934 —
662
1935
850
1936 - --
922
1937 -
1,092
1938
876
1939 --
000
1940 - -
1,095
1911
1,530
1942 _
1943 -
1,770
890
1944 .. _
-470
1945 - .. --
-2, 030
1946
-3, 281
1947 - ------
-1, 593
1948 - -- -
-710
1949
1950
-860
-400
1951
500
1953 ._ . ..
715
S40
i Estimated.
iSource: Income data, 1900, 3910, 1920, estimated based on NBER data in "National Productivity Since--
1869."
1929-52, the Economic Report of the President, 1954, table G-7.
Number of families based on United States census data.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
657
658
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Data Sheet 7, Chart 8
1929.
1930.
1931.
1932.
1933.
1934.
1935.
1936.
1937.
1938.
1939.
19*0.
1941.
1942.
1943_
1944.
1945.
1946.
1947.
19*8_
1949.
1950-
1951.
Total
debt, pri-
vate and
public,
billions
$191.
191.
182.
175.
169.
172.
175.
181.
183.
180.
184.
190.
212.
260.
314.
371.
407.
398.
419.
435.
446.
485.
519.
Private
debt,
billions
$161. 5
160.8
148.6
137.8
128. 8
126.3
125.4
127. 5
127.9
124.3
125.5
129.6
140.4
143.2
145.0
145. 7
140.8
155.5
181.8
202.6
210.0
246.4
277.2
Number of
families,
millions
29.40
29.90
31.24
31.67
32.16
32.56
33.09
33.55
34.00
34.52
35. 60
34. 95
35.85
36.45
36.88
37.10
37.50
38.18
39.14
40.72
42. H
43.47
44.56
Private
debt per
family
$5, 500
5,380
4,760
4,350
4,000
3,880
3,790
3, 800
3,760
3,600
3,530
3,700
3,915
3,930
3,935
3,930
3,755
070
650
975
985
670
6,230
Total
debt per
family
$6, 500
6,400
5,850
5,550
5,280
5,300
5,320
5,400
5,390
5,240
5,180
5,460
5,930
7,150
8,530
10,020
10,860
10,450
10,720
10,690
10, 600
11,180
11,650
National
income per
family
$2, 972-
2, 510'
1, 885
1,317
1,232
1, 493
1,718
1.92&
2,164
1,952
2,035
2,325
2,895
3,760"
4,600
4,950-
4, 870
3, 725
5,007
5, 490
5,140-
5, 530
6, 250
Source: Data on debt from Economic Almanac, National Industrial Conference Board, 1953-54, p. 122 t
Data on income derived from table G7, President's Economic Report; 1954, and Census Bureau data oa
families.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
659*
4, Hi
iieaffi
JMoJ||
JfiOO(fct|
■ftftfcffi
iSp J $ :
flSfajj kjr
7i "to
^||i^f
Q M
BSS
s
,ccy ffl
A .cJjffl-W
ig
Bse jo si 31 at as -to. « « it ■« re rt
660
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Data Sheet 8, Chart 9
19001
19011
19021
19031
19041
19051
19061
19071
19081
1909..
19101
19111
19121
19131
1914__
1915 <
19161
19171
19181.
1919..
1920..
1921..
1922..
1923..
1924..
1925..
1926..
Gross
national
product,
billions
Federal
debt,
billions
$16.9
$1.26'
18.1
1.22
19.2
1.18
20.5
1.16
21.6
1.14
23.0
1.13
24.5
1.14
26.0
1.15
27.5
1.18
28.8
1.15
31.1
1.15
33.4
1.15
35.7
1.19
38.0
1.19
40.1
1.19
47.0
1.19
53.9
1.23
60.6
2.98
67.5
12.24
74.2
25.48
85.6
24.30
67.7
24.00
68.4
23.00
80.4
22. 35
80.9
21.25
95.0
20.52
91.1
19.64
Gross
national
product
at 1929
consumer
price,
billions
$65.7
68.4
79.4
84.7
81.0
76.9
73.4
73.1
65.0
70.0
80.7
81.2
83.1
88.3
Gross
national
product,
billions
Federal
debt,
billions
Gross
natlanal
product
at 1929
consumer
price,
billions
1927-
89.6
91.3
103.8
90.9
75.9
58.3
55.8
64.9
72.2
82 5
90.2
84.7
91.3
101.4
126.4
161.6
194.3
213.7
215.2
211.1
233.3
259.
258.2
286. 8
329.8
348.0
366.0
$18. 51
17.60
16. 90
16.20
16.80
19 50
22.50
27.70
32.80
38.50
41.10
42.00
45.90
48.50
55.30
77.00
140. 80
202. 60
259. 10
269. 90
258. 40
252. 40
252.80
257. 40
255. 30
259. 20
266. 10
$88.6
91 2
1928 -
1929
103 8
1930
93 4
1931
85 fi
1932
73 2
193o
74
1934
83
1935
90 2
1936—
102
1937 .
107 8
1938
102 9
1939..
1940
112.5
124
1941
147 3
1942
169 8
1943
192 5
1944
208 1
1945
205
1946
1947
1948
185. 5
179.0
184 6
1949
186
1950—
205 2
1951
217
1952
19532
223.5
234.0
1 Estimated from data shown for 1899, 1904, 1909, 1914, and 1919 as indicated below.
2 Estimate based in data for 9 months and subsequent production data.
Source: Qross national product 1900-28, national product since 1869— NBER, pp. 119, 151. Federal debt
1900-28, Statistical Abstract of United States, 1930, p. 214. Federal debt, 1929-52, Economic Indicators
Supplement 1953. Personal Disposable Income, 1929-50, National Income, 1951 edition, table 3, p. 151.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
661
(ffi2
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATION'S
Data Sheet 9, Chart 10
Percent
Federal
debt
G. N. P.
Dispos-
able per-
sonal
income,
billions
Percent
D. I. P.
G. N. P.
Percent
Federal
debt
G. N. P.
Dispos-
able per-
sons!
income,
billions
Percent
D. I. P.
G. N. P.
1900
7.46
6.74
6.14
5.66
5.27
4.92
4.66
4.42
4.29
4.00
3.70
3.46
3.33
3.1.3
2.97
2.53
2.28
4. 92
18.1
34.3
28.4
35.4
33.6
27.8
26.3
24.2
21.5
1927
20.7
19.3
16.3
17.8
22.1
33.5
40.3
42.7
45.5
46.7
45.6
49.6
50.3
47.8
43.8
47.6
72.4
94.9
120.5
127.8
110.8
97.5
97.9
89.8
77.5
74.5
i 72.7
1901
1928
1902
1929
$82.5
73.7
63.0
47.8
45.2
51.6
58.0
66.1
71.1
65.6
70.2
75.7
92.0
116.7
132.4
147.0
151.1
158.9
169.5
188.4
187.2
205.8
225.0
235.0
' 250.
74.9
1903
1930
81.0
1904
1931
83.0
1905 - -
1932
82.0
3906.
1933
80.8
1907 — _
1934 - -..
79.5
1908 . - - -
1935
80.4
1909 -
1936....
80.2
1910 - —
1937 ,
78.8
1911
1938
77.3
1912
1939
1940
76.8
1913 -
74.7
1914
1941
72.8
1915
1942
72.2
1916 _.
1943
68.2
1917
1944
1945
68.8
1918
70.2
1919
1946
1947
75.2
1920
72.7
1921...
1948
1949
72.7
1922 -
72.5
1923
1950
76.7
1924
1951
68.2
1925 ... .
1952
67.6
1926
1953
168.3
i Estimate based on data for 9 months and subsequent production data.
Source: Gross national product, 1900-28, national product since 1869, NBF.R, pp. 119, 151. Federal debt
3903-28, Statistical Abstract of United States, 1930, p. 214. Federal debt 1929-52, Economic Indicators Sup-
plement, 1953. Personal Disposable Income, 1929-50, National Income, 1951 edition, table 3, p. 151.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
663
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
665
oqi- vi-oiGi - asti-LM^ysd
665a
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Data Sheet 10, Chabt 12
Industrial production' (physical volume)
Cleveland
Trust
index,
percent
of normal
Normal
trend,
1935-39=
100
Total
produc-
tion, 1
1935-39 =
100
New-
series
F. R. B.
data,
1935 39 =
100
Cleveland
Trust
index,
percent
of normal
Normal
trend,
1935-39=
100
Total
produc-
tion,'
1935-39=-
100
New-
series
P. R. B.
data,
1935-39 =
100
1900
103
103
103
101
96
108
110
106
86
102
101
94
104
105
95
100
114
112
107
100
102
76
93
112
100
107
108
32.7
34.2
35.7
37.2
38.8
40.4
42.1
43.8
45.6
47.3
49.2
51.0
52.9
54.8
56.8
58.8
61.0
63.2
65.4
67.5
69.4
72.2
74.4
77.0
79.4
82.0
84.4
33.7
35.2
36.8
^7.6
37.2
43.6
46.3
46.5
39.2
48.3
49.7
47.9
55.0
57.6
54.0
58.8
69.5
70,8
70.0
67.5
70.8
54.8
69.2
86.2
79.4
87.8
91.2
1927
1928
1929
1930
1931
1932
1933
1934
1935
1936
1937
1938
1939
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
1946
1947
1948
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953'-
104
106
110
87
73
57
68
68
77
89
93
71
88
102
127
132
138
134
123
114
126
131
115
133
139
130
138
87.2
90.0
92.8
95.6
98.3
100.5
102.8
105.1
107.6
110.0
112.5
115.4
117.9
120.6
123.8
127.4
131.0
134.5
138.5
141.8
146.0
151.9
155.6
161.0
165.7
172.5
177.4
90.7
95,4
102.0
83.2
71.7
57.3
70.0
71.5
82.9
97.9
104.6
82.0
103.7
123.0
157.3
168.2
180.7
180.2
170.4
161.7
184.6
199.0
179.6
214.5
230.0
225.0
2 245.4
94
1901
98
1902
109
1903
91
1904
74
1905
57
1905
69
1907
74
1908
87
1909
104
1910
113
1911
89
1912
107
1913
124
1914
161
1915
196
1916
235
1917
231
1918
198
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
1926
72
76
57
72
8 "t
82
91
94
167
185
193
180
207
222
230
»248
1 Derived from monthly data published by the Cleveland Trust Co. and independently calculated normal
trend.
2 Estimated.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
665b-.
OO I = (SE-J-CS1 3 9 U4>ra3\13d
666 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. McNiece. Then I assume that in answering any question it
would be permissible to clarify it by reading a particular section.
Mr. Hays. Surely.
Mr. Koch. The question now is whether you members would like
to ask any questions with respect to any part of that report, or whether
you would like to study it and ask some at a future time.
Mr. Goodwin. Mr. Hays.
Mr. Hays. I will surprise you by saying I have no questions.
Mr. Goodwin". The Chair concurs.
Mr. Koch. Then you are excused for today.
Mr. Goodwin. Thank you very much for your presentation.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Chairman, Miss Casey has been sworn, and I
think probaby her oath can be considered to be continued.
Mr. Goodwin, I would say so.
Mr. Koch. Miss Casey, you have prepared a report. What is the
title of that?
TESTIMONY OF KATHRYN CASEY, LEGAL ANALYST, SPECIAL COM-
MITTEE TO INVESTIGATE TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Miss Casey. It is called Summary of Activities of Carnegie Cor-
poration of New York, Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement
of Teaching, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Rockefeller General
Education Board.
Mr. Koch. That is a rather long document, and I understand unless
the gentlemen wish, you have no desire to read that entire document,
but there were certain paragraphs you felt you would like to read.
Is that it?
Miss Casey. Yes. I don't have any intention of reading this entire
document. I thought I might highlight some parts of it to give the
members of the committee a background. I would like to say first
of all that the object of this summary was to enable the committee to
have the benefit of the research done and give them the facts taken
from the foundations reports.
Mr. Koch. First of all, may that report be considered in the record ?
Mr. Goodwin. In the absence of objection, the report will be ordered
inserted in the record.
Mr. Hays. Reserving the right to object, and I shall not object,
I would just like to point out here that perhaps when some of the
people representing the foundations come before us, they may have
long prepared statements, and I hope there will be no objection to
using the same procedure on them, unless some member of the com-
mittee wants it read. In other words, the thing I am interested in is
that it is rather voluminous, and we have run to quite a few pages. I
hope there will be no inclination to keep something out of the record
when the minority has entered no objection to putting anything in the
record that anyone thought was pertinent.
Mr. Goodwin. That certainly would be the idea of the present occu-
pant of the Chair. I assume that it is the opinion of the staff that this
material should be in the record.
Mr. Koch. Oh, yes.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS " 667
Mr. Wormsee. Mr. Hays, the only comment I would like to make
on that is that I am asking these various foundations to give us copies
sufficiently in advance so that we ean at least know the material that
they are going to bring up. If you have talked to any of them, I
wish you would ask them to please do that. In some cases it is going
to be a rather short job for them. In other cases, they have quite a lot
of time.
Mr. Hays. Suppose they want to bring somebody in as the four
professors were brought in, and they wanted to speak as they did,
without any preparation ?
Mr. Eoch. Then they certainly should have the right to do that.
There is ho doubt about it.
Mr. Hays. I am concurring with you. Whenever they are going to
have a prepared statement, they should be submitted in advance. I
have no objection to that.
Mr. Goodwin. The Chairman assumes there will be no controversy
over any question of this sort.
(The statement Summary of Activities of Carnegie Corporation of
New York, Carnegie Foundation for Advancement of Teaching, the
Kockefeller Foundation, the Rockefeller General Education Board is
as follows:)
49720— B4— pt. 1-
668 tax-exempt foundations
Introduction
One of the objectives of the staff, as mentioned in Mr. Dodd T s report,
was to determine whether there was a common denominator, as it were,
in relation to foundation purposes. A collateral objective was to deter-
mine, if possible, whether the activities of foundations might fall into
certain definite classifications.
Upon examination of the material available in the Cox committee
files it was apparent that it was insufficient * to support a firm conclu-
sion on this point; as were the various reference books available on
foundations and their activities. After further study and discussion
as to both the quickest and the most efficient method of securing .suffi-
cient information, it was decided to examine the activities of the
first 2 major 3 foundations, to determine whether their activities could
be classified, on the theory that such an examination would also serve
the dual purpose of providing a guide for study of other foundations.
With size of endowment and date organized as criteria, the selection
of the agencies created by Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller
were quite obvious choices, as will be seen oy a glance at the following
chronological list :
Carnegie Institute (of Pittsburgh), 1896. ■
Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, 1901.
Carnegie Institution of Washington, 1902.
Rockefeller General Education Board, 1903.
Carnegie Hero Fund Commission, 1904.
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 1905.
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1910.
Carnegie Corporation of New York, 1911.
The Rockefeller Foundation, 1918.
The Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial, 1918.*
As a practical matter, the Carnegie Institute of Pittsburgh, the Car-
negie Institution of Washington and the Carnegie Hero Fund Com-
mission were eliminated as objects of study in relation to their fields
of activity, because their purposes were so clearly specified and their
activities confined thereto.
On the theory that the document itself is the best evidence, the
logical source of the best information was the records of the founda-
tions themselves, as contained in their annual reports and similar pub-
lication. When it proved difficult to obtain these reports from the
Library of Congress 5 recourse was had to the foundations themselves.
In the case of the two Rockefeller agencies— the foundation and the
General Education Board — the president, Mr. Dean Rusk, upon re-
quest responded immediately and loaned to the committee copies of the
annual reports of each of these organizations.
In the case of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
a request was made to permit studies of their records from the date
of organization, to which Dr. Johnson, the president, agreed without
hesitation, and every cooperation was extended in placing the records,
minutes of meetings, and confidential reports at the committee's
disposal. In the time available, it was not possible to cover in detail
all the material available for those years, but extensive notes were made
1 Not only as to details, but also because it covered only the years 1936-51, inclusive.
a In point of time.
3 In size of assets.
*Its activities were merged with those or the Rockefeller Foundation, 1928.
8 Since only 1 copy was available for circulation, the other being for reference.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 669
and verbatim quotations extracted ; Mr. Perkins, of the Carnegie Cor-
poration had equally cooperated but, subsequently on special request,
the Library of Congress permitted the reference copies of the year-
books of the Corporation, the foundation and the endowment to be
withdrawn from the Library for use at the committee's offices.
In -addition to these reports, the books and articles, including bio-
graphical material, available on both Mr. ^Rockefeller and Mr. Carnegie
and their foundations, were consulted and studied. 6
Based on these studies, and according to the records of the founda-
tions themselves, it was concluded that their activities had been car-
ried on in a handful of major areas, namely :
I. Education.
II. International affairs, including international law.
III. Politics (in the sense that politics is the science of civil government.)
IV. Public affairs.
V. Propaganda.
VI. Economics.
While some of these fields overlapped to a certain degree, that fact
does not affect the validity of the technique of analysis, nor the state-
ment of summation.
I. Education
GENERAL PURPOSE
Part I of this summary is devoted to answering three questions :
1. Have these foundations carried on activities in the field of edu-
cation ?
(a) At elementary level ?
(b) At secondary level ?
(c) At college and university level ?
2. What have these activities been (at each of the levels noted) ?
3. Did such activities have any evident or traceable effects in the
educational field ?
Secondly, once the answers to these questions are determined, what
is their relationship (if any) to education, in the light of the consti-
tutional and historic attitudes with regard to it in this country?
The activities relating to questions 1 and 2 will be summarized sep-
arately by foundation, for the entire period of its existence, in section
1. However, since the activities of all these organizations are paral-
lel — at least in part — the effects of all in the educational field, and
their relationship (if any) to the constitutional and historic viewpoint
will be summarized and compared in section 2.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Of the Carnegie and Kockefeller organizations only one — the Gen-
eral Education Board of Rockefeller ? — from its outset has operated
exclusively in the field of education, in the sense of a relationship to
institutions of learning, teaching, and so forth. In the sense that all
* Bibliography : Life of Andrew Carnegie (2 vols.), V. J. Hendrick : Forty years of Carnegie
Giving, R. M. Lester ; 30 Year Catalogue of Grants, R. M. Lester ; Fruit of an Impulse,
Howard J. Savage; Philanthropic Foundations and Higher Education, Ernest Victor
Hollis ; The Story of the Rockefeller Foundation, Raymond Fosdick ; History of the Stand-
ard Oil Co., Tarbell ; American Foundations — Their Fields, 20th Century Fund • Phi-
lanthropic and Learning, Frederick P. Keppel ; Public Bene/aCtioris' of Andrew Carnegie
Carnegie Corp. ; The Foundation, Frederick P. Keppel.
1 Terminated operations at end of 1953.
670 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
knowledge developed pertains to "education, of course, then the term
"education" becomes practically all-inclusive of every activity not
only of foundations, but of industry and government as well. How-
ever, in the former sense — which is the sense in which it is used here —
Carnegie Corp., Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teach-
ing, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and the Rocke-
feller Foundation are dedicated by their charters to purposes directly
or indirectly related to what might be called the advancement of edu-
cation.
In the case of the foundation, 3 originally intended as a means of
providing "retiring allowances" for professors, it is now its primary
purpose. The corporation 3 and the endowment * have it as one of a
multiplicity of purposes. Because this is particularly true of the en-
dowment, and because its activities are so closely interrelated that
agency's activities will be summarized as a unit when other categories
of foundation activities are covered.
One further fact should be noted because it is a matter which time
did not permit complete resolving. In the case of the corporation,
and the foundation, there is a considerable overlapping of funds, and
it is difficult at times to determine the extent to which the funds men-
tioned in the foundation's financial reports are duplicates of funds
mentioned in the corporation's report. To a certain extent this is
true also in regard to the endowment. Thus, while every effort will
be made in this report to differentiate clearly between the amounts of
money, it may be that sums reported in the foundation and the endow-
ment records are duplications of sums reported in the Carnegie record.
Inasmuch as the Rockefeller Foundation and the General Education
Board do not seem to have the interlocking relationships found in the
Carnegie organizations it is not believed that the same possibility of
duplication exists in regard to those two organizatons.
However, perhaps in an excess of caution, where doubt arose, the
item was not included so that whatever error has occurred has been
on the side of lower totals rather than higher.
BACKGROUND s MATERIAL PROM REFERENCE WORKS
Before proceeding to an analysis of information taken from the an-
nual reports of each of the foundations to be summarized, a brief
review of the activities in the field of education by these major con-
tributors may prove helpful and also serve as a basis for evaluation.
Dr. Ernest V ictor Hollis in his book Philanthropic Foundations
and Higher Education, published in 1938, covers not only the back-
ground and organization of foundations, but also the specific activities
of foundations in the field of education. While most of his references
are to higher education, portions of his work involve secondary educa-
tion indirectly, as will be seen later. Although published in 1938,
which makes many of the statistics of Dr. Hollis' book somewhat out-
dated, it is still regarded as an excellent reference.
1 This term will be used throughout to designate the Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching.
3 This term will be used throughout to designate the Carnegie Corp.
* This term will be used throughout to designate the Carnegie Endowment for Interna-
tional Peace.
B See bibliography, p. 669.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 671
According to Dr. Ernest Victor Hollis " "unfavorable public esti-
mate of the elder John D. Eockefeller and Andrew Carnegie made it
inexpedient in 1905 for their newly created philanthropic foundations
to attempt any direct reforms in higher education." The subject was
approached indirectly through general and noncontroversial purposes,
nearly all foundation grants made before 1920 being for such pur-
poses.
Dr. Hollis writes :
Far-reaching college reform was carefully embedded in many of these non-
controversial grants. It was so skillfully done that few of the grants are directly
chargeable to the ultimate reforms they sought to effect. For instance, there is
little obvious connection between giving a pension to a college professor or giving
a sum to the general endowment of his college, and reforming the entrance re-
quirements, the financial practices, and the scholastic standards of his institu-
tion. This situation makes it necessary to present qualitative influence without
immediately showing the quantitative grant that made the influence possible/
REMEDIES FOE EDUCATIONAL CHAOS
The first efforts of the foundations to influence the development of
higher education, according to Dr. Hollis, were directed toward a
differentiation and coordination of the levels of education, which he
stated "approached chaos" around 1902-5.
It is not proposed to discuss whether the conditions existing in the
educational system at that time were chaotic or inefficient; nor is it
intended to deny that the foundation and the General Education
Board were sincere in their belief that the system should be improved.
It is true, however, that neither of these organizations announced to
the public their intention to reform the educational system. On the
contrary, the board asserted on many occasions that it was determined
not to interfere with the institutions, nor direct their policies. 8 The
president of the foundation, in writing of the early activities of the
foundation, admitted that originally even the founder, Andrew Car-
negie, was not aware of any intention other than the commendable one
of awarding a free pension, and in 1935 Mr. Pritchett accepted the
fully responsibility for inculcating the reform idea in the pension
awards.
Moreover, it is not intended to evaluate the merits of the objective
and references are cited merely as indications of the intention and
attitude of the two foundations which first entered this educational
field. Additional references taken from the reports of the individual
foundations will be included in later sections of this part, dealing with
the individual foundation activity in education.
Dr. Hollis takes a very practical view of the manner in which
foundations approached the situation and the logical conclusion to be
drawn, when he writes :
As a condition of awarding a pension to a college professor what could be
more plausible than the necessity for defining a college? Both the logic of the
situation and the desire for the money caused colleges to seek the scrutiny
of the foundation. By this indirection the foundation was being importuned
to do what President Pritchett most wished, and what he probably could not
8 Philanthropic Foundations and Higher Education.
' Ibid., p. 127.
8 See sections on Foundation and Board.
672 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATION'S'
have accomplished by any amount of direct grants. With pensions as the induce-
ment the Carnegie plan for improving the colleges was explicit and avowed;
the scholastic, financial, and control standards that were demanded for affili-
ation guaranteed that the institution would be a real college. Despite its pro-
testations to the contrary, the General Education Board sought to effect the
same reforms. I used grants to capital outlay and to general endowment as
the inducement and its leadership was canny enough not to print or use an
inflexible set of standards. The college seeking assistance was judged in terms
of its promise within the local area. The board "made a thorough study" of
the institutions calling themselves colleges and from this factual survey came
to a conclusion similar to that of the Carnegie Foundation as to what should
be done. Each foundation decided to organize and lead a superior system of
colleges and universities as a demonstration to the rest of the country. Their
purposes were almost identical, though their methods of work were radically
different, as were also their attitudes toward church-controlled colleges. The
actions of the Carnegie Foundation were the more open and therefore will enter
more fully into this narrative. But this circumstance should not obscure the
fact that the General Education Board program sought similar goals and was
just as assiduously conducted."
Dr. Hollis goes on to say that, using this as a basis [eligibility for
a Carnegie pension], the specific requirements were established as to
what constituted a "college," and these requirements were later agreed
to in principle at a conference, sponsored by the foundations of all
agencies interested in improving college entrance requirements.
Dr. Hollis, in comparing the policies of the foundation and the
General Education Board, refers to the former's standards as an "all
or none" dictum which "was happily absent in the more flexible, less
explicit plans of the General Education Board for improving
colleges." 10
Dr. Hollis referred to the setting up of means for improving col-
lege entrance requirements which grew out of the indictment of the
so-called mechanical credits which were congesting the colleges with
inadequately prepared students and again notes the contribution of
the foundation when he states :
At every stage of this complex kaleidoscopic problem, the philanthropic
foundations interested in higher education have been alined with the progres-
sive educators who are seeking such changes as those described as taking part
at the University of Chicago. * * * In addition to cash, the above organizations
and the Carnegie Foundation furnished the highly valuable services of pro-
fessional staff members.
Psychological examinations, comprehensive achievement tests, cumulative per-
manent record forms, and related admission devices had to be planned and
perfected before much actual progress could be made in improving the certifi-
cate plan of admission by units. The best professional and technical abilities of
the universities and nonteaching research agencies were given to the construc-
tion of these instruments. Columbia, Chicago, and Stanford Universities were
the centers in which most of this research was done, but other universities made
notable contributions. The American Council on Education provided the general
administrative and supervisory direction necessary to coordinate such a large
cooperative undertaking. The philanthropic foundations provided $1,212,450 of
the sum necessary for the work.
The six regional accrediting associations have jointly and severally been
granted $150,000 as a supplement to other resources, for studies looking toward
the formulation and application of qualitative standards for accrediting high
schools and colleges. The north Central Association of Colleges and Secondary
Schools has alone received foundation grants totaling $115,000. This sum I 1 as
been devoted to developing standards for judging the effectiveness of the 285
institutions of higher education in the upper Mississippi Basin. It is expected
that the research will aid in a determination and statement of the aims, pur-
poses, and general philosophy of secondary and higher education. Aided by a
foundation grant of $25,000, the Committee of Twenty-one, representing the six
9 Ibid., pp. 129-130.
10 See sections on Carnegie Foundation and Hockfeller General Education Board.
T'AX-E&EMPT FOUNDATIONS 673
regional accrediting associations of the United States, is conducting a study of
accrediting that is focused on the secondary school. It has undertaken the
formulation of standards for accrediting high schools, and the outlining of pro-
cedures for their application and adaptation by the regional associations. Sev-
eral of the regional associations are individually undertaking minor studies
aimed at the solution of parts of the general problem. Educational and founda-
tion officials are united in the determination of supplement or supplant quanti-
tative accrediting with qualitative measures for admission to and progress
through high school and college. 11
According to Dr. Hollis, the method of the General Education
Board was preferable in many respects, particularly in that it was
more tolerant than the foundation of which he states: "The limita-
tion of funds, and the conception of the trust itself, as well as the
philosophy of its first president, tended to maintain a rigid pattern of
action. 12
He points out that the board, while it had a regard for high entrance
requirements, did not insist that colleges "conform to preconceived
general standards, regardless of actual local conditions." 13
It recognized that the difference in educational, financial, and social
conditions in various parts of the country made it impossible, even in
medical education, to achieve complete uniformity all at once, and that
to force the issue might merely result in changing the terms rather
than in fact raising standards. It was Dr. Hollis' opinion that the
failure to follow such a policy was "The basic cause for the early
bickering, strife, and only partial success of the foundation's college
admission efforts."
Much dissension has arisen over the use of the so-called unit and in
later years the Carnegie Foundation was to vigorously attempt to
disassociate itself from it. In that connection it should be noted for
the record that the foundation and the board did not invent the unit
as a device for measuring progress through secondary schools but they
did contribute to securing its more effective enforcement. They there-
fore share with the schools the responsibility for introducing it into
secondary education although its retention past its usefulness may be
charged to the schools through their accrediting associations.
Both the foundation and the board were in agreement that the chief
offenders against standards were the various Protestant religious
denominations, 14 and both agreed that there should be concentration
of effort in a few colleges which would have the effect of eliminating
the weak colleges through lack of finances and other causes. However,
the methods selected by the foundation and the general education
board differed materially.
The bylaws of the foundation provided that no institution could
share in its pension fund if it remained under the control of a religious
group. The foundation also required that all affiliated institutions
have a 4-year curriculum and at least 6 full professors. (This auto-
matically established the size of the liberal arts colleges, namely, six
departments) ; 15 and required a minimum endowment or in the case
of State universities, an annual income.
"Ibid., pp. 144-14H.
"Ib1d„ pp. 133-134.
M Ibid., p. 135.
u Ibid., p. 138.
15 After 1921 this was Increased to 8.
674 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The board approaches the problem by "systematic and helpful cor-
roboration with the religious denominations, which took the form of
direct support of the stronger of such colleges. 16
Both the foundation and the board had concluded that by withhold-
ing funds from "the weak and tottering or superfluous colleges," as
they were referred to, these institutions would die a natural death, con-
solidate or perhaps even coordinate with institutions selected by the
foundations as pivotal institutions. However, he adds, the results
have not borne out that conclusion — the Office of Education Directory
listing some 2,000 institutions of higher education in this country.
Moreover, according to Dr. Hollis, the waste, duplication and lack
of articulation are still evident, and according to Dr. Hollis were as
bad after the first World War as those facing the foundation at the
turn of the century.
* * * Accompanying this dissatisfaction with organization was an even
greater disapproval of the traditional content of the courses and their organiza-
tion into curricula. The manner of being admitted to and guided through these
offerings was reopened for further study. In short, after 1918 there was a new
start in efforts to resolve the confusion existing in American higher education,
and the philanthropic foundations influenced most of these undertakings.
After the war the philanthropic foundations entered into a more satisfying
relation with higher education. They were no longer forced to seek change by
indirection; rather, they directly concentrated their grants and influence to
remedy some of the more glaring deficiencies that had been revealed by the war.
A more favorable public attitude toward philanthropic trusts made their new
approach possible. They now directly cooperated with the professional forces
of higher education in a new attack on the problems of organization to assure
institutional operation that would be more effective in modern life.
By 1920 about 90 percent of all college admissions were by the certification of 15
or more variously required units of the type of credit described by Learned.
Under this system inadequately prepared students were congesting the colleges.
At the same time the system hampered the effectiveness of the high school in
serving the much larger group of students who would not enter college. Those
college and foundation officials who subscribed to Learned's indictment of me-
chanical credits began to pool their money and talents to provide means for im-
proving college entrance devices, and this soon led to more fundamental studies
of the relations of secondary to higher education.
In addition to what may be termed "direct" activities, i. e., funds
granted to institutions themselves, or for projects in the teaching or
educational field all of the Carnegie and Rockefeller Foundations
made direct contributions of funds to the following organizations :
Adult Education "
American Council on Education
Cooperative Test Service
Educational Eecords Bureau
Institute of International Education
London School of Economics
National Education Association
Progressive Education Association.
Because of the effect of several universities on education, founda-
tions' grants to these institutions have been tabulated. The institu-
tions are :
Columbia University
Columbia University Teachers College
University of Chicago
Lincoln School.
« Ibid., Dp. 138-140.
17 Including grants to American Association for Adult Education.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 675
THE CARNEGIE CORPORATION OF NEW YORK— THE
CARNEGIE FOUNDATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT
OF TEACHING
Carnegie Corporation of New York
establishment, purposes, assets
The Carnegie Corporation of New York was the last of the philan-
thropic agencies created by Andrew Carnegie, and he served as its
president until his death 8 years later in 1919. It was established "to
promote the advancement and diffusion of knowledge and under-
standing" among the people of the United States and the British
Dominions. Of its $135,336,869 endowment, $12 million is applicable
to enterprises in the British Dominions and Colonies, at the discre-
tion of the trustees. As of 1951 the assets of the corporation were
sm^o^io. 1
The corporation is managed by a board of 15 trustees, 4 of whom
are ex officio, 3 are presidents also of other Carnegie funds, and the
president of the corporation.
GENERAL POLICY
The corporation makes grants chiefly to universities, colleges, and
other organizations which the trustees believe can contribute to "the
advancement and diffusion of knowledge and understanding," and
devotes its entire annual income (except that necessary for adminis-
trative purposes) to such grants. Its officers do not attempt to keep
in active touch with programs, nor plan nor direct projects, full
responsibility being assigned to the recipient.
Question 1. From 1911 to 1952, inclusive, the last year for which
the annual report is available, the corporation made funds available
to:
Appro priations
Universities, colleges, and schools in the United States 1 — _ $56, 838, 274
For adult education 2 3,012,875
American Council on Education 1, 012, 875
Columbia University 2, 687, 265
Cooperative Test Service, Educational Records Bureau, Graduate
Record, College Entrance Examination Board 90, 924
Institute of International Education 2,366,326
National Citizens Commission for the Public Schools 750, 000
National Education Association 261, 500
Progressive Education Association 8 76,485
Teachers College 3, 727, 650
University of Chicago 2, 419, 450
Total 73, 243, 624
1 Does not include Columbia University Teachers College or University of Chicago.
* Including grants to the American Association for Adult Education.
8 Now called American Education Fellowship.
Funds were given to other organizations, such as the National Ad-
visory Council on Radio in Education, whose activities were less
directly related to education, but time did not permit exploring them
in detail. A brief description of the type of activity carried on by the
1 Basic Facts About Carnegie Corporation of New York and Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching, published by the corporation in August 1952.
676 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
American Council on Education, the National Education Association,
and the Progressive Education Association is given in section 2 of
this summary.
Prior to 1930 the major grants of the corporation were f of library
buildings, laboratories, endowment of liberal arts colleges, develop-
ment of such colleges through endowment, endowment of medical
schools at universities, and endowment, buildings, and support of
Carnegie Institute of Technology.
Question 2. All quotations are from the annual reports, and in
order to avoid undue length, a few have been selected from many of a
similar nature. They appear in the annual reports under the head-
ing of "General Education," unless otherwise indicated.
1937 report
Page 20:
The field of general education, even within the limits of scholarly inquiry is
too broad for any single foundation to cover, and, fortunately, more than one
foundation is now active therein. The present activities of the corporation,
working in close cooperation with the Carnegie Foundation, are the following :
tests and measurements and records; comparative education, notably in the
study of examinations; professional education, particularly in its relation to
professional practice and to supply and demand in personnel ; the relation of
research to professional education, especially in the graduate school ; new de-
velopments of undergraduate instruction, supported chiefly by direct grants to
institutions; and the maintenance of what may be called educational clearing-
houses, as in Australia and New Zealand. * * *
Page 21 :
* * * Meanwhile, the problems of professional standards in general, the rela-
tions of the professions to one another and -to other branches of education, the
needs of the public and the degree to which these are being met, have all been
comparatively neglected. The corporation has had opportunity to study these
questions rather closely in connection with training for librarianship, but its
interest includes all professions, large and small, as well as what may be called
emerging professions, that is, callings which are gradually assuming a profes-
sional status. It is the writer's belief that there is a definite need today to build
up a body of doctrine which will be based on reality and not on tradition. * * *
Pages 21, 22 :
This general situation opens opportunities to foundations for activities of the
greatest usefulness, but, unless the programs themselves are carefully organized
and rigidly limited in scope, there is a real danger lest they tend to draw the
foundation itself outside its proper sphere of action. It is essential not only
that the foundation be insured completeness of relevant £ata for its study, but
also that it be freed from any compulsion to press for action as a means of
justifying its conclusions. While it may advise frankly concerning changes,
when its advice is sought, it should never agitate for reforms or use its money
or influence as a means to a political end.
1938 report
Pages 31, 32, 33 : According to the report, on the basis of the general
purpose of each of the grants made in the period since 1933-34 for
educational studies, they might be divided as follows :
To understand the student $50, 300
To improve teaching 83, 100
To show what is being done 129, 350
To inform as to educational policy and organization 51, 000
To find out what the students learn , _i_ 191, 500
Various other purposes 35,600
Total _ 540,850
* * * * * * ; *
TAX-EXEMPT v FQUNRA33QNS 67X»
The longest unbroken series of grants of this character made by the corpora-
tion has been voted to the Institute of Educational Research of Teachers College,
Columbia University, and it should be of interest to summarize the results of
cooperation with a small group of workers under distinguished leadership. In
the 16 years from July 1, 1922, the researches in psychology and education at
Teachers College under the direction of Dr. E. L. Thorndike have been supported
by grants from the Carnegie Corp., totaling approximately $325,000. The find-
ings are reported in nine books or monographs already published (without cost
to the corporation), and nearly a hundred scientific articles, doctoral disserta-
tions, and special reports.
Nor must it be overlooked that, since science advances as a whole, the work
of gathering data which others may use, repeating experiments, adding here
and there to what others have proved, may in the long run be more valuable
than even such striking direct contributions.
191$ report
Pages 14, 15 : In the 1942 report the corporation lists as its three
major grants those made to the University Center in Atlanta, the
Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, and the New York Uni-
versity in New York.
Referring to the Atlanta enterprise ($150,000), it is noted that far
greater grants had been given to it by the General Education Board.
Its purpose is stated to be :
* * * a long-planned integration of the work of the several institutions of
college grade in that area under terms which will give Atlanta the advantage of
a modern university without requiring the constituent colleges to sacrifice their
identities. * * *
The grant to New York University ($100,000) was made with the
understanding that the fund would be used for current purposes
rather than for endowment.
Pages 16, 17 — The report then continues :
Two grants totaling $65,000 were made to the Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching for continuation of cooperative work with a selected
list of graduate and undergraduate schools in developing criteria for admission
and in providing* a basis for judgment as to ability of those already admitted
to candidacy for degrees. A more detailed statement on these studies will
appear in the 1942 report of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of
Teaching. Additional grants totaling $21,000 were also made to the foundation
for two programs undertaken in cooperation with the American Council on
Education. Another grant of $10,000 was voted for the formulation of special
tests to be used in selecting the persons to be trained under the defense-training
program of the United States Office of Education.
As was recorded in last year's report, one of the largest grants voted in 1940-41
made possible the establishment of the Institute of Adult Education at Teachers
College, Columbia University. It is a pleasure to report that the institute
is rapidly defining a useful role for itself, and that the American Association
for Adult Education, now maintained entirely from membership fees, increased
its dues-paying constituency during a year when most voluntary professional
associations were suffering a decline in membership.
*******
Among the adult education programs initiated with corporation support in
prewar days, none has proved more timely than that of the Council on Foreign
Relations. The regional committees organized in 12 strategic cities across the
country have met regularly for discussion of international problems and have
joined in producing an interesting summary of these discussions under .the title
of Some Regional Views on Our Foreign Policy, 1941." An appropriation of
$24,000 was voted for the continuation of this program.
In the United States it need no longer be argued that provision for the educa-
tion of adults is quite as properly a responsibility of the Government as is
education at other age levels. The war, indeed, has offered dramatic evidence
of the social cost of not affording such opportunities, and the numerous training
programs which have been improvised under pressure during the past 2 years
67^ TfBg&mR-'m&mgffim*?
may be expected to continue, with suitable changes and improvements, into peace
times. * * *
Question 3. The excerpts from the annual reports given above, as
well as the quotations from Dr. Hollis' book, are pertinent to this ques-
tion also. No attempt will be made to include all the statements in the
year books of the corporation. Moreover, it is believed that 1 or 2
in addition to those already given will suffice.
According to Dr. Hollis a the foundations are exercising the initia-
tive accorded them to spend most of their money on exploratory work
that seems only remotely connected with improving college education
on the theory that research must first be done in general education in
order to efficiently accomplish college reorganization.
1880 report
Page 14 :
One of the developments which has produced the most lively debate in educa-
tional circles has been the widespread movement to reinvigorate the ideals
embodied in the term "liberal education." The goal is rather widely accepted,
but there is substantial difference of opinion as to how to achieve it. The general
educationists offer a variety of curricular reforms. Advocates of the Great
Books press their claims for the wisdom of the past. Humanists decry the shift
of interest from certain disciplines to certain other disciplines. Our colleges are
literally awash with formulae for salvation ; all of which is healthy and part of
the process of getting things done in a democratic, heterogeneous, and always
vigorously assertive society.
*******
* * * President Conant and his coworkers at Harvard have provided leader-
ship in this direction with their efforts to develop a new approach to the teaching
of science as a general education course. During the current year the corpora-
tion made a grant to Harvard for the continuation of this work.
The social sciences also have a significant role to play. Serious men cannot
accept the view of those humanists who rhapsodize over Platonic generalizations
about society but resent the efforts of the modern social scientist to test these
generalizations. * * *
* * * Developments such as the new American studies program at Barnard
College (see p. 19) and the courses in Asiatic civilization at Columbia University
(see p. 21) would be impossible without vigorous participation, indeed, vigorous
leadership, on the part of the humanistic fields. But there is nothing in the
humanistic fields which offers a guaranty of salvation. They too have turned out
narrow technicians when they might have been turning out educated men. They
too have often ignored the central concerns of liberal education.
SUMMATION ']
Based on the foregoing, it can be assumed :
Carnegie Corp. contributed large sums of money to projects which
can reasonably be considered "in the educational field" as shown by
their activities during the past 40 years. 8
1911-20 : In mittiona
For library buildings, laboratories, or endowment in liberal arts
colleges — ^ , $3. 5
For development of liberal arts colleges chiefly through endownment 2. 8
1931^0,:
For research, study, publication ; grants-in-aid to individuals . , 5
For development of women's colleges chiefly through endowment 1. 5
For development of fine arts and music in academic institutions 2. 8
For adult education projects . 4,
1 Ibid., p. 150.
* Basic Facts About Carnegie Corporation of New York and Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching, p. 11.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 679
1941-50:
For area studies in universities **•
For research by faculty members; grants-in-aid 4. o
For education in American citizenship and history &■ »
For improvement of educational testing !• 2
For training in social science-- ■ j».
For research in social sciences *• "
For studies to improve education 4.
For graduate education in the South 1-2
For education in international affairs 4.
Total i 3&
This total does not include grants :
In millions
To Carnegie Institute of Technology $24.3
For development of schools of medicine , 10.
For support of dental research and education 1. $
For educational projects and for development of educational institutions
outside the United States , , — - — -„ — 4.
For development of college libraries and librarianships ; library schools
or library interests , ,, . , ,_ 8. ti
For free pensions for college and university professors 21. 5
For others : such as Church Peace Union, Red Cross, etc__ 3.
Total 72. 7
Grand total 110. 7
As mentioned previously, the corporation has contributed $1,237,711
to the work of the National Education Association, the Progressive
Education Association, and the American Council on Education, and
their combined activities affect education at all levels.
In the early years of the activities of each of these organizations,
the amount contributed by the corporation was undoubtedly a siz-
able portion of the funds available to each of them.
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching
establishment, purposes
The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, created
by Andrew Carnegie in 1905, was the third of the philanthropic
agencies he endowed and like the others has its own funds, trustees,
administrative offices, and conducts its own affairs.
Fifteen years before when he was appointed a trustee of Cornell
University, Mr. Carnegie had been shocked to find that college teachers
were "paid only about as much as office clerks." In the summer of
1904 while on his annual visit to Scotland, he renewed an association
with Henry S. Pritchett, a member of Theodore Koosevelt's Cabinet
and president of Massachusetts Institute of Technology; and from
that meeting grew the establishment of a fund to provide pensions
for professors in American universities.
There have been two distinctily different phases of the foundation's
activities :
1. Activities designed —
to provide retiring pension without regard to race, sex, creed, or color, for the
teachers of universities, colleges, and technical schools —
within those institutions —
who, by reason of long and meritorious service, * * * shall be deemed by the
board of directors to be entitled to the assistance and aid of this corporation
680 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
or who by reason of old age or disability, may be prevented from continuing
in the active work of their prof ession ; to provide for the care and maintenance
of the widows and families of the said teachers; to make benefactions to char-
itable and educational institutions, and generally to promote the cause of
science and education * * **
2. Activities designed —
(ft) In general, to do and perform all things necessary to encourage, uphold,
and dignify the profession of the teacher and the cause of higher education
within the United States, the Dominion of Canada, and Newfoundland aforesaid,
and to promote the objects of the foundation, with full power, however, to the
trustees hereinafter appointed and their successors from time to time to modify
the conditions and regulations under which the work shall be carried on, so
as to secure the application of funds in the manner best adapted to the condi-
tions of the time. 4
Until 1913 the foundation confined its activities to the first phase,
partly at least because the attitude of the founder was somewhat
different than that of its president, Henry Pritchett. The difference
is indicated in an exchange of correspondence between the two. Mr.
Pritchett apparently was imbued with the idea of coordinating col-
leges and universities into a more cohesive group. 3 In December 1905,
he suggested as a name, "The Carnegie Foundation for Education,"
and wrote Mr. Carnegie :
While the primary purpose * * * is the formulation of a pension system, our
charter enables us to undertake any sort of educational work for colleges and
universities * * * it may well happen in the future that our activities may
cover a far greater range with respect to education.
The name did not strike the founder favorably :
The Carnegie Foundation for Education does not strike me favorably.
"Foundation" seems superfluous. "Carnegie Professional Pension Fund" or
"Carnegie Educational Pension Fund" seems to me better. It might be well,
I think, for you to ask suggestions for the name from the (directors) * * *
I don't think that you should disguise the fact that it is first and foremost a
pension fund. The closer union it may bring about is incidental, though
important.
Dr. Pritchett, still president in 1916, indirectly confirms this : 4
The development of a pension system along sound lines is the most direct duty
of the trustees, a responsibility all the more important because the pension prob-
lem, while a living problem in every State and Province of the United States and
Canada, is still involved in confusion.
AS THE FOUNDATION VIEWED IT 20 TEARS LATER
The 1923 report includes the following paragraphs on page 20:
The relation of the foundation to educational development and the studies
which it has carried on with respect to various current problems in education
have occupied a large part of the activities of the officers and of the staff of
the foundations. These studies, which have been published in 16 bulletins, have
concerned themselves not only with special problems such as those of medical
education, of legal education, and of engineering education, but also with the
underlying fundamental questions of education which relate to good teaching,
to the content of the curriculum, and to the cost of public education. The estab-
lishment of the American Law Institute during the present year, by one of the
most distinguished groups of judges, lawyers, and law teachers ever brought
1 New York State Charter, granted May 8, 1905, surrendered when congressional charter
granted.
2 Sec. 2 (b) of congressional charter, granted March 10, 1906. Sec. 2 (a) contains in
slightly different language original provision as to pensions.
a Fruit of an Impulse, p. 56.
* 11th Annual Report, 1916, p. 17.
TAX-EXEMPT KOUNDATIONS 681
together,. is directly related to the studies on legal education which the founda-
tion has carried out through its division of educational inquiry. Experience
seetrti to indicate < that fm agency sucli as*the foundation,' staMrhg apart from
the immediate institutional life and having no constituency of its own, can do
Its greatest service by enlisting in such studies the most able students in, different
institutions, and that out of the contact brought about in such groups between
teachers, administrators, and school systems, members of the staff of the founda-
tion, and others there is reached a degree of knowledge and of judgment with
Tegard to these problems which commands a larger respect and attention than
can be had from the isolated statement of any one individual.
Outside of the direct activities involved in the study and establishment of
pension systems and in the educational inquiries and reports that have been
■made, the officers of the foundation have necessarily been involved in a number
of educational relations of a temporary character having to do with the inaugu-
ration and operation of the educational organizations of the country, such as
the College Entrance Examination Board, the Association of American Colleges,
the Association of American Universities, the American Council on Education,
the American Association of University Professors, and the various other organ-
izations of those involved in the work of teaching or organization of education.
It has thus come about that during the 18 years of its history, the foundation,
while pursuing in the main two specific lines of activity — the one having to do with
pensions and pension systems, the other haying to do with educational studies,
has nevertheless, by the very fact of these activities, been involved in greater
or less degree with all those complex relations in education which arise by reason
of the relationships between the schools of a nation; and the various bodies that
have to do with education. The foundation has sought, during these years to
he hospitably minded toward any agency in education that cared for its co-
operation.
According to Dr. Savage, 5 Dr. Pritchett's "pet idea" was realized
by Carnegie's grant to the foundation for establishment of a division
of educational inquiry, and credits "Pritchett's patient persistence."
Dr. Hollis quotes Dr. Pritchett as saying : 6
I put forward the suggestion, that while the primary purpose of Mr. Carneg'e's
gift was the establishment of a pension system there would be involved in the
administration of this gift a scrutiny of education which would not only be de-
sirable in the granting of pensions, but would go far to resolve the confusion that
then existed in American higher education. There was no general requirement
of admission , to college. Many institutions that were colleges in name, were
really high schools, and many universities were scarcely more than modest col-
leges. I suggested the notion that in the administration of this agency, some
■criterion would have to be introduced as to what constituted a college.
ASSETS
The foundation received from its founder and the corporation
$32,700,000. 7 Its affairs are managed by a board of 25 trustees and
according to the report for 1951 had assets of $12,874,718.84.
In the 1939 report of the foundation appears the following:
The cooperative arrangement between Carnegie Cooperative of New York and
the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching respecting projects
in the field of higher education has now been in effect for about 15 years. Its
success has been unqualified. A series of 148 grants totaling $1,449,393 have
been made by the corporation for 85 projects, of which 14, involving 34 grunts,
have been carried on in the offices of the foundation, and 71 projects involving
$1,087,350 in 114 grants have been carried on under the auspices of 41 other
educational institutions or bodies. To these the foundation has allocated and
transmitted the funds provided by the corporation. On account of 3 projects
which could not be carried out as planned, $25,000 was returned to Carnegie
Corporation of New York through the foundation. The total of projects effective
over the past 15 years is therefore 82.
« Ibid., p. 109 ; Annual Report for 1913, pp. 21-22.
« Annual Report for 1935, p. 120.
* Basic Tacts, p. 13.
682 TAX-EXEMPT FOTOSIDATIGNS
GENERAL POLICY
In the distribution of pensions, the foundation set up standards
which must be met by institutions in order to be eligible for pension
awards—designating those who met the requirements as "accepted"
and others as "not accepted." a
While as outlined earlier the foundation's activities began as a
pension award system for college and university professors, this was
shortly used as a springboard into secondary education with the ex-
planation that :
1. It was necessary to define a college in order to grant the pension.
2. In order to define a college it was necessary to establish standards
of admission and of college work.
3. If standards of admission were to be established it was necessary
to prescribe the courses of study in secondary schools which would fit
the student for the college — as defined.
The purposes of the foundation set out in its charter 9 clearly
place this agency among those whose sole or primary purpose is of
an educational nature, as evidenced by excerpts from its annual
reports.
From 1905 to 1951, inclusive, the last year for which complete
records are available, the foundation made appropriations to:
Universities, colleges, and schools in the United States $62, 763, 560
American Council on Education ^___ 90. 550
Cooperative Test Service, Educational Records Bureau, Graduate
Record, College Entrance Examination Board 2,850,000
National Education Association 10 115,000
Progressive Education Association" 92,000
Total 66, 011, 110
The foundation, like the corporation, gave funds to the organiza-
tions mentioned previously whose activities were also of an educa-
tional nature. 12
Question 1 and question 2. It would be difficult.to draw a line of dis-
tinction between the quotations applicable to each of these questions,
and for that reason both questions will be covered together.
All quotations are from the foundation's annual reports unless
otherwise indicated, and are only a few of the many similar quotations
which might have been chosen, but which have. been ommitted because
to include them would be merely repetitious.
Even after establishment of the division of educational inquiry in
1913 13 the greater portion of foundation funds were appropriated for
pensions, or matters directly pertaining thereto, as shown by the fol-
lowing summary of grants from 1905-51 : Xi
Retiring allowances and widow's pensions $59, 298, 459. 42
Support of Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association 513, 465. 37
Grants to colleges to initiate pension plans 775, 678. 79
Pension studies 30, 012. 87
Total 60, 617, 616745
8 Later changed to "associated" and "nonassoclated."
8 See pp. 26-27.
10 Although the foundation appropriated funds to NEA (either its own or the corpora-
tion's) Mr. Pritchett himself was strongly opposed to the association's lobbying activities
for a National Department of Education (annual report for 1933).
11 See footnote 3, p. 17.
12 See p. 17.
13 By grant of $1,250,000 from corporation. Total grants of the corporation were
$32.7 millions.
14 Basic Facts, ibid., p. 14. ' '
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 683
Studies in education (by the division) 2, 115, 265. 68
Merger of testing agencies ___ 750, 000. 00
Publications 45, 632. 18
Cooperative educational studies and research administered but
, no^diseeted by foundation *_____:. _____! 1, 161, 990. 34
Southern colleges : To stimulate undergraduate teaching 873, 775. 54
Total 4, 203, 963. 74
However, this does not mean that the foundation's activities affected
only pensions. Even as early as 1907 15 it was becoming more and
more a factor in determining not only what constituted a college, but
what type of organization was best for conducting a college, including
such matters as the size of the board of trustees, whether or not the
president of the college should also be president of the board, and the
extent to which alumni should have a government of the institution.
The report, referring to fears expressed that "a great gift like this in
the hands of a Limited number of men might prove a centralized power
which would hinder rather than aid the progress of education," dis-
counted such a possibility because the trustees were "in the main college
and university presidents who have come up through the profession of
teacher, and who are not likely to lose touch with needs and aspirations
of teachers." 16
1911 report
Page 46 — The report deplored the fact that :
* * * lack of supervision, both on the part of the General Government, and to
a large extent, on the part of the State governments, has resulted not only in an
extraordinarily large number of institutions bearing the name college or uni-
versity, but it has resulted also in the fact that these institutions have become
involved in local rivalries, so they represent in very small measure national
ideas on national purposes * * *.
The first "inquiry" of the new division, which expanded rapidly, was
into the training of teachers and the standards of medical and other
professional schools. From the first, emphasis was put on coordina-
tion between colleges and universities, between these units and second-
ary education, and between both and elementary education. The
"individualism," "class feeling," and "competition" of educational
literature was deplored as was the fact that universities were critical of
colleges, that State supported and privately endowed institutions
viewed each other with suspicion ; and relations existing between col-
leges and secondary schools, and between liberal and vocational edu-
cation were referred to as "armed neutrality and open hostility."
Before long, there was to come the recommendation that since edu-
cational foundations were conspicuous illustrations of educational
cooperation, educational institutions could do no less. The school
system is referred to as :
* * * an elaborate hierarchical device that undertakes through successive
gradations of textbook makers, superintendents, principals, and supervisors
to isolate and prepare each modicum of knowledge and skill so that it may safely
be entrusted to the humble teacher at the bottom, who is drilled for a few weeks
only, if at all, in directions for administering it ultimately to the child. Mean-
while, superintendents and school boards publicly measure their success by
numbers enrolled, by buildings and material equipment added, and by multplied
kinds of schooling introduced ; and the people are taught to accept this as educa-
15 2d annual report of the president and treasurer, 1907, pp. 54-55.
16 Ibid., p. 63.
49720 — 5i — pt. 1 44.
684 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
lion. Such perversions are ample comment on the thoughtlessness of our for-
mula. Where is the school system that by enlightened and fearless propaganda
has convinced its public that education consists flrst of all in the superior quality
and skill of its individual teachers, and is otherwise meaningless*
Qualitative education, as contrasted with the present dependence upon esti-
mates by bulk and housing, signifies a complete transformation in the character
and status of the teaching profession. Such a transformation once properly
accomplished, the other necessary modifications will inevitably take care of
themselves. America, with its hundred millions of people, needs upward of
three-quarters of a million men and women to represent her with the childhood
and youth of the Nation in a deliberate and thorough educative process. If wars
are to cease and democracy is permanently to hold the field, it will be a democracy
with sufficient wisdom to confide this, its most responsible task, to its most
competent citizens, and to prepare them thoroughly for its safe discharge. Gen-
uine education, in a sense consistent with any honest vision of its meaning, can
proceed only through immediate contact with keen minds fully informed and
persuaded of what the rising generation may become, and dedicated to such
achievement. Persons so equipped will in general not be had unless the dis-
tinguished rewards and opportunities of life are attainable through teaching
careers. Moreover, these careers must not be mere avenues of promotion, as in
notable cases today, but must constitute and be recognized as opportunities for
achievement in themselves. Any other course means simply to exploit the future
in the interest of the present by abandoning its control to second-rate minds.
Plato's provision that the head of the state be the director of education expresses
the unavoidable perspective in a completed democracy.
Marked changes must ensue in our present system of schooling if we undertake
to carry out an honest interpretation of our avowed aim of "universal education"
by making it not only universal but also education. In the first place our ele-
mentary and secondary school systems must be thoroughly integrated into one
homogeneous and indivisible unit — a varied but coherent 12-year career for mind 1
and body, whereby, as a youth, each citizen may acquire a certificate of the
health, intelligence, and character that underlie a successful society * * *
Dr. Hollis 17 comments on the foundation's activities and policies
30 years later :
The foundation had had a real battle to enforce entrance standards in the rela-
tively homogeneous endowed liberal arts colleges concentrated in the East. With
■the decision to admit State universities to the benefits of the Carnegie pension
jsystem it was faced with the problem of applying on a nationwide scale what was
in fact a regional accrediting standard for a group of superior institutions.
Educational, financial, and social conditions in this larger territory were so
uneven that many of the university officials in the South and Middle West urged
a flexibility in Carnegie standards in keeping with the realities the colleges faced.
After considerable study of the problem the foundation from considerations of
"logical consistency" (and possibly financial expediency), decided to leave the
rules a Procrustean bed for all affiliated institutions. The foundation was not
constructively interested in how a college might reach eligibility, but it did advise
the State universities not to raise their standards faster than the high school
could meet them, even if that meant delay in securing pensions. Apparently
the attitude was that growth could be stimulated by extending the hope of future
affiliation.
ELEMENTARY EDUCATION
Considerable attention was given to the place of both the elementary
and secondary schools in the educational picture. However, there is
indication that after 15 years of effort the foundation itself questioned
some of the results.
1903 report
Pages 78, 83 : Commenting that after the schools became free from
the hard-and-fixed curriculum and new studies intended to broaden
student opportunities were added, the report adds that the resulting
overexpansion was not entirely advantageous. As an example, it was
" Philanthropic Foundations and Higher Education, p. 133.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 685
pointed out that the organization and quantity of subjects had dis-
placed individual contact, relegating to an inferior position the fun-
damental truth that education does not consist in the amount of infor-
mation absorbed but rather in the ability to think clearly and to apply
the information accumulated to one's everyday life.
It would, therefore, seem to be fundamental that the elementary school should
accept clearly its own limitations. It should make sure that the teaching which
is common to all children is done with a sharp discipline of exact requirement,
but that a very large part of what is meant to be of cultural value shall be through
•exercises not followed by examinations, but having as their spring of influence
the contact with cultivated and inspiring personalities.
Under this regime the elementary-school curriculum would be greatly
•simplified.
In the second place, while we must in a democracy proceed upon the assumption
that every child is entitled to the fundamentals of an education in the elementary
school, we must frankly recognize that a large proportion of the children of
the Nation have neither the desire nor the intellectual ability to complete the
work of a secondary school with profit to themselves. In no nation in the
world is there a task comparable to that of the American teacher in the second-
ary schools, patiently and devotedly toiling to bring through to graduation
multitudes of pupils who have neither the desire nor the ability for intellectual
work. The high school should no longer be the refuge for mediocrity that we
have made it.
This involves no discrimination against any class or group in the body politic.
The stupid or indifferent child is just as likely to be the son of the well-to-do
as the son of the day laborer. Teachers are coerced by parents, by school direc-
tors, by all the influences that can be brought to bear, to keep in their classes
numbers of students whose happiness and usefulness are to be found elsewhere.
Again read without relation to other foundation activities, and
without linking with other organizations whose work it supported,
this, this too is a reasonable statement of a condition which might
need study in order to advance teaching. However, in view of the
results attributable to these other organizations in the installation
of "uniform standards and curriculum in the public schools," the
foundation's statements here and elsewhere in its reports cannot be
studied alone.
One of the present conditions, for example, which is undoubtedly
attributable to the philosophy reflected in this quotation is the 100-
percent promotion rule which exists in many communities, and to
w r hich serious objections have been raised.
EUROPEAN" INFLUENCE — PRUSSIAN, TRENCH, ENGLISH
At this point it should be noted that throughout the foundation's
reports the references are too numerous to mention — there are com-
parisons between education in this country and education in Europe,
always to the detriment of the United States. 18
The foundation began its exchange of secondary school teachers
with Prussia in 1908 and the report for 1909 expressed the hope that
more secondary schools and those in charge of them would begin to
appreciate the benefits to be had from this exchange. 19 This report,
and those for succeeding years, stressed the advantages of incorporat-
ing into the American secondary school, the same principles found
in Prussian schools with the object of raising the quality of teach-
es Annual reports for 1910 (pp. 35-39) ; 1911 (pp. 36-38) ; 1913 (pp. 57-59) ; 1924
.(pp. Ill, 116), and others.
" Annual report for 1909, pp. 46-48.
686 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
ing and education in the United States to a level comparable to that
of Prussia.
SECONDARY liEVEIi
In addition to cooperation and financial assistance to the National
Education Association and the Cooperative Test Service, the founda-
tion itself carried on work in this field. Again, there are numerous,
examples which might be cited from the reports, but only one or two-
will be included here.
192 Jj. report
Page 107 et seq. : Pointing out that the secondary school is the-
determining factor in the educational structure, the report goes on.
to state that through its entrance requirements the college dominates
the educational program of the high school, yet at the same time
there is an unsatisfactory situation as far as the colleges and pro-
fessional schools are concerned, because of :
* * * a growing army of high-school graduates who lack the qualities of
intellectual training which would fit them for fruitful college study. They
have indeed complied with the formal college requirements for admission, but
they have not learned to use their minds. A large number of the unfit are-
eliminated in their freshman year, a process neither wholesome for the college-
nor just to those thus summarily dismissed.
The report recommends as a remedy :
The college can take the first great step by a sweeping change in its entrance-
requirements. Instead of requiring a dozen subjects and accepting a passing
mark on all of them, it must test on a few fundamental subjects on which it will
demand a very high order of performance and accept the work of the secondary
school in all other subjects. To accept a passing mark of 60 percent has proved
demoralising alike to high school and college, to teacher, and to pupil. In
fundamental subjects a high order of performance must be secured. This con-
dition complied with, the college can leave the secondary school free to educate
in its own way.
Here again it should be noted that no evaluation is made of this
objective,, the particular means taken to achieve it; nor is it pertinent
whether the results have been good or bad.
In 1928 the foundation began its study of the relations of secondary
and higher education in Pennsylvania. This study continued for
several years with funds supplied by or through 20 the foundation
($365,091.36), and formed the basis not only for studies of a similar
nature both in this country and abroad, but in the publication of a
number of pamphlets; and its recommendations have since been put
into effect. 21
1929 report
Page 85 :
To meet the need for a suitable record a new form was devised and is now
published by the American Council on Education. On this record a student's
ratings in high school and college are presented graphically and comparatively
over a period of years so that his particular mental pattern appears at a glance
together with the tendencies of his intellectual development. Space is given
for standard test and achievement ratings of whatever nature, and provision
is "iade for appropriate personal data on the same comparative and chrono-
logical basis, thus presenting an integrated history of a student's educational
growth with the pertinent details.
20 From the corporation.
21 The most notable example is probably this suggested form which was recommended by
the Progressive Education Association for use in the schools.
TAX-EXS1®T F^^DATIONS 687
COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY LEVEL
There can be no doubt that the foundation carried on many activi-
ties at this level, not the least of which were those in connection with
its pension fund. One of the expressed hopes of the founder and
others was that by this method (removal of financial worries) retire-
ment would be accelerated, and new blood brought into this part of
1 he educational process.
Another example is the experimental program of grants-in-aid to
instructional staffs in colleges and universities of the Southeastern
States which became operative during 1946-47. The organization
of this program was based on 4 strategically located centers, each
■composed of 1 university group and at least 5 neighboring under-
graduate colleges. Each center received annually $15,000 from the
foundation, which it matched with $5,000 of its own funds.
2946-47
Page 24 : The purpose of the program as stated in the report, is to
•advance graduate instruction —
* * * to vitalize it ; to improve its quality ; to help focus attention in college
and university alike on the need of improving the general quality of undergradu-
ate teaching. That is the general aim. The choice of ways hy which one might
seek to achieve this general aim is wide, but, as far as this experimental program
is concerned, there has been selected and agreed upon as eminently appropriate,
■one single way. That particular way is the encouragement of faculty members
to carry on research and creative activities in fields in which they are interested
and competent. The underlying theory is simple : It is that a teacher actively
engaged on a scholarly research or creative project of his own choosing has more
than a fair chance of maintaining an intellectual activity which directly and in-
directly serves to raise his scholarly self-respect and to make him a more effec-
tive teacher. The primary interest of the program, then, is in the teacher and
his research, not in the instutition and its administrative and curricular prob-
lems and physical resources.
The foundation appropriated $700,000 for this program 22 for a
5-year period, 1946-51.
Graduate testing program, cooperative test service, merger-national
testing service: A related activity of the foundation has been the
graduate testing program, carried out primarily with funds from the
corporation with small additions from the foundation itself.
19J^-Ip5 report
Page 13 :
* * * In 1929, when the foundation was in the midst of an examination
study of secondary and higher education in the State of Pennsylvania, the Gen-
eral Education Board made a grant of half a million dollars to establish an or-
ganization for experimental service in the construction and use of educational
examinations. This impressive gift, routed through the American Council on
Education, was intended for the use of its committee on measurement and
guidance which had long been active in studying personnel problems under the
direction of the late Herbert E. Hawkes, then dean of Columbia College. There
was thus set up an agency known as the Cooperative Test Service which for
many years under the wise and vigorous leadership of Dr. Ben D. Wood promoted
the construction and use of excellent educational examinations- in many fields.
One of its notable achievements, developed shortly before the war, was the insti-
tution of a common qualifying examination for teachers which has been spon-
sored by the superintendents of a large number of the most important American
cities. This test and the graduate record examination possess many features in
common.
32 Funds furnished by the corporation.
688 TAX-EXEMFI FOUNDATI0N&
With the outbreak and early progress of the war the active functioning of this
agency fell into abeyance although its resources continued to accumulate. Its
recent revival under a reorganized committee of control was inevitable in view
of the indispensable part which objective iDeasuremerit has played in the educa-
tional preparation of theAa-med Forces and appears destined to retain in postwar
institutional activities.
With the revived Cooperative Test Service the graduate record office has be-
come closely affiliated in the broader matters of policy. Since February 1945,
Dr. Kenneth W. Vaughn, the associate director of the Graduate Record Office,
has also held the corresponding position with the Cooperative Test Service.
This mutual relationship has contributed much to effect a common understand-
ing between the two organizations and to coordinate their efforts in a common,
cause.
19 Ifi-Jfi report
Page 33 : The following year there is further reference to this sub-
ject which culminated in the merger of the testing agencies in 1947. 23
* * * In the main, this report directed attention to the compelling advantages
to American education of such a unification and to the principles on which a na-
tional nonprofit agency might be organized. The committee in the final para-
graph of its report indicated that its primary concern, in this phase of its work,
had been with tlie principles involved, and that no attention was given to the
practical problems of the several organizations whose cooperation was essen-
tial to the plan. It expressed the hope that its preliminary report would stimu-
late the fullest possible discussion of the practical means of arriving at the
objective.
In the spirit of this statement the committee recommended the establishment
of a new organization to be known as the Cooperative Educational Testing
Commission. It recomended further that the College Entrance Examination
Board, the Educational Records Bureau, the Cooperative Test Service, and Na-
tional Committee on Teachers Examinations of the American Council and the
Graduate Record Office of the Carnegie Foundation, join in the creation of this
commission, and that in addition to assets contributed by these constituent
agencies not less than $750,000 be provided by foundation grants.
While the report mentions serious objections raised by representa-
tions of the two largest agencies concerned, namely, the American
Council on Education and the College Board, it does not state what
the objections were, but added that there was no disagreement as to the
need for a central agency, or as to its purposes.
MERGER OF TESTING SERVICES, 1947 REPORT
Page 40 : s
On December 19, 1947, the Board of Regents of the University of the State
of New York granted a charter to Educational Testing Service and thus enabled
it to begin operations January 1, 1948. Besides the final grant of three-quarters
of a million dollars from Carnegie Corporation of New York, there were added
to the resources of the new Service approximately $450,000 from the College
Entrance Examination Board and the American Council on Education. The
initial capital assets of Educational Testing Service therefore reached about
$1,200,000.
Three trustees ex officio served in perpetuity : the president of the
American Council on Education, the chairman of the College En-
trance Examination Board, and the president of the Carnegie Founda-
tion. The board consists of from 9 to 25 trustees.
THE CARNEGIE UNIT
From the beginning the reports placed increasing emphasis on the
desirability oi "coordinating" all schools throughout the United
23 1947-48 report, p. 40, J ;ri'S3SH
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 689
States, and the setting up of so-called units which became known as
Carnegie units.
Dr. Savage, 24 tracing the influence of Dr. Pritchett in the expansion
of the foundation's activities into other than pension fields refers to
it as a "useful quantitative device" ; and the earliest known reference in
the public records of the foundation is in 1906. Undoubtedly the
foundation worked assiduously for its acceptance, and was successful.
When attacks began (as far back as 1909 ), 25 the foundation replied
that it was not standardizing, but merely working for uniformity in
entrance examinations, and later M that the use of the unit as originally
conceived and early promulgated did not tend to injure the educational
process, but it was the abuse at a later date by which "the individual
student was broken on the wheel of a mechanical device." The foun-
dation's attitude was : "What it has done is to make clear the standards
of the colleges themselves, and to throw the light of publicity on the
deviations from the standards they themselves have set up. 27
1947-48 report
Page 29 : This report contains a detailed account of the origin, use,
and merits of the "unit" which Dr. Savage closes with the following
statement :
Such in outline is the history of one aspect of American higher education in
which the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching had an im-
portant part. The foundation did not invent the term ''unit," nor its definition.
In a time of educational confusion such as the country was not again to see until
1945 Dr. Pritchett, for the foundation, used it as one instrument in an endeavor
to bring order out of chaos.
The fact that the Carnegie Foundation appears to have been the first philan-
thropic enterprise professedly to award grants upon carefully considered ap-
praisal of the American college, and, in connection with that appraisal, to use
the unit, as invented and defined by others, is probably what led a considerable
part of the academic world loosely to prefix to the word "unit" the name "Car-
negie." At any rate, the foundation has long considered the implications of the
phrase to be unmerited.
SUMMATION
From 1905 to June 30, 1953,^ the foundation spent $62,763,560 in
retiring allowances and approximately $5 million on studies and re-
search in education.
Like its sister agency, the corporation, the foundation has con-
tributed to the work of the National Education Association the
Progressive Education Association, and the American Council on
Education, as well as to such programs as the Cooperative Test Serv-
ice, the Graduate Record Service, and the College Entrance Examina-
tion Board. While the amounts contributed to these organizations
were not as substantial as those of the corporation, nevertheless we can
assume that their activities and the results thereof were acceptable
to the foundation. 29
24 Ibid., p. 102.
25 It was asserted that the "unit" was mechanical, tended to work against a true evalua-
tion of the individual, and that in pressing for it the foundation was attempting to impose
Standards of its own making on American higher education.
» Annual report for 1947-48, p. 26.
37 Annual report for 1909, p. 161.
! 28 48t^j annual report, 1952-53, p. 44.
28 See sec.* 2 for a description of the activities of each of these Organizations.
690 « TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
THE ROCKEFELLER FOUNDATION— GENERAL
EDUCATION BOAED
INTRODUCTION
The first of four philanthropic agencies created by John D. Rocke-
feller, Sr., was the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research in 1901 ;
the second was the General Education Board, limited to the promotion
of education within the United States and its Territories, established
in 1903; the Rockefeller Foundation, 1913; and the Laura Spelman
Rockefeller Memorial established in 1918 in memory of his wife. His
total gifts to each of these were : ^
The Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research $60, 673, 409. 45
General Education Board 129, 209, 167. 10
The Rockefeller Foundation 182, 851, 480. 90
The Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial 73,985,313.77
Total 446, 719, 371. 22
Note. — In 1928 the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial was consolidated with the
Rockefeller Foundation, with the exception of 1 or 2 specialized functions, which did not
fit into the foundation's program and which were transferred to a new organization called
the Spelman Fund of New York along with $10 million to carry on its work. This fund
has since been liquidated, as has the General Education Board (on Dec, 31, 1953, when
all its funds were entirely distributed).
One other agency in this field — the International Education Board,
to which he gave $20^050,947.50 — was created by John D. Rockefeller,
Jr., in 1923, because of the charter limitations of the General Educa-
tion Board. At this point it should be noted that the total of half a
billion dollars represented by the total of all Mr. Rockefeller's gifts,
is not the grand total of expenditures by his various agencies — it is
merely the principal to which must be added approximately the same
amount in income, which these agencies have also distributed, or yet
have to distribute.
REARRANGEMENT OF ACTIVITIES
The General Education Board carried on activities in the field of
education from 1902 to the end of 1953, but the Rockefeller Foundation
itself did not become active in the field of education for some years
after it was established, except to the extent that its work in the
medical, health, and agricultural fields may be considered educational.
The Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial operated only during the
decade 1918-28, and the International Education Board was in exist-
ence from 1923-38.
1928-29 report
Pages 3-6 : In the board's report that year, referring to the various
Rockefeller agencies, is stated that it was becoming evident that the
line between the activities of each was not clearly marked, resulting
in doubts on the part of the public as to the respective fields, and a
duplication of time and expense in the presentation of the same proj-
ects to two or more of the boards. A committee was appointed to study
the situation and to decide how the work might be carried on in closer
and more clearly defined cooperative relations. It recommended that
a new corporation, the Rockefeller Foundation, be created, into which
would be merged the former Rockefeller Foundation and the Laura
30 Story of the Rockefeller Foundation, Raymond B. Fosdick, p. lx.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 691
Spelman Rockefeller Memorial. A further recommendation was
extension of the scope of the new foundation to embrace as a major
function —
the advancement of knowledge in —
(1) the medical sciences,
(2) the natural science (taking over the program in foreign countries of
the International Education Board ) ,
(3) the social sciences (formerly carried on by the Laura Spelman Rocke-
feller Memorial), and
(4) the humanities ;
and the appointment of a director and staff for each of these fields.
The final recommendation was division of the field of education in
the United States between the Rockefeller Foundation and the General
Education Board, along definitely determined lines. The net result
of this was to create two Rockefeller agencies : The Rockefeller Foun-
dation, a broad and general operation; and the General Education
Board with activities limited to the promotion of education in the
United States.
According to this, "education" would fall into the orbit of the
board and "research" into that of the foundation. In the case of an
undertaking which embraces both objectives, the deciding factor was
the principal one, if the motive was education then it was a board
activity — if research a foundation activity.
The board from that time dealt chiefly with institutions rather than
with learned societies or research agencies. Also, it did not sponsor
individual research projects after that time except in educational
psychology and the educational processes that fell within its desig-
nated fields. Thus, the exclusive activities of the board after that
related chiefly to college education, public education and the processes
of education, the application of art to industry, and aid in accounting
methods and administration.
That year also the board withdraw from the field of medical educa-
tion because it felt that its part in the endeavor had been completed.
During the period 1913 to June 20 ; 1929, the board had contributed a
total of $87,154,319.33 to universities and colleges for whites, and
$18,191,328.39 to colleges and schools for Negroes, exclusive of any
projects carried on in such institutions with board funds.
The Rockefeller General Education Board
establishment, purposes, assets
Since the board 31 was the first of the Rockefeller philanthropic
trusts in the field of education, its activities will be summarized first.
As in the case of the Carnegie agencies no attempt will be made to
evaluate the merits of this agency or the Rockefeller Foundation,
and this section of the summary like the other sections will be devoted
to ascertaining whether it is possible to find answers to the questions
raised in the opening statement.
However, it should be noted that when Mr. Rockefeller gave the
$1 million to the board in 1902, he referred to the fact that the imme-
diate work Of the board would be in studying the needs and aiding
to promote the educational interests of the people of the Southern
81 The General Education Board will be designated throughout this section as the board.
692 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
States, and during the early portion of its life, it was in these areas
that the board's activities were concentrated. It should also be noted
that the first permanent endowment, in 1905, amounting to $10 million
was expressly designed to furnish an income —
to be distributed to, or used for the benefit of, such institutions of learning at
such times, in such amounts, for such purposes, and under such conditions or
employed in such ways as the board may deem best adapted to promote a com-
prehensive system of higher education in the United States. 82
This limitation does not appear in the charter of the board 33 and it
was later removed by Mr. Rockefeller in subsequent letters of gift.
Management of the board's affairs was in the board of trustees, con-
sisting of not less than 9 nor more than 17 in number, elected for a
3-year term. In following out its purpose it gave grants toward
the support of educational institutions, agencies, and projects, as well
as individual fellowships.
Although the board was created in 1902, the first published report
was in 1914 and it contains the following introductory note : 34
This volume gives an account of the activities of the General Education Board
from its foundation in 1902 up to June 30, 1914. The board has made annual
reports to the United States Department of the Interior and these have been
regularly printed in the reports of the Department; but no further report has
been hitherto issued, because, as the board's work was felt to be experiemental
in character, premature statements respecting the scope and outcome of its
efforts were to be avoided. After something more than a decade, tangible
results have begun to appear and to their description and consideration the
following pages are devoted. Henceforth, statements will be issued annually,
and from time to time, a more critical discussion like the present report will be
published.
In view of Mr. Rockefeller's deep interest in the South and southern
education, particularly elementary, the board at once set to work to
acquire a thorough knowledge of conditions in the Southern States
and surveys were made, State by State, culminating in a conference of
county superintendents in each State. These studies covered the
organization of the public-school system, its finances, the number and
character of school buildings, the number, training, and pay of public
schoolteachers, private and public secondary schools, institutions for
the higher education of women, schools for the training of teachers,
and schools, both public and private, for the education of Negroes.
1902-14. report «
Page 13: In a section entitled "Policy of the General Education
Board," the report states :
But the studies just referred to did more than supply facts. For out of them
a conclusion of far-reaching importance soon emerged. They convinced the
board that no fund, however large, could, by direct gifts, contribute a system
of jfublic schools ; that even if it were possible to develop a system of public
schools by private gifts, it would be a positive disservice. The best thing in
connection with public-school education is the doing of it. The public school
must represent community ideals, community initiative, and community support,
even to the point of sacrifice. The General Education Board could be helpful
only by respecting this fundamental truth. It therefore felt its way cautiously,
conscious of the difficulty, complexity, and delicacy of the situation.
As a statement of policy this language leaves nothing to be desired
and as referred to previously, in this respect the avowed intentions of
82 Letter of gift, June 30, 1905.
33 Art of Congress, January 12, 1903.
3i P. XV, annual report, 1902-14.
TAX-EXEMPT FQUNDATIGIStS' 693
the Kockefeller agencies were at variance with the avowed intentions
of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Question 1 and question 2. It is difficult, if not impossible, without
duplication to completely separate the quotations pertaining to these
two questions. For that reason and because they have equal validity
in providing answers to both questions, no attempt will be made to
distinguish between them.
Unless otherwise indicated, all quotations are from the annual
reports of the board, with the year and page as noted. Because the
activities of the board which relate to these questions are so varied
and also because they fall into certain more or less distinct topics
they have been subdivided.
ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION
1902-U report
Pages 80, 81, 83 : There is a certain amount of overlapping between
these two levels of education, and for that reason no dogmatic dis-
tinction has been made. Because it saw deficiencies in secondary edu-
cation in the South, the board approached the problem by selecting
a person or persons whose business it was to inform, cultivate, and
guide professional, public, and legislative opinions. Believing there
was need in every State for trained specialists in the field of secondary
education, it felt this individual should also "skillfully and tactfully
marshal all available forces for the purpose of securing concerted
action calculated in time to realize a secondary school system." Aware
of the lack of funds in the hands of the State departments of educa-
tion, or the State universities themselves, the General Education Board
then entered the picture and stated its willingness —
to make appropriations to the several State universities for the salaried and
traveling expenses of a professor of secondary education whose main and prin-
cipal work shall be to ascertain where the conditions are favorable for the estab-
lishment of public high schools not in existence; to visit such places and to
endeavor to organize in such places public high schools in accordance with the
laws of the State ; to endeavor to create in such communities a public sentiment
that shall permanently sustain such high schools, and to place the high schools
under such local leadership as shall give them intelligent and wise direction, and
he and the university shall exercise a fostering care over such institutions.
While stating that the board did not attempt either to indicate or
to dictate the lines along which the individuals should exert them-
selves, it describes their activities in the following terms :
In addition, the professors of secondary education were high-school evangelists
traveling well-nigh incessantly from county to county, returning from time to
time to the State university to do their teaching, or to the State capitol to confer
with the State superintendent. Wherever they went, they addressed the people,
the local school authorities, the county court, teachers, businessmen and business
organizations, county and State conferences, etc. They sought almost any sort
of opportunity in order to score a point. Law or no law, they urged their hearers
to make voluntary efforts toward a county high school, if a start had not yet been
made ; to add a grade or a teacher to a school already started ; to repair the build-
ing or to provide a new one ; to consolidate weak district schools into a larger
one adequate to town or county needs. Nor did they merely expose defects,
tender advice, and employ exhortations ; they not only urged the policy, but
nursed a situation. By correspondence they kept in touch with places already
visited ; from time to time they returned, to renew pressure or to recognize
achievement. * * *
694 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
During the 10-year period the board contributed $24,862 in 12
Southern States.
1916-16 report
Page 39 : The board held meetings those years on the question of
"needed reforms in elementary and secondary education, one out-
growth of which were the Occasional Papers 2 and %. However, the
Board was again quick to state that it was interested only in facilita-
ting the trial of "promising educational experiments tinder proper
conditions."
1918-19 report
Page 41 : The board continued to make sums available to the State
universities for a professor of secondary education and also made
funds available for departments of secondary education. These pro-
fessors of secondary education were urged and encouraged to work on
the high-school curriculum and organization as well as the improve-
ment of teachers in actual service and the administration and effect of
State subsidies and Federal grants, and it was around this time that
the subject of "public education" was included as a section of the
annual report.
Througnout its history the board divided its activities, devoting a
section to white colleges and universities, and a section to Negro
education.
1923-&4 report
Page 29 : The board states it was becoming increasingly clear that
the professors of secondary education had substantially achieved the
purposes for which they were originally supported.
That same report, in referring to the improvement in the State
departments of education in the Southern States, announced that it
had decided that the need was for trained men and women in the field
and with that object in mind it had appropriated in 1922, $50,000 to
provide scholarships for persons occupying important posts and
increased the sum to $80,000 during the year just closed.
The colleges most frequently selected were :
George Peabody College for Teachers
University of Chicago
Teachers College, Columbia University
Columbia University
Cornell University
University of Wisconsin
Harvard University
University of California
Hampton University
GENERAL EDUCATION INCLUDING TESTING AND ACCREDITING PROJECTS
The board began what it referred to as a general education program
in 1933 and it continued for about 5 or 6 years. It was during this
period that much of the work of the various testing and accrediting
agencies was being done, and for that reason much of the comment in
the reports is on that subject.
19S3-34- annual report
Page 4 : In this report there is the following statement :
From 1929 to 1932 the board gave its support to several projects for the im
provement of school and college relationships and for the intensive development
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 695
of quality in college education * * *. Through aid to institutions and to edu-
cational commissions, there were studies made of the accrediting, examining,
iind teaching procedures in force at a number of representative institutions and
within large areas of the country. At a few places controlled experiments were
carried on by the college administrative officers and staff having the respon-
sibility of selecting students and of organizing courses of study for both schools
and colleges * * *.
2933-31}, annual report
Page 5 : Referring to the critics of educational practice and their
request for new purposes rather than for further modification in
■existing routine, the report states :
It was pointed out that too little has been done to discover a form of education
universally useful to man in society today; that by formal or informal methods
every individual should be made familiar with the forces that he will encounter
in daily living; and that apart from special preparation for earning a livelihood,
he should be made ready for continuous participation in the responsibilities and
satisfactions of life to the extent of his individual ability.
The purposes of a general education for individual and social usefulness can
be stated, they believe, in a way that will have meaning for adults as well as
for younger students; the adaptation of methods for its attainment will then
he practicable through the processes of formal and informal studies. From
such considerations the board reached the conclusion that assistance through
the further definition and development of general education through appropriate
agencies' should be one of the purposes of its new program.
This is included at this time in view of the grants made later by
the board to other organizations and for types of projects.
BUILDING AMERICA
1935^36 annual report
Page 8: The report contains the following, under a subheading
"Reorganization of Subject Matter Fields — Society for Curriculum
Study 'Building America' " :
In the spring of 1935, a new ; monthly periodical was launched by the Society
lor Curriculum, Study with the assistance of funds- provided by the General
Education Board. The magazine represents an- attempt on the part of the
society to meet a long-felt need in secondary education for visual as well as
factual study of contemporary problems of our social, political, and economic
life. A characteristic feature of the publication lies in its emphasis upon pictures
and graphs as a means of presenting facts and indicating problems. Housing,
Men and Machines, Transportation, Health, Power, Recreation, and Youth Faces
the World are among the issues already published. Throughout the various
types of curriculum, ranging from instruction in subject matter to the newer
types organized around basic functions or major interests of society, Building
America studies are now being used in valuable organized visual aids and as
useful units of study. A further appropriation of $30,000 over a 3-year period
wa^ made-this year by the, board with a view to -developing the magazine to a
point where it will be self-supporting.
1935-36 annual report
Pages 11, 12, 13 :
The various educational accrediting associations of this country are in position
tto play a significant role in the reorganization of secondary education. For
some time now, they have recognized that important modifications in standards
;and procedures for accrediting are imperative and a cooperative attack on the
problem has been organized by a joint committee of 21 members representing
the several associations * * *.
$116,000 over a 2-year period has been made by the board to the
American Council on Education.
696 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
1936-37 report
Pages 60-67 : Grants were made that year in support of work by
organizations and institutions in the following types of activities :
General planning of educational reorganization : Taking Stock of the Mtoation,
discussion, and agreement upon the purposes of general education, and planning
for such reorganization of general education as is necessary to make it attain
these purposes.
Experimentation with the curriculum and evaluation of the results of such
experimentations.
Preparation of new instructional materials and experimentation with new
methods of teaching: This includes experimentation with new instruments of
education such as film and radio.
Recruiting, selection, and education of teachers : This includes the education*
of teachers already in service as well as work with prospective* teachers.
Study of youth : This includes studies of the special needs of various racial
and economic groups as well as studies of the needs of all young people for
normal physical, intellectual, and personal developments.
Again the organizations selected were the Progressive Education
Association, the National Education Association Department of
Secondary School Principals, and the American Council on Education
as well as the National Council of Parent Education, the American
Youth Committee, and Teachers College of Columbia University.
1936-37 annual report
Pages 63-65 : Dr. Robert J. Havighurst, director for general edu-
cation, made some interesting comments in this report. After
describing the evolution of the high school from the traditional func-
tion of preparing a small selective group for positions in business and
industries and another for institutions of higher learning to the educa-
tion of the mass of youth for more effective living. He states :
The kind of reorganization that the secondary schools must, undergo is deter-
. mined by social change in two different ways. As just indicated, social change
has brought young people of the most diverse capacities and interests into the
secondary schools which must develop a program to meet their needs. . In ad-
dition, social change is making new demands upon all people for understanding
human nature and society * * * for social change has made it necessary
to discard to a large extent old ways of living, many of which could be managed
by instinct, habit, tradition, and sheer untrained power * * * While we do not
need to develop new physical organs and adapt old ones to the new life, we do
need to develop new ways of living and to modify old ones. In this process a
reorganized program of general education can play an important part.
* * * one of the most significant things about the actions of educators and
educational organizations in this connection is their concern for making a re-
organized general education serve to help young people develop a loyalty to demo-
cratic ways of living and a confidence in democratic methods of solving social
problems.
He goes on to state that both the National Education Association
and the Progressive Education Association feel responsible for saying
in definite terms what they believe the ideals of democracy to be and
how education should be organized to lead to the realization of these
ideals. ,
These comments are particularly significant in the light of the ac-
tivities of the National Education Association and the Progressive
Education Association under what they term "democracy."
1937-38 annual report
_ Pages 66-69 : Dr. Havighurst, after pointing out some of the defi-
ciencies of the high school insofar as the mass of young people were
concerned, because the curriculum was geared to the requirements of
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 697
the minority, pointed out that while the board could not commit itself
to any one approach to these problems, it did extend assistance to a
number of responsible and representative organizations with the idea
of formulating what, in their opinion, are the underlying purposes of
a general education for young people and following that to recommend
a series of changes calculated to make "the systematic care and educa-
tion of youth serve these purposes better."
The board gave as its reasons for selecting the American Council
on Education,, the National Education Association, the Progressive
Education Association, and the regents of the University of the State
of New York the fact that "no truly representative canvass of existing
knowledge and points of view on the problems of youth could have
been made without the participation of these groups."
While Dr. Havighurst felt that the unanimity of these groups in
recommending a thoroughgoing reorganization of general education
at secondary levels was remarkable such unanimity would actually
appear to be only the logical result of the close cooperation and joint
projects of these groups and others, including Columbia University
and! Teachers College.
The board went on to give grants to those organizations which it
considered to be factfinding and deliberative and these were the same
groups which had done the preliminary studies.
In his report, Dr. Havighurst made the following comments on the
work of the American Historical Association, after referring to the
various deliberative committee reports which had been effective in
shaping American public education during the years roughly of the
board's operations :
: The present decade has produced several committees whose reports may be
ranked with those of previous decades. Four years ago the commission on social
studies of the American Historical Association published an important -series of
books dealing with the teaching of social studies in the schools. The committee
on orientation of secondary education (a committee of the Department of Second-
ary School Principals of the National Education Association) has produced two
reports— one on the Issue of Secondary Education and othe other on the Func-
tions of Secondary Education. The Federal Government's Advisory Committee
on Education is now issuing a series of statements on its various inquiries. To
these documents may now be added reports coming from several groups which
have reecived aid from the General Education Board.
He goes on to discuss the reports of the regents' inquiry as to the
character and cost of education in New York and those of the Ameri-
can Youth Commission. 35
One of the most important results was the issuance of three major
statements on educational policy by the Educational Policies Commis-
sion of the National Education Association entitled "The Unique
Function of Education in American Democracy," Charles A. Beard ;
the "Structure of Education in American Democracy," by George D.
Strayer; and "The Purposes of Education in American Democracy ,"
by William G. Carr, secretary of the National Education Association.
1938-39 annual report
Pages 87-93 : Referring to the board's program in the fields of gen-
eral education through the American Youth Commission of the
American Council on Education, the Educational Policies Commission
35 How Pare American Youth ? Homer P. Rainey ; Secondary Education for Youth in
America, Harl Douglass ; Youth Tell Their Story, Howard M. Bell.
698 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
of the National Education Association and the Commission on Sec-
ondary School Curriculum of the Progressive Education Association
and the inquiry staff of the New York State Board of Regents (report-
ing that much of the work had been completed or was nearing com-
pletion) Dr. Havighurst continues : "And is now serving not only as
a basis for changes in the curricula of many secondary schools but as
an incentive to experimentation with a variety of procedures for the
care and education of young people."
sp sp "K v •P >P V
Page 93 : Dr. Havighurst, referring to the activities of the board
states :
Aid to experiments with the curricula of secondary schools and junior colleges
and evaluation of the results of such experiments has been an important part of
the board's work in general education. Grants for work in this area have included
such undertakings as the Progressive Education Association's 8-year experimental
study of the 30 schools, the American Council on Education's Cooperative College
Study, and the Michigan Secondary School Curriculum Study * * *. The inter-
est was continued by appropriations that year including a continuation of the
National Education Association civic education project, one of the major objec-
tives of which was the improvement of civic education in the United States with
particular stress on the importance of developing in young people an intelligent,
appreciative, and active loyalty to democracy.
191ft annual report
Page 4 : A total of some $8,500,000 had been appropriated, the effects
of which, the report states, it was too early to judge. But the report
continues :
But it can be said with considerable assurance that the studies and experi-
ments which have been aided by the board under its program in general education
have made significant contribution toward a better understanding of the problems
of youth in an age of rapid social change * * *. Undoubtedly, projects aided by
the board had stimulated a widespread interest in the development of ways for
improving the care and education of young people ; they have built up a new and
much-needed body of organized psychological, physiological, and social knowledge
about youth ; and they have set in motion systematic planning on the part of insti-
tutions and national organizations for a continuing consideration of problems
involved in the preparation of youth for the democratic way of life.
•Jp *& *J* ^9 5p i|» ifi
Page 76 : Dr. Havighurst once again devoted a special section of
his report to discussing the program in child growth and development
which the board had been supporting since 1933, continuing the inter-
ests evidenced by the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial. From
1933 to the close of 1940, $1,032,888 had been appropriated for studies
of adolescents ; $519,543 for studies of infancy, and $173,000 for fel-
lowships, conferences, and special studies. In 1940 the board re-
moved the earmarkings of the various sums which prior to that time
had been segregated for different phases of the board's programs and
that year, 1940, also marked the end of the general education program
which began in 1933.
191$ report
Page 34: Referring to the National Citizens Commission for the
Public Schools, the report states :
Among the most promising projects for rehabilitating the public schools was
that begun during the year by the National Citizans Commission for the Public
Schools, New York. This laymen's commission was established upon the advice
oi a number of leading educators, and under the chairmanship of Mr. Roy E.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 699
Larsen and is arousing latent grassroots interests in the improvement of public
education. By means of studies, conferences, printed materials, addresses and
publicity the committee intends to bring about community participation in
behalf of better school administration, better instruction and more generous
support for local educational needs. In publicizing examples of good school and
community practices, the Commission hopes to assist thousands of communities
in their efforts to build stronger schools. This is the first laymen's attempt to
deal with this important educational problem. Toward expenses of its first
year, the board appropriated $50,000.
1950 annual report
Page 45 : The following year, reporting on this commission the re-
port states : "The Commission has stimulated group action by example
rather than by direction." Good practices have been publicized, con-
ferences and study groups have been encouraged, and in response 973
local citizens' committees have been set up across the country to deal
with local school problems. The report goes on to state that regional
offices have been established and subcommittees set up, and the board
appropriated $75,000 for use over the next 2 years.
COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES
1902-lk report
Pages 142, 143, 148 :
The three main features of the policy of the general education board in deal-
ing with higher education may therefore be expressed as follows :
(1) Preference for centers of wealth and population as the pivots of the sys-
tem;
(2) Systematic and helpful cooperation with religious denominations;
(3) Concentration of gifts in the form of endowments.
The board tentatively decided that an efficient college should enjoy
an income from endowment covering from 40 to 60 percent of its
annual expenditures and from these and subsequent reports it would
appear that grants from the board were held out as an incentive to
institutions to put themselves in this financial position. This proce-
dure is in no wise unusual and was contingent upon the institution
itself raising matching or greater sums. And again, no criticism is
made of this approach, that such grants were in education fields, and
selected educational fields and somewhat too, selected educational in-
stitutions, is only pertinent in relation to this question.
Another item which the board refers to as safeguarding the property
of the institutions was to give special attention to the business meth-
ods of the institutions to whom grants were made and on this point
the report states : "* * * The board was indeed bound to exercise as
much care in the distribution of its income as in making investment of
its principal. For this reason, the business management of colleges
applying for contributions has been carefully scrutinized with a view
to suggesting such improvements as might be advisable." From this
it is reasonable to assume the board at least to a degree decided upon
what were efficient methods.
The board itself admits that its grants were in the nature of incen-
tive grants, and of this there can be no doubt, and at this stage in its
operations the board also freely admitted that many years would have
to elapse before the main task in which the board was assisting could
even be approximately completed, but it felt that the board's gift
served an indispensable purpose as leverage.
49720—54— pt. 1 45
700 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Until 1915 the board's activities were grouped into the following
divisions :
(1) Appropriations for colleges and universities
(2) Medical education
(3) Education in the Southern States, including white rural schools, Negro
rural schools, and secondary education.
(4) Farm demonstrations
(5) Educational research
In the following years the title selected was somewhat different,
but the fields of activity remained practically the same, with profes-
sional education becoming a section around 1920.
LINCOLN SCHOOL
1916-17 report
Pages 48-49 : This report contains the first mention of the grants
made to Lincoln School, and the board states that this is an example
of the service that can be performed in "support of educational experi-
ments." It goes on to state that the Teachers College of Columbia
University had requested the board to provide the funds needed to
conduct a school which endeavored "to organize a liberal curriculum
out of so-called modern subjects." The report compared this to its
work in the farm demonstrating program and added : "In addition
to its primary and essential task — that of endeavoring experimentally
to construct another type of education — the Lincoln School will, in
the judgment of its promoters, assist in developing a critical attitude
throughout the field of education."
192I,,-25 report
Page 21 : The board decided that year that the Lincoln School had
a permanent function to perform and it made initial appropriation of
$500,000 to Teachers College toward endowment. Referring to its
activities later, 36 the board states: "During recent years the appro-
priations of the board to colleges and universities have been mainly
directed to the development of graduate activities." And declaring
that a fine line cannot be drawn, it continues : "The board is now look-
ing to the development of graduate instruction and research."
1925-W annual report
Pages 36-37 : In reporting its appropriation of $500,000 toward the
endowment of Lincoln School, at the discretion of Teachers College,
the board quotes from the annual report of Dr. Russell, dean of
Teachers College, as follows :
Eight years ago, with the support of the general education board, we estab-
lished the Lincoln School for the purpose of experimenting with the materials
of instruction and methods of teaching suitable to a modern school. The success
of the undertaking has exceeded all expectations from the standpoint both of a
school and of an experiment station.
SUMMATION
Based on the foregoing :
1. The board contributed large sums of money to projects in the
educational field.
2. In the course of its activities the board has made grants to the
American Council on Education, National Education Association, and
36 1927-28 annual report.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 701
the Progressive Education Association and others in the following
amounts :
Universities, colleges, and schools in the United States $257,157,581
For adult education 50,000
American Council on Education 4,841,005
Columbia University * (7, 607, 525)
Cooperative test service, Education Records Bureau, graduate
record, college entrance examination board 3,483,000
Lincoln School of Teachers College 1 (6,821,104)
National Citizens Commission for the Public Schools 150,000
National Education Association 978, 312
Progressive Education Association 4, 090, 796
Teachers College 1 (11, 576, 012)
University of Chicago 1 - (118,225,000)
Total 270, 750, 694
1 Grants to these institutions are included in amount shown for universities, colleges,
and schools.
The Rockefeller Foundation
establishment, purposes, assets
As mentioned in the section dealing with the board, the foundation
was the last agency created by Mr. Kockef eller which is still in exist-
ence. The amounts and dates of his gifts to the foundation 37 were :
1913 _ $34, 430, 430. 54
1914 65, 569, 919. 46
1917 25, 765, 506. 00
1917 5, 500, 000. 00
1918 , 1, 000, 000. 00
1919 50, 438, 768. 50
1826 37, 000. 00
1927 _ , 109, 856. 40
Subtotal 182, 851, 480. 90
1929 " 182, 851., 480. 00
Total " 241, 608, 359. 74
The foundation's affairs are under the direction of a board of 21
trustees, elected for 3 years, and its charter 40 states as its purpose "To
promote the well-being of mankind throughout the world." As of
December 31, 1952, its assets were $167,890,851.75 and its income for
that year was $16,893,519. Both principal and income may be spent.
According to the information filed with the Cox committee 41 by
the foundation, its expenditures from May 22, 1913, to December 31,
1952, 42 were :
For land, buildings, and fixed equipment $48,232,370
For endowment and capital funds 70,003,956
For current support of institutions, agencies, projects, and fellow-
ships 340, 101, 279
Total 458,337,605
For 15 years after its creation the foundation placed its major
emphasis on public health and medical education, although a division
37 This term will be used in this section to refer to the Rockefeller Foundation.
38 Funds from the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial.
39 Annual report for 1952 gives $316,220,894 as received from donors.
40 Incorporated by special act of New York State Legislature, 1913.
"And incorporated in annual report for 1052, latest available.
4S Does not include expenditures of Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial prior to
consolidation.
702 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
of studies had assigned to it several miscellaneous interests, including
the training of nurses, aid to dispensaries, human aspects of biology,
and anthropology. In time its programs and those of the other Rocke-
feller agencies began to overlap, and in 1928 after an extended study
a plan was evolved whereby all programs of the four Rockefeller
boards relating to the advance of human knowledge 43 would be
concentrated in the foundation.
The expenditures of the foundation from 1913 to December 31,
1952, in fields of major interest were :
Appropriations for the social sciences, humanities, medicine and
public health, and natural sciences and agriculture have been
excluded. 44
While the foundation as mentioned has disclaimed any credit for
results, we can assume that their contributions would not have con-
tinued had there not been some measure of approval of the activities
and the results. Here again, since the foundation is an operating
agency only in the field of public health and agriculture, the results of
the agencies selected -for contributions are pertinent, and particularly
insofar as there have been traceable and evident effects in the educa-
tional field as the result of the agencies' activities, they are attributable
to the foundation itself.
The work of the agencies aided by the foundation have already
been described briefly elsewhere, with the exception of the Institute
of International Education, which is quite evidently in the field of
education, and that description will not be repeated here. It is suffi-
cient to state that the results of their activities are apparent.
Public health and medical sciences $227, 981, 638
Natural sciences and agriculture 43, 335, 198
Social sciences " 63, 775, 805
Humanities 26,810,321
Total 361,908,962
The foundation, as well as the board, 46 sought to influence higher
education largely through the universities and the associations of
learned societies, but no attempt will be made to cover the contribu-
tions of the foundation or the board to the latter group of organiza-
tions. According to Dr. Hollis, 47 the foundation profited by the
experience of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of
Teaching (whose methods in this field have been discussed earlier)
and thus avoided much of the criticism that was directed at that
a.<?ency. Perhaps another reason was that the foundation came into
being after a decade of public awareness, but it should be noted that
at its inception the foundation was subjected to severe attack when
it applied for a congressional charter, and (although the board had
been granted one in 1903) so great was the opposition that the matter
was dropped.
For whatever reason, the annual reports of the foundation are much
less outspoken in their evaluation of their activities and merely state
in narrative and statistical terms the grants made each year. How-
43 Later expanded to include the dissemination and application of knowledge.
44 Any overlapping is very slight and does not affect the validity of these figures.
* 5 Does not include $55,339,816 disbursed by Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial prior
to consolidation in 1929.
"This term will be used throughout this section to refer to the Rockefeller General
Education Board.
** Philanthropic Foundations and Higher Education.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 703
ever, a glance at these grants over the years will substantiate the state-
ment that the foundation has been active in the field of education
throughout its existence and in some specialized aspects (such as
teacher training and the like) it has been particularly active since the
early thirties.
Moreover, this is confirmed by the extensive answers of the founda-
tion's Cox committee questionnaire (sec. E). 48 In the preliminary
comment to that section there is a statement of the policy of the
foundation which can be summed up in the last sentence : "We are
ready to state what we have done, but much of the assessment of its
worth must be left to others."
19Jf8 annual report
Page 7 : Within recent years there has been a brief statement which
conveys the foundation's own estimates :
The chartered purpose of the foundation with its wide scope and its absence
of preconceived or specialized interests has in a quite informal and undersigned
manner caused the foundation to become one of the crossroads of the scientific,
educational, and scholarly world.
SUMMATION"
In addition to its direct grants to colleges and universities, the
foundation appropriated the following sums from 1929-52 :
Universities, colleges, and schools in the United States 1 (esti-
mated) $335, 000, 000
For adult education 3,435,500
American Council on Education 1, 235, 600
Columbia University (1929-52) - 33, 300, 000
Institute of International Education 1, 406, 405
London School of Economics , 4,105,592
National Education Association 31, 900
Teachers College 1, 750, 893
University of Chicago 2 60, 087, 000
Total 440, 352, 890
1 Does not include appropriations made to Chicago University, Columbia University,
Teachers College, or the London School of Economics.
* Includes grants of $35 million by John D. Rockefeller, Sr.
While the greater portion of its expenditures have been in the field
of university and college education, it has also contributed to the work
of the American Council on Education, the National Education Asso-
ciation, and the Progressive Education Association (as shown by the
foregoing table) , and also to adult education generally.
Question 3. It is apparent that each of the Carnegie and Rocke-
feller agencies referred to have carried on ' activities at all levels of
education, either as an operating agency or through its choice of
institutions and other organizations.
Among the organizations selected have been : The American Coun-
cil on Education, the National Education Association, and the Pro-
gressive Education Association, the Institute of International Edu-
cation and the National Citizens Commission for the Public Schools.
*> P. 79 of Rockefeller Answers to Questionnaires.
704 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The American Council on Education is in the nature of a coordi-
nating agency between the Government and educational institutions
and organizations, but also carried on projects which affect education
at all levels.
The National Education Association and the Progressive Educa-
tion Association concentrate on primary and secondary schools.
The Cooperative Test Service, the Educational Records Bureau, and
the Graduate Record and College Entrance Examination affect edu-
cation at all levels.
The Institute of International Education carries on its activities in
secondary schools and at college and university levels.
There is considerable evidence that the efforts of the first three
of these organizations, to a greater or lesser degree, have resulted in
standardization of methods, both as to teaching (including testing
and training of teachers) and administrative practices in the field
of education.
Even those not in the educational field recognize that today there is,
in effect, a national set of standards of education, curricula, and meth-
ods of teaching prevailing throughout the United States. As a prac-
tical matter, the net result of this is nothing more nor less than a
system of education which is uniform throughout the country. More-
over, in the case of the National Education Association, one of its
goals for the "united teaching profession in 1951-57," is stated on page
13 of the National Education Association Handbook for 1953-54
to be:
A strong, adequately staffed State department of education in each State and
a more adequate Federal education agency.
*******
^Equalization and expansion of educational opportunity including needed State
and national financing.
The Carnegie and Rockefeller Foundations mentioned have con-
tributed $20,249,947 to these four agencies (or almost 9 percent of the
total of all their grants in this field of activity) ; 49 and since the sup-
port has continued up to now it indicates approval and sponsorship
of the activities of these agencies and their results.
Among the institutions selected have been: Chicago University,
Columbia University (including Teachers College) and the Institute
of International Education, and the London School of Economics.
These institutions have received contributions amounting to $194,-
100,589, or approximately 22 percent of the total grants to all uni-
versities, colleges, and schools, including the amount contributed to
pension funds by the Carnegie foundations. If the pension funds
are excluded, then the contributions represent 27 percent of the funds
given universities, colleges, and schools.
tB Excluding grants to universities, colleges, and schools.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
705
In addition, with the exception of the Rockefeller Foundation, all
contributed to the various testing and accrediting agencies which were
finally merged into the Educational Testing Service (aided also by
grants from these foundations) .
The amount and distribution of the appropriations are summarized
in the tabulation following:
[In millions of dollars]
Carnegie
Corporation
Foundation
Rockefeller
Board
Foundation
Total
Universities, colleges, and schools in the
United States. -
Adult education
American Council on Education
Columbia University
Cooperative Test Service, Educational
Records Bureau, Graduate Record,
College Entrance Examination Board. . .
Institute of International Education
National Citizens Commission for the
Public Schools -_
National Education Association
Progressive Education Association
Teachers College
University of Chicago
Lincoln School of Teachers College
London School of Economics
56.838
3.013
1.013
2.687
.091
2.366
.750
.262
.076
3.728
2.420
62.764
.092
2.850
257. 158
.050
4.841
7.608
3.483
335.000
3.436
1.236
33.300
1.406
.115
.092
.150
.979
4.091
11. 576
118. 225
6.821
.032
1.750
60.087
4.106
Total.
711. 760
6,499
7.182
43. 595
6.424
3.872
1.000
1.388
4.259
17.054
180. 732
6.821
4.106
994.492
The quotations already given from the various reports relate also
to this question regarding the effects of foundation activities in educa-
tion, and therefore only 1 or 2 additional references will be included.
Probably the most recent self -evaluation by one of this group is that
contained in the 1952 Report of the Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching, at page 14 :
1952 report
Page 14 :
One of the developments which has produced the most lively debate in educa-
tional circles has been the widespread movement to reinvigorate the ideals
embodied in the term "liberal education." The goal is rather widely accepted,
but there is substantial difference of opinion as to how to achieve it. The gen-
eral educationists offer a variety of curricular reforms. Advocates of the great
books press their claims for the wisdom of the past. Humanists decry the shift
of interest from certain disciplines to certain other disciplines. Our colleges are
literally awash with formulae for salvation ; aU of which is healthy and part of
the process of getting things done in a democratic, heterogeneous, and always
vigorously assertive society.
* * *
President Conant and his coworkers at Harvard have provided leader-
ship in this direction with their efforts to develop a new approach to the teach-
ing of science as a general education course. ^During the current year the corpo-
ration made a grant to Harvard for the continuation of this work.
706 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The social sciences also have a significant role to play. Serious men cannot
accept the view of those humanists who rhapsodize over platonic generalizations
about society but resent the efforts of the modern social scientist to test these
generalizations * * *.
* * * Developments such as the new American studies program at Barnard
College (see p. 19) and the courses in Asiatic civilization at Columbia University
(see p. 21) would be impossible without vigorous participation, indeed, vigorous
leadership, on the part of the humanistic fields. But there is nothing in the
humanistic fields which offers a guaranty of salvation. They, too, have turned
out narrow technicians when they might have been turning out education men.
They, too, have often ignored the central concerns of liberal education.
A statement on this point made in the early years of its existence is
found on page 87 of the 1902-14 Report of the General Education
Board under the heading "Favorable Legislation" :
It can fairly be said that in framing and putting through this legislation, the
high-school representatives supported by the General Education Board have in
every instance taken a leading part. They would, however, be the first to refuse
any undue credit. The organizations already mentioned — the Peabody Board,
the Southern Education Board, and the Conference for Education in the South —
had greatly stimulated the demand for adequate and orderly educational facil-
ities ; in every State, local bodies and organizations, State and local officials were
working along one line or another to arouse educational interest.
The section concludes with results in terms of increased schools,
buildings, and so forth, and the amounts appropriated by individual
States for new and improved buildings.
In a later report of the board (1939-40, p. 22) in a section entitled
"How Have the General Education Board's Activities Been Related
to These Happenings ?" there is the following paragraphs :
Board-aided projects have been associated with nearly all the changes de-
scribed above. It is obvious, however, that these changes have been called
forth by the broad social changes of the times, not by the educators, not by
educational foundations. If educational changes are well adapted to the broad
social changes of the times, they find a place and are incorporated in the
continuing social processes.
However, based on the records of the board itself, no other projects
which might possibly have resulted in "changes" 50 were selected
except those board-aided projects.
The board, in appraising its contributions to the American Council
on Education's Cooperative Study of Secondary School Standards
(1947-48 report, p. 113), wrote:
Under an earlier program of the General Education Board appropriations were
made to the American Council on Education for the study of standards for the
secondary schools. The regional accrediting associations for whom the study
was undertaken were interested in developing methods of evaluation that would
take account of significant qualitative factors, so that less reliance would
need to be placed on the purely quantitative criteria in the evaluation of
secondary schools. The study committee worked out and tested new criteria and
procedures and published its conclusions in four volumes : How To Evaluate a
Secondary School, Evaluative Criteria, Educational Temperatures, and a General
Report. The committee anticipated that these materials and procedures would
need review and revision about every 10 years.
e0 That is, those such as the Eight- Year Study, the Study of Secondary School Curriculum,
and the Cooperative Study of General Education.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 707
Since 1938, almost 25 percent of the secondary schools of the country have
used the new procedures. In the Southern and Middlewestern States, especially,
criteria have been widely used and found helpful in raising the general level of
secondary education. Meanwhile, further educational research, experience
with war-training programs, and changing relations between secondary schools
and colleges have made a general revision of the criteria desirable. The accred-
iting associations have requested such a revision. An appropriation of $24,500
was made to the American Council on Education for use by a joint committee
of the accrediting associations toward the cost of revising the materials and
procedures developed in the earlier investigation.
While it is quite true that at the present time $1 billion is not par-
ticularly impressive when compared with endowments and Govern-
ment spending in related fields such as research and the like, two
things should be borne in mind. First, at the time the foundations
first began making grants to institutions and agencies, they were the
biggest and only contributors on that scale in the country. Second,
all have had the same policy of giving grants to inaugurate a particular
type of project or organization, withdrawing financial aid when it
has become self-supporting or aroused the financial interest of other
individuals or groups. Dr. Hollis, 51 writing about this phase of
foundation giving, states (excerpt from chapter 1, introduction, Phil-
anthropic Foundations and Higher Education, by Ernest Victor
Hollis) :
Although foundations are important for the volume of money they distribute
to cultural undertakings, the essential nature of their influence is not in the
aggregate of their contributions. Rather it lies in the fact that the grants may
be large enough to provide the essential supplement necessary for foundations
to hold the balance of power. In the 1924 fund-raising campaign of 68 leading
universities there is an illustration of the powerful influence that foundations
may exert even when the amount they contribute is only a small percentage of
the total. They contributed only 18.1 percent of the funds raised, but they were
reputed to have exerted a dominant influence on the purposes and plans of the
campaigns through being the largest single donors. The average size of grants
from foundations were $376,322.76 as compared to an average of $5,902.75 from
individuals who gave $1,000 or more. About 3.4 percent of the individual givers
contributed 59.3 percent of the total fund but because the average of their gifts
were not large enough to be considered an essential supplement, they were reputed
to have exerted a negligible influence in the policies and programs of these 68
colleges. If such vital and strategic potential powers are a possibility in
foundation activities, it should be known whether these new social institutions
are committed to a philosophy of social and cultural values in keeping with
the needs of a rapidly changing social order.
Dr. Hollis discusses the matter of foundation influence in education
at some length, and according to him foundations have influenced
higher education notably and increasingly "toward supporting social
and cultural ideas and institutions that contribute to a rapidly chang-
ing civilization * * * the chief contribution of the foundations
(being) in accelerating the rate of acceptance of the ideas they chose
to promote."
" Ibid, pp. 3-4.
708 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
In his opinion the foundations had been "exercising the initiative
accorded them to spend most of their money on exploratory work that
seems only remotely connected with improving college education" * * *
"on the theory that research must first be done in general education if
valid college reorganization is to be accomplished."
He asks the question, "To what extent and in what direction has
higher education in the United States been influenced by the philos-
ophy, the administration, the activities, and the money of philan-
thropic foundations?" 52
In reply he writes :
In order to answer one must consider not only the degree of educational control
or dominance that is exercised by the foundations, but also whether their activi-
ties indicate progressive participation in a living culture that looks toward the
future, or whether they indicate a static or even reactionary tendency that
attempts to maintain the existing social order. While categorical answers
cannot be given, enough evidence has been introduced to remove discussion from
the realm of biased assertion or mere conjecture.
_ To the question, "To what extent and in what direction has American
higher education been influenced by philanthropic foundations?" 53
To what extent and in what direction has American higher education been
influenced by philanthropic foundations? An answer to the original question
may now be ventured. This study concludes that the extent is roughly $680
million and the direction increasingly toward supporting social and cultural
ideas and institutions that contribute to a rapidly changing civilization. Foun-
dations at the start were dissatisfied with existing higher education and they
have promoted programs that have, for the most part, been in advance of those
prevailing in the institutions with which they have worked. To a large extent
these ideas were originated by frontier thinkers within the professions; the
chief contribution of the foundations has been in accelerating the rate of
acceptance of the ideas they chose to promote.
In contending that these ideas have been closer to the "growing edge" of Ameri-
can culture than were the university practices they proposed to supplant, no claim
is made that wiser choices could not have been made or that there has not been
occasional overemphasis of foundation-supported ideas, resulting in dislocations
and gaps in an ideally conceived pattern of progressive higher education. This
study has often been critical of individual ideas, policies, and persons, and has
illustrated the foundations' frequent lack of social awareness, their failure to
anticipate educational trends, and the presence of unavoidable human fallibility
in their official leadership.
The question then arises whether or not the activities of these foun-
dations in the field of education are in harmony with the constitutional
provisions with regard to education.
VIEWED IN RELATION TO THE CONSTITUTION
"Education" is not directly referred to in the Constitution, nor in
any of the amendments. Under the taxing power as well as the pro-
hibition against discrimination, there have been cases in which the
question of educational opportunity or facilities was involved — that
is, in decisions as to the constitutionality of State statutes.
There is a long line of cases in which the scope and effect of the
10th amendment have been precisely delineated. It is well estab-
82 Ibid., p. 282.
03 Ibid., pp. 294-295.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUJSDATKHStS 709
lished that the reservation contained in that amendment can only be
interpreted to mean that, in effect, the rights of sovereignty which
the respective States possessed before the adoption of the Constitution,
and which they did not specifically relinquish by that document, are
expressly reserved to the individual States. It was drafted because
the f ramers of the Constitution and the Bill of Eights were well aware
that under the pressure of either "emergency" or "general welfare" the
National Government might attempt to assume powers that had not
been granted. They were determined to leave no opening for such
an assumption, and thus, if further powers seemed necessary in the
future, they could only be provided for by amendment in the manner
set out in the Constitution.
At times it is erroneously stated that the 10th amendment provides
for a distribution of power between the United States and the States—
actually, properly stated, it is a reservation of power of the States.
This is readily understood when one recognizes that each of the States
(Colonies) was actually an autonomous political entity, prior to the
ratification of the Constitution. As such each has all the sovereign
powers (within its territorial limits) enjoyed by any foreign nation,
including unlimited jurisdiction over all persons and things.
Within its own borders, education, at every level of instruction, is
the sole province of each of the 48 States. This extends to the cur-
riculum, textbooks, teachers, and methods of instruction, as well as
standards of proficiency for both the student and the graduate.
The foundations, it is true, have taken the position that any stand-
ards they may have set have been in order to qualify for grants of their
funds — but, in their own words, they have had in view achieving a
uniformity and conformity of education and educational standards
throughout the country.
Each State has by statute prescribed the methods where changes
affecting its educational system shall be made, and in the case of
drastic changes the usual practice is to present the matter to the elec-
torate for its decision. From the records it is apparent that the foun-
dations did not follow the statutory provisions of the States relating
to education — and apparently it never occurred to any of them to con-
sult the authorities concerning those of their "educational" activities
which fell within the purview of State regulation. At any rate, at
no time did the individual States themselves (either through an
elected official or the electorate) have an opportunity to approve or
disapprove the changes brought about by foundation funds.
From a practical standpoint — and again it is emphasized regardless
of their merits — the changes have occurred; now it is more difficult
to determine what the decision of the individual States would have
been then had they been consulted, particularly because many of them
(invaded as it were through the back door) have been "conditioned"
to the invasion, and would probably not display the same vigorous
opposition to the intrusion as might have been expected and forth-
coming when this encroachment on State powers first began.
Kathryk Caset,
Legal Analyst.
710 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Koch. May Miss Casey make such, running comments as she
thinks might be pertinent to help the committee ?
Mr. Goodwin. The Chair would suggest rather than read verbatim
something that is in the record, if you might off the cuff make your
comment.
Miss Casey. That is what I plan to do.
Mr. Goodwin. Very good. Go ahead.
Miss Casey. First, I want to explain how it was decided to do
this. The decision was actually the result of the situation we found
ourselves in. In trying to get material on what the foundations had
done, we first had recourse to the Cox files to see whether or not
there was any firm pattern which all of them followed as far as their
activities were concerned.
That was not a very successful operation, so we went back to the
annual reports of the foundations themselves. Of course, the four
in existence longest were the ones we started with, that is, Carnegie
Corporation of New York itself, the Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the Rocke-
feller General Education Board.
The General Education Board no longer exists, having dispensed
its funds by the end of 1953. I will give you the total amount of
money they spent when I come to that particular organization.
In connection with trying 'to find out if their activities fell into
an easily classifiable group, it developed that these four foundations
did. They were education, international affairs, politics, public affairs,
propaganda, and some economics.
The other source of information was a bibliography which, the
Library of Congress furnished our office, and from which I selected
books pertaining to these two organizations.
Taking the first of these activities, education, the entire report is
devoted to answering^ three questions. One, have these foundations
carried on activities in the field of education at elementary level, at
secondary level, and college and university level, and what have these
activities been ? The third question was, Did such activities have any
evident or traceable effects in the educational field?
Once the answers to those questions were determined, the idea was,
if possible, to determine if there was any relationship between their
activities and education in the light of the constitutional and historic
attitudes with regard to it in this country.
Mr. Hays. Are you reading now from the report ?
Miss Casey. I am paraphrasing it. It is on page 4. Would you
like me to tell you the pages as I go along ?
Mr. Hays. It might be a little helpful.
Miss Casey. All right. I may skip a few pages.
Mr. Hays. You may skip as many as you like, but if you skip from
page 4 to 40 — that is not a suggestion — just tell us you are on page
40, or whatever it is.
Miss Casey. All right.
Mr. Goodwin. The committee won't criticize you no matter how
much you skip.
Miss Casey. I will cover this rapidly.
The other thing I should tell you is the term "education" as used
here means "learning-teaching," not just absorbing knowledge in gen-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 711
eral. That would have necessitated a study of every activity of the
foundations and every activity of Government and industry as well,
and we did not feel that was going to be productive.
There are several differences between the foundations which are
fundamental. In the first place, the Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching — this is on page 5 — was originally intended
to provide retiring allowances for college professors, while the Car-
negie Corporation's activity was more general. However, the Foun-
dation for the Advancement of Teaching, rather shortly after it was
founded, got into educational activity other than just granting pen-
sions and providing money for pension funds.
The Rockefeller Foundation did not get into education, other than
medical education, until around 1928 or 1929. I will come to the exact
date further on, and I can give it to you.
The General Education Board from the beginning granted funds
for endowment or other purposes.
There was also a difference in approach between the Carnegie organ-
izations and the Rockefeller Foundations, the former being much
more direct in their approach than the latter.
In that connection I will read a quotation on page 7, from Dr. Hollis'
book, Philanthropic Foundations and Higher Education. He refers
to the fact that the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of
Teaching made their grants in a very direct way, as far as saying
they wanted to make changes in the educational system is concerned,
that is. Dr. Hollis writes :
Far-reaching college reform was carefully embedded in many of these non-
controversial grants. It was so skillfully done that few of the grants are directly
chargeable to the ultimate reforms they sought to effect. For instance, there
is little obvious connection between giving a pension to a college professor or
giving a sum to the general endowment of his college, and reforming the
entrance requirements, the financial practices, and the scholastic standards of
his institution. This situation makes it necessary to present qualitative influence
without immediately showing the quantitative grant that made the influence
possible.
The Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, however, set up
a definition of what was a college and what curriculum would entitle
it to be called a college before they would grant pensions to professors
in that institution.
Mr. Hays. Would you criticize that?
Miss Casey. Mr. Hays, may I say that I am only reporting on the
research which I personally did in relation to these four organiza-
tions. My function as a staff member was not to give opinions, but to
try to save the time of the committee members by digesting this mate-
rial for others. Dr. Hollis took a very practical view of the method
- of accomplishing what they did, because he said, "What better method
is there for doing it ? "
Mr. Hays. Do you have any idea how many volumes have been
written about the foundations?
Miss Casey. That is an interesting thing ; there are not very many.
Mr. Hays. That is what I wanted to know.
Miss Casey. A bibliography appears on page 3. That is not the
complete bibliography by any manner of means. There are others,
such as Philanthropic Giving, Philanthropic Giving for Foundations,
which I did not include because they had no pertinent information
to the subject of these four in the field of education.
712 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
If you like, I can have the complete bibliography included.
Mr. Hays. I think it might be interesting. I might later want to
ask you why you picked 1 or 2 volumes and did not seem to quote the
others.
Miss Casey. I might say now that many of them said substantially
the same thing or else did not particularly deal with the activities of
these four in relation to education.
Now I am turning over to page 8. I am not going to read it, but
in that connection there is one fact I want to mention. At no time
did any one of these four foundations indicate that underlying their
activities in giving endowments to institutions or in granting pensions
to professors or aything of that type was a determination to change
the system. They did not say they were going to change the educa-
tional system. They did not in any manner indicate that. From my
point of view, there is no attempt in this particular summary to evalu-
ate the merits of what they did or the methods which they used.
On page 10 there is a reference to a quotation of Dr. Hollis com-
paring the two systems, which I will mention now, because I did make
reference to the fact that there were two methods by which they
approached the question. He refers to the General Education Board
approach as much more flexible than that of the foundation, which
he called an all-or-nothing dictum. It was in relation to granting
pensions to the institutions.
One of the things the reports show is that in all of them there was
considerable discussion of what was referred to as the "Carnegie unit."
The various reference books also referred to it, and some were quite
critical of the endorsement by the Carnegie system of the unit system.
Later on the Carnegie Foundation was not entirely happy with
some of the results and explained its reasons for sponsoring it at that
time.
Mr. Hays. You mean a unit system of teaching ?
Miss Casey. A unit system of credits.
Mr. Hays. If you left the unit system, you would be getting over
into some of — what do they call it — modernistic ?
Mr. Wormser. Progressive.
Mr. Hays. That is one of the things they want to get away from.
Miss Casey. First, Mr. Hays, the. foundations sponsored the unit
system and then later on they argued for its elimination. One of the
requirements of the foundation in connection with granting pensions
was it said that in order to qualify as a college, an educational institu-
tion must have a certain number of professors and teach a certain
number of subjects ; and, being a teacher, Mr. Hays, you know this,
I am sure, at that time there was no requirement as to how many
subjects should be included in a college curriculum, nor how many
professors there should be. That was one thing the foundations put
into effect. So, as a matter of practicality I think originally, the
institution had to have six departments in order to qualify as a college.
Later they raised it to eight.
Mr. Hays. That is probably to get away from institutions like Mr.
Reece's College of Lawsonomy .
Miss Casey. I don't know how many departments that has.
Mr. Hays. It was a standard to go by.
Miss Casey. The foundation and the board also concluded that if
they withheld funds from weak and tottering colleges the institutions
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 713
would die a natural death, or would be coordinated into institutions
the foundations selected as "pivotal" institutions.
I am going over now to page 15. I shan't quote from that page
but there are listed certain organizations, four institutions, and a
heading "adult education," a type of activity they went into particu-
larly. American Council on Education, Cooperative Test Service,
and the Educational Records Bureau and the related activities of that
group, the Institute of International Education, the London School of
Economics, the National Education Association and the Progressive
Education Association.
Funds from these four foundations flowed into those organizations
more often than into others ; as a matter of fact, my recollection is that
they were the only ones, of this type, that were so generously sup-
ported, with the exception of the National Advisory Council on Radio.
But these were the ones that the most money went to most frequently.
The institutions were Columbia University, Teachers College, Uni-
versity of Chicago, and the Lincoln School of Teachers College.
I will give later the amount of money available to all of these insti-
tutions so I don't believe I will particularly go into the assets they had
and the amounts they disposed, except to say that on page 17 there is a
breakdown of who received the total of $73,243,624 given by the Car-
negie Corporation.
Mr. Goodwin - . That is the corporation by itself without reference
to the Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching ?
Miss Casey. Yes, sir; that is right. The agencies I mentioned
earlier are also described briefly on pages 17 and 18. Following
through, you will find various quotations from their own reports.
Practically without exception the quotations are from the annual
reports of the individual institutions and organizations, or from
the book which I mentioned, of Dr. Hollis, or one of the other books
listed in the bibliography. Those are the only sources I quote.
In the 1937 report of the corporation, the quotation begins on page
18, the foundation itself recognized that in this system of setting up
agencies which would do the testing, and be accredited, there were
some dangers. They mentioned it particularly in this report and refer
to the fact that "unless the programs are carefully organized and rigidly
limited in scope, there is a real danger lest they tend to draw the
foundation outside its proper sphere of action."
They worked for an integration of education and a coordination of
it because they felt that would be the bast method of aiding both the
educational system financially and improving it.
One of the methods that they selected was to have several colleges
in a certain area integrate themselves. They mention, the General
Education Board does, pivotal institutions which would work with a
small group.
Mr. Goodwin. Have you amplified anywhere what is meant by "un-
derstanding the student" ?
Miss Casey. No, sir; they did not go into that. I was unable to
find any explanation of exactly how they arrived at their understand-
ing. You are referring to page 19 at the bottom.
Mr. Goodwin. "Studies to understand the student." Go ahead.
There is a lot here I don't understand.
Miss Casey. Incidentally, that particular page shows a total of
half a million dollars, roughly speaking, in that particular field of
714 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
activity — educational studies. By 1951, and even earlier than that,
the amount of money being spent on that type of thing had increased
materially and it is a great deal more now. The policy, I would say,
changed drastically.
Mr. Goodwin. I think it might be sometime a proper inquiry to
delve a little more into the purposes. That next to the last in that
same classification, "to find out what the students learn."
Miss Casey. I will see if they have any publications of what the
results of these studies were. This was a special group of studies
when they were beginning on what they called educational studies.
and educational reports. There is no point in that report or subse-
quent reports at which they explain what this covered. I imagine we
could find out by asking them to send their reports on it.
Mr. Goodwin. 'No, I would not ask for that. I imagine that before
the hearings are concluded, there may be an opportunity to inquire
just what was attempted to be found out here.
All right. You may go ahead.
Miss Casey. Throughout these reports there is constant mention
in the foundation reports themselves, and also in Dr. Hollis' book as
well as several others, of the fact that they were actually doing explora-
tory work, in their own words, and that is particularly true of the
quotation from Dr. Hollis. He refers to it as the remote theory that
research must be done first in general education in order to sufficiently
accomplish college reorganization. By that time they were talking
rather more directly of reorganizing the colleges, and reorganizing
the curriculum.
By the time I had finished going through the reports and these other
volumes, it was apparent that the Carnegie Corporation had been
engaged in fields which were educational in character. I tried as far
as their reports would let me to stick strictly to the educational work
and discarded anything about which there might be any question
because I felt that would give a bstter view of what they' had done,
and what they had not done in education.
Practically without exception— I don't think there is one exception
to this in this particular group — they all supported the National Edu-
cation Association, the American Council on Education, and the Pro-
gressive Education Association. Their sponsorship after that varied..
Some would choose one and some another. But that, again, I will
give you all at the end.
The next one I will take up is the Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching. Actually the Carnegie Foundation was
older in point of time than the Carnegie Corporation. It entered into,
its educational work almost immediately whereas the corporation did
not. I mentioned earlier that the original purpose was to provide
pensions and in that connection it might be interesting to know that
Mr. Carnegie himself up to a point was not aware of the fact that Mr.
Pritchett, who was then president of the foundation, actually looked
upon that as a somewhat secondary item, and the educational activities
as its primary purpose.
Mr. Carnegie also did not particularly care for the name "Carnegie
Foundation for Education," which was suggested, and thought it
should be called a professional pension fund.
On page 30, 1 have listed the various activities which were organized
and sponsored by the foundations, and that was the College Entrance
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 715
*
Examination Board, the Association of American Colleges, the Associ-
ation of American Universities, the American Council on Education,
and the American Association of University Professors.
Mr. Hats. You say that is on page 30 ?
Miss Casey. Yes, sir ; it is at the end of the second quotation. In
the quotation at the bottom of the page the 1913 report states that "by
the very fact of these activities been involved in greater or less degree
with all those complex relations in education which arise by reason of
the relationships between the schools of a nation," and so forth. The
reason for including that is to show that the foundation itself felt it was
engaged in educational activities. When it started its original activity
in pensions, it had a system which it referred to as "accepted institu-
tions" and "nonaccepted institutions." That particular phraseology
was not particularly "acceptable" to the universities and colleges and
it was changed rather shortly to "associated" and "nonassociated."
The foundation itself when it began its work in educational activi-
ties confined it to colleges and universities. However, later it got into
secondary education and even into elementary education, because it
went on the premise- — this is covered on page 32, incidentally — that
before it could grant a pension it was necessary to define a college,
and in order to define a college, it was necessary to establish standards
of admission and college work. Then if standards of admission were
to be established, it was necessary to prescribe the courses of study
in secondary schools.
On page 33, there is a tabulation of the funds expended by the
foundation from 1905 to 1951. That is roughly $66 million. Of that
amount, $62 million went into pensions or related activities, pension
funds or studies on pension giving.
All the quotations which I have given so far, and the ones that
follow actually bear on all three questions I raised in the beginning.
It was very difficult to divide it into these pertaining to questions 1, 2,
and 3. While that has been followed more or less, it is not a firm
rule.
As to question 3 on page 4, whether there were any trace
Mr. Hays. Are you going backwards now?
Miss Casey. No, I am merely referring to the questions on page 4
in order to indicate their relationship to these quotations. I thought
it might be easier for you to follow.
Mr. Hays. Don't make it too easy. I like to do things the hard way.
Miss Casey. As to whether or not these activities had any evident
or traceable effects in the educational field, beginning on page 34, I
would say the answer to that question, as far as its own reports are
concerned, is the emphasis was placed on coordination between col-
leges and other institutions. It was quite critical of the situation
in schools and colleges at that point, and also critical of what was
referred to as the hierarchical device of gradations which the schools
then represented.
On page 37, of the 1919 report, pages 100 and 101, there is one
quotation which I think should be read, because it sums up their
attitude at that time :
Marked changes must ensue in our present system of schooling if we undertake
to carry out an honest interpretation of our avowed aim of "universal education' -
by making it not only universal but also education.
49720 — 54 — pt. 1 46
716 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Apparently there was a good deal of opposition to the foundation's
activities from the very beginning, and Dr. Hollis refers to it fre-
quently, as do most of the others who cover that phase of its activity.
Dr. Hollis is very outspoken on that point, and since this is a short
quotation I will read it.
The foundation had had a real battle to enforce entrance standards in the rela-
tively homogeneous endowed liberal arts colleges concentrated in the Bast. With
the decision to admit State universities to the benefits of the Carnegie pension
system it was faced with the problems of applying on a nationwide scale what
was in fact a regional accrediting standard for a group of superior institutions.
The foundation felt there was no need to take into account any
difference in financial or social conditions in an area. The standards
were the same. The General Education Board, on the contrary, felt
that in some areas the regulations in connection with what w T as a col-
lege, what should be the curriculum, and so forth, might differ. But
the foundation did not.
About 1923, this is covered on pages 38, 39, and 40, the foundation
began to be a little bit worried about the effects of some of their
activities and went on to say that the schools should not be set up
only for the minority of the students. The difficulties in the schools at
that time in preparing all students in a huge number of subjects was
quite different from any other country in the world. Throughout the
foundation's reports and throughout the others, there is constant
reference to the Prussian system of education which it was felt was
much more desirable than ours.
One of the results which has been attributed to this foundation's
activity is the 100 percent promotion rule which exists in many com-
munities, and which has resulted from putting into effect the philoso-
phy that schools should not be for the minority and their standards
should be based on what the greater number of students can achieve.
The foundation also recommended that the college take the first step
in this reorganization of education by making sweeping changes in
its entrance requirements.
This is on page 41, Mr. Hays.
It also worked with the educational groups, such as the National
Education Association, the Progressive Education Association, and
the American Council on Education, in setting up a record form to be
used in the schools, because a report which gave more information
about the student's personality and something other than just his at-
tainment record would be desirable, according to the foundation.
Mr, Hats. You don't intend those quotations on page 41 to be
critical ?
Miss Casey. They are intended to indicate the type of work done,
and what the foundation itself thought of it.
Mr. Hats. The reason I ask you that question is because I happen
to concur in the items set forth on page 41, and if you thought there
was something wrong with them, I thought I would debate it with you.
Miss Casey. As I said a little while ago, I don't think it is within
my province to give an opinion on what was done.
One other method was used in connection with the college- and
university-level work, page 43— and this is a followup of a system
they had put into effect earlier — in 1946 and 1947 the foundation set
up 4 strategically located centers in the South, each composed of 1
university group, and at least 5 neighboring undergraduate colleges.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 717
It was just about this time or shortly before that the foundation, be-
cause of its heavy load of financial liabilities on the pension end,
became a little less active in the educational studies. The foundation
had received a great deal of money in grants from the Carnegie Cor-
poration, and it was decided by both organizations that until the
pension fund released some of the money they had put into teachers'
annuities and things of that kind, the foundation would lessen its
activities and the corporation would probably increase them.
I have already mentioned, and this is referred to again on pages
43 to 45, the fact that it had been active in a graduate testing program
and a cooperative test, and also gave the sum of $750,000 received from
the Carnegie Corporation around 1948 for the merger of all of the
testing agencies, because, it said, while there was not exactly competi-
tion there was pulling and hauling between all of them.
In the 1946-47 period, page 45, there is a quotation which refers
to this subject which did culminate in the merger of the testing
agencies in 1948. The foundation pointed out what was referred to
as the compelling advantages to American education of unification
of these organizations.
Now, on page 47, there is a more detailed discussion of the Carnegie
unit. I won't read it. It is taken from the 1947-48 report. It is Dr.
Savage's discussion of the unit. Incidentally, neither the foundation,
that is the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching,
nor any of the others actually evolved the unit system. They did
influence the colleges and universities to accept it, but they did not
evolve it.
Mr. Hays. Then after they accepted it, they pushed to do away
with it; is that it?
Miss Casey. 1 would say from the record it would appear that way.
The major portion of the foundations' funds have always gone into
pension activities. In 1953, which is the last year we have, the rela-
tionship is still $62,763,000 to approximately $5,000,000 for research,
studies, and education.
Next I will take up the Rockefeller group.
Mr. Goodwin. Before you go on to that, for my information, were
the activities of the Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching
confined to the problems of pension and annuities?
Miss Casey. Most of the money went into that, because it set aside
a fund each year for the number of prospective annuitants. By the
1940's I would say that would have become a considerable amount of
the money they had received from Mr. Carnegie and others who had
given it funds. So at that point their funds were somewhat limited,
they received a great deal of money from the Carnegie Corporation
incidently, and that is one of the difficulties in segregating their
money, Mr. Goodwin. The corporation and the foundation worked
very closely together in later years, and it is difficult sometimes to say
which is corporation money and which is foundation money. In order
to try to separate them, I did not include money that came from the
corporation. I have included it as an activity, but it will not show
up always in the total you have for the foundation, because it was
not possible to say without any possibility of error that the money
was foundation money.
So actually you have to almost read the two together.
718 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Goodwin. All right. Now, do you want to go along witk
Rockefeller?
Miss Casey. The* original Rockefeller philanthropic trust was the
Institute for Medical Research and the General Education Board was
also formed before the Rockefeller Foundation was. The other in
what might be called the educational group was the Laura Spelman
Memorial Fund, which operated primarily in social studies, and
was merged in the Rockefeller Foundation in 1948.
The reason for that was by that time the Board and the founda-
tion had been carrying on activities which were so similar there was
duplication of requests and both felt it was an inefficient and un-
economic way to have both doing somewhat the same work.
The total of the Rockefeller grants given either by Mr. Rockefeller
himself or at his or at Mrs. Rockefeller's death, totaled half a billion
dollars in 1929, when the Laura Spelman-Rockef eller Memorial Funds
were consolidated with those of the Rockefeller Foundation.
I think I told you earlier that the General Education Board began
in 1902, and that the foundation did not get into education other than
medical until around 1928-29. Primarily the foundation concentrated
in the beginning on medical research, medical education, dental edu-
cation to a degree, and agriculture. When they divided the activities
between the two about 1929, the Board then was to deal primarily with
institutions rather than learned societies and research agencies. Be-
fore that it had had some research carried on by other agencies, and
also it had research and studies carried on by the learned societies.
As a matter of fact, and this has held true throughout its activities,
the board originally at Mr. Rockefeller's wish was set up to operate
in Negro colleges and southern colleges because he felt that was an
area of the country that needed the most help as far as funds were
concerned. From the very beginning, therefore, they divided their
activities as to whether they were in white colleges or in Negro col-
leges. I am sure that is the only reason that division was made.
The Rockefeller General Education Board — and the reason for
handling it before the Rockefeller Foundation is because it was in the
fielcftif education first — in setting up its activities in connection with
secondary education in the South, it first made rather extensive studies,
and did not issue an annual report of any kind from 1902, when
established, until 1914. That report, which is a consolidated report,
said the board had approached the problem by selecting a person or
persons whose business it was to inform, cultivate, and guide profes-
sional, public, and legislative opinions. This is on page 56.
Such individual, this report goes on, should also —
skillfully and tactfully marshal all available forces for the purpose of
securing concerted action calculated in time to realize a secondary school
system.
Appropriations were made for various purposes, one of which was
to State universities to pay the salary of what they called a pro-
fessor of secondary education. His main and principal work would
be to ascertain where the conditions were favorable for the estab-
lishment of public schools and to visit places and endeavor to organize
in such places a public high school.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 719
On page 57 there is a quotation which states the board had no inten-
tion of dictating or indicating the lines along which these individuals
should work. It then describes their activities :
In addition, the professors of secondary education were high-school evange-
lists, traveling well-nigh incessantly from county to county, returning from
time to time to the State university to do their teaching, or to the State
capitol to confer with the State superintendent. Wherever they went, they
addressed the people, the local school authorities, the county court, teachers,
businessmen and business organizations, county and State conferences, etc.
They sought almost any sort of opportunity in order to score a point. Law or
no law, they urged their hearers to make voluntary efforts toward a county
high school, if a start had not yet been made; to add a grade or a teacher
to a school already started; to repair the buildings or to provide a new one;
to consolidate weak district schools into a larger one adequate to town or
county needs. Nor did they merely expose defects, tender advice, and employ
•exhortations; they not only urged the policy, but nursed a situation.
That is given merely to indicate their activities in the South where
they were primarily directed to establishing high schools. In the
South the work was entirely in high schools. That was not true of
activities elsewhere.
Incidentally, those activities continued only until 1924. The re-
port itself is not definite as to when it started, but I gathered it was
shortly after the board was founded in 1902. They were stopped in
1924 because the board felt that they had achieved the purpose for
which they had been employed.
About 1933 the board went into what it called a general education
program. This had been called eductional studies, but at that point
the board set out on what was referred to as the general educational
program, which continued for about 5 or 6 years to 1939. It was
during that period that most of the work was done with the various
testing and accrediting agencies.
In working with the testing agencies, they carried on studies at
various institutions. Chiefly : Columbia, Chicago, Teachers College,
and the Lincoln School of Teachers College. It was that same year,
1934, that the board began work in connection with what later devel-
oped into the Building America series, according to their 1935-36
report. I am on page 60.
Under the subheading Reorganization of Subject Matter Fields —
Society for Curriculum Study Building America," that report refers
to it as follows :
The magazine represents an attempt on the part of the society to meet a long-felt
need in secondary education for visual as well as factual study of contemporary
problems of our social, political, and economic life.
The General Education Board felt these educational testing and
accrediting services were very important, because it said they were in
a position to play a significant role in the reorganization of secondary
education. That was around 1935-36.
Mr. Hats. Perhaps instead of reading these paragraphs here and
there into the record again, if you could give us the significant ones
as you see them, and have us underscore them, because what we are
going to do now is to read this and read the record again to see the
important parts of it.
720 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Miss Casey. That is why I am giving the page numbers, Mr. Hays..
Mr. Hats. Why don't you just give us a memo ?
Miss Casey. You mean another one?
Mr. Hats. I have been following pretty closely now for about 10
minutes, and 95 percent of what you have been doing is reading a sen-
tence or a paragraph here and there through the thing. That is
exactly what we tried to get away from to save time.
Miss Casey. It was those particular paragraphs that I felt were
particularly pertinent to show the trend which each agency had taken.
Mr. Hays. I understand that, and I am not criticizing at all. I am
saying it would be easier for the committee in their perusal of this
document if we had a list of the highlights with the page numbers,
and we can relate them with the page. In this way we have to read
not only this document, but the whole transcript again. Do you fol-
low me?
Miss Caset. I do. For example, I will tell you right now that on
page 61 there is a quotation which is particularly pertinent as regards
the activities of the General Education Board, and which it pursued
from that point on to the end of its existence in 1953.
I will merely read the types of activity they carried on. Is that
agreeable?
Mr. Hays. Sure.
Mr. Goodwin. That is in line with the suggestion we made earlier,
if you could give us now an off-the-cuff dissertation of what is in here,,
rather than quotations ; it would save our time.
Miss Casey. All right, sir, fine.
Beginning in 1936-37, the General Education Board concentrated on
what they referred to as general planning of educational reorganiza-
tion, experiments with curriculum, preparation of new instructional
materials, and selection of teachers in the study of youth.
From then on the major field of activity as far as secondary educa-
tional activities are concerned was development of what the board
terms a reorganization of secondary education. In doing that it worked
closely with the National Education Association and the Progressive
Education Association, and to a degree with the American Council on
Education.
The stated reason for that was it was felt no study would be com-
plete unless the board had the knowledge of those representative-
groups.
When its activities in this field of education ended in 1939, this
particular phase of education, it was felt they had made a great contri-
bution ; that a great deal of good had resulted from it, from the work
of the Progressive Education Association and the National Education
Association, particularly in relation to the studies which they issued,,
and from the work of the American Historical Association.
After 1915 the board began to use agencies other than institutions
of learning. It was very much interested in the Lincoln School,
and the grants to that institution total, I think, something over $6%
million. That continued from about 1918 to the early 1940's.
The total amount of money the Rockefeller General Education Board
expended in these fields, I will not read them, it is on page 73, was
$270,750,694.
There are footnotes on Columbia University, the Lincoln School of
Teachers College, and the University of Chicago, which are not
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 721
included in the total $270 million, because they are already included
in the amount shown for universities, colleges, and schools in the
United States.
Mr. Hays. How long did it take them to spend that money ?
Miss Casey. You mean the $270 million ?
Mr. Hays. Yes.
Miss Casey. From the time they were formed in 1902.
Mr. Hays. Congress spends more than that lots of times in an after*
noon.
Miss Casey. You would know more about that than I would, I am
sure.
The foundation, as I mentioned earlier, did not get into education
right away. It received from Mr. Rockefeller a total of $241 million.
That includes the Spelman Fund. It had a great influence by giving
money for land and buildings, particularly in the early days, as well
as to endowments and gave large sums for medical education at
Chicago University and Columbia University.
It was also interested in having the university medical schools either
become affiliated with a hospital and the foundation even built
hospitals in many instances.
On page 77 there is a comparison between the types of activities in
which the foundation engaged. You will notice there are $227 mil-
lion for public health and medical sciences which is by far the major
field in which it operated.
The foundation was much more reticent in taking credit for what
it accomplished than the General Education Board of any one of the
Carnegie groups. It is mentioned particularly in the Cox committee
questionnaire in which it is stated the foundation is perfectly willing
to state what it had done, but they felt any assessment of it should be-
left to others.
Practically the only quotation I think might be merit as its own
view of the work appears on page 78 in their 1948 annual report.
From the reports it is apparent that both the Carnegie philan-
thropic trusts and the Rockefeller philanthropic trusts had carried on
activities in the field of education. They had done it in two ways.
Either through their own activities as an operating agency, or through
choosing other related agencies.
On page 79 there is a total of the amount of money in millions which
all four of these organizations spent. It is $994 million.
Mr. Hays. That is nothing. We have spent as high as $45 billion
in an afternoon. You want to get into big money if you want to
impress anybody around here. If we passed an Armed Forces appro-
priation of less than $30 billion, somebody feels they are deprived.
Miss Casey. I agree, Mr. Hays, that sum is not particularly impres-
sive compared to funds available through Government sources today.
But at the time it was going into this field, these four funds were the
largest organizations making funds available and contributed the
greatest amount of money. They were the only contributors on that
scale. All four of the foundations had a common practice, that is,
they all felt they should contribute funds to an organization, either to
inaugurate it or to get it through its first years of operation and then
cease contributions. There are frequent references to the fact that
once an organization is self-supporting or getting funds from other-
722 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
soures, that these four foundations did not feel they should put the
money into it.
I will not read Dr. Hollis' comments in connection with the founda-
tions, but you might be interested in reading pages 80 and 81. He
refers particularly to a fund-raising campaign of 68 leading univer-
sities. He said that while they only contribute 18.1 percent of the
funds, they were reputed to have exerted a very predominant in-
fluence on the purposes and plans.
He also raises the question to what extent and in what direction has
higher education in the United States been influenced by the philoso-
phy of the foundations, and he said that would have to be viewed in
the light of all other activities. You will find that quotation on
page 42.
Beginning on page 83, there is a two-and-a-quarter-page reference
to the question raised in the beginning of the summary as to the rela-
tionship of their activities in the educational field in the light of the
Constitution and its attitude toward education.
The subject of education is not discussed in the Constitution and is
not raised in any one of the amendments to the Constitution, but there
is a very long line of cases as to the power and the jurisdiction of the
individual States in the light of the 10th amendment to the Constitu-
tion. These cases bear out the idea that any power not expressly
given to the Federal Government is expressly reserved to the States.
Since education is not mentioned, it can be assumed that the question
of education is entirely a State province.
The foundations have by their activities and the amount of money
they have put into the field of education certainly influenced the
matter. I won't read it, but on page 26 of this summary, I refer to
the fact that the organizations which I mentioned earlier, National
Education Association, Progressive Education Association, and
American Council on Education, have to a degree caused a standardiza-
tion of methods, both as to teaching and as to the testing and training
of teachers, and also as always to the curriculum in various schools.
There is to a degree, and I would say to a very large degree, uniform-
ity throughout the country as far as educational curricular and meth-
ods of teaching are concerned. Of course, that does not cover every
institution of learning, but by and large the National Education Asso-
ciation has worked very hard
Mr. Hats. Miss Casey, you are discouraging me. I thought we
had you up to page 83. Now you are back to 26.
Miss Casey. You need not be discouraged, Mr. Hays, I only
wanted to give you the page number where I mentioned this pre-
viously. As I started to say, the National Education Association
made that a major activity. We are back now to page 83.
Mr. Hays. That is the direction I like to travel.
Mr. Goodwin. This is a temporary retrogression.
Miss Casey. Each State has prescribed methods whereby change
affecting its educational system can be made, and in most instances if
there is anything drastic about it, it is provided that it shall be done
either by consulting with the proper official or by taking the matter
to voters at election time. For that reason, many of these changes
would probably not have gone into effect had the foundations at that
time had to get the approval of the individual States in order to do it.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 723
To that extent they have encroached on the powers of the individual
States. .
That is the end ; that is page 85.
Mr. Goodwin. That completes your comments ?
Miss Casey. Yes, sir.
Mr. Goodwin. Have you anything?
Mr. Koch. Just for the record, Miss Casey, what other reports are
in the works, so to speak, of the staff ?
Miss Casey. As far as I am concerned ?
Mr. Koch. Yes.
Miss Casey. The others are mentioned on page 3, and the ones cov-
ering international affairs, politics, propaganda, and political activi-
ties. The reason for making this report as the first is because the same
methods are followed in their other activities when these foundations
substantially follow the setup that they put into effect in connection
with education generally.
Mr. Koch. Those additional reports are not ready yet; is that right?
They may be ready next week or the week after ?
Miss Casey. That is right.
Mr. Koch. So this is all you have to present today ?
Miss Casey. Yes.
Mr. Koch. That is all we have to present today.
Mr. Goodwin. Any questions, Mr. Hays?
Mr. Hays. No questions.
Mr. Goodwin. If not, thank you very much for this survey. It
shows ample research certainly, and the committee will endeavor to
match your industry by our careful reading of the survey.
Mr. Hays. One question, and not on the report. I think to keep the
record in some sort of focus, I don't believe, and I am sure it was
inadvertent, that Miss Casey was originally sworn just briefly to
testify about some other matter that came out at the time. Could you
give us something about your background, Miss Casey ?
Miss Casey. Yes ; I will be glad to. I went to public
Mr. Goodwin. That doesn't require any information about the date
of birth.
Miss Casey. I was wondering about that. Although I would not
mind saying it, I will date myself by my activities.
I am a lawyer. I graduated from law school right here in Wash-
ington, Columbus University, a small law school that recently became
affiliated with Catholic University.
I have taken various other legal subjects at Catholic University and
George Washington University. I did my undergraduate work at
the University of California in Berkeley.
My earlier education was in public and parochial schools in the
District of Columbia. I have been a lawyer for the last 16 years.
(Discussion off the record.)
Miss Casey. I started to say I have practiced law since 1940 as a
trade association executive and general counsel, and I have practiced
before the various Government agencies. I am a registered lobbyist,
and have appeared before congressional committees.
Mr. Hays. You are a registered lobbyist at this point?
Miss Casey. You never lose it, do you ?
724 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hays. I don't know. I have never been one. I just thought it
might not make very good headlines if somebody would write that the
committee had a registered lobbyist on its staff.
Miss Casey. Perhaps I should say I was a registered lobbyist.
Mr. Hays. I think that would be more preferable.
Miss Casey. Does that cover the extent to which you wish to go,
or do you want me to go further ?
Mr. Hays. That is sufficient.
Mr. Koch. Did you ever write a book ?
Miss Casey. Yes, called Bituminous Coal Code, Annotated, I have
also written articles for the magazines on various subjects, including
several in connection with the Interstate Commerce Commission,
before which I had a fairly extensive practice.
Mr. Goodwin. I listened in vain for any reference to any activities
east of the Hudson River.
Miss Casey. That is where all have been. My practice has all been
in Washington, D. C, Mr. Goodwin. I am admitted to the bar in the
District.
Mr. Goodwijst. I referred to the Hudson. Let me say specifically
New England.
Miss Casey. The organization which I represented for some years
had a good many members in New England, Mr. Goodwin. It was
an agricultural group.
The Chairman (presiding). In your work with the trade associa-
tion, I assume it was necessary that you write those articles ?
Miss Casey. At times, but frequently I was requested to write on a
particular subject not necessarily connected with my work. I have
been admitted to the Bar of the District of Columbia, I am a member
of the Bar of the Supreme Court, and have been admitted in the
States of Maryland, Pennsylvania, and New York by motion.
Mr. Hays. That is all.
The Chairman. Thank you. It is now approximately 4 o'clock
so I presume there would hardly be time to take up anything else.
As I understood from your conversation just now, it was anticipated
that Miss Casey would probably run until tomorow, and you had no
one else scheduled.
Mr. Wormser. That is right.
The Chairman. Anticipating closing at noon tomorrow.
Mr. Kock. Somebody put a long plea for a long weekend a couple
•of weeks ago so can we start on Tuesday morning %
The Chairman. That would be my inclination.
Mr. Hays. That suits me. Of course, I don't have the dynamic pro-
gram for next week from the leadership yet.
The Chairman. This farm program is coming up and that ought to
be dynamic enough.
Mr. Hays. Could we get some information ?
The Chairman. Mr. Counsel, what is the outlook for next week?
I am familiar with one aspect, but you go ahead and state it.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Reece wishes some evidence to be brought in on
the League for Industrial Democracy, and the American Labor Edu-
cation Service, and the Twentieth Century Fund. Beyond that, ex-
cept for occasional interludes for reports which I presume will be
introduced shortly, we want then to bring on the major foundations
who should have an opportunity to appear.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 725
I would like to discuss with Mr. Hays and Mr. Reece also possibly
in what order to put them. I want to suit their convenience as much
as I can. I would like to get in touch with them individually and
perhaps clear with you two first how it should be done.
Mr. Hays. I don't know anything about this League for Industrial
Democracy, except what I heard here, but are you going to subpena
somebody from that organization? I don't want to be obnoxious
about it, but I want to know a little bit specifically what we are going
to do.
The Chairman. We anticipated having someone to make a sum-
mary of their publications and activities from propaganda and
political viewpoints, more or less, and then have some official from
the league.
Mr. Hays. You mean you are going to have someone outside of the
organization ?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Hays. Can you tell me who that is going to be ?
The Chairman. I have in mind Mr. Ken Earle, who was formerly
with the Senate Internal Security Committee, who is familiar with
the subject, and has done a good deal of research. Mr. Wormser, with
my understanding, had requested that he prepare a written statement
which we hope will be available Monday for the members of the
committee.
Mr. Wormser. I would like to have as much guidance as I can get
on organizing the program.
Mr. Hays. By the way, right now, what progress have you made in
getting the additional material on Facts Forum that I asked you
about?
Mr. Koch. We wrote in for it last Friday.
(Discussion off the record.)
Mr. Koch. That is in the works now.
Mr. Hays. Can you follow it up with a wire and get that in, because
I am at a sort of standstill.
Mr. Koch. Mr. Hays, Miss Casey said she telephoned so it will
speed it up.
The Chairman. So far as I know, the committee will meet in this
room. If there is any change, there will be an announcement made
of it. So the committee will stand adjourned until 10 o'clock Tuesday
morning.
(Thereupon at 3: 55 p. m., a recess was taken until Tuesday, June
15, 1954, at 10 a.m.)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
TUESDAY, JUNE 15, 1954
House of Representatives,
Special Committee To Investigate
Tax-Exempt Foundations,
Washington, D. 0.
The special committee met at 10 a. m., pursuant to recess, in room
304, House Office Building, Hon. Carroll Reece (chairman of the
special committee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Reece (presiding), Goodwin, and Hays.
Also present : Rene A. Wormser, general counsel ; Arnold T. Koch,
associate counsel; Norman Dodd, research director; Kathryn Casey,
legal analyst; John Marshall, chief clerk.
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
Mr. Wormser, who is the next witness ?
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Earl is the next witness.
The Chairman. Mr. Earl will take the stand. Will you qualify?
That is our custom. Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are
about to give in this proceeding shall be the truth, the whole truth
and nothing but the truth, so help you God ?
Mr. Earl. I do.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Chairman, before we proceed, I would like to put
this in in the form of a request, and I hope the committee will see fit
to grant it. I received a copy of Mr. Earl's testimony late yesterday
afternoon at my office sometime, and I don't know exactly how long,
apparently not as long as I had first thought, after the press gallery
had received their copies. I had only time to read it over.
And I want to make it clear that I don't know anything about the
League for Industrial Democracy. As a matter of fact, I don't know
as I have heard of the organization prior to these hearings.
I am not, and I don't want to be, in a position of defending it or
condemning it, either one at this time. But since Mr. Earl's testi-
mony is full of prominent names, it is full of paragraphs taken out
of context, which I thought I had demonstrated was a dangerous
proceeding, I would like to have an adjournment of 24 hours for the
purpose of evaluating this testimony so that I can intelligently com-
ment or question Mr. Earl about it.
It may be that everything in his testimony is true. On the other
hand, there may be quite a number of things that I would like to look
over. And I think before we go ahead and name all of these promi-
nent names, and I want it made clear that I don't intend to name any
myself this morning, I believe, Mr. Chairman, under any kind of rules
of procedure whatever that it would be only fair that we do have a
chance to try to evaluate this so that we can intelligently talk about it.
727
728 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The Chairman. Due to circumstances in my family, it was neces-
sary for me to be out of the city over the weekend. So the gentleman
from Ohio is 24 hours ahead of me so far as the statement is con-
cerned because I have not had an opportunity to read it.
But without reference to this statement, if I may, Wayne, I would
like to make one statement with reference to lifting things out of
context.
I think when Mr. Dodd appeared before the committee, and the
other witnesses, they had made a studious effort in every instance when
a quotation was given, to give the source, the authorship, and enough
of the context, a sufficient summation of the context so as not to get
in a position of talking quotations out of context.
Now, I don't think, or I am not sure that that same thing can be
said about what the gentleman from Ohio did when he read a couple
of statements to the committee at a recent session. But so far as the
committee members and so far as the committee staff is concerned^
they have made a special effort not to get into a position of lifting out
of context.
Having heard of the question that you raised with reference to Mr.
Earl's statement being released to the press in advance of your receiv-
ing a copy, I made inquiry, and I understand that they were sent to
the members and sent to the press all in a simultaneous operation.
And as to who received the very first copy, I have no information. I
did not get mine until this morning. On the other hand, I was not
expecting it until this morning since I was out of the city.
The chairman has no disposition so far as he is concerned to rush
a hearing. In fact, he has a very important, or there is a very impor-
tant meeting of the Eules Committee this morning at which my pres-
ence is urgently requested, if not needed. And the gentleman from
Massachusetts, whose active participation in the committee is highly
appreciated and has been most helpful, has an executive session of
the Ways and Means Committee this morning. So I think that it
would suit our convenience entirely.
But I would suggest that we meet in the afternoon, Wayne, if that
is agreeable, so as not to delay too much.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the courtesy in partially
agreeing with my suggestion, and I would be happy to compromise
any way I could, but I just simply won't have time by afternoon to
evaluate this.
Now, I will be glad to tailor my convenience to suit the committee
in working an extra day, or I would be glad to hear Mr. Dodd whom
we have postponed in cross-examination, or anything, to defer it;
but I would like to have time to have my office staff evaluate this and
look up some of the pamphlets that are quoted from and let me get on
my desk the material so that I cannot only read the paragraphs that
Mr. Earl has quoted but read some of the preceding and some of the
following paragraphs in order to get a grip on the material. Because,
frankly, Mr. Chairman, as I said before, this League of Industrial
Democracy is obsolutely a new field to me, and it is a thing that I know
nothing about. And I just feel that I would like to be a little bit
prepared on the subject.
The Chairman. I am not in a position to evaluate the League for
Industrial Democracy upon the basis of the evidence because the evi-
dence has not been presented. But I am not sufficiently naive to say
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 729
that I have been around Congress as long as I have and do not know
anything about the League for Industrial Democracy. I think its
impact has been in evidence in too many areas for me not to have made
some observations concerning it.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Chairman, I will say to you this: that I am just a
country boy from Ohio and I am very naive, as anyone who has at-
tended these hearings can see, and so I will plead guilty to it right
now.
Mr. Goodwin. My only interest is that we should get along, Mr.
Chairman. I think that we should proceed with these hearings. I
would like the forenoon off and the afternoon off, and as the chairman
suggested I would like to be over in Ways and Means now as they are
in executive session on a very important matter, the Philippine trade
bill. I think, however, that this proceeding here is of great im-
portance.
I have been considerably irked as we have gone along with the
tremendous amount of time we have wasted here. I am already getting
communications from people who are interested, expressing a fear that
we will get along to the point where there won't be any time for some
of them to be heard.
My only interest is that we should go forward as rapidly as we
can.
The Chairman. The committee will stand in recess until 2 : 30, for
various reasons, all of which have been discussed.
(Thereupon at 10: 15 a. m., a recess was taken until 2: 30 of the
same day. )
AFTERNOON SESSION
The hearing was resumed at 2 p. m.
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
I might first say that when the committee meets tomorrow morning, ,
which I presume will be at 10 o'clock, we will meet in the Banking and
Currency Committee room, 1301 New House Office Building.
Mr. Koch. I was going to ask Mr. Earl: Before you read your-
statement, will you give the committee a brief outline of your history
or background? Then the committee might want to ask additional
questions.
TESTIMONY OF KEN EARL, ATTOKNEY, LEWIS, STRONG & EARL,
MOSES LAKE, WASH.
Mr. Earl. Yes, I will be glad to. My name, of course, is Ken Earl.
I am an attorney out in the State of Washington now, although for 4:
years prior to going out there to practice I was an employee on the
staff of the Internal Security Subcommittee and the Immigration Sub-
committee over in the Senate. I mean just that, too. I wasn't the
counsel or the assistant counsel, or anything of the kind. I was a
person who helped out in many of the projects and tasks which they
undertook, and, of course, am not at liberty to divulge just what those
were.
My home originally was in Nevada. As far as background other
than that is concerned, I am a graduate of the Georgetown University
Law School and took- my undergraduate work in Brigham Young
730 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
University, Provo, Utah. Perhaps there are other areas someone
would like to ask me about.
Mr. Koch. How long have you been a member of the bar ?
Mr. Earl. Since about 1951.
Mr. Koch. Are you an expert on foundations ?
Mr. Earl. No, sir, I am not an expert on foundations.
Mr. Hays. I might say that, as I said this morning, I do not know
much about this League for Industrial Democracy. In fact, if I were
to call myself an expert, I am a 4-hour expert on it, since from 10 : 30
this morning until now is all the time I have had to do any research on
it. Would you say you are an expert on this LID organization %
Mr. Earl. I would say this, Mr. Hays, that as far as the LID is con-
cerned, the LID's publications pretty well speak for themselves, and
so a person's main qualification in taking the material which I have
to see what the LID has stood for and what it now stands for would
be the ability to read and think.
Mr. Hays. Would you mind telling us how old you are, Mr. Earl ?
Mr. Earl. I am 34 years old.
Mr. Hays. You are 34.
Mr. Earl. Eight.
Mr. Hays. In what year were you born ?
Mr. Earl. 1919.
Mr. Hays. In other words, in 1932, you were about 13 years old ?
Mr. Earl. That is approximately right.
Mr. Hays. Well, we may have occasion to refer to that.
How did you happen to be called to testify before this committee ?
Mr. Earl. I was called by the chairman of your committee, because
he learned, apparently from someone here in Washington, that I had
occasion in the past to at least be interested in the LID and its activ-
ities.
The Chairman. If I may interrupt, I had intended to make a pre-
liminary statement along that line. I became interested, along with
the subject of the foundations in general, in the League for Industrial
Democracy, and while it may not be a foundation within the accepted
impression of foundations, it is a tax-free organization and is a foun-
dation or a comparable organization. Over a period of time, a very
considerable amount of literature was acquired by me on the League for
Industrial Democracy, as well as some other comparable organizations.
And in order to get it in form to be presented, I felt it was best for it to
be given to someone who had some background arid interest in this sub-
ject, and I knew about Mr. Earl and his work with the Internal Secu-
rity Subcommittee of the Senate, and I called Mr. Earl and asked if he
would take what he had and might have access to or get access to, and
take the information which I had, and reduce it to a summary which
could be presented to the committee. He at first had some uncertainty
whether he could take the time to do it, but finally decided that he
could do so, and I feel that we are very fortunate to have a young man
with his experience, although young, and with his training and overall
familiarity with the subject-matter, particularly the phases with which
he is dealing, here to present the result of his research to the commit-
tee for its evaluation.
Mr. Hays. In other words, did I understand you to say, Mr. Chair-
man, that it is really not a foundation? It really has no bearing on
this investigation, then, does it ?
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 731
The Chairman. I had a telegram from the League for Industrial
Democracy today, raising the question whether the League for In-
dustrial Democracy is a foundation. And I presume an accurate defi-
nition of foundation may have been formulated with the view of deter-
mining the scope of what foundations as embraced in the resolution.
But in any event, the resolution under which we are working not only
empowers us to investigate foundations but comparable organizations,
and the language is written so that I think the committee has au-
thority, for that matter, to investigate any tax-exempt organization,
call it whatever you might. But, of course, I think actually the League
for Industrial Democracy, receiving tax-free funds, is a foundation
in the accepted sense of the word. And it is embraced in the group of
some 7,000 foundations to which we have referred.
Mr. Hats. Let me read a little of a telegram that I have here, a
copy of a telegram. It says :
Recent trends indicate critical decisions during 1954 will materially affect
Nation's future. * * * Radio tremendous force influencing public particularly
grassroots America. * * *
Two labor unions spending over 2 millions annually on radio-television.
Surely business should join spending fraction that sum. * * *
I am just reading a few sentences to give you a general idea.
I have no objection to putting the whole thing in the record.
America's future reached successful climax signing 5-year contract Mutual
Broadcasting System.
They go on to say they are going to have John T. Flynn. It says :
Make check (tax deductible) payable America's Future, Inc. and send to:
Francis A. Smith, first vice president, Marine Trust Co., of western New York,
Maine at Seneca, Buffalo, N. Y.
And it is signed by various people and was sent out to the presidents
of practically all the large corporations in the country.
Would that come under your purview ? If we are going to in-
vestigate this LID maybe we ought to investigate this group, too.
The Chairman. Without having the details, I could not say unques-
tionably it would come under the purview of this committee.
Mr. Hays. Then we could just investigate anything that you take
tax deductions for, including the Ked Cross, according to your defini-
tion, is that right? Or your church ?
I mean, you are allowed to deduct for that, if you contribute to the
church; aren't you?
The Chairman. Certainly, in the general concept
Mr. Hays. I am trying to circumscribe the thing and get some
kind of a definition as to how far afield we are going to go.
The Chairman. Then do you feel that the League for Industrial
Democracy is outside the purview of this committee ?
Mr. Hays. Mr. Chairman, that is not the point at issue. _ The point
a.t issue is who is deciding who the committee will investigate. You
decided in your own mind apparently that that is a fertile field, and if
you want my opinion you felt you had fallen down so badly with
the foundations you had better get something to salvage the situation
with, and maybe this would be a good thing. Understand, I am not
defending the LID, because I don't know enough about it. But I
am just trying to bring out the facts and let the chips fall where they
may.
49720— 54— pt. 2 47
732 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The Chairman. It was originally the chairman's thought that
the LID would have been presented very early in the hearings, very
early. And then, as a matter of policy, it was my idea that it was
best to outline the broad criticisms first, and then bring in the indi-
vidual foundations and organizations in accordance with the proce-
dure which was adopted.
Mr. Hays. I have some more questions. I would like to get this
thing in perspective, if there is any way to do it.
You did answer the question about being an expert on this, Mr.
Earl.
Now, let me ask you this : Do you have any idea of the membership
of the LID in numbers ?
Mr. Earl. No, I do not.
Mr. Hats. Would you know anything about its annual budget?
Mr. Earl. No, I don't. I don't think it is really pertinent.
Mr. Hays. Well, of course, I didn't ask you that, but since you
brought it up, I would be glad to discuss it with you.
Would you think its budget would be similar to that of the Ford
Foundation? Do you think it spends $10 million a year? I think it
is pertinent to find out what its budget is, so that we will know what
its influence is.
Mr. Earl. No, of course it doesn't have a budget like the Ford Foun-
dation. I would think in comparison to Ford it would have a rather
modest budget.
Mr. Hays. A kind of miniscule budget, wouldn't it ?
Mr. Earl. A which?
Mr. Hays. Very minute. That is a good word, isn't it? I hope I
am using it the right way. I like the word.
Mr. Earl. In comparison with the Ford Foundation, certainly.
Mr. Hays. But you don't have any idea of what its budget might be ?
Mr. Earl. No, I do not.
Mr. Hays. Would you be surprised if I told you its annual budget
was less than $50,000?
Mr. Earl. No, Washington doesn't surprise me a bit any more.
Mr. Hays. Well, I can see it is not going to be possible to surprise
you very easily. Having been on the McCarthy committee, nothing
will probably surprise you.
Mr. Earl. I am very proud of having worked on the McCarthy
committee.
Mr. Hays. If you feel you have to defend it, I would be glad for
you to take time to do it.
Mr. Earl. Go right ahead
Mr. Hays. Do you have any idea how this organization derives its
income, its tax-free money 1
Mr. Earl. It is my understanding that it derives the greatest part
from contributions from people like you and I.
Mr. Hays. You mean people of very limited income. I don't know
anything about your income, but if you are talking about mine, it is
in the limited class.
Mr. Koch. Minuscule?
Mr. Hays. Well, there is some debate about this. I am inclined to
belong to the school thinking it is minuscule, yes.
Mr. Koch. Me, too.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 733
Mr. Earl. But I understand that most if not all comes from con-
tributions.
Mr. Hats. In order that this discussion can proceed with some sort
of continuity, you have no objection if, when you are quoting a para-
graph, I stop and ask you where it was taken from or ask you a ques-
tion or two about it, do you?
Mr. Earl. Not at all.
The Chairman. Mr. Earl has a prepared manuscript.
Mr. Hays. I understand that, Mr. Chairman, but we have had so
many prepared manuscripts and we have deferred the cross-examina-
tion, most of which is still pending, and since he came from such a
great distance
The Chairman. He is going to remain until the cross-examination
is completed — if we follow the regular procedure.
Mr.lHAYS. I think if we go along we can get it in today. I don't
think it will take too long.
The Chairman. I very much hope so.
Mr. Goodwin. I have been waiting for some time, Mr- Chairman, to
get started.
Mr. Hays. I may say I hope I don't inconvenience you, Mr. Good-
win, but you seem to be able to start off with less background than I
have, and that is just a little difference we have, and I hope that doesn't
annoy you too much.
Mr. Earl. Mr. Chairman, let me preface my statement by referring
to something which gave Mr. Hays concern this morning. That is
that a great many prominent Americans are mentioned in my prepared
statement. I assure the committee that I am not engaged in character
assassination nor anything akin to it. The various persons mentioned
in my statement believe wholeheartedly in the things which they have
said and done, and they are not about to repudiate any connection with
or support given the LID and its activities.
Nor is this an attempt to "get" the LID or paint it as a Communist
front. Far from it. The LID stands very proudly upon its record,
as do the men and women who are associated with it. The LID and
those around it have espoused a cause, and much for which they fight
has been accomplished; not entirely, of course, due to the efforts of
the LID, but they do lay claim to have exerted some influence and
have helped bring about the goals for which they stand. This I do
not quarrel with.
However, I do dispute their right to be feeding a team of players
with tax-exempt dollars, when the medium through which most of us
engage in political activity has no corresponding tax-exempt privi-
leges.
May I also say a word regarding the problem involved in quoting
excerpts from any prepared material? One obviously cannot, in at-
tempting to characterize certain works, read the entire contents of a
publication. And so in excerpting one becomes chargeable by another
with an opposite view with quoting too little material, quoting out of
context, or quoting too much material.
The LID has been a producer of very prolific pamphlets, and it is my
belief that all have been written for the purpose of spreading, explain-
ing, and making more palatable the Socialist program for America.
734 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
That is the conclusion which I have reached after reading great
amounts of their literature. In excerpting from these publications, I
really face the problem of deciding which of a great number of quotes
to use, rather than the problem of finding something spicy enough
to use.
With that foreword, I would like to turn to the prepared statement
that the committee has.
As I mentioned earlier, I have had occasion to be interested in the
course of the LID and your chairman has asked me to come here
and chart that course.
In the Treasury Department publication, Cumulative List of Organ-
izations that are Eligible for Tax-Exempt Contributions, the LID
is listed on page 174 as such an organization, and I believe that it
has had tax-exempt status for a great many years.
Mr. Hats. Do you happen to know, Mr. Earl, whether that was ever
questioned or not?
Mr. Eael. It was questioned some years ago. It was questioned, I
believe, in the case of Weyl, W-e-y-1.
Mr. Hats. Weyl v. The Commission?
Mr. Koch. And may I say, if it is helpful to the committee, that that
decision was in 1932, and it wasn't until 1934 that the prohibition
against propaganda was placed into the statute.
Mr. Hats. Of course, a good deal of the things that Mr. Earl is
going to quote occurred in 1932, so I thought the court decision might
have some bearing.
Mr. Eael. That decision was in 1932.
Now, of course, in charting the course of any organization, I presume
you have to have a starting place, and with this one I started back
at the time it received a new name, back in the twenties, and I men-
tioned its activities and doings in the thirties, and then more recently
in the forties and fifties.
Under the law, certain organizations are granted tax-exempt status
providing no substantial part of their activities are devoted to propa-
ganda, political purposes, or attempts to influence legislation. As has
been pointed out by prior witnesses before this body, notably Mr.
Andrews and Mr. Sugarman, the task of checking on tax-exempt
organizations is difficult, because of legal provisions that are too gen-
eral, and in which the terms mentioned, "substantial," "political," and
"propaganda" are not defined.
Mr. Hats. Right there, I would like to stop you and tell you that
if you don't mind my saying so, I think you are misquoting Mr. Sugar-
man and Mr. Andrews, and I would like to read, if you will permit me,
from the record, page 979 of the transcript.
Mr. Eael. Go ahead.
Mr. Hats (reading) :
Mr. Sugarman. As I indicated at the earlier stages, the Revenue Service at
one time attempted to draw a line between propaganda and education by indi-
cating that organizations engaged in disseminating knowledge or their views
on controversial subjects may be engaged in propaganda and not entitled to
exemption. The courts felt we should not draw that line into the statute. For
that reason, organizations of that sort may now be granted exemptions under
the existing judicial precedents.
I think that propaganda problem is one that we pretty well leave alone in
the sense that in this area, like many others, we find that attempts to define terms
do not help us particularly when we get to actual cases.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 735
And then I would like to refer you also to a question that Mr.
Goodwin put to Mr. Sugarman on page 992 of the transcript.
Mr. Goodwin. Now my final question : I want to put that to the Commissioner.
I am sorry. He put it to Mr. Andrews.
Would it be a fair statement to say that this is an indication that the Congress
is pretty well satisfied with the way the Bureau and the Department are inter-
preting the original terminology, and the way in which the courts are placing
their decisions?
Commissioner Andrews. I think that is a fair conclusion, yes.
Mr. Earl. I did not have access to the record.
My information came from an article by Robert K. Walsh, of the
Washington Star. I quote :
He and Mr. Andrews —
speaking of Mr. Sugarman —
added that the task of checking on tax-exempt organizations is difficult because
of legal provisions that are too general and the agency's lack of funds and
facilities.
I agree, of course, with the statement made by Mr. Sugarman or
Mr. Andrews, whichever it was, that the spelling out in the statute
denning very meticulously what is and what isn't political propa-
ganda, et cetera, wouldn't be very much help in actual cases.
The Chairman. I might interject that those of us around here who
have read the observations of Mr. Walsh have very great confidence
in his conclusions and analyses.
Mr. Hays. I would say Mr. Walsh, who is present here today, is
limited probably by the number of words he can put on the wire, and
while he got across a general impression of what they did say, I think
it might well be said that somewhere in here, and I don't have the
exact page, they made another flat statement that they didn't want
in any case to become censored down there.
Mr. Earl. It is a problem. I know that.
The Chairman. I don't think you should quote one sentence there.
We have had a great deal about lifting things out of context.
Mr. Earl. I was only lifting one to quote one that had been lifted,
you see. I thought it was permissible in that case.
The Chairman. There is no question but that the statute, as I under-
stand the statute, does place responsibility upon the Bureau of Internal
Revenue, in connection with activities and organizations, of deter-
mining to what extent these organizations do engage in political work
and work of a propaganda nature. They are circumscribed by prece-
dent and by decisions. We all recognize that. But, nevertheless, I
think it is generally accepted that the Internal Revenue Service does
have a responsibility there.
But I hope we won't take too much time discussing this angle.
Mr. Hays. I don't intend to take any more.
I was a little flattered. I hope I interpreted your remarks accu-
rately, to signify that my expression about lifting things out of con-
text made some impression the other day.
The Chairman. I was very much impressed that that was true in
the two instances in which you were involved.
Mr. Hays. Well, that was the demonstration I was talking about.
The Chairman. You may proceed.
736 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Earl. In an attempt to obviate certain apparent difficulties of
this nature, I shall refer to two definitions which Mr. Norman Dodd,
director of research for this committee, used in his recent report.
I received a copy of this report shortly after I came to Washington.
He defined "political" as "Any action favoring either a candidacy
for public office, or legislation or attitudes normally expected to lead
to legislative action." And he defined "propaganda" as "Action hav-
ing as its purpose the spread of a particular doctrine or a specifically
identifiable system of principles. (In use, this word has come to
infer half-truths, incomplete truths, as well as techniques of a covert
nature. )
However, when one tries to ascertain whether or not a "substantial"
part of an organization's activity is "political," "propaganda," or
"designed to influence legislation," a problem of immense proportions
is encountered. An organization's activities, ordinarily, will be
neither white or black, but a shade of gray, and the problem becomes
one of ascertaining whether black or white predominates in the gray.
In this prepared statement I have assembled excerpts from publica-
tions of the League for Industrial Democracy which I think appropri-
ately illustrate and demonstrate its activities, both in years past and as
of now. My own comments serve to tie the excerpts together and
identify them, and, of course, represent my own views. However, I
think that these excerpts will speak for themselves in demonstrating
LID propaganda themes, political action, and attempts to influence
legislation.
Let us first find out what the LID is :
The League for Industrial Democracy is a membership society engaged in
education for a new social order based on production for use and. not for profit.
That is taken from an LID ad on an inside back cover of 1940
pamphlet entitled "New Zealand's Labor Government at Work, by
W. B.Sutch."
Some time after 1940, this statement was changed, and a recent
publication entitled, "The LID and Its Activities," reads :
The League for Industrial Democracy is a nonprofit educational organization
committed to a program of "education in behalf of increasing democracy in our
economic, political and cultural life."
Now, as a short aside : In both, the word "democracy" pops up and
I presume presents the problem of trying to find out what they mean by
the word.
This last pamphlet or publication that I referred to says this :
The league seeks to encourage every movement in the fields of labor, of coop-
eratives, of democratic public control and ownership, of social legislation, of
civic rights, of education, and of international relations, which aims at the
preservation, strengthening, and fulfillment of the democratic way of life.
Mr. Hats. Well, do you question their right to promote those ideas
at all?
Mr. Earl. No, I do not.
Mr. Hats. Then what is the basis of your argument? The fact
that they are doing it with tax-free money ?
Mr. Earl. That they shouldn't be in the political arena with tax-
free dollars.
Mr. Hats. What about the Committee for Constitutional Govern-
ment?
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 737
Mr. Earl. I am not going to talk about any other organi-
zation, Mr. Hays, because you are going to get into organizations
about which I know nothing. If I speak of any other political parties,
it will be the Democrats or the Republicans. Because I think the
LID is an adjunct of the Socialist Party. Now, the Socialist Party
itself, when you make a contribution — I don't infer that you do, but
when anyone makes a contribution to the Socialist Party, it is my
understanding that that contribution is not tax exempt, that you can't
list it on your income-tax return.
Mr. Hays. You are talking pretty much about a cadaver, aren't you,
Mr. Earl?
Mr. Earl. What is that ?
Mr. Hays. You are pretty much concerned with a cadaver, aren't
you, Mr. Earl ? The Socialist Party is a corpse. It isn't even running
a candidate any more. As a matter of fact, I think you will find, if
you want to go back to when you started this, in 1932, and read the
platform of the Socialist Party, and then read the Republican Party
platform in 1952, you will find that their aims are very similar. I
don't know what you are getting at. Or the Democratic Party plat-
form for that matter.
The Chairman. The word "cadaver" — I would question its appro-
priateness. The group which is generally embraced in the term
"socialist," as represented in parties of that stripe, has been control-
ling a great many elections and had a vital influence, in my opin-
ion, on our national life. And I think some of the quotations I have
read in his statement will indicate that it is not the numbers that
have the greatest influence, but it is the course of action of certain
people.
Mr. Earl. Allow me, with regard to what you have said, Mr. Hays,
to say this : You mentioned that the Democratic program as of today,
the Republican programs as of today, embrace a great many of the
things that the LID embraces and that the Socialist Party embraces.
And I am the first to agree with you. I agree that they do. But I
disagree when it comes down to this. The Republicans and the Demo-
crats are putting forward that program with tax dollars. Now, you
will have to agree with that.
Mr. Hays. No, I don't agree with you at all, and I will tell you why
I don't.
Mr. Earl. Go ahead.
Mr. Hays. The Republican National Committee has widely adver-
tised that its congressional budget this year will be in excess of $3
million. And it would be very interesting from my point of view to
learn how much of that in excess of $3 million is going to be depletion
allowance money from Texas. And that is certainly not tax dollars.
Mr. Earl. Well, I will tell you. When you or I contribute to the
war party fund of either the Democrats or the Republicans, we don't
list it on our income tax. And that is what I am talking about.
Mr. Hays. We don't list it on our income tax?
The Chairman. As a deduction?
Mr. Earl. As a deduction.
Mr. Hays. That is right.
Mr. Earl. If you made a contribution to the LID you could.
Mr. Hays. I suppose that people who give $5 could. But do you
know how many do ?
738 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Earl. Enough do to keep them going. Put it that way.
Mr. Hays. To get up to that $45,000 a'year they spend.
Mr. Earl. I don't know whether they spend 45 or how much they
spend.
Mr. Hats. Well, I am telling you. I can read the exact figures as
to how much they spend if you want, in promulgating these ideas of
theirs.
The whole point I am making, Mr. Earl, is that it seems to me you
have crossed the continent on a rather unimportant mission about a
very unimportant organization, as I see it.
Mr. Earl. Perhaps that is the way you feel about it.
Mr. Hays. Which has no relation to this investigation, that I can
see.
The Chairman. If Mr. Earl will be permitted to give his statement,
we will be in a position to evaluate it.
Mr. Hays. I am going to evaluate, Mr. Chairman, as we go along,
if you don't mind. I think we can get a better evaluation.
Mr. Goodwin. Mr. Chairman, I wonder if that is the way to do this
in the most expeditious way ? My desire is to make progress. It seems
to me I don't want to make a motion at this stage, but I am very!
definitely of the idea that we should go ahead with the statement, and
such speeches as are to be made from the committee rostrum should
come at the conclusion of the testimony of the witness.
Mr. Hays. That is a good idea, Mr. Goodwin, except that, to use
your own terminology, we never get to make the speeches, because then
we have another witness the next day, and they are put off indefinitely.
So that these people get to peddle all of this tripe, if you will permit
me to use the word, and it gets out to the press, and they release it to the
press before the committee gets it.
Mr. Goodwin. The gentleman from Ohio has thus far in the pro-
ceedings been able to get in what speeches he wanted to apparently.
Mr. Hays. And he wants to keep it up, too, if you don't object.
The Chairman. The chairman was just about to apologize for his
failure to give the gentleman from Ohio any opportunity to project
himself into these hearings, and I certainly don't want to be guilty of
such laches in the future. And I particularly have in mind the case
of one witness where a rough calculation indicated that he had only
been interrupted 246 times.
Mr. Hays. Now I know where Fulton Lewis got that statement.
And are you the one who told him I was put on this committee to
wreck it?
The Chairman. I didn't know Fulton Lewis got the statement in
the first place.
Mr. Hays. I wouldn't want to question your veracity.
The Chairman. I know by inference that you do question it. That
doesn't make a particle of difference. I am not expecting you to
accept my veracity in public. In private, of course, I know you would.
Mr. Hays. I would accept it even in public, Mr. Chairman. But
once or twice you have tested my credulity pretty far. But I accept
your veracity right down the line ; and if I don't, I won't tell you by
inference or innuendo. If the time ever comes, I will tell you, period.
So until then don't you read anything into my remarks.
The Chairman. Well, I know that the gentleman is very frank and
he isn't very credulous.
TAX-EXEMPT FCTCNDATIONS 739
Mr. Hats. When somebody tells me he doesn't know how television
got here, I have to be credulous to accept that. But I did.
The Chairman. There is no misunderstanding as to how television
got here. The organization which I presume these gentlemen repre-
sent called me before the hearings started about television and stated
they wished to take a TV newscast. I told them it would be satis-
factory with me, and I discussed it, I am sure, with the gentleman from
Ohio and some of the other members of the committee and no objection
was advanced.
Mr. Hats. Oh, no objection at all.
The Chairman. And insofar as the hearings this morning were
concerned, they came in- on the basis of their prior authorization. So
there is no misunderstanding about that.
Mr. Hats. Oh, no, no.
The Chairman. And the hearings would be so much better if the
gentleman from Ohio would confine his attention to the matter before
the committee and not get involved in these other matters.
Mr. Hats. If you want to debate this, we can. Did you or anyone
speaking for you advise anyone that you had a witness coming in
today who would blow the lid off ?
The Chairman. I certainly did not.
Mr. Hats. All right. I accept your veracity. I just heard that.
Mr. Goodwin. I would like the record to show, Mr. Chairman, that
I am suggesting that the witness be permitted to go ahead and submit
his evidence without interruption. At the end of that, of course,
there will be an opportunity for any members of the committee to ask
questions, and I assume to make speeches f rom_ the rostrum.
Mr. Hats. Would you have any objection to just having him insert
it in the record ? We do not have to be read to, or do we ?
Mr. Goodwin. I think we should hear his testimony. My only
concern, Mr. Chairman, is that we go ahead and make as much speed
as we can and get along. I am told that the program for this session
of Congress is to adjourn on the 31st of July at the latest. I can see
that, unless my suggestion is adopted, we are likely to come up to
the end of this afternoon's session with probably not more than 2 pages
out of 40 gone over. I think this is a waste of time.
The Chairman. The Chair hopes that the suggestion of the gentle-
man from Massachusetts might prevail, which is in accordance with
the motion that was made and was carried earlier in the proceedings,
since a script of the testimony is available to the committee, and we
adjourned over until this afternoon in order to give all the members
opportunity to read it or at least such members as might have had time.
Mr. Hats. Yes, but when the gentleman finishes reading his script,
which is going to be some time later this afternoon, I can just hear
the chairman now saying, "It is 4:30, and it is time we adjourned,
and then tomorrow we have someone else coming in as a witness
and you will have to defer cross-examination." And I am just not
going to submit to that kind of procedure, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to go along and be as agreeable as possible, but this
business of letting these people release these stories to the press and
letting it go out unchallenged — I can't sit idly by and do it, especially
when they go back to 1932 and talk about things that were preva-
lent then.
740 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
And a lot of people made a lot of statements in 1932, and, of course,
when they were living through the depression they felt very strongly
about it, and they perhaps wouldn't make them in 1952 or 1954.
I Avill try to not interrupt the witness any more than I can help,
but there are some things, such as the statement about Mr. Andrews,
that I felt had to be straightened out before we go any further.
The Chairman. With that discussion, then, the gentleman will
please proceed.
Mr. Earl. We were talking about the definition of the word
"democracy" and what the LID means by that word. Reference is
made in a publication entitled, "Revolt" — this is a long time ago, 22
years ago, as a matter of fact, October 1932. •
Mr. Hats. Who published that ? May I ask that ?
Mr. Earl. The LID published it.
Mr. Hats. Was that an LID publication, or of some affiliated body ?
Mr. Earl. By the Intercollegiate Student Council of the League
for Industrial Democracy.
Mr. Hats. Then it was not the LID itself, but an affiliate; right?
Mr. Earl. Right. We have read now where it is from, published
by Intercollegiate Student Council of the League for Industrial
Democracy.
Mr. Hats. That is all I wanted in the record.
Mr. Earl. And under an article entitled, "What the LID Stands
For," the concluding paragraph throws some light, I think, on what
they mean by democracy.
Mr. Hats. Are you reading now from your statement ? I am trying
to follow you here.
Mr. Earl (reading) :
The LID therefore works to bring a new social order ; not by thinking alone,
though a high order of thought is required; not by outraged indignation, find-
ing an outlet in a futile banging of fists against the citadel of capitalism; but
by the combination of thought and action and an understanding of what is
the weakness of capitalism in order to bring about socialism in our own lifetime.
Now, of course, that is a long time ago ; but my thesis is that they
haven't disavowed that. They still have the same aims. I think
it is very well put there.
We are told by Harold Lewack in Campus Rebels, a Brief History
of the Student League for Industrial Democracy, published in 1953,
that the Intercollegiate Socialist Society, forerunner of the LID,
was founded in 1905 following a call by Upton Sinclair and George
H. Strobell for the organization of an association —
for the purpose of promoting an intelligent interest in socialism among college
men and women.
Now, another aside from the prepared statement is that they still
have their own student organizations on the campuses, and it is pre-
sumed they still have the same goal in mind.
In 1921, for various reasons cited on page 8 of Lewack's Campus
Rebels, the society's name was changed to the League for Industrial
Democracy.
Let us observe that Socialist forms of government are in power in
various countries of the world, but I presume it is admitted that
ours is a Republican form of government; though not long ago it
would have been permissible to refer to it as a Democratic form of
government.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 741
You have referred to it as a cadaver. That is fine, but the LID is
still strong and healthy. Of course, that is the problem involved
here. Whether or not the LID has abused its tax-exempt status.
Let us now examine some of the agitation and propaganda themes
of the LID.
This next, preceding the excerpt, is my thought as to what that
attempts to do.
Mr. Hats. You are editorializing now.
Mr. Earl. That is right.
Special pleading and incitement to direct action on the picket line
and elsewhere would appear to be outside the scope of the normal
educational process. In Revolt, the publication to which I referred
earlier, for October 1932, published by — I said LID, and now I
should change that to Intercollegiate Student Council for the LID—
are found practical suggestions for political agitation. Under the
heading "Blueprints of Action — a Handbook for Student Revolu-
tionists," students are urged to do several things. Among them :
Teach labor courses, form workers' educational groups, boycott businesses
unfair to labor ; parade with antiwar banners and floats from the campus to the
business center of town on Armistice Day ; distribute "No More War" leaflets ;
sell Disarm —
which was a publication.
Where ROTC is compulsory, a student strike is advocated as the most effective
weapon.
And picket homes and offices of the guilty capitalists. And earlier
they had referred to Tom Mooney and his troubles.
Mr. Hays. Right there, you have a star, and it says, "Not a direct
quotation inside brackets." That is your own summation %
Mr. Earl. Where I have, "Who have imprisoned Tom Mooney and
other innocents," it refers to the fact that earlier in the article they
were speaking about Tom Mooney and his troubles.
Mr. Hays. What are those dots in there ? That indicates you have
left out sentences ?
Mr. Earl. That indicates material is left out.
Mr. Hays. I don't suppose you would want to comment, after what
happened the other day, but I would just like to read you one short
paragraph and see if you think it would be dangerous.
Mr. Earl. I heard what happened the other day. I read about it.
And I will say right now that I probably, though yo\i may read it,
won't comment on it.
Mr. Hays. All right. You have that privilege.
Our forefathers of a hundred or even 50 years ago likely called our present
social organization socialistic. Socialism has certainly infiltrated into our social
and economic structure. Our own liberal political and social philosophers have
affected it, and many of the measures of President Roosevelt's New Deal were
labeled socialistic. Perhaps some were.
This part I want to emphasize —
but I feel that many conservatists were alarmed at the expression "social
justice" and believed that anything connected with it was tainted with socialism.
At any rate, socialism has been a strong propelling force in the last hundred
years to make men's minds more alert to the necessity of social justice.
You wouldn't want to comment on that, would you?
Mr. Earl. No. May I go ahead now ?
742 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hays. Would that ring faintly familiar at all to you, Mr.
Wormser ?
Mr. Wormser. I think it does.
Mr. Hats. That is from one of your books, isn't it ?
Mr. Wormser, That is right.
The Chairman. Since you have read" that, I want to interject that
that is one of the purposes of opposition, to have some effect upon the
majority party.
Mr. Koch. Mr. Chairman, on behalf of my partner, may I say Mr.
Wormser is not tax-exempt.
Mr. Hays. I just point out that there are people who have ideas
and express them, and I am wondering if you are trying to stifle ideas,
the free market place of ideas. Someone used that expression once.
In fact, I think a president of a university used it.
Mr. Earl. No ; I would be the last to try to stifle it.
The Chairman. The only thing, as I understand it, that you are
trying to show by the quotation is that organizations promoting what
amounts to a destruction of the institutions under which we have
grown and prospered these one-hundred-sixty-odd years ought not to
be financed by tax-exempt funds ?
Mr. Hays. Are they advocating the destruction or the change of
them ? That is the thing I want to know. And if they are advocat-
ing the change, the gentleman has already testified that he was —
what ?— 13 years old in 1932 ?
Mr. Earl. I am now 34.
Mr. Hays. But in 1932, do you remember anything about the
depression at all? Who was feeding you then? Somebody must
have been. You weren't earning a living.
Mr. Earl. I will tell you. I have never had a hungry day in my
life.
Mr. Hays. You don't know how you would feel if you did, do you ?
Mr. Earl, No. I trust I never will.
Mr. Hays. And I trust that some of these social revolution changes
that have taken place, such as social security and unemployment com-
pensation and Federal deposit insurance will keep you from that very
thing.
Mr. Earl. Let me say this: I won't argue with you about social
security or the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or any of them,
or the merits of them, either way. Because both parties have espoused
them. That isn't the problem here, as I see it. The problem is:
You get into the arena with tax-exempt dollars, or don't you ?
Mr. Hays. But you take a pretty limited view of this, Mr. Earl.
That is my only quarrel with you. I think you have a legitimate
point.
Maybe you would answer this question, without naming anyone.
Do you think it is just as bad to get into the conservative side with
tax-exempt dollars as you do the other side ?
Mr. Earl. It would be a legitimate place of inquiry ; sure.
Mr. Hays. Well, that makes it a little better.
The Chairman. The question involved here is an organization using
tax-exempt money, promoting "Parade With Antiw T ar Banners," at
a time when the security of the Nation is involved.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 743
Mr. Hats. In 1932 ? The security was involved all right, but your
party didn't do anything about it ; when the Japs went into Manchuria
and Hitler went into the Hhineland and so on.
The Chairman (reading) :
Where ROTO is compulsory, a student strike is advocated as the most effective
weapon.
LID is a militant educational movement which challenges those who would
think and act for a new social order based on (production for use and not for
profit) that is a revolutionary slogan. It means that members of the LID think
and work for the elimination of capitalism. * * *
And so forth and so on.
Those are the things that we are making inquiry about, as to whether
tax-exempt money should be used to promote them.
Mr. Hat. Let me read you a revolutionary slogan and see if you
think we ought to investigate it.
Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of those ends, it is the
right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government,
laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form as
to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.
Now, that is real revolutionary. That is out of the Declaration
of Independence. You can't get much more revolutionary than that.
The Chairman. Of course, the Declaration of Independence refers
to the right of the people to set up a government.
Mr. Hays. And to abolish it and to change it and to do whatever
they think is necessary for their happiness. I don't know anything
about this LID or how bad an organization is.
Mr. Goodwin. We are trying to learn something about it.
Mr. Hays. I don't think you are going to learn much except from
one side.
The Chairman. We will be very glad to have the representative
from whom we received the telegram come down and give us the other
side. Now, we have been here 1 full hour.
Mr. Hays. And we have had some very profound documents read
from, such as the Declaration of Independence.
Mr. Wormser, I meant no offense by quoting your book. You
should be glad to have it read with such high-class literature as this,
I am trying to prove that people have ideas and have a right to
promote them and sell them if they can.
Mr. Woemser. I think it is only fair to say that it was read out of
context.
Mr. Hays. Oh, yes. I have done a lot of reading from your books.
I want to know what goes on in the staff's mind. And I did find that
some of the things that go on in your mind click in mine. So I feel we
are closer together than we have ever been.
Mr. Goodwin. That is a hopeful note to go on with.
Mr. Hays. But I keep saying, "Don't be too optimistic."
Mr. Earl. Any notion that the LID was to confine itself to the
cloistered atmosphere of academic pursuits, as distinguished from
"work" and "action" is dispelled by the editors of Kevolt, who write
on page 6 of this issue, under the heading "What the LID Stands
for"
Mr. Hays. Is that still 1932?
Mr. Earl. Yes.
744 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The Chairman. If I may interject, he is going back to the beginning
of the LID, when it was organized under the name of League for
Industrial Democracy as the successor to the Student Communist
League or whatever it was, and he is going to come on up to date, so
that his quotations are not from any one period, but over a long period
of years.
Mr. Hays. We could prevent a lot of interruption, which un-
doubtedly must interrupt your cerebral continuity somewhat, if you
would just, as you read these quotations, say, "This is 13, and this
is 35" if you happen to know.
Mr. Earl. I ordinarily prefer them with that. If you can stand it,
we will be to 1950 on page 11.
Mr. Hays. I will try to wait with bated breath.
Mr. Earl. From the publication in 1932, Revolt, on page 6, under
the heading of "What the LID Stands for"—
The League for Industrial Democracy is a militant educational movement
which challenges those who would think and act for a new social order based on
production for use and not for profit. That is a revolutionary slogan. It means
that members of the LID think and work for the elimination of capitalism, and
the substitution for it of a new order, in whose building the purposeful and pas-
sionate thinking of student and worker today will play an important part.
Other quotations from page 6 of this same article suggest that LID
spokesmen were interested in a rather strenuous program of education :
Men and women who would change a world must blast their way through the
impenetrable rock. No stewing over drinks of tea or gin, no lofty down-from-
my-favorite cloud, thinking more radical thoughts than thou attitude makes a
student movement or a radical movement. LID students talk and write about
conditions. LID students act about them.
* * * a staff of 6 or 8 leave the Chicago or New York offices to help co-
ordinate activities. They get into classrooms, they talk to classes. * * * In addi-
tion these speakers furnish a valuable link between students and their activities
later on. After graduation the work continues unabated. In city chapters, in
New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Detroit, Baltimore, the work of education and
action goes on.
The LID emergency publication, the Unemployed and Disarm, have reached a
circulation of one-half million. * * * Students organized squads of salesmen to
sell these magazines, containing slashing attacks on capitalism and the war sys-
tem, at the same time it enable the unemployed to keep alive.
In November of this year a training school for recent graduates will be opened
in New York * * * to equip students by field work to perform their tasks in
the labor movement. * * *
This language about recruiting and training, I think, would be more
appropriate in an Army field manual than in the journal of an educa-
tional association.
In the same issue, Paul R. Porter, a field secretary of the LID, who
has more recently been a director of the EC A in Europe, and as an
aside, a recipient of an LID distinguished award, expressed his fears
that American business leaders might turn to fascism as a means of
saving their dying world. In an article entitled, "Fascist Goat Glands
for Capitalism," Mr. Porter writes, and this, of course, is from the
same publication published in October 1932 :
Social systems do not commit suicide. Societies grow senile and shaky hut
their ruling classes hold to the last their power and privileges against the class
ultimately destined to displace them. It is this fact which makes so grave the
prospects of fascism, in America as well as in Europe.
Because political democracy, for all its weaknesses and delusions, is a power
instrument in the hands of the workers, the ruling class will attempt to divest
them of it (p. 7).
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 745
Talk of "ruling classes," the "delusions" of democracy, the in-
evitability of class displacement, is language borrowed from Stalin
and Lenin.
Mr. Hats. Let me read you a paragraph right here very similar
to this :
President Hoover and his associates had announced there would be a short
period— -
this is 1932 they were talking about —
of unhappiness, after which the law of supply and demand, if not interfered with,
would restore normal conditions. This might have been true, but the country-
felt very sick when Franklin D. Roosevelt took office and was in no mood for
waiting. Those who were without jobs, who could not pay their rent, who could
not sell their merchandise, who could not get their money out of banks which
had failed, were not hopeful that the old capitalistic system would correct
its own maladjustments. F, D. R.'s overwhelming victory at the polls was
deemed a mandate to overhaul the old machinery thoroughly.
Do you think that is revolutionary ?
Mr. Earl. I am not quarreling with it.
Mr. Hats. Do you think it is revolutionary, Mr. Wormser ?
Mr. Wormser. I think you ought to put my whole book in evidence.
Mr. Hats. We ought to get the title in anyway. It might create a
demand for it among the New Dealers.
Mr. Koch. And the price.
The Chairman. You may proceed.
Mr. Earl. Explaining that a "Socialist revolution means a redis-
tribution" of wealth "on an equalitarian basis," Mr. Porter advises
workers and farmers that —
* * * their recourse now is to form a political party which they themselves
control, and through which they might conceivably obtain state mastery over the
owning class (p. 7).
Mr. Porter visualizes the onset of fascism in these words :
When Community Chests are more barren than Mother Hubbard's cupboard
and workers begin to help themselves to necessities in stores and warehouses,
when bankrupt municipalities stringently curtail normal services, then vigilante -
committees of businessmen, abetted by selected gangsters, might quickly and
efficiently assume command of governmental functions.
The assumption of power by vigilantes in a few key cities would quickly
spread. The President (Hoover or Roosevelt) would declare a national emer-
gency and dispatch trops to zones where vigilante rule was endangered. Prob-
ably he would create a coalition super-Cabinet composed of dominant men in
finance, transportation, industry, radio, and the press, a considerable number
of whom would be Reserve officers.
Mr. Hats. May I ask you about the "Hoover or Eoosevelt" in
parentheses ? Does that mean that was written before the election ?
Mr. Earl. This was written in October of 1932, and I think the
election was in November.
The Chairman. Are you correct in this phrase here, that Mr.
Porter — Paul R Porter, we should say, to distinguish him from
another distinguished man — spoke of "vigilante committees of busi-
nessmen, abetted by selected gangsters" ?
Mr. Earl. Where are you reading from, sir? Oh, that is from
the quote at the bottom.
The Chairman. That is pretty strong language.
Mr. Hats. That is the bottom of page 4, the second paragraph from
the bottom, the next to the last line.
Mr. Earl. I will read from the magazine.
746 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Koch. Is that a direct quotation?
Mr. Earl. Yes, it is.
Mr. Hays. I understood Mr. Porter as saying that could happen.
Eight?
Mr. Earl. Yes. His thesis here seems to be that that very well
could happen.
Mr. Hays. That was written in 1932?
Mr. Earl. October 1932.
Mr. Hays. You could get a lot of funny statements written back
there, when people really were hungry, with 12 million unemployed.
Of course, that makes them pretty poor prophets today.
Mr. Earl (reading) :
The bulldozing methods of the wartime Council of Defense would be em-
ployed against protesting labor groups and some individuals might be imprisoned
or shot, though several "cooperative" A. F. of L. officials might be given posts of
minor responsibility.
And then my own comment on that :
Mr. Porter's objectivity and ability to see the picture of life as a
whole — valuable assets to a scholar engaged in education — are further
demonstrated by this passage taken from the same publication, the
same page :
The American working and middle classes are, politically and economically,
among the most illiterate in the world * * * . Insofar as they (the middle class)
comprehend the class structure of capitalist society their impulse is not to
welcome union in struggle with the working class into whose ranks they are
being pushed, but on the contrary to vent their humiliation in resentment against
militant labor.
Many workers, for their part, are disgusted by the impotence of most A. F. of L.
unions and would quickly respond to demagogic Fascist agitation, even as many
once flocked into the Ku Klux Klan. Unemployment to them is not an inevitable
consequence of maldistributed income * * * (p. 7).
Having analyzed the danger, Mr. Porter then outlines the action
program that can ward it off :
Watch now those little flames of mass unrest * * * Great energy will be gen-
erated by those flames of mass revolt. But revolt is not revolution, and even
though new blankets of cruel repression fail to smother the fire and in the end
only add to its intensity, that energy may be lost unless it can be translated into
purposive action. Boilers in which steam can be generated— if we may work our
metaphor — need be erected over the fire, and that steam forced into engines of
reconstruction.
Trotsky, in describing the role of the Bolsheviks in the Russian Revolution,
has hit upon a happy figure of speech which we may borrow in this instance. No
man, no group of men, created the revolution ; Lenin and his associates were but
the pistons driven by the steam power of the masses. The Marxist Bolshevik
party saved that steam from aimless dissipation, directed it into the proper
channels.
To catch and to be driven by that steam is the function of the radical parties in
America today (p. 8).
Mr. Porter was a trifle unhappy because the Socialist Party was
"not yet a consistently revolutionary party," and he apparently re-
g retted the tendency towards moderation in the Socialist parties of
oth Great Britain and Germany.
This is from the same article :
There are members who would pattern it (the Socialist Party of America)
after the German Social Democracy and the British Labor Party, despite the dis-
astrous experiences of two great parties of the Second International. There are
members who have lost to age and comfort their one-time fervor, and members
who would shrink from struggle in time of crisis (p. 8).
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 747
Yet, voicing hope for the Socialist revolution in America, Mr.
Porter closed on a note of optimism and advice.
They (the Socialists) must overcome the quiescent influence of those whose
socialism has been dulled by intimacy with the bourgeois world, and they must
speak boldly and convincingly to the American working people in the workers',
language.
If their party can rise to these tasks then perhaps capitalism can be decently,
buried before it has found temporary rejuvenation in a Fascist dictatorship
(p. 8).
While it would not be fair to attribute these views to the entire mem-
bership of the LID, they are of special significance for the reason
that Mr. Porter, as organizer and lecturer for the LID, was the mis-
sionary who contacted thousands of students in his travels about the
country. They are not the opinions, therefore, of a casual contributor
to a party organ, but the fixed beliefs of one of the most active of the
permanent cadre of our Socialists.
In another article, Journal of the LID Chautauqua,— this was
taken from Revolt, page 10, printed in October 1932 — Carrie Glasser
describes an LID summer school. She writes as follows in the same
issue of Revolt:
We can tell also of heartening accomplishment, of the seeds of new thought
we have planted, of clubs organized for working men and women (in the West
Virginia coalfields), of labor plays written and acted, of songs composed by
the workers themselves, and herein we see the hope of a fruition of social dis-
content which will lead to a social change (p. 10).
Mr. Hays. I am going to have to comment right there : do you know
about conditions in the east Ohio oilfields, adjacent to where I grew
up and still live, in 1932? Do you know anything about those con-
ditions ?
Mr. Earl. I have read about them, but I am sure you are much more
familiar with them than I. I realize they were very bad.
Mr. Hats. Do you realize men worked 14 hours, sometimes going
to work in the dark and coming home after dark, and that instead of
a pay check, they frequently got a slip telling them how much they
owed the company for groceries ? Have you heard of such conditions
that existed in Ohio in 1932?
Mr. Earl. I have heard that they did.
Mr. Hats. I did not "hear that they did." I saw it and lived
through it. And I saw my father extending credit to those coal
miners' families for food, knowing full well he was never going to
get the money, because he could not stand to see their kids go hungry.
Then you talk about a little revolutionary dogma. I am amazed they
did not say worse things than that.
The Chairman". Whatever the conditions were, and they were bad,
that does not justify an organization, for the purpose of sponsoring
a revolt against our form of government, going in and trying to
capitalize on the misery and discontent of the people.
Mr. Hats. They wanted change and they got the change.
The Chairman - . The whole tenor of what he is saying here is that
they are revolting against our system of free enterprise and free labor.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Reece, you are not proud of that free enterprise
that was paying those men no wages at all in 1932?
The Chairman". I am proud of our system of free enterprise, free
enterprise and free labor, which has given us the highest standard
of living that any people on earth ever enjoyed. While we have our
49720— 54— pt. 1 18
748 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
ups and downs, the continuous course of history has been upward,
and I am proud of it. And for one, I do not want to see the taxpayers'
dollars used to try to break down that system.
Mr. Hats. Well now, I do not think you are as disturbed about
that as you are perhaps about some other political matters, but be
that as it may, let me say to you, as to the great free enterprise system,
that I believe in it. I am a capitalist. And as I said to you the other
day, I do not want anybody running my business.
But you know, when the capitalistic system — and as I say, I am
one of them — gets in trouble, as your coal miners and operators did
in 1932, they were very happy for the Government to bail them out.
The Chairman. I voted for the Bituminous Coal Act because I
thought it was a good thing.
Mr. Hays. Because you thought that the Government could help
out free enterprise. It is all right if it is free enterprise and they are
getting a little help, but when the fellow who is doing the work gets
help, that is revolution.
The Chairman. If we are through
Mr. Hays. I do not know if we are through or not. I do not get
many answers, except that I get some speeches about wrapping your-
self in Old Glory and how wonderful the Fourth of July is. But
these are pretty fundamental things. They were to those people
then. And I have heard it said to this committee, "Just muddle along
through these depressions." Of course, if 10 or 12 million people
starve to death, I expect they would not want to "muddle." But if
they want to do something about it, that is revolution. Is that what
we are saying ?
Mr. Goodwin. There must be a better forum, Mr. Chairman, for
colloquies of this sort. I do not know quite where it would be, but
I am sure it is not in this committee.
Mr. Hays. Well, I won a debate on this subject over on the floor
of the House from a fellow statesman, geographically, that is, from
Ohio, and I will debate it any place anyhow, because I lived through
it. When you start talking about the coal miners of West Virginia
and Ohio, you are talking my language. I know something about it.
The Chairman. Proceed.
Mr. Earl. Felix S. Cohen, under the heading "Politics and Eco-
nomics," has this to say in the same issue of Revolt :
The crucial issue of industrial civilization today is not between laissez-faire
individualism on the one hand and collectivism on the other. History is deciding
that question. The question for us is what sort of collectivism we want (p. 20).
Modern technology makes collectivism inevitable. But whether our collec-
tivism is to be Fascist, feudal, or Socialist will depend * * * upon the effective-
ness with which we translate those political ideals into action (p. 20).
Mr. Cohen reminds his colleagues that political warfare to achieve
a new social order is total, not limited, conflict :
You cannot fight on the economic front and stay neutral on the legal or
political front. Politics and economics are not two different things, and the
failures of the labor movement in this country largely arise from the assumption
that they are. Capitalism is as much a legal system as it is an economic system,
and the attack on capitalism must be framed in legal or political terms as well
as in economic terms (p. 21).
* * * a Socialist attack on the problem of government cannot be restricted
to presidential and congressional elections or even to general programs of legis-
lation. We have to widen our battlefront to include all institutions of govern-
ment, corporations, trade unions, professional bodies, and even religious bodies,
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 749
as well as legislatures and courts. We have to frame the issues of socialism
and democracy and fight the battles of socialism and democracy in the stock-
holders' meetings of industrial corporations, in our medical associations, and
our bar associations, and our teachers' associations, in labor unions, in student
•councils, in consumers' and producers' cooperatives — in every social institution
in which we can find a foothold * * * {pp. 23-23).
This is scarcely the outline of an educational project. Rather it is
the battle plan of strategic sociology, through which an entire civili-
zation can be shifted from its cultural, economic, political, and moral
foundations. Mr. Cohen's language is the jargon of the professional
revolutionary, not the scholar. Consider the following :
I don't think that we can capture the New York Telephone Co. or the BMT
in a day or a year. But then I don't think we can capture the Federal Govern-
ment in that time, and if we did gain control of the Federal Government without
having any experience * * * in other institutions which govern the country,
our control of the Federal machinery might not do us much good {p. 23) .
Mr. Cohen explains the advantage of infiltration over the simple use
of the ballot in advancing the cause :
Even a single stockholder in a public utility may have a nuisance value that
modifies the activity of that corporation in the interest of its employees or its
•consumers, and may have a voice that reaches the public outside of the corpora-
tion in impressive terms. Paul Blanshard has done more for socialism with
his two shares of stock in the BMT and the New York Telephone Co. than a
hundred men and women who vote the straight socialist ticket on election day
and forget about socialism the rest of the year (p. 23) .
Finally, Mr. Cohn reminds his colleagues that these tactics of pene-
tration are useful however the revolution is finally accomplished — by
legal or unconstitutional means :
But the need of fighting politically within corporations and trade associations
and professional bodies, as well as labor unions, is just as pressing if we think
that fundamental social change can be secured in this country only by uncon-
stitutional measures.
In a revolution, when the ordinary political machinery of government breaks
down, it is absolutely essential that the revolutionary force control the remain-
ing centers of social power. In Russia the success of the Bolshevik revolution
rested with the guilds or Soviets, which weer not created by the Communist
Party and which antedated the revolution. A socialist revolution in this country
will succeed only if our guilds, chief among them our engineering societies, have
within them a coherent socialist voice (p. 23).
The author reveals his respect for the democratic process in these
words :
We may not need a majority. We do need at least a few Blanshards in every
important corporation and association who have made themselves familiar with
the concrete evils which that corporation or association contributes* to the putrid
mass of capitalism, and who will be able to carry essential industrial activities
through a time of crisis (p. 23).
In the December 1932 issue of the same publication, Revolt, appears
an article by Amicus Most entitled "Students in the Class Struggle."
Its announced purpose is to give serious though to the part that stu-
dents can play in the class struggle and their place within a workers'
movement. Excerpt follows:
Karl Marx in the Communist Manifesto wrote: "In times when the class
struggle nears the decisive hour—a small section of the ruling class cuts itself
adrift and joins the revolutionary class," and "A portion of the bourgeois ideolo-
gists, who have raised themselves to the level of comprehending theoretically
the historical movements as a whole," goes over to the proletariat. Students
will, therefore, fall into this classification. They are really idealists who are
acting against the economic interests of their own class, for the middle class is
actually opposed to changing the capitalist system (p. 11).
750 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
It, therefore, becomes essential, if the student who has accepted the Socialist
philosophy is to become an active factor in making socialism a reality, to com-
pletely forget his class interests (p. 11 ) .
The student must be active in strikes, in unemployment organizations, in
demonstrations, etc., not as a leader, or by making an occasional speech, but by
participation as a rank and file worker. He must be a picket, he must do the
clerical work, distribute the leaflets, face the police and thugs, the dangers and
the public condemnation just as any other worker does (p. 11) .
In the same issue of Revolt, Paul Porter, field secretary, whom
we referred to earlier, reports on activities of individual LID chapters :
* * * the true measure of student Socialist strength will be found in the
League for Industrial Democracy chapters and Socialist clubs that remain per-
manently on the campus. Their manifold activities will comprise the main stem
of the radical student movement ( p. 12 ) .
Mr. Porter announced the convocation of a mass really against war
in New York.
Planned as an outgrowth of the conference will be a student delegation to
Washington soon after Congress convenes, to serve notice that hundreds of stu-
dents will reject the role of cannon fodder in another war, to request that the
State Department furnish a list of investments for which American youth may
some day be called upon to fight, and to demand that money now spent in main-
taining the ROTO and the CMTC be used providing relief for the unemployed
(p. 12).
Surely a march on Washington constitutes an attempt to influence
legislation.
And, to quote from page 12 :
Delegates are already making preparations to attend the traditional Christ-
mas holiday conferences of the LID, which will be held for the 18th successive
year in New York and for the 5th in Chicago. This year's New York theme will
be "Socialism in Our Time" and has been divided into three main categories,
to with : "How May Power Be Won," "Building a Power Winning Organization,"
and "The Morning After the Revolution." The Chicago conference will be along
similar lines.
Mr. Hats. Can you tell me what year those two paragraphs were
written ?
Mr. Earl. They are still from 1932, sir.
It is conceivable that the subjects discussed under those headings
were all theoretical, though the titles suggest "action."
Other projects of LID chapters, described by Porter, include riots
and visits to soup kitchens.
Taken from page 13 of the same publication :
On Armistice Day military-minded former Senator Wadsworth * * * spoke
in Ithaca on behalf of a bigger Army and Navy. Members of the Cornell Liberal
Club, the Socialist Party, and student peace groups held a rival meeting after
which they marched with banners past the high school in which Wadsworth
was speaking. Leonard Lurie, Cornell LID representative, describes their gentle
reception : "Several of the Army officers rushed at us and tore down a few
posters. The police joined the destruction which was over very shortly. They
prodded us along the street with their stick, and Fred Berkowitz remarked,
"I wonder how much the police get for hitting people * * *."
Growing in frequency are those trips of economies and sociology classes to
case illustrations, such as breadlines and strikes, of this magnificent chaos
called capitalism. Recently students from Amherst and Mount Holyoke, under
the leadership of Prof. Colston Warne, made the rounds of New York's choicest
soup kitchens, and visited Brookwood Labor College and the officers of various
radical organizations (p. 13).
And in parentheses, I refer to the Report of Proceedings of the
48th Annual Convention of the A. F. of L., November 19-25, 1928,
pages 315-318, on Brookwood Labor College. Also see New York
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 751
Times, November 29, 1928, page 12, for report of action at the same
AFL session. (See also Appendix IX Investigation of Un-American
Activities, Select Committee on Un-American Activities, House of
Representatives, in the 78th Congress, for citations for Prof. Colston
Warne.)
Under "Blueprints for Action," on page 14 of this issue of Revolt,
students are urged to :
Transform your Thomas-for-Presiflent Club into a permanent LID chapter,
which we hope can be known as a Socialist Club, if you have not already done
so. Have each member joint the LID. Many may also wish to join the Socialist
Party, which should be encouraged. For an elaborate program of action in
the months ahead consult the detailed Blueprints in October's Revolt, or write
to Paul Porter at the LID.
Mr. Hats. That is still 1932?
Mr, Earl. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hays. That dangerous movement of 22 years ago folded up
pretty completely, did it not?
Mr. Earl. A message from the national chairman of the Intercol-
legiate Student Council reads :
The presidential campaign is over, but ours has just started.
It is hardly necessary to make suggestions as to what is to be done. Workers'
forums, college forums, miners' relief work, LID Lecture Series, renewed and
vigorous efforts to sell Revolt — all these projects will aid in the educational
work that is so necessary at this time.
We must look ahead 4 years. Local elections are in a sense more important
than national elections. To measure the success of the LID, is to measure the
growth of socialism in the community yow, are in (p. 14). [Emphasis added.]
If encouraging students to join the Socialist Party and working to
win local elections for Socialist candidates is "educational" activity,
it is difficult for me to see why the Republican and Democratic Parties
do not qualify for tax-exemption under the same provisions of the
statute.
In February 1933, the title of "Revolt" was changed to the "Student
Outlook." The editorial states :
With this issue Revolt becomes the Student Outlook. Students felt it was
more important to sell our magazines and convince by its contents than to shout
"revolution" and have no one listen. Persons who give us more than a glance
will not mistake our colors.
Another editorial on page 1 of this issue calls for "student guts" :
* * * it is questionable whether the student who hasn't guts enough to get
out on his college campus and hawk the Student Outlook will overcome his
delicate scruples if the time comes to face tear gas and machine guns * * *
Only those who steeled themselves to decide with firmness during school hours
will do so at those moments that historians pick out for special mention.
Under the title "Socialism in Our Time," in the same issue of the
magazine, Helen Fisher reports on the 17th New York conference of
the LID. She writes {on p. 8) :
The speeches and questions were those of participants in the building of a
power-winning organization, not spectators.
It was a conference of practical revolutionists.
Both Reinhold Niebuhr and Franz Daniel ruled out the possibility of our ever
attaining a Socialist commonwealth by purely parliamentary action * * * Both
felt that the change would come through the general strike or some weapon
similar to it.
In the discussion of the Day After the Revolution, Paul Blanshard stressed
the necessity of presenting at least a sketch of the proposed society to those we
are trying to get to fight for it. Sociolopia, according to Mr. Blanshard, would
752 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
have an international government, some international battleships and airplanes,,
complete control of munitions, an international language and socialized owner-
ship of industry with control by workers, technicians, and consumers. Lewi*
Mumford then spoke about the need for disciplining ourselves morally and intel-
lectually the day before the revolution.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Earl, would you care to comment there on whether
or not, as to all of these quotes you have read—and some of them sound
pretty radical, I would be the first to admit — you perhaps think r
though, sort of prove the case for the value of free expression; that
even though people talked like that in the 1930's, when we had a de-
pression, we solved those problems' by peaceful legislation, and that
the capitalistic system has become even stronger because of remedial
legislation, certainly, then it was in the thirties?
Mr. Earl. I will agree with you, Congressman Hays. But I think
I w T ill have to revert again to the theme that this is what I would term
"political action," and I doubt that they should have been in it.
Mr. Hays. In other words, are you advocating now, Mr. Earl, that
the Congress take some kind of action to dry up the $45,000 a year
that this organization has, so that they cannot express these views ?
The Chairman. You are not recommending anything, as I under-
stand it.
Mr. Earl. I think that what I believe in and advocate is pretty well
set forth here, and of course it will be up to the committee to decide.
However, I have said before, I have said earlier here, that I think
that their tax exempt status was certainly being violated.
The Chairman. Wayne, it is not correct, that while we won out,
so to speak, there was great difficulty encountered? Take the sit-
down strikes, particularly in Detroit, but which spread to other parts
of the country. Take the Allis-Chalmers strike. And now it has
been definitely established, I think, on a factual basis, that both of
those disturbances that gave the country genuine alarm were in-
spired, prompted, by these and similar, comparable influences for the
purpose not of helping the United States and our system here but
for the purpose of destroying it insofar as they had the power to
destroy it.
There were many other instances, over the country, delaying pro-
duction of essential military equipment, as well as equipment to pro-
duce the supplies needed by the military, to the point that we were
very greatly handicapped for a period of time, as a result of which we
had great losses.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Chairman, I would not want to get into any debate
with anybody about relative merits of the various strikes that have
occurred in this country.
I come from an area where strikes are not an unknown thing.
I have, as I grew up, witnessed the militia coming in and breaking
up strikes, and I have even seen a few strikers shot and seen them
hauled away, and all of that. And I want to say to you as objectively
as I can that it has always seemed to me that in any strike that I have
personally observed, there were probably two sides to the thing.
There probably was more merit on one side than there was on the
other. This is as I viewed the situation, when the coal miners struck
in 1927, and again when they have had strikes since then. And I
might tell you now, and you probably know as much about it as I do
or more, that the big coal companies do not have strikes much any
more, because they have finally adopted the idea that labor unions are
TAX-EXEMPT FOTJNDATIONS 753
here to stay and we are going to do business with them. But there
was always some merit there. The men were either getting not enough
to live on — and I suppose from the viewpoint of the operators, they
had merit, too, because they had to show a profit, and they had to try
to pay some dividends to their stockholders.
It seems to me that the whole thing that has come out of it — neither
this committee nor any other committee can edit the thinking that
goes on in people's minds. I think the crux of this is not whether this
little minute organization that has only $50,000 a year approximately
to spend has espoused some, to me, rather radical ideas, if these quota-
tions are accurate, and I assume they are. That is not the issue, as I
see it, whether they have done it on tax-free dollars' or whether they
have not. It seems to me there is a bigger and more basic issue here.
Who is going to edit the thinking of people? Who is going to say
that you cannot demand social change ? Who is going to say that you
cannot advocate the changing of the social order ? I think it is here
that we have something basic.
The Chairman. In a much shorter speech, I will answer that:
Nobody.
Mr. Hays. I am glad to have that concession.
Mr. Earl. I might say this, before I continue, that it is my thinking
that these quotes that we have listened to, Mr. Hays, although they
concern very difficult problems of the times back in 1932 and 1933, that
have since been solved to a great extent, all in the political arena. And
they do more than that, as far as these people were concerned. You
will notice all through here that their theme was the pushing of
socialism. And a great many things that have happened are things
that you and I agree with today. And just because a Socialist is
supposed to love his mother and his wife, I should not turn around
and say because they believe that I certainly will not love my wife
or love my mother.
The things that they advocated were that all of these be done not
particularly to help America and help the system that was then in,
but to overthrow that system and supplant it with a system of
socialism.
The Chairman. And your quotations later will indicate the doings
right up to the present time.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Earl, in a very friendly way, I am going to ask you
to try to answer this question. Do you not suppose that if someone
had spent as much time as you obviously have in studying the writings
of people on the other side, we could come up here, somebody could
come up here, with a pretty long document of pretty horrible quota-
tions about people who were advocating the use of troops to put down
the workers and to move in police and to surround the workers' homes
and all that ?
Do you not think we could dig up that kind of stuff ?
Mr. Earl. You probably could, sir, but probably not with tax ex-
empt money.
Mr. Hats. Then let me say this, before you go any further. The
thing that I am trying to point out is that despite all of the extreme
argument on either side, I consider it kind of a tribute to the good
commonsense of the American people that we rectified what were some
obvious mistakes by peaceful means and did not listen to the extrem-
ists on either side. And I am just wondering about what the value
,754 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
is of rehashing this 20 years later. And at the moment we are only
rehashing one side of it.
As far as I am concerned, I do not even want to rehash the other side,
which would be just as extreme, I am sure.
Mr. Koch. Mr. Hays, if there were another side that was financed
by tax-exempt foundations, I think the staff would like to have it.
Mr. Hays. Well, now, right there, are you saying that this organi-
zation was financed by tax-exempt foundations ?
Mr. Koch. No ; it is a tax-exempt foundation.
Mr. Hays. No ; it is not a tax-exempt foundation. It is a tax-exempt
organization. I will grant you that. But it is not a foundation, by
any stretch of the imagination.
Mr. Koch. I think we can agree on this. It is one of those founda-
tions that are created under section 101, subparagraph 6. And that
section, Mr. Hays, has a provision against propaganda. And, as I
understand it, it is our job to check whether that definition is clear
enough, or whether we should throw the thing out and let all the
foundations, whether they have an income of $33 million a year or
$50,000 a year, get into the act. The thing is that we have to go into
this question of propaganda, as I see it, under 101, subdivision (6),
and I do say that LID is one of those creatures.
Mr. Hays. Of course, there are a lot of other creatures, too. There
is the Committee for Constitutional Government. But you do not
want to go into that. I will promise you that you do not.
Mr. Koch. Wait a minute. Did not the witness who mentioned the
outfit — did we not find out that that was 101, subparagraph (8),
which has not got that propaganda clause ? And the contributions to
that other are not tax-exempt.
Mr. Hays. You mean to say that the contributions to the Committee
for Constitutional Government are not tax-exempt?
Mr. Koch. I understand that their own income is not tax-exempt.
Mr. Wormser. There is that distinction between 101 (6) and the
other.
Mr. Hays. Which one are they under? I will agree with this in
principle to save further argument. And though I may disagree with
some of the people who represent the Committee for Constitutional
Government, I firmly agree that they have the right to espouse what-
ever belief they want to. But the only thing I will get into any argu-
ment on is that I think these people and the people from the Com-
mittee for Constitutional Government ought to be treated alike. If
one is tax-exempt, the other should be, and if the one is not, the other
should not be.
Mr. Goodwin. And you will agree that if we can conclude these
public hearings seasonably, we ought to leave plenty of time in
executive session to go into all of those matters ?
Mr. Hays. Oh, yes. I have no optimism that we will ever be able
to come to any agreement, but I am willing to devote as much time as
necessary trying.
Mr. Goodwin. I am going to be much more optimistic than you are,
Mr. Hays.
The Chairman. Knowing the agreeableness of the gentleman from
Ohio and his great capacity to study and resolve the facts and work
amicably with people when he gets behind closed doors, I have con-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 755
fidence that we will be able to get out a report which will be signed by
all the members of the committee.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Chairman, if I were as thin-skinned as you are, I
would take offense at that obvious sarcasm, but I am going to accept
it just as though you meant it, and when the record comes out there
will not even be your inflection in there, and people will think you did
mean it.
The Chairman. We do not have any trouble when we are together
behind closed doors. We never have.
Mr. Hays. I will just say : Do not be too optimistic.
The Chairman. You may proceed.
Mr. Earl. Alvin Coons made a similar report on the conference in
Chicago, where the LID considered everything "from technocracy
to technique." This is from page 9, and this is still back in 1933, in
February :
Clarence Senior, national secretary of the Socialist Party, expressed the belief
that reforms would only further encumber the capitalistic system and that every
concession would only hasten its end.
Affirming his faith in democracy as an instrument of social change, he
advocated its use as long as possible, not however, excluding the use of other
methods should it fail.
"Radical students," he declared, "can spend their time more profit-
ably getting acquainted with the problems of the workers, than they
can in studying chemistry to learn how to make bombs, or in going into
the ROTC to learn how to shoot. You can hardly expect to teach the
workers to shoot straight for bread if you cannot teach them to vote
for it" (p. 9).
Under Blueprints for Action, in the February issue of The Student
Outlook, these techniques are advocated (p. 16) :
Boring from within.— Never will it be emphasized too strongly that college
radicals must shunt their freshmen, particularly, onto the college paper. Espe-
cially journalism students, those that write well, and will succeed. Send so many
for tryout that one, at least, will make the grade. Keep their marks up to avoid
disqualification or suspension.
Make interlocking directorates, by having your men in all school activities, to
promote radical activity of otherwise quiescent groups, and to make the news of
these groups redly tinged. Cosponsored action, possible with interlocking direc-
torates, makes good news.
Then, if I may, I will turn to that article. They entitle this, "This
Is One Way to Sell Radicalism." And down under a subheading
called, Newspaper Style, paragraph E :
Propagandize only in quotations or in adroit wording. Examples : "Capitalism
is bankrupt. At least this is what 100 youths contended at a meeting."
It is now time to turn from an analysis of LID ideology and
revolutionary techniques in the early thirties to an examination of
contemporary activities and beliefs. A study of LID personnel and
pamphlets suggests that, even today, the league is expending more
energy in political action than in education. Certainly there is much
evidence to support the view of LID "research" is designed to in-
fluence legislation.
On April 15, 1950, for example, the league sponsored a symposium
entitled "Freedom and the Welfare State" to celebrate its 45th anni-
versary. Some of the speeches made at the conference will indicate
the bias of the educators present. All of the quotations which follow
756 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
are taken from Freedom and the Welfare State, a published account
of the conference.
Dr. Harry Laidler, executive director of the LID, called upon
his associates to meet the need of college students for guidance from
those who do "honest, independent thinking" and thus offset "reac-
tionary" propaganda in the colleges and the "totalitarian" propaganda
from abroad.
This is taken from pages 5 and 6 of that publication, which I have
here.
We in the league are happy to record the social progress that has been made
during the first half of the century. We are, however, conscious of the fact that
the goals of full democracy and economic security have not as yet been
reached * * * Economic injustices in the distribution of the fruits of industry
are widespread. An inner circle of owners and executives of mammoth corpo-
rate groups still possess vast power over the lives of our people.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Earl, right there, on that very last sentence that
you read, starting with "An inner circle," would you disagree with
that statement?
Mr. Earl. I would not necessarily disagree with it, no.
You mean, as regards my own thinking ?
Mr. Hays. Yes. It is more or less a true statement, is it not?
The Chairman. I personally disagree with it, myself, but you have
a perfect right to express your opinion if you care to do so.
Mr. Hats. This committee has apparently been trying to make out
the thesis that an inner circle of executives of foundations possess
vast power over the lives of our people, and I am wondering if it is
not true that an inner circle of owners and executives of great corpo-
rations possess vast power over the lives of our people.
Mr. Reece has a right to his own opinion, but I think he is pretty
far out on a limb there.
To go back to my more or less famous quotation of last week,
exactly the same words almost
The Chairman. All of our corporations now are controlled by the
Government, under the law which has been set up to provide free
competition in the enterprise system, so that today an inner circle
of owners and executives of corporations can control the lives of the
people.
Mr. Hays. Of course, the law says that they shall not do that, but
again any law is only as good as its enforcement agencies, and of
course you will never forget, I do not suppose, and probably never
will be able to live down the statement that "what is good for General
Motors is good for the country."
The Chairman. Even the inner circle of the great New York Cen-
tral Kailroad was not able to control the lives or its own stockholders,
much less the people.
Mr. Hays. And that is the case right there, because I did not know
how to get my friend, Mr. Young, into this. He went out and fought
for the stockholders and the little people in the New York Central,
and he had a tough time getting his battle won. It was not easy, and
he will tell you that himself.
The Chairman. Of course, we had better not get into that discus-
sion. All of his associates were not particularly little people.
Mr. Hays. No. That is true. They certainly were not. But he
has put forth a program and a platform for the little stockholders,
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 757
and he has done an unusual thing in his very first meeting, saying
that his board of directors are not even going to take expenses. So
I kind of feel like the little stockholders are going to get a break.
The Chairman. I have a very high regard and very warm affection
for Mr. Young. And I suffered no great pangs of disappointment
when he gained control in his fight.
You may go ahead.
Mr. Eakl (reading) :
The league, with its program of total democracy in industry, government,
and human relations, has surely a great educational task before it.
We are seeking to meet the social challenge in many ways. We are con-
tinuing to send distinguished lecturers from here and abroad to our colleges
and cities. We have published more pamphlets on educational and social prob-
lems this year than in many years past. We are conducting a campaign for
the organization of city chapters which is meeting with remarkable success.
And I mention again that this is in 1950.
Our dinners and conferences during the last year or so, with Senator Hum-
phrey, President David Dubinsky, John Dewey, Senator Lehman, and Walter
Reuther, among others, as honored guests, have been of historic significance.
Such college conferences as the recent regional conference at Harvard have been
of a high order.
Our greatest educational task, is, however, before us. In the college world,
the 2% million young people on the campuses are today groping for light, on
problems of democratic social change. They are being propagandized by nu-
merous reactionary organizations which have large sums of money at their
disposal. They are being propagandized by totalitarian forces that receive
their line not from hard, honest, independent thinking, but from a dictatorial
government abroad. They are bewildered. Students are looking to democratic
organizations like the league for enlightenment and guidance (p. 6).
Eecruiting, training, organizing, public relations — these are still
the chief activities of the LID by the testimony of its own com-
manding officers.
Both Mr. Ewing and Mr. Reuther — Mr. Ewing, as an aside, is Mr.
Oscar Ewing, who went to represent President Truman at this par-
ticular meeting — seemed to feel that the real threat to America was
from reactionaries.
The conservatives may yell "socialism" at any suggestion for improvement.
They may feel the hot breath of revolution with every proposal for change.
But most dangerous enemies we have to our American way of life are those very
people whose emblem is not the eagle but the ostrich * * * (p. 13).
Those blind forces of reaction in America who would lead us back down the
road to so-called normalcy and commit the American economy to the economics
of scarcity and special privilege, are the Cominform's most valuable allies.
These same blind forces, if permitted to grow unchecked in America, will drive
us again to depression and disaster as they did in 1929, and provide the Comin-
form with a weapon more devastating than a stockpile of H-bombs.
Mr. Hats. Just one question there, Mr. Earl. Do you not agree
that if we did have another depression, it would be a good weapon
for the Comiri form ?
Mr. Eael. Would be what, sir?
Mr. Hats. A very good weapon for the Cominform.
Mr. Eakl. Sure, I agree.
The Chairman. It is now 4 : 30. It would appear evident that Mr.
Earl is going to be unable to complete his testimony this afternoon,
and I thought we ought to discuss what the program is.
758 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
We had anticipated completing with Mr. Earl today, but not finding
it convenient to proceed this morning, and being delayed somewhat in
the afternoon, it is now certain that we cannot complete today.
Some of us have some obligations in our offices that must be fulfilled.
What are your suggestions, Mr. Wormser ?
Mr. Wormser. I think we had better continue first thing in the
morning with Mr. Earl. We have the Social Science Eesearch Coun-
cil scheduled for tomorrow, but I suggest that we put them on after
Mr, Earl.
The Chairman". If that is agreeable, then, we will go ahead with
Mr. Earl.
Mr. Hats. Is there any objection to inserting the rest of his state-
ment into the record ? We can have time to read it tonight and ques-
tion him in the morning.
The Chairman. There may be some parts of it that he might sug-
gest be put in the record, and some read. I have not, myself, had
opportunity to read it yet, and I have had no one to assist me in digest-
ing it, so that I am not in a position, as one member of the committee,
really to say.
Mr. Hays. My only point is this, Mr. Chairman. He is going to
read it into the record, and I certainly am not going to object to his
reading it. I would think that we could expedite the thing, since
it has already been released to the press, and they have had a chance
to cull over any parts of it they want, and the committee may have
an opportunity to go over it tonight, and we could just consider it
read and go on in the morning.
The Chairman. I am sure there are certain parts he would like to
read.
Mr. Earl. If I may suggest this : I will go through this tonight and
digest the rest of it.
Mr. Hats. Why not insert it in the record, and then if you have any
comments on various pages, you could go through it and note your
comments. Do you think that would work out?
The Chairman. Let us determine that tomorrow. This is valuable
testimony, in all probability, that he is now getting ready to present,
and the chairman would not like to see the committee restrict him too
much in the presentation of it.
Mr. Hats. I had no idea of restricting him. I would be willing
for him to comment at any length he wanted. But it seems to me the
mere reading of it, since it has been released
The Chairman. At the gentleman's insistence, we have suggested to
the witnesses to prepare written statements of their evidence, and I
am sure the gentleman does not intend to reflect on the importance of
the testimony by reason of the fact that it has been prepared in writing
and therefore is presented by the way of reading it.
Mr. Hats. No ; the gentleman from Ohio has no such intention, and
my only idea in this in the beginning was to do the very thing we have
done now. We go up to quitting time, and if the witness is not
through, in order to prevent a break in his presentation, we could
allow him, as we did for the staff, to put it in the record and continue
his comments at another time.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 759
The Chairman. I am sure of that. But we canceled the session this
morning, and in the first hour of the session this afternoon, practically
the full hour was consumed in colloquy between the members of the
committee, which the chairman does not remove himself from as a
participant, but the result has been that the witness has only occupied
1 hour this afternoon. ,
Mr. Hays. I have no objection, Mr. Chairman, to the witness read-
ing the rest of it in the morning if he wants to. I was only trying to
expedite the thing and give some continuity to his presentation.
The Chairman. That can be done.
The committee will stand adjourned until 10 o'clock tomorrow
morning.
(Whereupon, at 4 : 35 p. m., the hearing was adjourned until 10 a. m.,
Wednesday, June 16, 1954.)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 16, 1954
House of Representatives,
Special Committee To Investigate
Tax-Exempt Foundations,
Washington, D.G.
The special committee met at 10 a. m., pursuant to adjournment, in
room 1301, New House Office Building, Hon. B. Carroll Reece, chair-
man of the special committee, presiding.
Present: Representatives Reece (presiding), Goodwin, Hays, and
Pfost.
Also present : Rene A. Wormser, general counsel ; Arnold T. Koch,
associate counsel ; Norman Dodd, research director ; Kathryn Casey,
legal analyst ; John Marshall, chief clerk.
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
You may proceed, Mr. Earl.
Mr. Goodwin. I wonder, before Mr. Earl starts, Mr. Chairman, if
we could not get some sort of a stipulation from the committee that we
will be as easy as possible on the questioning. I notice that we are run-
ning behind schedule all the time. We learned yesterday that there
was a possibility that the House may go into a 3-day recess period
beginning with the first of next month. I know that those of us who
like to get home occasionally would dislike very much to be held in
Washington for the continuation of the public hearings. If the mem-
bers of the committee could perhaps forego the temptation of cross-
examining, it might be possible to expedite.
The Chairman. If Mr. Earl could be permitted to conclude his
prepared statement, I think that would be well.
Mr. Hays. I would like to have him put his statement in the record.
The Chairman. I haven't had the opportunity to study his state-
ment, myself. As one Member of Congress, I would like to hear it.
There might be some questions at the end that I would like to ask him.
Mr. Hays. I would just like to say that I will try to refrain. I am
just as anxious to get home as anybody else. But since I have sat pa-
tiently through a lot of testimony, some relevant and some not so rel-
evant, about foundations, I am not going to show any inclination to
shut this questioning off. I think the thing is very fundamental, and
ample time should be given to this.
Mr. Goodwin. My thought is that we could get down to the funda-
mentals the gentleman from Ohio refers to much more quickly if we
use a little more discretion.
Mr. Hays. I appreciate the gentleman's position, and I will try to
cooperate, but I think the discretion will have to be left up to each
761
762 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
member of the committee. I don't believe anybody can decide but me
what I think it is best to ask about and what is not.
Mr. Goodwin. The last thing I would attempt to do is to tell you
how you should conduct your questioning.
The Chairman. We will do the best we can to expedite the presenta-
tion, I am sure.
You may proceed, then, Mr. Earl.
TESTIMONY OP KEN EARL, ATTORNEY, LEWIS, STRONG & EARL,
MOSES LAKE, WASH.— Resumed
Mr. Earl. Might I ask first whether or not the sound system is
working ? Is my voice heard up there now ?
Mr. Hats. If you will pull the microphone as close to you as you
can, Mr. Earl, that will help. These are not as sentitive as some
microphones.
Mr. Earl. We had gotten to the middle of page 12 of my prepared
statement. We were speaking about a conference which the LID
held in 1950. They reported that conference in a pamphlet entitled,
"Freedom and the Welfare State." And beginning with the middle
of page 12 :
Mr. Israel Feinberg, vice president of the ILGWU and a member
of the Board of the LID, had this to say :
Labor, in effect, must become the vanguard of the welfare state. But welfare
measures alone don't go to the heart of the problem. Labor must lead an
attack on the private monopoly power of the giant corporations. It must seek
a redistribution of income so that the working people have sufficient purchasing
power to halt the drift to depression. All this would require further Govern-
ment interventions into our economic life. To see to it that the necessary pro-
grams are carried out democratically, labor should insist on a voice in formu-
lating and administering them. Labor should be represented on management
councils, whether the ownership be private or public — that would be real indus-
trial democracy.
Another LID board member, Mr. Norman Thomas, Socialist leader
and chairman of the Post War World Council, attacked anticom-
munism in these words. This is also taken from the same publication.
This is obviously a summary written by one of the editorial writers of
the LID :
"Within the trade unions, in the growth of which he rejoiced, there was grave
danger that, under cover of a fight against communism — which, properly con-
ducted, is legitimate and necessary in our unions — certain leaders may attempt
to fasten a kind of Fascist dictatorship of their own on the unions."
At Washington and in some of the State capitals, we suffer from a rash of
stupid and reactionary proposals —
such as the Mundt-Ferguson-Nixon bill, which would, if enacted —
jeopardize all of our liberty while doing nothing important to stop communism.
The setbacks in civil liberties Mr. Thomas blamed on "the whole Communist
technique of conspiratorial deceit," on the reactionaries who exploit the situ-
ation caused by Communists, "partly to cover their own bad records by a
boisterous partiotism," and on the Republican Party, which is trying to find itself
an issue in "socialism versus liberty" (p. 31).
I injected both of those excerpts, because I think that they are
strictly in the political arena.
On April 11, 1953, just a year ago, the LID held its 48th annual
luncheon in the Hotel Commodore. The subject was "The Crisis in
American and World Resources." Speakers included Mrs. Eleanor
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 763
Roosevelt; Oscar L. Chapman, former Secretary of the Interior;
Thomas C. Douglas, Premier of Saskatchewan, Canada ; Adolph Held,
chairman of the Jewish Labor Committee; Paul K. Porter, former
United States Deputy for Economic Affairs in Europe. Dr. Ralph
J. Bunche, Senator Paul H. Douglas, Congressman Jacob K. Javits
and Dr. Harry A. Overstreet sent messages of congratulation and
admiration to the league.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Earl, could you tell me just why you put these names
in right there, and what significance it has ?
Mr. Earl. I put the names in partly because a little later I refer
to some of their messages, and also to indicate the political character
of the persons who attended the conference. And also, although this
came up yesterday, I would like to refer to it : You mentioned yester-
day that you figured I had come a long way to testify concerning a
very unimportant organization. I rather suspect that persons of
Mrs. Roosevelt's stature and Mr. Chapman's stature, and various other
people who have been honored by the league and who pay it homage,
would be rather at odds with you about that, because they obviously
consider it an important organization.
Mr. Hays. Well, I suppose, Mr. Earl, that they would be able to
testify about that better than you would. I don't think you need to
put any words in their mouths, and if they want to take issue with
you, they can. But if you put their names in here for the purpose of
trying to indicate that they are mixed up with any leftwing organiza-
tion, I happen to know a couple of these people, namely, Congressman
Javits and Senator Douglas, and I want to say to you that there are
no more outstanding Americans in Washington today than those two
men, and both of them have a long record of anticomnmnism.
Mr. Earl. Mr. Hays, I did not say that these people were left-
wingers, that they were Communists, or anything of the sort. I would
like to point out that these people are proud of their association with
the LID, and what the LID has done. They have said so. And
they are going to be the last persons in the world to disavow anything
that they have said concerning it.
Now, I put their names in here to indicate the type of people who
are associated with the LID and who nurture the things that the
LID stands for. That is the reason I put their names in there.
They have been associated at their affairs, and some of these people
have been honored by the LID and have gone there to receive their
plaudits and banquests, et cetera. And I don't think any of them are
going to disavow what the LID has said.
Mrs. Pfost. Mr. Earl, do you think that is bad, for them to be
mixed up, as you say, with the LID ?
Mr. Earl. No, Mrs. Pfost, I don't think that it is "bad." I say that it
demonstrates the political nature of the LID, and the fact that it is con-
stantly in the political arena. I am not here to judge the merits or
the demerits of the program that the LID has espoused, except to say
that the LID has espoused socialism, and that they are for certain
things, and that, being for a certain political program, for certain
legislation, I think they should be plumping for it with dollars that
remain after their income has been taxed.
Mrs. Pfost. By your dropping these names in or referring to
these people as being associated with or mixed up with the L. I. D.,
49720 — 54— pt. 1 49
764 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
does that mean that you feel that these people are trying to further
socialism? Is that the implication, by bringing the names in?
Mr. Earl. I think that the implication stands for itself. The
LID stands for certain principles. It has made no bones about
what those principles are. I think the record of the various confer-
ences indicates what those are. You and I know that a great many of
those principles have been espoused by both the Republican and the
Democratic parties. So I will just drop it there.
Mr. Hays. Well, let's not drop it there, for just a minute. You
use a technique that is not one that you have developed yourself. It
has been around here before ; in which you start off with the premise
that these people are not Communists, and thereby plant the seed;
just as though I would say to you, "Now, Mr. Earl, don't for a minute
think that I think you are stupid," and if I hadn't brought that up,
nobody would have thought about it, would they ? I am just using
that as an illustration, not that I mean you are. But that is the kind
of technique you are using on these names.
Mr. Earl. I disagree with you, but that is all right.
The Chairman. It is pretty difficult to discuss an organization
without discussing some of the names that are associated with it, it
seems to me. But, as I understand, the whole purpose here, or the
primary purpose here, is to indicate the political characteristics of
the activities of the organization, which is supported by tax-exempt
funds.
Mr. Hats. Well, I will just give you a little example. We get over
here, and he says Senator Douglas received ,an award, and he says he
sent a speech up which would make interesting reading, implying
there is something bad about it. When we come to that I am going
to read it.
Mr. Earl. I was going to read it.
Mr. Hays. I would like to read it, and you may comment on it.
The Chairman. Proceed.
Mr. Earl. The LID, according to the luncheon program, "serves
as a liaison between many liberal forces of this country and abroad."
It is questionable if liaison work with political activists is "educa-
tional" within the limits of our statutes relating to tax exemption.
It is even more doubtful that giving public relations support to the
political leader of a Canadian Socialist Party is pure research.
The Chairman. It was my impression that the State Department
served as liaison between this country and the forces abroad. Maybe
I was in error in that.
Proceed.
Mr. Hays. From some of the comments I have read about the State
Department, I would say that almost anything you might say about
them could be in error.
Mr. Earl. Here is the league's citation to Thomas C. Douglas,
Premier and Minister of Cooperatives, Saskatchewan, Canada :
In 1944, following a brilliant career as ethical leader and member of the
Canadian Parliament, you were elected, against the powerful opposition of the
forces of special privilege, the C.C.F. Premier of Saskatchewan.
Four and eight years later, you and your able and dedicated coworkers were
returned to power with overwhelming majorities. Under your dynamic, crea-
tive and socially visioned leadership, the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation
Government assured to the people a clean and honest administration ; enacted
the most advanced legislation on the American continent in the fields of natural
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 765
resources, human rights, health and social insurance ; worked out a harmonious
relationship between the strong cooperative movement and expanding public
enterprise; steadily improved the cultural and recreational services, and gave
to the world an example of social and economic planning with freedom that has
placed every democratic country in its debt.
In recognition of these historic achievements, the League for Industrial Dem-
ocracy, at its 48th Annual Conference, takes pleasure in presenting to you its
1953 Award to a Distinguished Leader from Abroad, and looks forward to your
continued pioneering services to your Province, your country and the demo*
eratic world.
Mr. Norman Thomas, in presenting citations to Paul Porter and
Clarence Senior, said :
Today we wish to show our appreciation to two active student officers of the
late twenties who have since been of great service to our country and the world.
* * * nowhere in their career is it mentioned they were active Socialists. Paul
Porter used to give me kind of a headache too about the kind of Socialist he was
at times, but it's not mentioned now ; he perfectly safe as far as I am concerned.
And as for Clarence Senior, I read that "* * * following his graduation, after
a decade of service in the fields of adult education * * * public housing and
labor and Socialist political action, * * * he entered the field of inter-Ameri-
ean * * * relations." Now the truth about this man must be told ; he was
once the national secretary of the Socialist Party and he did a very good job.
I am awfully proud to have known these men so long, and awfully proud of
what they have done. They have done the kind of work that might have saved
us if more people had done it. For instance, imagine if by their work in the
days of their less reputable calling they could have made Texas or Louisiana
Socialist?
Do you think we would have had to worry about who would own the oil? I
don't. I am quite sure that there would have been an extraordinary change in
our theory of States rights, Mr. Ex-Secretary Chapman, at this point. They
did a grand job and they are doing it now. (Prom the luncheon program.)
The LID News Bulletin, January 1953, in announcing this forth-
coming conference (referred to above) used this language :
At a time when the country is using up many of its natural resources at an
unprecedented rate; * * * when powerful lobbies are seeking to take our off-
shore oil resources out of the control of the Federal Government, to return the
TV A to private monopoly and to prevent the further public development of the
Nation's vast hydroelectric resources, and when adequate aid in the development
of resources of other lands is vital to the maintenance of world democracy, it
is most fitting that the LID should give its attention this year to this important
problem of conservation (p. 1).
If there is any doubt that the bulletin is anything other than a rally-
ing cry for a militant lobby — rather than an educational journal —
such doubt can be dispelled by turning to page 6 of this same issue.
There the LID's program for "democracy in action for 1953" is
set forth by Dr. Harry Laidler, executive director. It should be noted
that the academic recommendations endorsed by the league just hap-
pen to deal with the issues then before Congress. Moreover, instead
of presenting both sides, they urge action in behalf of a particular
piece of legislation. Excerpts from this democratic program follows :
In presenting this program, Dr. Laidler declared that advocates of a
strengthened democracy would be confronted in 1953 with powerful opponents,
well supplied with funds, and that, for the first time in 20 years, the main body
of the Nation's press would be alined on the side of the party in control of our
national government * * * (p. 6).
1. Conservation of natural resources: It urged the increase of forestland
public ownership and control ; the "retention of offshore oil by the Federal Gov-
ernment and the use of revenues from oil resources for educational purposes;
extension of the TVA principle to other river basin developments * * *
2. Social security: The program recommended that the Nation consider the
enactment of a democratically operated national health insurance system * * *
766 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
and the strengthening of the old-age pension and unemployment insurance
system * * *
3. Labor legislation: * * * (reorganize child labor laws)
4. Economic stability : It favored the formulation of plans for the maintenance
of economic stability when defense tapers off, by means of credit controls,
progressive taxation, useful public works, social-security programs, and other
measures.
5. Housing: It proposed * * * Federal aid for the construction annually by
municipal housing authorities of a minimum of 135,000 apartments for low
income and middle income groups
Mr. Hats. That is the Eisenhower and Taft program.
Mr, Earl (reading) :
6. Education: * * * (Federal aid, better salaries for teachers, "freedom of
inquiry," etc.)
7. Civil rights and antidiscrimination legislation: (stressed need for Federal
and State FEPO laws, liberalization of our immigration laws, fair hearing to all
public employees charged with un-American activities.)
8. Corruption: (Favored purge of dishonest officials.)
9. Foreign policy : The program favored, in addition to military aid, increased
economic, social, and educational assistance to developed and underdeveloped
countries * * • *
10. Labor and cooperative movements: It urged * * * labor unity, the
strengthening of collective bargaining * * * in white collar trades. * * * It like-
wise urged the strengthening of the consumers' and producers' cooperative move-
ment * * *
* * * the league report viewed as antidemocratic trends the increased influence
of such public figures as Senator McCarthy on important Senate committees;
* * * the increased confusion among Americans regarding what should con-
stitute a realistic democratic foreign policy ; the bitter propaganda against the
United Nations which had been witnessed on all sides during the year and the
continued threats of men like Governor Byrnes to destroy their State's public
school system rather than abolish segregation in the public schools (p. 6).
Whatever the merits of these proposals, they suggest the platform of
a political party or the legislative guide of an organized lobby — not
the reflection of an educational institution.
An examination of some of the pamphlets recently published by the
LID reveals that the league is still marketing a product suspiciously
close to "propaganda."
From — Needed: A Moral Awakening in America, a symposium;
report on LID luncheon, April 25, 26, 1952— this is a summary by the
editor.
August Claessens, national chairman of the Social Democratic Federation,
took a dimmer view of trends in business morality than did Mr. Rennie, and
declared that, in his opinion, "capitalism, now so> inoffensively called 'private
enterprise,' is essentially immoral. It is a source of corruption in business and
polities. Private enterprise corrupts Government enterprise and the only ef-
fective steps toward the elimination of these immoral influences are the rapid
extension of collectivism and the advance of the cooperative movement" (p. 28).
At the same luncheon, Walter Reuther presented a citation to Philip
Murray on behalf of the LID. The citation was received by James
B. Carey for Mr. Murray, who was unable to be present. Mr. Reuther
referred to the Government seizure of steel as an example of the
need for morality in American industry :
The steel industry cries aloud in protest against Government seizure, yet the
steel industry fails to realize that in a free society there is no substitute for the
voluntary acceptance and discharge of moral and social responsibility. It was
the failure of the steel industry voluntarily to discharge its social responsibility
by bargaining in good faith that created the crisis that compelled the Government,
as the agency of the people and the guardian of the public good, to intervene.
Never in the history of industrial relations has there been a greater need for,
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 767
and such a tragic lack of, the moral leadership on the part of American in-
dustry (p. 7).
James B. Carey, secretary-treasurer, CIO, made the following re-
marks in accepting the citation on behalf of Mr. Murray :
It is fitting, therefore, that a League for Industrial Democracy should honor
a Congress for Industrial Organization. The aspirations and goals of our two
organizations are more than similar— they are complementary.
The steel barons of our day are determined to victimize not only their own
employees, but all American consumers and wage earners. In their complete
abandonment of moral and ethical sensibility, they would undermine the living
standards of millions of Americans and even jeopardize the national defense
program itself. * * *
Our country needs, and our world needs, collective indignation that takes on
strength and crusading power only by the cohesion of brotherhood inspired by
the common economic, political, and social goals that all working men and women
share * * * (p. 11).
Mr. Abraham Lefkowitz, principal of Samuel J. Tilden High
School, made the case for progressive education as a means of fighting
corruption. This is taken from pages 24 and 25.
Mr. Goodwin. Where is the Samuel J. Tilden High School ?
Mr. Earl. The Samuel J. Tilden High School is in New York.
Democratic education creates social individuals, not individualists. The indi-
vidualist works for a self and subtracts from others ; but the social individual
is most to be desired because of what he bestows upon others, through no loss
to himself.
Having attracted first-class minds free to develop the highest spiritual ideals,
how can our schools help pupils to be receptive to these values? We know
exhortation is no more effective than mere possession of knowledge. Children
must face vital social problems and participate in their solution, based on recog-
nized social values that evolve from group planning, discussion, study, and
action. Hence, our schools, now dominated by the competitive ideal of each for
himself and the devil take the hindmost, must subordinate the competitive ideal
with its marks and rivalry for individual gain to the social service ideal of
cooperation for the common good or for group objectives or the development
of talent (pp. 24, 25).
Perhaps there is no more succinct explanation of the interrelation-
ship of progressive "education" and socialism.
Mrs. Pfost. What connection does Mr. Lefkowitz have with LID ?
Mr. Earl. I am not sure what his current affiliation is. I would
have to check. H appeared as a speaker at this particular program,
Mrs. Pfost. I beg pardon?
Mr. Earl. I say he appeared as a speaker at this particular
luncheon.
Mr. Lefkowitz continues :
A critical study of social problems ; emphasis on sports where the indivdual,
despite his desire to shine, is taught to subordinate self to the team chosen with-
out discrimination ; or stress on creative arts or school group activity based on
democratic planning, etc. — all these develop a social outlook and should make
for spiritual values ( p. 25 ) .
Toward Nationalization of Industry, by Harry W. Laidler, exec-
utive director of the LID, was published in 1949 and represents a fairly
recent explanation of LID views on this subject. Excerpts from this
pamphlet follow :
One of the outstanding questions before the American people today is whether
they should work for the increase or the decrease of the powers of the Federal
Government over the economic and social life of the country (p. 3).
768 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Among our public utilities, one corporation controls a practical monopoly of
the telephone business and another of the telegraph business of the country.
Great holding and investment corporations control much of our electrical indus-
try, while a major part of the mileage on the Nation's railways is directed by a
handful of large railroad systems and banking groups. One, two, three, and
four overlords of industry control more than half of the business in many of our
manufacturing industries, while a few large banks, centering in New York,
possess an enormous influence over the industrial structure of the country (p. 4).
Mr. Koch. Mr. Earl, a pamphlet such as this, Toward Nationaliza-
tion of Industry, is that for sale, or sold, by the LID, or is that dis-
tributed free of charge ? Do you know ?
Mr. Earl. On the front it reads, "Price 25 cents," so they must
have been for sale.
Mr. Koch. And, of course, we don't know whether they make money
or lose money on some of their publications, but they do publish books,
don't they, or pamphlets ?
Mr. Earl. Yes, they have quite a list of pamphlets that they list on
the back of each of their publications.
The selection of facts, the emphasis and the choice of vocabulary
here combine to distort the picture of America in much the same fash-
ion that it is distorted by the propaganda mills of the U. S. S. R. Dr.
Laidler continues :
Under a system where the basic industries of the country are privately owned
and run primarily for profit, therefore, much of the income of its wealthiest cit-
izens bears little or no relation to their industry, ability, or productivity (p. 6).
Here is the familiar theme, common to all Marxists, that capital-
ists are drones and parasites. Moreover, it will be seen from what fol-
lows, that they are actual or potential fascists. Then we go on, on
pages 8 and 9 :
The development of our system of private industry, furthermore, has been
accompanied by attempts at autocratic controls of economic, political, and social
relationships by owners and managers of our giant industries.
Many of our great leaders of industry who have constantly and bitterly opposed
the extension of Federal power and nationalization on the ground of "regimenta-
tion," for years spent much of their time in an attempt to regiment their own
labor forces and, through the use of the spy system, armed guard, police, con-
stabulary, militia, injunction, and blacklists, to prevent the workers under them
from exercising their American right to organize and to bargain collectively.
Laws passed during the thirties have made illegal many of these practices, but
ruthless and undemocratic procedures in labor relations are still resorted to In
industry after industry by the possessors of economic power. These same leaders
have sought to control and regiment political organizations, the press, the
platform, the pulpit, the school, and university in the city, the State, and the
Nation.
The industrialists of the Nation have frequently kept prices high and rigid,
have kept wages down, have constantly chiseled on quality, and have run their
businesses not for the service of the many but for the profit of the few. In many
instances they have sought to involve the country in international conflict with
a view of safeguarding their investments abroad (pp. 8, 9).
Dr. Laidler calls for nationalization of our forests, coal mines, oil
reserves, railroads, electrical power, communications, et cetera:
Our forests should be brought far more completely than at present under
Federal administration * * * (p. 9).
The forests of the country, under private ownership, are, furthermore, cut
down faster than they are restored.* * * Public ownership and operation, on
the other hand, would guarantee scientific forest management (p. 11).
Bituminous coal mines should be brought under the control of the Federal
Government. * ** The condition of the industry under private control has long
been chaotic {pp. 11, 12).
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 769
Anthracite coal is another resource which, in the interest of the Nation,
should be owned and controlled by the Federal Government (p. 13).
The waste in the exploitation of our oil resources likewise necessitates further
Federal control (p. 13).
The Federal Government should likewise increase its control over the Nation's
power resources * * * Dr. Isador Lubin some years ago suggested the creation
of a Federal Power Corporation, which should have ownership not only of water-
power, but of coal, oil, and natural gas, with the view of coordinating the efforts
on a national scale of all of those industries which generate power (p. 15).
(Dr. Lubin, Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics from
1933 until 1946, was the United States representative to the U. N.
Economic and Social Council from 1946 until March of 1953.)
The case for the nationalization of the railroads is a powerful one. Such
ownership, in the first place, would make possible the scientific planning of the
transportation industry for the entire country (p. 16).
Only under Government ownership can a sensible plan be worked out. Only
under such ownership can a foundation be laid for cooperation between the
railroad system and busses, water transportation, airlines, trucks, and other
forms of transportation, a cooperation absolutely essential to the health and
welfare of the Nation's transportation system ( p. 17 ) .
If this means anything at all, it means rigid Government control over
all forms of transportation, not just railroads. Note also the wholly
unreal assumption of bureaucratic infallibility which underlies the
case for continental coordination of transportation.
And to quote from page 18 :
Only under Government ownership will it be possible to secure enough cheap
capital adequately to modernize the railroad system.
Finally, Government ownership would serve the interests of democracy by
taking this vitally necessary industry out of the grip of a mass of holding com-
panies and financial interests intent on profits and placing it in the hands of
representatives of the 150 million people in the United States. Surely an indus-
try on which the health of the whole continent system is so dependent should
not be the plaything of small groups of railroad magnates and financiers. * * *
Statements to the effect that American railroads are the "plaything"
of financiers do not belong to the realm of responsible scholarship.
Mr. Hays. Mr. Earl, I would like to interrupt you right there and
just ask you a question or two about that last editorial statement of
yours.
Are you familiar with such characters as "Bet a Million" Gates,
Diamond Jim Brady, Commodore Vanderbilt, and a fellow by the
name of Grew, and so on, who played around with the railroads for a
great many years ?
Mr. Earl. I have heard some of their names, yes.
Mr. Hats. Did you ever hear about the time one of them bundled
up $5 million in securities and crossed the river in New Jersey so that
the opposition crowd couldn't get hold of the money it was felt be-
longed to the new board of directors ? Did you know that the Erie
Railroad only within the last 10 years or so paid off the indebtedness
caused by water that was put into its stock by some of these same
people % I mean, if you are going to editorialize, I think you ought to
perhaps be a little more familiar with your subject.
Mr. Earl. Well, I point out here that I still contend that these are
things that these people in a tax-exempt organization shouldn't be
indulging in.
Mr. Hats. Which people? You mean the manipulators shouldn't
have indulged ?
Mr. Earl. No, I am talking about Mr. Laidler.
770 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hays. All right. That is all. Go ahead.
Mr. Earl. Quoting from page 19 :
Similar arguments may be advanced for the public ownership of our elec-
trical power. The experiments by the Federal Government in hydroelectric
power in the TVA in Boulder (now Hoover) Dam and Columbia Basin, as I
declared before, should be extended and the city, State, and Federal Govern-
ments should secure all control over the electrical resources of the Nation.
Public ownership of our electrical industry, as of our railroad industry, would
make possible a unified control of the industry throughout the country. It would
lay the foundation for a coordination of the power industry in general (p. 19).
Communications, manufacturing, banking and credit are not ignored
by Dr. Laidler's proposals for nationalization. (See p. 20) And on
page 22 Dr. Laidler calls for a housing bill which stirs the imagination.
Dr. Laidler would not nationalize the composition of symphonies or
the writing of novels, but his language suggests that "thought control"
would follow "industrial control." (See p. 23.)
Dr. Laidler goes on to say :
If public ownership is to be truly democratic, furthermore, each socially
owned industry should be administered democratically. That does not mean
that the workers in each industry should completely control that industry, * * *
The final control of a publicly owned industry should be in the hands of society
as a whole (p. 24).
Dr. Laidler goes on to admit that :
Of course the exact type of democratic control which should be adopted would
have to be worked out on an experimental basis over a long series of years
<p. 25).
Answering the charge that socialism will eliminate and frustrate the
range of consumer choice, Dr. Laidler replies :
Of course under public ownership consumer choice should be made
as free as possible. In ordinary commodities and during ordinary
times, the Government should merely try to chart the past trends in
the field of consumer demand, and, on the basis of past demands,
decide how much of various types of commodities should be produced
in the immediate future. In the nature of the case, Government
agencies and voluntary groups and individuals should do their part
to educate the public regarding the value of certain commodities; to
encourage the purchase of socially desirable goods and discourage
the purchase of "illth" * * * instead of wealth. But all regimenta-
tion in this field of activity should be avoided (p. 26.) [Italics added]
It is difficult to reconcile the pious declaration against "regimenta-
tion" with the suggestion that Government agencies should "educate"
the public to accept "socially desirable" goods. Incidentally, who
writes the definitions? Who decides that the times are "ordinary"?
For notice that it is only during "ordinary" times that the choice
will be as "free as possible." Finally, where is the guaranty that
linking future production to "past trends" will benefit the consumer?
In analyzing the propaganda themes of the League for Industrial
Democracy, it is instructive to see what prominent members of the
league have had to say about communism. And I would like to say
first here that I have included these references concerning this subject
as a demonstration of socialism's constant search, at least what I think
is its constant search, for the silver lining in the Communist cause.
Since Marx's manifesto is the foundation of both socialism and com-
munism, socialists feel very badly about seeing their first cousin go
astray. And further I have included them because communism is
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 771
one of the powerful political issues of our time; that most people
are now agreed that communism is an international conspiracy.
Hence, it is interesting to read what certain people have had to
say about it. And if you want me to, I shall go through it. It is
contained on page 20 through the middle of page 24 of my statement,
and contains first the statement of Mr. Alfred Baker Lewis, who was
chairman of the LID board in 1943 and 1944. This pamphlet, en-
titled, "Liberalism and Sovietism," was published in 1946.
This essay represents an attempt by socialist intellectuals to dis-
associate themselves from the terror and cruelty of Russian com-
munism. An uncautious reader is left with the feeling that, while
Russian foreign policy is evil, the economic program of the Soviets
is really quite acceptable.
Excerpts from the above pamphlet follow. Mr. Lewis explains to
his fellow liberals just how the Bolsheviks came to be unfriendly :
The governments of every capitalist nation, i. e., of every nation in the world
but Russia, immediately upon the Bolshevik's seizure of power in that, land,
turned against the Bolsheviks, or the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics, to
use the official title. They did this partly from determination to preserve the
right of capitalist ownership of industry, banks, and natural resources.
Since every government was against them * * * the Russians naturally were
against every government. They therefore sought to set up out-and-out revolu-
tionary parties in all other countries (pp. 8-4) .
Such was the call to revolution. It wus not unnatural; in fact, it was largely
a defense measure, since all the Russian Government was doing was building
backfires against the governments which were conducting either directly or
through agents military invasions against it (p. 4). [Italics added.}
Now, let me digress for a moment and say that Mr. Lewis was very
rough on the Communists in here for their terror and all of the other
things that we know that Russia is doing. But I think this first thing
demonstrates in a small way the fact that he was trying somewhere to
find a silver lining.
Substantially the same argument was used by Communists to ex-
plain the Soviet war against tiny Finland, and the knife thrust into
Poland's back. All Russia was doing was protecting herself against
Fascist invasion by seizing another broad band of territory across
which Nazi armies would have to march. Similarly, subversion to-
day is merely the Kremlin's method of combating the aggressive war
plans of American imperialism.
Throughout the booklet, Mr. Lewis shifts the emphasis from the
international Communist conspiracy as a threat to world peace and
stresses the danger of Russian imperialism. In effect, this kind of
argument produces the kind of psychology in, say, America, that might
unify the Russian people behind their Communist overlords, in much
the same way that the dogma of "unconditional surrender" unified the
German people behind the Nazis. Russian "imperialism" is lightly
chastized as a modern form of British imperialism. Slave labor, gen-
ocide, brain-washing, espionage, kidnaping, political assassination —
all the instruments of total and unlimited terror are, by implication,
equated with the rule of the English sahib, sipping gin in the Indian
sun.
And then to go on, from pages 16, 18, and 19 :
Russian imperialism is also evident in Bulgaria (p. 16) .
In another part of the world, in Manchuria, the Russians are pursuing the
policy of Hitler * * * In addition, directly reversing the policy of the Soviet
•Government under Lenin when the Russians ceded their imperialist rights in the
772 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Chinese Eastern Railway to the Chinese Government, the Russians got from the
Chinese Government an agreement giving them a half interest in the Manchurian
port of Dairen * * * (p. 18).
The British Labor Government and the American Government have usually
opposed to some extent the extreme demands of Russia * * * On numerous
other minor issues the British and Americans have differed with the Russians.
Consequently, the Russians have done all they could to embarrass the British
and American Governments, especially the British. For that is simply the psy-
chology of you oppose me and I'll oppose you (p. 19) . [Italic added.]
The "master plan" for world conquest, it would seem to Mr. Lewis, is
nothing more than simple retaliation for British and American rude-
ness.
Mr. Lewis concludes his study with suggestions as to what "real
progressives" should do in the fight against communism. He urges
them to oppose Communist penetration of liberal groups and, at the
same time, to "loyally defend the civil rights of Communists."
Liberals should not be afraid of being called redbaiters. Strictly speaking, no
one is a redbaiter except a person who tries to deny to Communists their civil
and political rights. Liberals should and most of them do loyally defend the
civil rights of Communists as well as others * * * (p. 25).
You are not a redbaiter because you oppose Communist penetration in the
guise of liberals into other organizations or oppose the Communist Party's in-
fluence in its "innocents clubs" or transmission belts or because you oppose Rus-
sian imperialism. You will be called such, but do not let that worry you. You
would only be a redbaiter if you tried to prevent by law the Communists fron»
establishing their own organizations (p. 25).
A fter arguing that the way to stop Eussian imperialism is by strength-
ening the United Nations, Mr. Lewis ends on a note of hope. After
all, he says, the Communists are not as bad as the Nazis; there is,
therefore, "a real possibility of peace."
* * * there is one important and vital difference between the Russian totalita-
rian dictatorship and the Nazi one. The Communists never were racialists, even
though the Soviet Government refused to admit Jewish refugees from Nazi
persecution * * * Far from being racialists the Communists both in Russia and
elsewhere are sturdy opponents of racial discrimiation, and active propagandists
against race prejudice (p. 28) .
Mr. Lewis then advances an ingenious argument to demonstrate that
aggression and war are not necessarily part of the Communist plan.
(See pp. 28, 29.) The statements of Soviet leaders that the destruc-
tion of either the Communist or the capitalist world is inevitable are,
apparently, as irrelevant as their acts.
We may reasonably have some hope, therefore, that Russian Communist lead-
ers can be persuaded * * * that the American and Western European democ-
racies want peace and the end of imperialism and of power politics, and oppose
Russia only when she is imperialist, not simply because she is Communist * * *-
We might at the worst have two worlds * * * yet all competition between them
could be kept on a civilized basis of raising higher their respective standards of
living, and that would not necessarily lead to war * * * (p. 29).
The Soviet's original attacks on the governments of the democratic nations
through the Communist Parties which it set up and controlled, were defensive
measures against attacks actual or expected from those capitalist nations. Rus-
sian imperialism today is the result of an act of will on the part of the Russian
dictator, Stalin, and not because it is the nature of a Communist dictatorship to
practice aggression upon its neighbors (p. 29).
The invasion of Korea, the seizure of Tibet, the use of Chinese Com-
munist arms and cadres in Malaya and Indo-china seem to sing a
contrary song.
(Note. — Alfred Baker Lawis, author of above statements, is listed
as chairman of the board of the LID for the year 1943-44.)
TAX-EXEMPT FOmfHAMONfir 773
There seems to be some inner compulsion which prompts even
tough-minded liberals, who understand and despise the Soviet police
state, to search desperately for the silver lining. Here is Norman
Thomas, another chairman of the board of the LID, writing in Democ-
racy Versus Dictatorship, published in 1937.
This pamphlet, entitled "Freedom and the Welfare State," which
was published in 1950, still carries "Democracy Versus Dictatorship"
as one of their current pamphlets.
This is a quote from page 11 :
* * * it is still true that between the Fascist and Communist types of dictator-
ship there are important differences. Both accept in practice the doctrine of
the totalitarian state, under the dictatorship of one party which form of govern-
ment, and communism as an instrument for achieving the final Communist society
in which the coercive state will have become unnecessary. The Fascist dictator-
ship is bent upon preserving in a large measure the profit system and the class
divisions of society. The Communist dictatorship has already practically
abolished the profit system and the older class divisions of society. Neither
Italian fascism or German nazism has any such record of social achievement in
the education and industrialization of a backward people as the U. S. S. R. since
1917. If there is danger in Russia of a new type of class-driven society at least
communism, like Christianity, carries along in its own sacred books the dyna-
mite for the overthrow of the hierarchies it may develop.
Mr. Thomas leaves no doubt in the reader's mind that socialism is
to be achieved at the polls :
It will be the business of the workers with hand and brain, the lovers of true
peace and true democracy, to make the wars and confusions of a bankrupt
society, the society of a federation of cooperative commonwealths.
That cannot be done simply by the ballot in a world gone mad. Indeed, under
no circumstances can the working class put its trust simply in the political
democracy of which the ballot is the symbol.
In another booklet, Russia — Democracy or Dictatorship? published
by the LID in 1939, and I think still on their current list, Norman
Thomas documents the case against the Soviet slave empire. The
piece is a detailed indictment of most, if not all, of the horrors of the
Stalinist regime. Nevertheless, the concluding paragraph ends on
this somewhat curious note :
One can hope that the Russian revolution, stolen from the masses by a Stalinist
bureaucracy, will some day be rewon by them. One can hope that democracy
can be achieved within the Communist Party, and that other parties will win
the right to function. One can hope that the material benefits of state owner-
ship will be more equitably shared by the masses, and supplemented with the
liberty that Socialists believe to be equally important. One can still hold
communism superior to fascism, while rejecting the continuing totalitarian
terror that is a common feature of both, and that tends to reduce life under it
to a common denominator of serfdom to the state. Above all, one can hope that
the western democracies, including the United States, will some day enjoy the
blessings of socialism without having first to endure the agony of the transition
period, through which Russia has been passing for more than 20 years.
Mrs. Pfost. Mr. Earl, if you put in this quote here, why did you
not put in the quote that gave the detailed indictment of most, if
not all, the horrors of the Stalinist regime? We will all agree that
certainly we would not want to live under his regime, and if you
are going to quote the one section, why did you not quote the other,
to give us both sides of the picture ?
Mr. Earl. I am going to submit for the committee's use all of
the pamphlets to which I have referred, so that you will have that
material. I mentioned that he had done that, but I put this con-
cluding paragraph in to demonstrate once again this great hunt
774 TAX--EXHMPT FOUNEiTIOSfS
for the silver lining that they find in communism; and that they hope
that socialism can be achieved here without our having to go through
that terrible period that Russia is passing through. Does that answer
your question?
Mrs. Pfost. Yes. I just couldn't understand, if you were going to
give the true picture, why you would put one quote in and leave the
other out.
Mr. Earl. I think we all understand what Russia is.
Mrs. Pfost. Yes.
Mr. Earl. And that it is a dictatorship, and that there are a great
many terrors there, and he does a beautiful job of documenting those.
In the preface to this work, the editors state they have tried to
publish a work which would contain two viewpoints, one "more
sympathetic to the present Soviet Government" than the one offered
by Mr. Thomas.
Among those who have been invited to present the other side of this con-
troversial subject are Maxwell Stewart, Corliss Lamont, Robert Dunn, Mary-
Van Kleeck, Jessica Smith, and Earl Browder (p. 3) .
When there were no takers, the LID, after delaying for nearly a
year, finally decided to publish the Thomas essay, which is highly
critical of the Russian experiment. Apparently, however, the editors
could not resist at least one word of explanation in the preface which,
might soothe the outraged feelings of the pro-Soviets.
The authors will be the first to insist that ideal democracy exists nowhere,
and certainly not in the United States, with its unemployment and labor injunc-
tions, its treatment of Negroes and sharecroppers, and its many other problems.
They will be the first to admit, likewise, that the U. S. S. R. should be examined
and judged, not by American standards, but in the light of Russian history
and conditions. It must also tie admitted that democracy everywhere is more
limited during war than in times of peace, and that the Soviet leaders, living
for many years in almost constant fear of attack, had a war psychology long
before hostilities began (p. 4).
Mr. Hats. In order to know what that paragraph means, Mr. Earl,
could you give us the year when it was published or written ?
Mr. Earl. I believe I referred to the year of 1939. Just a second.
Yes, December 1939.
A Conference of the League for Industrial Democracy, held at the
Hotel McAlpin, New York City, on May 8, 1943, brought together
a number of labor leaders, Socialist professors and foreign politicians.
They met to emphasize the need for postwar planning if the free
world was to be spared mass unemployment and depression. The.
presence of so many Socialist leaders from abroad emphasized the
reality of the world movement against capitalist society, a movement
in which allies join hands across national frontiers to combat their
own countrymen.
The proceedings of the conference were published in an LID
pamphlet entitled "The Third Freedom: Freedom From Want."
A list of outstanding participants, together with significant excerpts
from their speeches, follows :
1. The Right Honorable Arthur Greenwood, leader of the British
Labor Party in the House of Commons, broadcast a message from
England which was rebroadcast during the LID luncheon. (Mr.
Greenwood was elected treasurer of the British Labor Party in the
summer of 1943; as a Minister in the War Cabinet of 1941, he ap-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 775
pointed Sir William H. Beveridge chairman of the committee which
used the Beveridge report on social insurance.) Greeting his friends
in the LID, Mr. Greenwood remarked :
The significance and importance of your work will not be limited to the
United States. We over here are greatly interested in it, too. The subject you
are dealing with vitally concerns people everywhere because it expresses one
of the deepest aspirations of the masses of all peoples (p. 3) .
It is our duty, according to the British Labor Leader, to make free-
dom from want —
inalienable through the law of nations. To provide freedom from want is one
of our chief tasks. It is an urgent problem that concerns the society of nations
and national communities, and is not merely one of individual responsibility
(p. 4).
It is very clear that Mr. Greenwood, like many of his colleagues, sees
the necessity of pressing for socialism at the strategic level (i. e. world
cooperation as well as socialism within nations) .
A new inspiration and impetus was given to social planning by the declara-
tions of the Atlantic Charter. But important as these individual national
preparations and plans may be, it is of the first importance that we should keep
constantly in our minds that the indispensable basis of a universal forward
movement toward social security and social justice for the peoples is to be found
only in the concerted action of the nations working in the closest and most
effective cooperation (p. 4).
Mrs. Pfost. Mr. Chairman, we have been here now a little over an
hour, and we have covered 12 pages, and there have been very little
in the way of interruptions. We have 13^ pages yet to go. Do
you think it is necessary for us to sit and listen to the material read
to us ? Couldn't Mr. Earl submit this for the record ?
The Chairman. Mr. Earl would have preferred to have spoken
offhand, but in order to give the committee members the testimony in
advance, it was necessary for him to make a written statement, so as not
to fall into the position for w T hich some of the previous witnesses have
been criticized. And the mere fact that at the instance of the com-
mittee as well as its insistence it became necessary for him to prepare
a transcript, I hardly think it is fair to the witness to suggest that
there is anything odious about reading a statement.
Now, so far as I am concerned, I have not had opportunity to read
this, myself, and it takes no more time for me to listen to it than it
would for me to read it myself.
Mrs. Pfost. The reason I brought it up was in view of the fact that
we did have the material in advance, and I have gone over it, and I was
hoping that he might be able to expedite the hearing just that much ;
because we do have the context of what Mr. Earl is trying to convey
to the committee, and in view of the fact that the House is in session,
I thought perhaps it would speed us up considerably if we would be
able to offer the statement for the record, and that we might question
him a little.
The Chairman. Well, he has certain passages marked, I think, to
have included in the record, and has included some of them, and is
only going to read what he thinks would be of more particular interest.
Mr. Earl. How t would it be if we compromise, and I will go through
and just refer to some of them. Of course, whatever the committee
decides is agreeable with me.
Mrs. Pfost. It was my understanding last night that he expected
to sort of hop through the testimony, and I for one am appre iative
776 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
that we do have this transcript before us and that we have had an
opportunity to have a few hours. We didn't get very many hours
before your testimony started.
Mr. Earl. I got it to the committee as quickly as I could.
The Chairman. You may proceed.
Mr. Earl. Two. Dr. Carter Goodrich, chairman of the governing
body of the International Labor Office and professor of economics at
Columbia University, reinforced Mr. Greenwood's thesis :
I wish to argue, first, that attaining freedom from want for our own people,
as well as for others, requires international cooperation as well as national ac-
tion; and, second, that in this cooperation we should make large use of an
agency, the International Labor Organization, which is itself, in its structure
and way of working, a notable example of industrial democracy (p. 6).
3. Mr. Robert J. Watt, international representative of the American
Federation of Labor, produced a typical propaganda assault on capi-
talist society :
Freedom from want is the No. 1 of the goals toward which civilized man has
Worked through the centuries. The present paradox of want amid plenty is
evidence of negligence, of laziness and leadership, of stupid, unthinking accep-
tance of an economic fetish from the laissez-faire cult.
Democracy cannot survive if it bends its economic life to the taboo of an
ancient medicine man (p. 10).
He also poses an economic and political solution to the problem of
want :
For freedom from want, workers must be paid such wages as represent their
true productivity in order that their purchasing power can sustain the circula-
tion of goods. Wages of capital should go down to the measure of its actual
social value (p. 11).
Yes, for freedom of our people from want, the Nation cannot pay too high
a price. "What we cannot afford is to ignore or be overly timid in preventing
such want (p. 12).
Of course, in skipping around here, I don't want any inferences that
I am just trying to pick out some juicy parts. I think it is all im-
portant, or I wouldn't have written it.
Mr.- R,. J. Thomas, chairman of the United Automobile Workers,
CIO, sent an address, and I am just going to quote the last quote in
pages 14 and 15. He tells, first, that after the war he figures that
there will be a lot of trouble and depression, et cetera, and then he
has this to say :
There is another alternative : That alternative is to insist that our great pro-
ductive machinery shall be used — as it has never been used' before — for the sole
purpose of providing abundance for our people. This second alternative must
be based on the principle that industry should serve the people, and not merely
the chosen few who own' industry and operate industry for private profit
(pp. 14-15).
While it is perfectly proper in the political arena to assert dog-
matically that, unless the opposition is overthrown, there will be chaos
and dictatorship, it is quite another matter for a tax-exempt organi-
zation to publish this quackery in an educational pamphlet. The
postulating of the socialism-or-dictatorship dilemma is, of course, a
standard theme in the propaganda schools of the left.
Let's go to the next page, page 27.
Mr. Hats. Let's not go to the next page too soon, because I have
a question.
Mr. Earl. Go right ahead.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 777
Mr. Hays. You mention this Dr. Eveline M. Burns in here, and I
don't know whether you are skipping her for any reason. You have
put her name in. Who is she?
Mr. Earl. All I know about Dr. Burns is that she is the Director
of Research, Security, Work, and Relief Policies of the National
Resources Planning Board, and I mentioned her because of what
she said.
Mr. Hays. Do you know anything else about her?
Mr. Earl. No ; I do not.
Mr. Hays. Would you be surprised to know that Mrs. Hobby
picked her as one of the members of her Board to make recommenda-
tions for the new social-security law which just passed the House?
Mr. Earl. I wouldn't be a bit surprised ; no, sir.
Mr. Hays. Well, I know you are hard to surprise. For the record,
it might be interesting also to put in that she is the wife of Dr. Arthur
F. Burns, Chairman of the President's Council of Economic Advisers.
I don't mean any leftwing president, either. That doesn't surprise
you, does it ?
Mr. Earl. I was not aware of it.
Mr. Hays. And you are not questioning my veracity ?
Mr. Earl. No; I am not.
The Chairman. There is nothing in here characterizing Mrs. Burns
in any way, as I see it. It is merely quoting from her speech.
Mr. Hays. You editorialize about it as you please, Mr. Chairman,
but I will tell you if my name were mentioned in this document any
place, I would resent it. I would think it was an attempt to show
I was a leftwinger.
Mr. Earl. Do you want me to skip around? I don't want to be
accused of skipping something.
Mr. Hays. I just didn't want you to skip Dr. Burns. Now you can
skip from here on if you want.
Mr. Koch. The quotation on page 24 that you mentioned. What
does that come from ? Fou quote from the lady and give it as page
24. And I just wanted to find out whether that is page 24 of some
LID document.
Mr. Earl. That is page 24 of the document from which we are
reading right now, The Third Freedom, Freedom From Want.
Mr. Koch. And that is an LID publication?
Mr. Earl. That is an LID publication.
Mr. Hays. When you say she admonishes her colleagues, who are
you talking about, her colleagues down from Mrs. Hobby's office,
or who?
Mr. Earl. She is speaking here at an LID conference, so I am talk-
ing about those people.
On page 27, item 6 : Dr. I. S. Falk, Director of Research and Statis-
tics of the Social Security Board, argued that :
A strong system of social insurance is neeessary to prevent want in the post-
war period, even if full employment is achieved.
Now, again, I am not arguing with social security right now. I am
just indicating here that social security is a political subject, and it is
one that has current legislation before Congress, and did at that time.
Next I point out some of the subjects that were discussed.
Henrietta C. Epstein, vice president of the American Association
for Social Security
778 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hats. Mr. Earl, I might ask you a question right there? In.
view of Congress's penchant for investigating practically anything
and everything, do you think there is any subject we could discuss
that woudd't have some kind of overtone or implication ? If we are
going to be that broad, there is no way to get away from it.
Mr. Earl. I think it is much narrower than that, because the law
under which these organizations received their tax-exempt status
indicated that they received that status provided that no substantial
part of their activities were devoted to poliical purposes, et cetera,
It is my thesis that more than a substantial part of the LID's- activ-
ities have been devoted to attempts to influence legislation and polit-
ical purposes.
Mr. Goodwin (presiding). The second bell has now sounded for
a quorum call.
The commitee will stand in recess subject to the call of the Chair,
probably for about 15 minutes.
(Short recess.)
The Chairman. The committee will come to order, please.
You may resume, Mr. Earl.
Mr. Eakl. We were speaking about the symposium held in 1943
by the league.
As to the subjects discussed : Henrietta C. Epstein, vice president of
the American Association for Social Security, spoke on the subject,.
Health Insurance Our Next Forward Step ; Dr. Arne Skaug, Direc-
tor, Norwegian Government Disability Services, explained The
Norwegian Crusade for Social Security ; and Dr. J. Raymond Walsh,
director of research and education, CIO, urged that labor "find the
media and words to articulate and implement" its aim. (Dr. Walsh's
address, published in the Freedom from Want pamphlet, was made be-
fore the Washington chapter of the LID on March 5, 1953.)
Then Alfred Baker Lewis, chairman of the board of the League
for Industrial Democracy, continued his bit :
To get freedom from want in the postwar world we must be clear that we
cannot do so by reestablishing complete freedom of enterprise, the fifth freedom
which ex-President Hoover and the National Association of Manufacturers want
to add to the four freedoms (p. 53) .
Mr. Lewis explained why private enterprise could no longer avert
terrible depressions. He indicated that they had gotten us jammed up
before, and that they just didn't have the capacity to pull us out of
the hole.
Thus the free land in the West acted as a safety valve for unemployment and
depression. But by 1930 that free land was no longer available except for moun-
tain tops and deserts. The automatic safety valve upon which we relied com-
fortably before World War I and which gave rise to the belief in the efficiency of
rugged individualism as a cure-all for our economic ills, has gotten jammed and
needs to be regulated by careful Government planning and vigorous Government
action if we are to avoid an explosion of suffering and unemployment again
(P. 54).
George Baldanzi, executive vice president of the Textile Workers
Union of America, seemed to feel that Hitler and his Nazi henchmen
had little to do with bringing on the war. Nor, presumably, were the
Japanese responsible.
Business and industry are looking for a solution to the problem of full employ-
ment within the framework of what they call free enterprise. What they mean,
of course, is their old freedoms to exploit. But free enterprise is drawing its
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 779
last gasp. This very war we are fighting, and the causes of the war, are indica-
tions of the breakdown of the economy of free enterprise (p. 57) .
Labor believes that special privilege will have to accept a planned economy,
that the days of laissez-faire are gone with the winds of war. We believe that
production will have to be geared to social need rather than to private profit
(P. 57).
History has shown us that full employment is not possible under a system of
free enterprise. * * * The free enterprisers are interested in profits, not people
(P- 57).
Whether it is established on the basis of democracy or on the basis of monarchy
or on the basis of fascism, the system of free enterprise inevitably leads to war.
When they dry up at home, entrenched privilege must look for them abroad.
War inevitably follows, and another war will follow this war unless the leaders
of the United Nations begin to think in terms of changing the economic pattern
as well as the political pattern of liberated and conquered nations (p. 58).
Participants in a roundtable discussion on social insurance and full
employment included Dr. Oscar Lange, associate professor of eco-
nomics of the University of Chicago; Donald S. Howard, of the
research staff of the Russell Sage Foundation; Dr. Herman A. Gray,,
chairman of the New York State Unemployment Insurance Advisory
Committee ; E. J. Coil, director of the National Planning Association ;
Charles Abrams, a director of the National Public Housing Confer-
ence ; Ellis Cowling, educational director of the Consumers' Cooper-
ative Services of New York; and Charles C Berkley, executive direc-
tor of the New York Committee on Discrimination in Employment.
The subject, I think, is the important thing here, social insurance
and full employment.
The conference also discussed another program under the heading
'"Mobilizing Our Forces in Behalf of the Third Freedom."
Nathaniel Minkoff of the ILGWU, who is this year's president of
the LID, called for a new party :
So much for the present. The real test will come immediately after the war,,
when, what with sudden deflation, demobilization and shrinkage of production,
as well as with the inevitable worldwide confusion, our Nation will face the
grave danger of economic collapse. Only a courageous, farsighted economic
policy, based on long-range social planning, can save us from disaster. It is not:
my purpose now to discuss what this postwar planning should consist of nor
how it should be undertaken. I merely want to stress that it is not merely an.
economic and social question, least of all a more question of technical expertness.
It is primarily a political question, for even the best program in the world must
remain a mere scrap of paper unless it is implemented with political power
(P- 71).
We must organize independently of old, now meaningless party affiliations into
a compact and mobile force able to exert its influence where and how it will do
the most good * * * (p. 72).
Above all we must be clear as to our social basis. What we want, I think,
is a democratic coalition of all functional groups in the community with organized
labor as its backbone and basis. I am not holding out to you any perfect models
but, with all its faults, I think the American Labor Party of New York State
is something of the sort we have in mind (p. 72).
He, of course, was calling for the formation of a new political party
in America, and I question the legitimacy of that for an educational
association.
Mr. Samuel Wolchok, president of the Retail, Wholesale, and
Department Store Employees of America, CIO, also demanded
political action. His address, printed in this same booklet, was made
to the Washington Chapter of the LID in March 1943. The tone is
scarcely academic.
There is the sharp line of cleavage as to the future of the postwar world*
between the idealistic forces of the liberals on the one hand, and the blind, cruel
forces of the reactionaries on the other.
49720 — 54— pt. 1 50
780 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The reactionaries are well organized. They have power, the press, the radio,
money and ruthlessness on their side. They are well-girded for battle. They
are far more interested in controlling the peace than in winning the war and
their energies are solely directed to that end (p. 73).
The reactionaries in this cpuntry have no program to solve this country's ills
and the ills of mankind * * * Their program can only culminate in fascism
and dictatorship here, followed by revolution (p. 77).
Mr. Wolchok then adds his voice to the swelling chorus demanding
political action :
The solution then lies in a third party * * * a party supported by trade
unions and true farmers' unions, by welfare organizations, by civic bodies, and
by other social-minded groups and committees * * * (p. 74).
He mentions further that there is already a great nucleus here for
the formation of a third party. He refers to the CIO, the A. F. of L.,
the National Farmers unions, and then suggests that to this could be
added the liberal, civic, and welfare organizations spread throughout
the country.
Prof. Frank H. Underhill, professor of history, University of
Toronto, Canada, pictured the advantage of having a political party
to implement liberal and Socialist goals. Then he described the suc-
cess of the CCF in Canada, and suggested that they have a program
there but it works much better when they have a political party with
which to carry out that program. He lectured his audience on the
advantages of having that political party and the things that they
should try to accomplish.
On page 31 of my prepared statement, following the quotation, I
mentioned that Mr. Leroy E. Bowman, supervisor, Bureau of Adult
Education, New York State, spoke on the subject "Educating for the
Abolition of Want," and I would just summarize by saying that his
speech, in his speech, he visualized a vast interlocking directorate of
labor, consumer, and Government interests in control of the mighty
apparatus of adult education. His theme throughout was that we
must eduacte the adults in America to accept this social planning over
all of our economic extremes in the country.
Next, Mr. Mark Starr, educational director of the ILGWU, and Dr.
John L. Childs, professor of philosophy of education at Teachers
College, and a member of the postwar planning commission of the
A. F. of L., presided over a roundtable with the title "Mobilizing Our
Forces, Economic, Political, Cultural, In Behalf of the New
Freedom."
He suggested that all organized groups must be mobilized and used.
And to quote 95 and 96, "I wish we had the outlook for a CCF in
America. There is no such adequate approach available here."
Another pamphlet published by the LID is entitled "Toward a
Farmer -Labor Party," and the author is Harry W. Laidler. It was
printed in 1938. However, it is still on the current list of LID
publications and I presume has not been repudiated by the league.
To summarize what this pamphlet calls for, I think that it would be
rights to say that it calls for the formation of a political party with the
labor groups and the farmers as the basis, and that only through such
a coalition could they reach the goals that Mr. Laidler would have
them reach.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUND ATIONS 781
■
He indicates, as I have said on the bottom of my statement, on page
32, and he is quoting here from another magazine :
To delay the building of a new party of the masses because of the possibility
or probability of the selection of a "liberal" candidate by the Democratic Party,
these students of politics contend, "is to repeat the error of past years."
"Similar arguments," Oswald Garrison Villard maintains, "have postponed
the organization of that third party ever since 1924 * * *. Now once more,
progressives are called upon to stay in the party fold. Frankly, it seems to me
shortsighted reasoning."
And then he goes on to say that he would much rather they formed
this new party rather than try to stay within the framework of any
of the parties then in existence.
To me agitation for the formation of a new party scarcely qualifies
as legitimate project of a tax-exempt organization.
Now, if we can go down to the middle of page 34, just below the
middle, speaking of the Forward March of American Labor that was
fublished by the league in a revised printing as recently as 1953.
t is supposed to be a history of the American labor movement. The
text, however, is embellished by a remarkable series of cartoons which,
in the year 1953, strike an impartial reader as a crude effort to dis-
credit today's business with faults that have long since been corrected.
Mr. Hats. When were those cartoons originally published, approxi-
mately?
Mr. Earl. I mention that the pamphlet was originally published a
long time ago.
Mr. Hats. I mean the cartoons.
Mr. Earl. I don't know, sir. I would have to check that and see.
Mr. Hats. They did just what you are doing. They went back
several years and lifted up some cartoons that give a kind of a wrong
impression in 1953, much as your quotations of 1932 might give.
Mr. Earl. The point is, though, that they haven't disavowed many
of the things that I pointed out in yesterday's testimony concerning
their aims and goals stated in the 1930's.
This pamphlet struck me as not particularly setting forth the true
picture of the situation as it is now.
On April 25 and April 26, 1951, the LID held another of its annual
conferences in New York. The proceedings were published in a
pamphlet entitled "World Cooperation and Social Progress." The
league presented the citation to Dr. Ralph J. Bunche, Director of the
Trusteeship Department of the United Nations, and awarded another
citation to President William Green of the A. F. of L. And it gave
a John Dewey award for distinguished LID alumni to Senator Paul
H. Douglas of Illinois, who "in his graduate days," according to the
pamphlet, had been —
leader of the league's chapter at Columbia University, and, since his university
days, has done distinguished work in the fields of economics, civic reform, social
legislation, and international peace.
Senator Douglas was not present and he accepted the award in
absentia, and an address extolling the LID, sent by Senator Douglas,
was read at the conference.
Now, I believe that both the gentleman from Ohio and myself would
like to refer to that.
782 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hats. Yes. I have some photostatic copies here that Senator
Douglas made available to me from his files of the letter that he sent
up. I think that we ought to just read that, and then have you tell
me what is wrong with it. We will give these to the press. He says :
I want to express my heartfelt appreciation to my friends in the LID that
they should have honored me with a John Dewey award for contributions to social
progress. When I see the slow rate at which we advance toward the social
goals of democracy, I sometimes wonder if the making of such awards should
be held in abeyance until we have greater achievements to celebrate. The
understandable and essential efforts to meet the military and strategic threats
to free nations, in World War II, and, now again, as we face an aggressive
Communist totalitarianism, have absorbed our attention rather completely. We
must turn back the Communist threat of a police state and in the process social
progress has, therefore, been accorded a subordinate place, and has been possible
ordinarily only when it can be related to defense needs. In some areas, it has
suffered serious setbacks.
Where we have made gains, however, as in housing, social security, reduction
of racial discrimination in the Armed Forces, resistance to monopoly grabs,
sounder fiscal plans that do not destroy essential welfare programs, and foreign
economic assistance, they have come as the result of the thinking and planning
and wwking of many persons and many groups. Your award to me, therefore, is
fitting, only if today you treat me as merely one representative of that great
company of persons, in public office and out, who have tried, however imper-
fectly, for a better society in a better world.
I want also to pay a brief tribute to the LID for the nearly half century of
educational work it has done. It has undertaken research in, and analysis of,,
many of the basic economic problems of our times. It has stimulated students
and statesmen, members and leaders of many groups, to a more thoughtful con-
sideration of democratic objectives. It has brought a much-needed emphasis on
extending democratic principles and practices into the economic and industrial
phases of American life, lest the power of monopoly or of unrestrained man-
agerial domination, challenge our political democracy and threaten freedom it-
self. Even when we have not agreed with all of its conclusions or recommen-
dations, we have found the LID a valuable goad, a stimulating source of infor-
mation, and a place for frank discussion of basic problems. Tor his writing, his
research, his speaking, his editing, and countless other services, I'm sure we
would all agree that our good friend Harry Laidler deserves the major credit
for this record of LID achievement.
Yet to list the contributions of the past is to remind us of the great tasks that
still lie ahead, I'm glad your conference has put these into the international
setting in which all issues must now be resolved, for peace, as well as economic
and social progress, must be won for the world if we are to enjoy them in our
own country. We must recognize that freedom is about the most precious pos-
session mankind can have and that we should determine that the State is made
for man and not man for the State.
These jobs ahead are gigantic ones. To halt the pell-mell rush of inflation ; to
achieve a greater equality of sacrifice and of participation in our defense effort ;
to advance the elimination of racial and religious discrimination ; to check the
thrust of special interest for special privilege and power ; to keep the public in-
terest central in Government operations ; to weed out graft and special privilege ;
to guard the civil liberties of individuals while maintaining the security of the
Nation ; to make what increases we are able, in low standards of living here
and abroad — these aims must also be kept in view, even as we strive to keep the
free world' united in effective resistance to Communist aggression. It requires,
as you all recognize, the fresh thinking, geared to the needs and conditions of this
day, which we associate with John Dewey's approach to issues.
If this occasion can serve to evoke a rededication on the part of us all to
these great aims of democracy, I shall feel well compensated for the role in
which you have so kindly cast me today.
Is that an accurate reading of the letter ?
Mr. Earl. That is an accurate reading.
Now, I presume that you will want to know what I find interesting
in that.
. TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 783
Mr. Hats. I would be interested to know what you mean by the
word "interesting" ?
Mr. Earl. First, I mean this : that it sounds more like a speech at
the Democratic convention, or perhaps even the Republican conven-
tion, than at an educational luncheon and seminar.
Next, at the bottom of the first page, in the center, where he has
this to say, speaking of the LID :
It has undertaken research in, and analysis of, many of the basic economic
problems of our times. It has stimulated students and statesmen, members,
and leaders of many groups, to a more thoughtful consideration of democratic
objectives.
Right there, I was just wondering to myself whether or not when
he speaks of "democratic objectives" he is speaking of them in the
sense that the LID understands democratic objectives.
You will recall from yesterday's testimony that democratic objec-
tives, as understood by the LID included some things we men-
tioned today, the nationalization of a great many of our basic indus-
tries, and
Mr. Hays. Senator Douglas points out that he has not agreed about
all of its conclusions or recommendations.
Mr. Earl. Yes ; he does that at the top of the next page, and he says :
Even when we have not agreed with all of its conclusions or recommendations —
However, I think it is probably common knowledge that he espouses
a great many of their common objectives mentioned in both his second
paragraph and in his next to the last one.
That is fine, and I don't quarrel with Senator Douglas' privilege
or right, or anything else to espouse those.
Mr. Goodwin. I did, however, Mr. Chairman, if I listened cor-
rectly, understand that the Senator was looking forward to that
depression even then.
Mr. Hays. What are you trying to say ? Is it that he was a pretty
fair prophet, or what ?
We have 20,000 unemployed in my district. And I don't know what
you want to call it. You can call it a depression or recession, or what-
ever it is. But the people are out of work. And they have a lot of
names for it, and none of them very complimentary to this
administration.
Mr. Goodwin. The reports are that this year of 1954 is the most
prosperous in the history of the Republic, with one exception, and
that one exception was 1953.
The Chairman-. I don't want you to lose your role as defender of
this administration.
Mr. Hays. Don't worry about that because I have been just about
as critical of the administration as I have been in its defense. I only
come to its defense when I think it needs defending from its own
party. And then I feel free to criticize it any time I think it is
wrong. It casts me in an independent role, one which I find seems
to suit me better. Perhaps it is better than endorsing everything in
either party.
The Chaieman. You may proceed.
Mr. Earl. Luncheon speakers included M. J. Coldwell, member of
Parliament and president of the CCF of Canada; H. L. Keenley-
side, Director-General, Technical Assistance Administration, United
784 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS .
Nations ; Paul E. Porter ; and Ralph Wright, Assistant Secretary of
Labor.
I think rather than read what they say, it is just more of the politi-
cal platform and a demonstration of political action.
On the next page, page 36, Stanley H. Ruttenberg, director of the
Department of Education and Research of the CIO, observed:
It is not certain that this mobilization program will develop into an all-out un-
democratic force, but it presents certain dangers. One of these dangers is the
dominance of representatives of big business in key positions * * *
Mildred Perlman, secretary of the Student LID., called upon labor
to finance the socialistic apparatus. According to the editor :
Mrs. Perlman concluded with an appeal to labor which has been closely
allied over the years with the struggle for democratic education, to build a
war chest in behalf of democratic education on the campus and in the com-
munity. In so doing it will * * * help train a democratic leadership for the-
future.
If this is a legitimate undertaking, under the tax-exempt banners of
the LID, there seems to be no valid reason why Young Republican
Clubs or Young Democrat Clubs should not also solicit contributions
which can be deductible from income tax returns. Tax law, in a
capitalist and free enterprise society, should not show undue partiality
towards those who are trying to abolish that form of economic
organization.
The final session of the conference was given over to a "considera-
tion of labor political action." In this case they were concerned with
the problem of how they could give increased emphasis to their poli-
cies and their program, and how they could implement it through
other parties than those that were in effect and in existence at the
time.
The president of the CCF of Canada, Mr. Coldwell, gave his .* meri-
can Fabian friends some advice about how they could organize this.
He mentioned, at the end of this statement that I have chosen from
page 36, that during the last 4 or 5 years the Canadian Congress of
Labor had designated the CCF as the political arm of that labor
organization and that the CCF had a growing support.
Mr. Robert Bendiner, former managing editor of The Nation,
argued that, on page 38—
labor should aim at political action that would not be confined to a narrow pro-
gram of wages and hours, but would be directed to the achievement of public
welfare in the broadest sense. Labor should show more and more independence
than has been hitherto the case.
Now, the LID's latest annual conference, held April 9, 10, and 11, in
New York — since I wrote this I have received a copy of the LID news
bulletin covering this conference. The news bulletin was published
in June of 1954 and reports this conference.
It indicates that George Meany, president of the A. F. of L., and
Senator Wayne Morse, of Oregon, were honored bv the LID, and that
this 49th annual conference discussed domestic and foreign policy and
made certain awards.
In going through this, they had a great number of people there, of
course, and a lot of important people. I think that if anyone were to
take this and take a look at it, then go back to 1952, to the Democratic
National Convention, or the Republican National Conventions in Chi-
cago, and get a report of some of the things that happened there, that
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 785
this would turn out to be a minor political convention, so to speak,
because of the themes that they discussed.
Now, the theme of the conference's main panel was entitled "How
Free Is Free Enterprise." And various speakers took the capitalist
system to task and indicated that they wanted more Government in-
tervention in a great many fields.
I am going to submit this to the committee along with the other
items that I have already submitted.
Incidentally, the reference I make here to Mr. Mark Starr's press
release is included in here, of course, after it had happened, and there
would be no need to refer to that.
They indicate that the pamphlet covering this session will not be
available until fall.
Mr. Goodwin. What is that?
Mr. Earl. Will not be available in print until fall, that is the report
of the various speeches.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, let me
say that in this presentation I do not quarrel with the right of these
many people in the LID, and all of those who have been its recipients
of awards or have spoken to it, and I don't quarrel with their people,
to say and write the things which we have discussed, though I disagree
with many of the things which they advocate.
My thesis is this : If the LID is to continue to fill the air with
propaganda concerning socialism; if it is to continue stumping for
certain legislative programs; and if it is to continue to malign the
free enterprise system under which we operate — then I believe that it
should be made to do so with taxed dollars, just as the Democrats and
the Republicans are made to campaign with taxed dollars.
Now, rather than burden the text of my statement with further ex-
cerpts from a great many other LID pamphlets, I have taken the
liberty of preparing a list of those pamphlets in which fruitful read-
ing might be had.
I have listed them on the last page of my statement. I have them
here and I would be glad to offer them to the committee for whatever
help they may be to the committee.
That concludes my testimony.
The Chairman. Without objection, the pamphlets will be accepted
but not all are to be printed with the record. Mr. Earl's statement
will be included in full.
Mr. Earl. That is right.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Chairman, before we go any further, I want to cor-
rect the record on one statement that I made today. I do so because I
don't like to let anything stand that I have said that is wrong when I
find out it is wrong and also because I don't want to be put in the posi-
tion of having our record make anyone seem an adulteress or bigamist.
Going back to Dr. Eveline Burns, I find that in checking her biog-
raphy in Who's Who that she is the wife of an economist. He is not
Dr. Arthur F. Burns. He is Dr. Arthur R. Burns. And in checking
the biography of Dr. Arthur R. Burns in Who's Who there are three
Dr. Arthur R. Burns. And my staff got the wrong Dr. Burns. I
checked his biography and so I had a lady married to someone she is
not married to. She is not the wife of the President's economist but
the wife of another economist whose middle initial is the only differ-
ence in their names. And in saying that let me say that I have checked
"786 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
further and she was on Mrs. Hobby's committee. But she is not the
wife of the President's economist.
Mr. Earl. I wasn't sure of that myself. I had here that she wasn't
the wife, but I wasn't certain, and so I didn't know.
The Chairman. Are there any further questions ? Do you have any
questions %
Mr. Wormser. I have none.
The Chairman. Are there any questions by members of the com-
mittee ?
Mr. Hats. I have a statement. And if Mr. Earl cares to comment
on it, I am sure it would be all right with me. I might say, Mr. Earl,
I have more or less patiently listened to you and I have just heard you
deliver a valedictorian in which you attempted to summarize what you
allege to have proved by your testimony : To say that your thesis is
that the LID is to continue to fill the air with propaganda concern-
ing socialism ; and continues its stumping for certain legislative pro-
grams; and if it is to continue to malign the free enterprise system
under which we operate, then you believe that it should be made to do
so with taxed dollars.
I would like to analyze now what you have testified about. In the
first place, I read yesterday excerpts to you from the testimony of
Commissioner Coleman Andrews of the Bureau of Internal Revenue
and Mr. Sugarman, his principal assistant, who is charged with the
responsibility of these tax-free foundations. And by the way I might
just put in there that we have more or less agreed this isn't a founda-
tion. But we are investigating it anyway. It is clear from that testi-
mony the following : First, if one of these foundations receiving tax
exemption is found to be subversive, then upon that finding the tax
exemption can be removed.
Now t we know that this organization, the League for Industrial
Democracy was challenged in 1931 in the courts, and I am just trying
to bring out the facts, and not to defend this organization, because
many of the things, that it apparently espouses, I don't favor. It was
challenged in the courts as to its tax-exempt status. And in that case,
although the law has been changed, that case still stands and it hasn't
been challenged again, and so that that still is part of the law
Mr. Eael. I would like to see it challenged today. But go ahead.
Mr. Hays. Which is reported in the Federal Reports of the Circuit
Court of Appeals, 2d Circuit of New York, following the argument
that you made here, found that the contrary as follows — and I am
quoting from page 812 of the 48 Federal Second :
The fact that its aims —
meaning the LID —
the fact that its aims may or may not resemble that of a political party does not
of itself remove it from the category of an association engaged in educational
work.
Now understand, I am not a lawyer ; nevertheless, I recall from the
testimony of the people from the Bureau of Internal Revenue that this
law was changed in 1934. And as I said, but it in no way affected the
validity of the ruling of the court that I have just read.
So it is perfectly clear that so far as the Bureau of Internal Revenue
is concerned this organization, the League for Industrial Democracy, is
not subversive. Otherwise, we have a right to assume that, with the
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 787
vigilance of the Internal Revenue, the tax-exempt status of this or-
ganization would have long since been denied.
It is further clear that its program in no way has been found to be
one affecting legislation in the Congress or else, under the terms of the
decision I have read you, the tax-exempt status would have been
removed.
Now the third point that we get from the testimony of the people
of the Internal Revenue is that, if such organizations are neither sub-
versive nor have they invaded the field of legislation so as to deny
their status as educational foundations, then if their advocacy is either
to the left or to the right their status is left untouched as it properly
should be under any constitutional concept of freedom of speech, free-
dom of assembly, and propagation of ideas.
Let me summarize what I have told you. Under the law establish-
ing the tax exemption of LID, the regulations of the Bureau of
Internal Revenue and the decisions of the court concerning this spe-
cific association, it has in no way violated the provisions of either the
law nor the regulations and is in all respects entitled to the tax exemp-
tion which it now receives. And I will remind you, further, that the
people from the Internal Revenue we questioned about this stated
unequivocally that they did not want to see the law changed, and
stated that in answer to a question by Mr. Goodwin, so as to put them
in the position of being censors of the authority or actions of the
foundations in this category.
The only thing they were interested in w T as to prevent tax dollars
from going for the purposes of subversion and evasion schemes to
be set up under the guise of foundations.
Now, Mr. Earl, I would like to challenge you on one point, and
this has been a summary so far. You have taken quite a bit of time
to pick out those quotations from the literature of this organization
and people wdio have spoken or written under its auspices to lead this
committee to believe that either, one, this association is subversive,
which it is not, or that it has gone into the field of legislation under
the field of organizing a political party.
I have not had the opportunity of reading all of the literature that
has come out of this organization. But I feel that, if it were put
into the record, it might well log water down and might miss some
of the things you have read. But I am only taking the record you
have made.
And now I ask you to show me one iota of proof that the LID at
any time has taken legislative action, created a political party, or done
anything more than to express its belief in the economic and social
aims which they think can be best achieved by the political route.
I admit they have done that. If you cannot establish these facts,
I think that your whole summary argument falls. Because it is clear
from the law and the regulations of the Internal Revenue and the
decisions that the tax-exempt status of this organization in no way
can be taken from it simply because it advocates that its ideas have
been made through persuasion to become the law of the land.
I hope to God the day will never come when anyone challenges the
right freely of organizations and people to do that. Let me recall
to you that just prior to our entry into World War II an organization
known as America First was established under the sponsorship of:
Colonel McCormick, General Wood, and many others, w T hich organi-
788 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
zation violently opposed our entry into the war against Germany. You
may recall that one of the chief spokesmen of that organization was
then Col. Charles E. Lindbergh, and I am sure that there must be
many Americans today who look back with shame upon the derision
they heaped upon that great man's head because his ideas did not
happen to conform to theirs.
Thank goodness the Government today has taken steps to remove
the onus which was placed upon him during the war, simply because
he disagreed with the majority.
Now my recollection is that the America Firsters started as a tax-
exempt organization. I want you to understand from me clearly that
I am perfectly consistent in my belief that such organizations as that,
and I understand the organization is being revived, should receive
the same tax-free status as the League for Industrial Democracy.
I only make this statement because I believe in openhandedness and
I don't think the Government should favor or take favors away,
through its tax-exemption laws, from any organization on either side
of the political spectrum so long as that organization is not subversive
and does not advocate the violent overthrow of our Government.
The Chairman. Are there any further questions?
We appreciate very greatly the efforts which you have made to pre-
sent this presentation. The committee will evaluate in due course
your presentation, together with the pamphlets which have been sub-
mitted.
In order that the record may be complete, the last pages which you
did not read will be inserted here in the record.
(The material referred to follows:)
To people who use one tax-exempt organization for politics and propaganda,
there is apparently nothing incongruous in suggesting that "welfare organiza-
tions" support a new party.
"There already exists in this country a powerful nucleus for such a third party.
One does not need too vivid an imagination to visualize the strength behind a
third party backed up by the might of the Congress of Industrial Organizations,
the American Federation of Labor, the Railroad Brotherhoods, and the National
Farmers Union. Add to this the many liberal, civic, and welfare organizations
that are spread throughout the land and we have a force powerful and strong
enough to decide elections in every county, State, and even in the Nation" (p. 75) .
In defining the third party, Mr. Wolchok again emphasizes the necessity of
international collaboration with fellow Socialists :
"The third party's program must be international as well as national in scope.
Its program must provide for collaboration with the liberals of other nations
* * * Its program must strive for the liberation of those countries now subject
to imperialism, as well as of those conquered countries now under the Nazi, the
Fascist, and the Japanese yoke. Its program must provide for assistance to the
downtrodden of all nations. It must promise succor to the forgotten man of
every land" (p. 76).
Prof. Frank H. Underbill, professor of history, University of Toronto, pictured
the advantage of having a political party to implement liberal and Socialist
goals. He described the success of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation
(Canada's Fabian party) :
"In Canada we have gone further toward building up an effective political
party of the left. In 1942 the CCF (Cooperative Commonwealth Federation)
celebrated its 10th birthday. In its early years it seemed a rather sickly child,
but during the past few years it has been growing rapidly. There are several
points about the structure of the CCF which are worth nothing. In the first
place it is a definitely Socialist Party, speaking the language of Fabian rather
than of Marxian socialism, with a program based on the Canadian situation pre-
sented in terms which the Canadian public can understand" (p. 80).
Professor Underbill then explained the facts of political life of his American
hosts :
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 789
"The value of having an organized Labor Party is shown again today in the
different receptions given in Britain and the United States to new schemes
for complete social security. The Beveridge report in Britain has aroused wide-
spread discussion among all political groups ; the report of the National Re-
sources Planning Board has been received in a conspiracy of silenee in this
country * * *" (p. 79).
"If there is a general reaction toward the right in the United States in the
next few years, the forces of the left have no reserve with which to organize a
counterattack. In fact, the left has no army of its own at all, though it seems
to have a good supply of willing generals. In Canada the army is in existence
and has learnt by 10 years experience how to overcome its own internal dif-
ferences and to make an effective righting force out of itself * * *" (p. 80).
Mr. Leroy E. Bowman, supervisor, Bureau of Adult Education, New York
State, spoke on the subject, "Educating for the Abolition of Want." So far,
according to Mr. Bowman, this "idea has not been taught in the schools," partly
because "economically successful persons" have accepted the fact that poverty
(for others) is "an ineradicable part of existence."
"* * * the necessities of business operations under present circumstances
and the understandable reluctance to see change occur have led to the con-
clusion by them that want is Inevitable. So those who suffer want have been
wholly engaged in coping with it, not in eliminating it. And those not suffering
from want have had resistance to the idea that it could be done away with"
(P. 87).
From Mr. Bowman's point of view, it would seem that control over consump-
tion, the planning of production, and the use of government to achieve economic
welfare for the masses are not "ideological" notions, but part of the external
structure of the universe. ( See pp. 88 and 89. ) Mr. Bowman visualized a vast
interlocking directorate of labor, consumer, and government interests in control
of a mighty apparatus of adult education (p. 89).
Mr. Mark Starr, educational director of the ILGWU, and Dr. John L. Childs,
professor of philosophy of education, Teachers College, Columbia University,
and a member of the postwar planning commission of the A. F. of L., presided
over a round-table discussion on Mobilizing Our Forces — Economic, Political,
Cultural — in Belnxlf of the New Freedom. Said Dr. Childs :
"1. Freedom from want is related to other objectives. We cannot progress far
on that front unless we progress also on other fronts of our domestic econ-
omy. * * *
"8. We cannot make progress unless we can create a political situation which
will stop attacking liberals in Government, and the baiting of labor. * * * All
organized groups must be mobilized and used. I wish we had the outlook for
a CCF in America. There is no such adequate approach available here. * * *"
(pp. 95-96).
One of the most extraordinary documents published by the LID is Toward
a Farmer-Labor Party by Harry W. Laidler. Although the booklet was first
distributed in 1938, it is on the current list of the LID pamphlets and cannot,
therefore be repudiated by the league. Excerpts which demonstrate the politi-
cal and propaganda nature of this work follow :
"The reasons for these developments toward a party of workers of hand and
brain on the farms, in the factories, mines, shops, and offices are not hard to find.
* * * They have witnessed the two-party judiciary handing down decisions
which well-nigh paralyzed labor's efforts to organize. They have observed the
officers of the law breaking up their meetings and their picket lines and deny-
ing them their elementary constitutional rights. * * * And they have witnessed
America, under the political control of the parties of the propertied interests,
subjecting the masses of its people to widespread insecurity, poverty, and the
threat of war, at a time when the natural resources, machinery, and trained
labor of the land could, if fully utilized for the common good, insure a life of
abundance and security to all" (p. 5).
Dr. Laidler equates genuine labor and Socialist movements with the dictator-
ship of the criminal elite in the Kremlin who, by the testimony of a U. N. Cora-
mission on Slave Labor, are the most savage exploiters of labor since the Pha-
raohs of ancient Egypt, it is fair to inquire why such a scholarly institution as
the LID if is no longer entertains its pro-Russian view, has not withdrawn this
pamphlet and prepared another.
"American labor and farming groups in this country are on the move politi-
cally as well as industrially. * * * Representatives of labor are today the pre-
miers in the three Scandinavian countries. * * * Labor and Socialist Parties
790 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
now constitute the largest single parties in France, Belgium, Switzerland, and
Finland. In Great Britain, the British Labor Party is 'His Majesty's chief
opposition.' * * * In far-off New Zealand, labor in 1935 captured 53 percent of
the 80 seats in the New Zealand House of Representatives. * * * In Russia, the
Communists Party dominates. * * *" (p. 3).
The reforms of the New Deal were not radical enough to suit Dr. Laidler,
or those for whom he acts as spokesman :
"There are others who contend that millions of workers in the city and on the
farm are rapidly coming to the conclusion that New Deal democracy offers no
solution for unemployment or for any of the other grave evils of our economic
life but, on the other hand, that it is heading this country toward another war"
(P. 6).
Dr. Laidler quotes an article from the Nation which urges no delay in build-
ing a "new party of the masses."
"To delay the building of a new party of the masses because of the possibility
or probability of the selection of a 'liberal' candidate by the Democratic Party,
these students of politics contend, 'is to repeat the error of past years.' 'Similar
arguments,' Oswald Garrison Villard maintains, 'have postponed the organiza-
tion of that third party ever since 1924. * * * Now once more progressives are
called upon to stay in the party fold. Frankly, it seems to me shortsighted
reasoning. * * * No one can foretell where Franklin Roosevelt will stand in the
next 3 years. * * * For one thing the President is steadily undermining •democ-
racy by encouraging the growth of militarism in the United States. Wherever
you find large armies and navies, there you find enemies of democracy. * * *' "
(P. 6).
Agitation for the formation of a new party scarcely qualifies as a legitimate
project of a tax-exempt foundation. And one may also wonder if the Communist
conspiracy should be described as a "working class political movement," as in this
paragraph :
"Other working class political movements organized during the present century
were the Communist Party, formed in 1919, following a split with the Socialist
Party, and a small and temporary Farmer Labor Party, in 1920. * * * Socialists
and Communists are still actively at work on the national field, although the
combined votes of the Presidential candidates of minority parties in 1936 consti-
tuted only from 2 percent to 3 percent of the total.
"The next farmer-labor alinement on the political field of the future, it is hoped,,
will not only wrest concessions from the old parties in power but will supplant
the parties of business with the party of the masses" (pp. 7, 8).
Dr. Laidler offers practical suggestions for political action :
"Everyone interested in the development of a Labor, Farmer-Labor, Socialist,
or other political party representing the interest of the masses in his State,,
should make a survey of present laws and immediately begin educational and:
agitational work for improvement" (p. 9).
"A second problem confronting the organizers of a new political party is how
to insure that the party and its elected officials shall be democratically controlled'
by those economic groups that obtain their living through their labor of hand
or brain and not through ownership of the means of production and distribution"
(p. 9).
"Whatever the form chosen for representing the will of the masses in these
organizations, the particular organizational structure adopted has usually been
developed with the view of keeping control in the hands of the working class;
and farmer membership or leadership and of preventing the party from becoming
a neublous 'liberal or 'progressive' organization with no class basis or from being
employed as an instrument to keep in power a few political leaders" (p. 11 ) .
Dr. Laidler discusses tactical procedures which he recommends to Socialist
politicians :
"* * * frequently, after helping to elevate an old party candidate, through
labors endorsement, to a high political position, the Farmer-Labor Party finds
that it has 'built up' a political figure who, as a representative of a capitalist
party in subsequent elections, might be in a position greatly to retard the devel-
opment of a party of the masses. The Farmer-Labor Party, by such political
trading, thus tends to perpetuate the 'good-man' concept in politics.
"Moreover, when a Farmer-Labor Party throws its support to a capitalist
party candidate, it is difficult for it in the same campaign to put forward with
vigor the main arguments for the existence of, and the imperative need for, a
party of labor of hand and brain" (pp. 13, 14) .
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 701
"An even more important problem facing the new political alinement is that
*of bringing about a genuine understanding between city and agricultural pro-
ducers of hand and brain. * * * Both are exploited by those who live primarily
by owning and not by working" (p. 14) .
The executive director of the LID warns Socialists of the dangers of forming
a coalition with the petit bourgeois :
"A problem facing most Farmer-Labor parties, likewise, is the place of the
small-business man within its ranks. Some businessmen join with labor polit-
ical groups because they are convinced that there is no security under a com-
petitive system, and that they must unite with the masses to inaugurate a planned
society. * * * Others, on the other hand, ally themselves with labor for the
purpose of inducing labor to join with them in a general 'trust-busting' campaign,
a campaign against big business, in behalf of the restoration of small industry.
Intelligent labor, however, realizes that all such efforts in the past have led to-
futility. * * * Not in trust busting, but in community ownership lies labor's
salvation. Control of labor party policy by the small-merchant class anxious
to turn back the weels of industry leads to nothing but confusion. Merchant
groups animated with this purpose constitute a danger to any healthy growth
of labor or farmer-labor partyism" (p. 15).
In conclusion, Dr. Laidler says :
"At the present moment, the divisions in the ranks of labor and the belief
that labor should support the Rooseveltian New Deal against big-business at-
tacks have somewhat retarded developments on a national scale * * *.
"* * * only a fundamental change in property relations will bring security,
economic justice, and a high living standard to the working masses" (pp. 53, 54).
All in all, Toward a Farmer-Labor Party is a field manual for applied Socialist
political action.
The Forward March of American Labor was published by the LID in a revised
printing as recently as 1953. It is supposed to be a history of the American
labor movement. The text, however, is embellished by a remarkable series
of cartoons which, in the year 1953 strike an impartial reader as a crude effort
to discredit today's business with faults long since corrected. I refer the com-
mittee to the pamphlet for both its text and the cartoons mentioned.
On April 25-26, 1951, the LID held another of its annual conferences at the
Hotel Commodore. The proceedings were published in a pamphlet entitled
"World Cooperation and Social Progress." In addition to discussion of inter-
national cooperation and how to curb "antidemocratic forces at home," there
was the usual technical consideration of how to produce more effective political
action.
The league presented a citation to Dr. Ralph J. Bunche, Director of the Trustee-
ship Department of the United Nations. It awarded another citation to Presi-
dent William Green, of the American Federation of Labor, It gave a John
Dewey award for distinguished LID alumni to Senator Paul H. Douglas, of
Illinois, who "in his graduate days," had been "leader of the league's chapter at
Columbia University, and, since his university days, has done distinguished
work in the fields of economics, civic reform, social legislation, and interna-
tional peace" (pp. 3, 4). Senator Douglas accepted in absentia, and an address
extolling the LID, sent by Senator Douglas, was read at the conference. I
refer the committee to that address, found on pages 12 and 13, for some interest-
ing reading.
Luncheon speakers included M. J. Coldwell, M. P., president of the CCF of
Canada ; H. L. Keenleyside, Director General, Technical Assistance Administra-
tion, United Nations; Paul R. Porter, Assistant Director, Economic Cooperation
Administration ; and Ralph Wright, Assistant Secretary of Labor. Follow-
ing are excerpts :
From Dr. Bunche : "Unfortunately, there are those who attempt to take
advantage of the public anxiety caused by the East-West conflict and the world-
wide ideological struggle between democracy and communism, to stifle pro-
gressive thought and honest criticism, to circumscribe our traditional freedom,
and to restrict the enjoyment of our civil rights. We must be ever vigilant
against internal as well as external threats to our traditional liberties" (p. 7).
Clarence Senior presided over a panel discussion on Counteracting Antidem-
ocratic Forces in America. President A. J. Hayes, of the International Associa-
tion of Machinists, lectured his associates on the need for a more aggressive
psychological warfare program on the domestic front :
792 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
"Radio and television are today unduly controlled by big business. The voice
of liberals must be heard and strengthened. When one considers the 15 million
trade unionists and their families, labor can be far more influential in the field
of public opinion than it now is. One way of increasing that effectiveness is
through the publication of a labor daily, especially 'for the group of active leaders
who make all national trade union organizations tick.' There are thousands of
articulate men and women in this group. Its great need is for rapid, up-to-date
information to help them understand the quickly shifting scene. A labor news-
paper would not be a substitute for a regular daily press, but a supplement to
it" (p. 30).
President Hayes argued that the mobilization defense program was a "glaring
example of the undemocratic process" :
"I think that you can find some of the antidemocratic forces in America in the
atmosphere which set up that program. The security measures, which, in some
rational form, are necessary in this peculiar situation, have given the enemies of
all progressive measures an ideal opportunity to block and hamstring all prog-
ress, and so to smear and attack all progressives that decent people are tending
to withdraw from the central liberal cause. As they do so, the victory of the
evil forces becomes more sure" (p. 30).
Stanley H. Ruttenberg, director of the department of education and research
of the CIO agreed with Hayes. He observed :
"It is not certain that this mobilization program will develop into an all-out
undemocratic force, but it presents certain dangers. One of these dangers is the
dominance of representatives of big business in key positions * * *" (p. 31).
Mildred Perlman, secretary of the student LID, frankly called upon labor
to finance the socialistic apparatus on the campuses. According to the editor,
"Mrs. Perlman concluded with an appeal to labor which has been closely
allied over the years with the struggle for democratic education, to build a
war chest in behalf of democratic education on the campus and in the com-
munity. In so doing it will * * * help train a democratic leadership for the
future" (p. 33).
If this is a legitimate undertaking, under the tax-exempt banners of the
militant LID, there seems to be no valid reason why Young Republican Clubs
or Young Democrat Clubs should not also solicit contributions which can be
deductible from income tax returns. Tax law, in a capitalist and free enter-
prise society, should not show undue partiality toward those who are trying
to abolish that form of economic organization.
The final session of the conference was given over to a "consideration of
labor political action," with Murray Baron in the chairman's seat. The first
speaker was Tilford E. Dudley, assistant director of the political action com-
mittee of the CIO, who "urged more effective labor political education and
increased labor activity in politics" including consideration of a new party
(p. 33).
Gus Tyler, director of the political department, ILGWTJ, A. F. of L., declared
that labor should "give increased emphasis to educating the rank and file on
political issues, to more effective fund raising, to the registration of voters and to
the directing of votes along proper channels. This series of steps, he believed,
might lay the foundation for statewide 'third parties', and 'accelerate party re-
alinement and party responsibility.' "
The president of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation of Canada ( a
farmer-labor party with a democratic socialist program"), Mr. M. J. Coldwell,
gave his American Fabian friends some practical advice. The editor sum-
marized :
"Mr. Coldwell declared that the remarks of the previous speakers reminded
him of political discussions he used to hear in Great Britain in 1906.
"No matter how good the men we elected in Britain in 1906 on the ticket of the
Conservative and Liberal Parties, we found that their programs were inevitably
controlled by those who appointed the machines. Consequently, in Great Britain
and Canada, and, indeed, in most of the countries where we have the same kind
of parliamentary institutions, labor and progressive elements were forced to
organize their own political movements. He declared that, in Canada, the
Canadian Congress of Labor, a counterpart of the CIO, had, during the last 4
or 5 years, designated the CCF as the political arm of that labor organization
and that the CCF had a growing support" (p. 36) .
Mr. Coldwell then revealed the international linkage of the Socialist movement.
"This afternoon I want to go outside of my own country and outside of the
United States, and to say to this group of American Progressives that we are
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 793
associated together in a group of Socialist parties which have been meeting
continually ever since the war ended. The representatives of these parties are
now preparing a modern manifesto of Socialist principles with a view of estab-
lishing a common oasis of thought and of assisting the backward people of the
world in organizing for similar objectives" {p. 37).
Robert Bendiner, former managing editor of the Nation, argued that "labor
should aim at political action that would not be confined to a narrow program
of wages and hours., but would be directed to the achievement of public welfare
in the broadest sense. Labor should show more and more independence than
has been hitherto the case" {p. 38).
The LID held its latest annual conference April 10, 11, 1954, at the Hotel
Commodore in New York, according to a press release, dated April 9, 1934, one
of the sessions at the conference was to deal with the subject How Free Is Free
Enterprise? Mr. Mark Starr, educational director of the ILGWU, and a member
of the LID, was to lead the discussion. According to the release, Mr. Starr had
this to say :
"On the other hand, those believing in more collectivism must work out ways
and means of attaining planning plus the Bill of Rights * * *"
In conclusion, let me say that in this presentation I do not quarrel with the
right of these many people in the LID to say and write the things which we have
discussed, though I disagree with many of the things which they advocate. My
thesis is this : If the LID is to continue to fill the air with propaganda concerning
socialism ; if it is to continue stumping for certain legislative programs ; and if
it is to continue to malign the free-enterprise system under which we operate —
then I believe that it should be made to do so with taxed dollars, just as the
Democrats and the Republicans are made to campaign with taxed dollars.
Rather than burden the text of my statement with further excerpts from a
great many other similar LID pamphlets, Mr. Chairman, I have taken the liberty
of preparing a list of those other pamphlets in which fruitful reading might be
had.
Other LID publications
Socialism in the United States, by Harry W. Laidler, 1952
A Program for Labor and Progressives, symposium edited by Harry W. Laidler,
1946
The Atomic Age, by Aaron Levenstein
Canadian Progressives on the March, by M. J. Coldwell, 1945
Recent Trends in British Trade Unionism, by Noel Barou, 1945
40 Years of Education, symposium edited by Harry W. Laidler, 1945
What Price Telephones, by Norman Perelamn, 1941
Labor Parties of Latin America, by Robert Alexander, 1942
British Labor, by Harry W. Laidler
The Road Ahead, a Primer of Capitalism and Socialism, by Harry W. Laidler,
1950
America's Struggle for Electric Power, by John Bauer, 1935
Toward Independent Labor Politics in Britain, by Edward M. Cohen, 1948
Democratic Socialism, by Norman Thomas, 1953
National Health Insurance, by Seymour E. Harris, 1953
World Labor Today, by Robert J. Alexander, 1952
British Labor on Reconstruction in War and Peace
Public Debt and Taxation in the Postwar World, by William Withers, 1945
Labor Government at Work, by Harry W. Laidler, 1948
Canadians Find Security With Freedom, Thomas C. Douglas, 1949
A Housing Program for America, by Charles Abrams
Our Changing Industrial Incentives, by Harry W. Laidler, 1949
The Chairman. Thank you very kindly indeed.
Mr. Earl. May I now be excused from the subpena, sir?
The Chairman. Oh, yes ; you are excused.
The committee will meet at 2 o'clock this afternoon in this same
room.
(Thereupon, at 12 noon, the special committee recessed, to recon-
vene at 2 p. m., this day.)
794 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
AFTERNOON SESSION
(The hearing was resumed at 2 p. m.)
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
Who is your first witness, Mr. Koch?
Mr. Koch. Mr. Pendleton Herring, the president of the Social
Science Research Council ; and the gentleman on his right is Mr. Paul
IVebbink, the vice president; and the gentleman on his left is Mr.
Timothy Pfeiffer, counsel for the association.
The Chairman. We haye had the policy of swearing all witnesses.
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you give in this matter
shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help
you God?
Mr. Herring. I do.
Mr. Koch. I believe Mr. Herring would like to read a statement
which he has prepared, and which has been distributed among the
committee.
Is that right, Mr. Herring?
TESTIMONY OF PENDLETON HERRING, PRESIDENT, SOCIAL SCIENCE
RESEARCH COUNCIL, ACCOMPANIED BY PAUL WEBBINK, VICE
PRESIDENT, SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH COUNCIL, AND TIMOTHY
PFEIFFER, ATTORNEY, NEW YORK CITY
Mr. Herring. Yes.
The Chairman. You may proceed in your own way, and unless
someone is moved to do otherwise we will permit you to make your
presentation and then be questioned.
Mr. Herring. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Hats. I think it might be well, in conformity with the pro-
cedure we have had, if Dr. Herring might, unless counsel wants to
ask him some questions, just give us his general background, and so
on, which would keep the thing in conformity with the testimony of
the previous witnesses.
Mr. Herring. Mr. Chairman, I would like first to express my
appreciation of the opportunity of being here today. A good deal
has been placed before the committee that I find some difficulty with.
Mr. Wormser. I think Mr. Hays made a good suggestion. You
might just first qualify yourself with biographical data.
Mr. Herring. I will go to that immediately, then.
My name is Pendleton Herring. I am the president of the Social
Science Research Council, with an office in New York City.
As I started to say, I feel that it might be helpful to the committee
if I placed before you a few facts about my previous experience, since
I want to be as helpful to you as I possibly can and try to speak
directly against the background of my own experience and observation
in these fields.
I was born in Baltimore, attended the public schools there, attended
Johns Hopkins University, got my A. B. in 1925 and my Ph. D. in
1928.
It might possibly be of interest to the committee if I said that
during my college years I went off as a merchant seaman and worked
my way to various parts of the world. And I mention that here,
because at that rather early stage I got the impression that the world
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 795
was a pretty big place and there were a good many different kinds of
people in it. I also did some newspaper work for the Baltimore Sun
paper. And then I went off to Harvard in 1928 and taught there until
1946, when I went with the Carnegie Corp., from 1946 to 1948, when
I took over my present responsibilities with the council.
During those years I wrote a number of books, not quite as many
as Mr. Wormser, but a number ; and I also served as a consultant for
various governmental agencies, the Air Force, the Army
The Chairman. What were the titles of some of your books?
Mr. Herring. Well, my doctoral dissertation, Mr. Chairman, was on
group representation before Congress, and I wrote a book a little later
on entitled "Public Administration and the Public Interest." That
was a book that took me to the other end of town, and I visited a
good many administrative agencies. A little later on, I wrote a book
entitled "Presidential Leadership," on the relations of the Chief
Executive and Congress. I found that rather a complex and fascinat-
ing subject. And I wrote a book in this instance considerably, shall I
say, in the empirical vein, on our Federal commissioners. I just
wanted to know who they were and where they got their education
and what their previous experience had been, and I wrote that up in a
little book.
And I also wrote a book on the impact of war, that developed the
idea that a democratic government, as of this country, has proved its
capacity in the past to fight for its principles, and that our system,
with its faults, that are as dear to us as other aspects, is yet able to
face up to danger when the challenge comes. That book was written
on the eve of the last war.
Well, don't let me go on this way. It is a subject I like to talk
about.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Herring, weren't you too modest about your
teaching career % Will you tell us something more about that ?
Mr. Herring. I was in the department of government. In Harvard
we call it political science-government. I was in the department of
govenment there. And in 1936, M. Littauer, whom some of the mem-
bers of the committee may recall, a prominent Member of the Con-
gress for many years, established the Littauer Center of Public
Administration. I was the secretary of that school during its first
10 years, and during those 10 years we faced right up to the problem,
How do you train them for the public service? We found that was
a very complicated problem. There were no easy pat answers. But
that school was started by Mr. Littauer and has turned out a number
of people who are serving their country in various governmental
posts.
Is that adequate on that ?
Mr. Wormser. I thought you had professorial status.
Mr. Herring. That is right. I was a member of the faculty.
The Chairman. That is very good. Thank you very much.
Mr. Herring. Now, what I would like to do, Mr. Chairman, if you
will permit me, is read this introductory statement to the committee,
and then I will say a word or two about other documents, and so forth.
The Chairman. We would be very happy to have you do so.
Mr. Herring. In this introductory statement to the committee, I
hope that I may have the opportunity to present my views concerning
the general thesis that the staff of the committee and other supporting
40720— 54— pt. 1 51
796 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
witnesses have developed. In the light of my own experience, I would
also like to comment briefly on social scientists and their ways of work-
ing. But first, may I explore with the committee what common
ground we all share in the problems under investigation.
In the investigation, thus far, most of the basic questions raised
are within the traditional discourse and debate on public policy.
Time and again, in the past, attacks have been leveled at wealth and
bigness; debates on such matters are almost traditional. In this
present instance, there is, to be sure, a modern twist to suit the times :
Big foundations are the target rather than big business. We meet
again the recurrent problem of how far to extend Federal regulation.
In view of the references to collectivism, I am sure that we share a feel-
ing of caution concerning governmental intervention and control over
education and research. However, it is certainly in the public interest
to give thoughtful consideration to such matters and also to whatever
attitudes may affect the course of foreign policy. All would agree
these are proper topics for public discussion, particularly if these
broad matters can be reduced to specific terms.
Hence, I hope you will not feel me unduly critical if, at the very
outset, I call attention to one disturbing aspect of this investigation
that is rather vaguely sketched in Mr. Dodd's opening statement and
referred to by other witnesses in indirect and somewhat baffling lan-
guage. In effect, the committee has been presented with an effort
on the part of their staff and supporting witnesses to rewrite Ameri-
can history and to explain what has happened in the United States
since the turn of the century in terms of a conspiracy.
To assert that a revolution has occurred without violence and with
the full consent of an overwhelming majority of the electorate, and
to imply that peaceful change overwhelmingly supported by the voters
of the country is the result of a conspiracy, would strike us as a more
outrageous error if it were not such a fantastic misreading of what we
have all witnessed and experienced.
To imply that an interlock of individuals unknown to the American
public is responsible for basic changes in our national life over the last
50 years, is to belie the responsible statesmanship of the Republic, the
lawmaking authority of the Congress, and the good sense of the Amer-
ican people. The whole tenor of the ambiguous charges set forth by
the staff strike at the very integrity of our system of self-government.
These allegations suggest that the American people are dupes and
that our elected officials are puppets. To underrate the valiant and
thoughtful response of the American people and their Government
to two world wars and a great depression, and to imply that the legis-
lative enactments and governmental policies worked out through the
process of democratic self-government is the result of a conspiracy
operating through American education, is not only a travesty of his-
tory but a travesty of the very principles by which we live as a free
Nation. This line of innuendo I am confident must be uncongenial to
the fundamental principles of all the members of this committee. As
experienced lawmakers, you know how public policy emerges through
established constitutional forms, and the interplay of politics, and I
know that no committee of the Congress will countenance unmaking
the facts of history to suit some special purpose.
Hence, the question is promoted as to why such a travesty of Ameri-
can principles and politics is presented at this time. I think the thesis
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 797
being developed by the staff is better understood as symptomatic of a
troubled state of mind on the part of a few persons than as a logical
statement to be refuted literally.
The committee has been reviewing developments in education and
the intellectual life of the country, since the turn of the century, and
I think we can all agree that during these decades changes of great
moment to this Nation have taken place. None of us, of course, can be
opposed to change as such. Life is constantly changing. But there
are important questions concerning the direction of change, of the
forces that may affect change, and what can be done by way of public
policy to direct change in the public interest. This latter responsi-
bility is essentially the responsibility of Government, particularly
of the Congress, and I would not presume to comment on these mat-
ters. It seems to me, however, that some of the disquietude and wor-
ries of previous witnesses may be taken as symptoms that may direct
constructive thought to underlying problems of general common con-
cern. I can identify two.
The first is the spectacular advance in science and a great increase
in educational opportunities throughout the country. The full impact
of a great increase in new knowledge, and its dissemination throughout
all our society, creates a dynamic force that none of us can fully under-
stand. No nation that I know of has advanced, disseminated, and ap-
plied so much knowledge so widely and so rapidly as has the United
States since the turn of the century. This has inescapably affected
traditional attitudes and ways of doing things. It raises questions of
interest to the Congress, to industry, labor unions, churches, and other
organizations, as well as to educational institutions. How can prog-
ress in knowledge both of natural and human affairs be absorbed,
digested, and utilized so as best to advance the general welfare?
There are many, many particular questions that can be brought
under this broad one. I gather that this committee is particularly
concerned with whether or not certain particular viewpoints have had
an undue importance upon our intellectual life. Have we become the
victim of special pleaders, advancing their special "isms" ? For exam-
ple, have internationalism, collectivism, or socialism, as bodies of
thought, exercised undue weight ? I know of no way, in entirely ob-
jective terms, of weighing or measuring such influences. I know of
no reliable method of analysis for establishing cause and effect rela-
tionships between such ideas and what has happened in our recent
history. For my part, I find the best safeguard in the maintenance
of a free market place of ideas so that truth can prevail in the result-
ant competition of ideas. If there has been interference with this
free interplay, it is well that the country hear about it. The first
problem, then, in which we all share a concern is our great national
harvest of the tree of knowledge and how the fruits of knowledge
may best be used to strengthen and nurture our society.
The second great factor of our generation is the evil force made
manifest by international communism and Soviet imperialism. How
can we reckon with tyranny of this order of strength and complexity
and, at the same time, keep our own institutions free and strong?
Here, again, the answer comes not from 1 school of thought or 1 po-
litical party, but rather from our united endeavors as responsible cit-
izens of this Republic. Moreover, the essential part that knowledge
and reason can play in increasing our national strength and overcom-
798 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
ing the communistic menace needs wider public support. Finally, we
need perhaps to appreciate more fully the fact that the free study and
inquiry carried on in our great educational institutions constitutes in
itself one of the essential American values that we must protect from
the evil forces at large in the world.
I think we can all agree that thoughtful attention should be given
to the problems of relating scientific advance to education and that
great attention should be given to safeguards against communism. We
all want to maintain freedom and pursue truth. We are all concerned
with justice and the good life. We are all concerned as citizens with
national security.
The problems before this committee are much more specific in char-
acter. This investigation is concerned with ways in which foundation
officers and trustees and educators and social scientists have discharged
their responsibilities.
When I turn from this broad statement of common objectives and
basic purposes to much of the testimony that has been offered, and to
the statements that have been made with respect to the social sciences,
I must confess to a sense of bafflement. The staff has tried to call into
question the efforts of the very individuals and institutions who are
devoting their resources and energies to the increase and dissemina-
tion of knowledge and the protection of the American way of life.
The picture that has been presented to the committee does not accord
with my own observation and experience. The most charitable ex-
planation that comes to mind is that they speak from ignorance rather
than malice. Perhaps I could be most helpful to the committee by
sketching very briefly my own sense of reality about the kinds of
problems dealt with by the staff and other witnesses. The committee
has been presented with statements about an alleged interlock, financed
by the foundations and controlled from the top in such a way as to
foster educational theories along certain definite lines. We are told,
in effect, that a few organizations constitute an efficient integrated
whole, tending to work against the public interest. I shall limit my
observations to the kinds of individuals, fields, and organizations that
I know something about at first hand, and I must say flatly that my
experience here contradicts the views that have been suggested by the
staff.
My contacts are largely with the social scientists over the country
and with the limited number of foundations interested in social sci-
ences and closely related fields. Most of the social scientists with
whom I work are on the faculties of our universities and colleges. I
come into contact, also, with a smaller number employed in industry
and governmental agencies. These individuals are men and women
of independent judgment and integrity. They have dedicated their
lives to research or teaching, or both. They have an extraordinarily
high sense of civic duty and respect for truth. Their primary objec-
tive is to attain a greater understanding of human behavior and social
relationships and to share this knowledge. They are sensitive to any
impairment of freedom of inquiry. They bring sharp critical judg-
ments to bear on the work of their fellow-professionals in various
fields. No other country has such professional groups, so highly de-
veloped, and so widely concerned with an analytical approach to
human problems. While our debt to European scholarship, particu-
larly of the 19th century, is very great, the 20th century development
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 799
of the social sciences is widely recognized abroad as a distinctively
American contribution. This growth has been large since the turn of
the century. While many traditionally minded European scholars
remain somewhat skeptical of much that has happened here, there is
an increasing interest among the younger university men in other
countries about American developments. Just as in the natural sci-
ences, the tide has turned from Europe and scholars from all over the
world come to the United States for advanced work in the social
sciences.
This development was possible in the United States because of our
greater willingness to experiment. Our expanding universities could
give opportunity to research men who wished to explore new leads.
They were not forced into the conformity set by a ministry of educa-
tion ; they were not trammeled by faculties firmly set in old ways. It
was the very absence of control under national educational systems,
that provided the conditions favorable to growth and exploration.
Hence, the big fact that impresses me is not a system of interlocking
cartels, but rather, an extraordinary degree of individual initiative.
The individual social scientists over the last 50 years or so, have
organized professional associations for the purpose of sponsoring pro-
fessional journals and holding annual national conventions. But, here
again, the interests of individuals could not be contained in a single
professional organization. Many members of these associations also
belong to many other associations that have little or nothing to do
with their professional concerns. Even within the area of profes-
sional interest, regional associations have been formed, and wholly
separate societies have been established within each field. The prob-
lem has not been that of authoritative control, but rather, of maintain-
ing enough unity of purpose and focus of attention to keep the associa-
tions reasonably harmonious.
The social scientists in the United States, in recent decades, have had
a wide range of opportunities for their skills. Their work is so much
in demand that their problem is essentially one of choice. The demand
for the services of outstanding economists, psychologists, demog-
raphers, and the rest has been for years far in excess of the supply.
For those interested in applied research, there is a wide range of
opportunities in government, business, labor unions, and a great va-
riety of organizations concerned with social problems. Students turn
with lively interest to those fields that attempt to advance our under-
standing of human affairs and student interest in these subjects has
been so great that our universities and colleges must compete in re-
cruiting able social scientists to their faculties.
Our economy of abundance seems to operate in intellectual matters
as it does in other fields. Teaching, applied research, and consulta-
tion in various practical fields tend to absorb the energies of social
scientists. For the limited number who are carrying on original and
costly research, foundation aid is very welcome. Such social scien-
tists need foundation support unless they are to be largely dependent
on industry or government. They are not dependent on foundations
to provide opportunities for their skills and abilities ; they have many
alternatives. Even if they desired to, foundations could not possibly
control the interests and attention of the social-science professions.
However, I know of only 10, or so, foundations with a real interest
in social-science research.
300 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
I have emphasized the independent of social scientists and I have
called attention to their diversity of interest and the broad range of
opportunities open to them and their development in the United
States, in order to get before the committee a better sense of per-
spective and proportion about the problems under investigation. In
conclusion, I would like to emphasize that it is the men and the women
in these fields of learning who are our strongest national resource for
advancing the ranges of knowledge that will make us better able to
understand our common problems. They command the analytical
methods for most effectively getting at such questions in basic and
tangible terms. Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty and social-
science research is an essential tool for the vigilant.
The social scientists have an essential contribution to make. They
don't know all the answers, but they can explore many of the signifi-
cant problems and offer highly relevant facts on a variety of impor-
tant questions. But since the committee's staff and other witnesses
have brought into question the methods of the social scientists, par-
ticularly their use of empirical methods, I would like to clarify what
is meant by the empirical approach.
To approach a problem empirically is to say : "Let's have a look at
the record." To employ the empirical method is to try to get at the
facts. Where feasible, counting and measuring and testing is under-
taken. There is nothing necessarily technical about empirical meth-
ods and there is no simple distinctive empirical method as such.
Congressional investigating committees normally follow an empiri-
cal approach. To imply something immoral about using an empirical
method of inquiry is like implying that it is evil to use syntax.
One thought occurs to me. It came to my attention the other day.
Our system of self-government is based on the necessity of the
apportionment of congressional seats, and you might say at the outset
it was necessary to count noses ; and our census is built into our con-
gressional structure. You have there a quantitative approach, if you
will, that is simply integral to popular self government. You have
to know how many people there are, in order to go forward. I just
mention that as a thought that might have some pertinence here.
There is another entirely separate question, namely ; is fact-finding
enough in itself? Obviously not. Logically and necessarily, a posi-
tion must be taken on a priori grounds as to whether a problem is
worth investigating. In strictly research terms, this involves the
investigator's assumptions as to what is significant or worth while to
study. In terms of applied research, it involves a determination by
the responsible decisionmaker, to tell the research man what body of
fact he wants investigated and what questions he would like answered,
if possible.
Neither the Social Science Research Council nor any responsible
research organization that I ever heard of has ever made fact-finding
an end in itself. Here fact-finding is obviously open to the charge of
aimlessness. On the other hand, the scientific investigator does not
work to establish predetermined conclusions. He may follow his
hunches. He may go from one experiment to another. His intuitive
or rational knowledge of his field helps direct his curiosity toward
those avenues of inquiry that seem promising. He guards against
wishful thinking. He will not let his hopes of what should be get
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 801
in the way of his concern with what actually exists and what can be
observed. From his background of work in his particular field, he
follows leads concerning what may be most significant to investigate.
He seeks to array the facts, and he remains sensitive to the hypotheses
that seem to be suggested by the facts and that way point to certain
tentative generalizations. Once having gained some sense of direc-
tion or relationship from this initial inquiry, he may formulate other
hypotheses that suggest meaningful relationships among a wider
range of factual data. Out of all this, there may or may not emerge
a theoretical formulation. It frequently happens in science that
theories are established that can be tested experimentally and where
other workers in the same field from their independent work arrive
at the same conclusions. When this takes place, theories can be built
into larger conceptual schemes, behavior can be predicted, and prac-
tical ways of putting the theories to work can be stated.
This method of analysis for many years has been applied to the
study of human beings and social interrelationships with varying de-
grees of success. No responsible witness would predict that all human
problems can be scientifically studied, and no responsible-minded
social scientist would argue that all human problems can be solved
by science. All would agree, however, that knowledge is better than
ignorance, and the attempt to analyze in more orderly and systematic
fashion the problems that confront man and society is well worth the
effort. Some people working in the social sciences are more optimistic
tfea-n others concerning our present stage of advance and our prospects
for the future.
To deny that the social sciences have a contribution to make, or to
cast doubt on the capacity of man to guide his destiny by applying
thought to human problems, in secular terms at least is to embrace
either an obscurantist or anti-intellectual position, or to adhere to a
determinist position. The current and most menacing school of
thought that denies the fundamental premises of the social sciences
is the Marxian philosophy of history. The obvious unreality of their
dogma seems to have no effect upon the adherents of communism,
despite the fact that it has led to the triumph of statism and the
worst tyranny of modern times. The point here is that it denies the
validity of empiricism as a relevant method of inquiry because it
asserts that the course of history is inevitable and individuals can
do nothing to basically affect the outcome,
Mr. Hats. Dr. Herring, would you mind if I interrupted you right
there for a question along that line? Do you have any knowledge
of whether the Communists — I am speaking now of the Russian Gov-
ernment — object to empirical research?
Mr. Heeeing. Mr. Hays, I have with me some rather interesting
data on this point, and if it would meet with the pleasure of the com-
mittee, I would like to submit it to you a little later. I can sum-
marize on the point now.
Mr. Hats. Just very briefly, if you could answer the question.
Mr. Heeeing. The gist of it is that they do object to it most vio-
lently ; that the one thing that anyone believing in this predetermined
course of affairs or any one committed to a politically dictated course
of policy cannot tolerate is an objective analysis of the facts. And the
Russians certainly have a way, in their publications, of coming up
with some interesting fulminations.
802 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hays. I do not want to disrupt you too long, but would you
care to just briefly comment on why you think they object to empirical
research? Is it because they are afraid that the findings will not
coincide with what they say is right, with their dogma %
Mr. Heering. Here you have an authoritative line of policy that is
enunciated by the Kremlin, and whatever is called for by that pre-
determined line is produced, or else. That is one aspect of it, in sort
of practical terms.
The other side is that here is a system of belief, of view, that fits in
with the philosophy of history that makes this kind of free inquiry as
to what is going on something that cannot be entertained by people
who have that cast in mind. But this sort of point can be documented
over and over again by people who have a first hand familiarity
with what has spewed out of Russia.
The Marxian dialectic confuses the issue by asserting a scientific
validity to their doctrine. And it may be just as well to emphasize
this point, because it does confuse matters. This is wholly false and
misleading. It is based on the argument of Marx that his theory of
class struggle was arrived at by reviewing the efforts of the laboring
man through revolution and other means to achieve a relatively
stronger degree of political and economic power.
The social sciences stand four-square in a great tradition of freedom
of inquiry which is integral to American life, to the Anglo Saxon tra-
dition of self-government, and to the concern with the individual
fundamental to both Western civilization and its ancient heritage
stemming back through the Renaissance to the Classic World and
to Judaic-Christian concern with human dignity.
To spell out the full course of historical events that would pro-
vide the empirical evidence for this assertion, would unduly tax the
time of this committee and it is obviously not necessary to argue this
case before a committee of the Congress of the United States.
This is the sort of thing that could be pursued perhaps in a seminar
room.
However, since the issue of empiricism has been raised by other
witnesses, a brief explanation may be helpful. I have been discussing
the empirical method as a tool of analysis and I have indicated that
our American tendency to get at the facts, to have a look at the
record, to separate mere speculation from factfinding, is so embedded
in our habitual ways of doing that that it really needs no defense.
It has been suggested, however, that there has been an overemphasis
on this method and that it may somehow, in a manner unspecified,
lead to undue control, the corruption of moral principle, the confusion
of the public, the domination of education, and the corruption of
ethical principles and spiritual values. It is somewhat difficult to
come to grips with this broad allegation, since it is presented in terms
of inference and innuendo. The charge is not made flatly, but rather
in terms of overemphasis or posible deleterious effects in the future
if an empirical approach is carried too far.
I would agree, as a logical proposition, that extremism in any
subject is, by definition, bad. Hence, the problem, I suggest, is one
of balance and degree. Witnesses have asserted that overemphasis
has been placed upon an empirical approach. This remains a matter
of opinion and I know of no way in which such a charge can be
definitely established one way or the other. In my opinion, there is not
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 803
an overemphasis upon empirical research. In my opinion and ex-
perience and observation, quite the reverse is true. I observe a strong
human tendency on the part of a great many of us, as individuals, to
see what we choose to see and to believe what we want to believe. I
observe a readiness to speculate, to guess, to haphazard opinions, and
to come to judgments on the basis of very inadequate evidence. It is
my observation that this is a very human tendency, if not indeed a
common human weakness. This tendency is found in all walks of
life. It becomes a matter of high moment in policy decisions and in
the formation of public opinion.
Social scientists working as economists, historians, statisticians,
sociologists, or what not, are prone to this weakness as individuals, just
like anyone else. In their professional capacity, it is their duty to
guard as best they can against letting wishful thinking get in the way
of objective analysis. Sometimes they fail, but in my opinion more
often than not they succeed. In their work as scientific investigators,
they operate within an appropriate system of values, to wit: They
cannot be unmindful of the ethical principle of seeking the truth and
of honestly analyzing their evidence. They cannot be oblivious of
spiritual values of freedom, because their work as investigators is de-
pendent upon a full sense of truth and freedom and justice. They are
the first to suffer if their fellow-citizens relinquish a common loyalty
to truth, to freedom, and to justice. The evidence of this is obvious
when we recall that after dictatorships arose in Russia, in Italy, and
in Germany, the freedom of scholars and research men to pursue the
truth as they saw it on matters of public policy, of economics, of his-
tory, and of the nature of man and society, was immediately curtailed
and ultimately destroyed. It was imposible for them to carry on
empirical work. The facts could not be arrayed in terms designed to
bring out their true meaning. The ends were dictated by the State and
either incompetents or prostitutes in the social science fields were
ordered to produce the results demands by the dictators and to array
evidence in accordance with the principles predetermined by the single
party in power. The social sciences were destroyed before the dicta-
tors began their perversion of the natural sciences, particularly biol-
ogy and genetics, and their erosion of the church and religious beliefs.
I repeat that eternal vigilance is the safeguard of liberty, and recent
history proves that particular vigilance must be exercised if the free-
dom to study human problems is to be maintained. The dangers here
are not simply the obvious threats of totalitarian rule, but likewise
(and more insidious for us in the United States) the dangers of preju-
dice, malice, and wishful thinking. Authoritarianism that denies the
freedom of the individual to study, to question, to inquire, to form his
own opinions on controversial matters, is not always expressed through
conspiratorial parties, concentration camps, and secret police. Author-
itarianism is found in many less obvious ways in the United States
today. It is expressed in Mr. Dodd's statement in an indirect and
subtle fashion, and is all the more dangerous for that reason. It is in-
sinuated rather than asserted, when he states (on p. 26) "that it may
not have occurred to (foundation) trustees that the power to produce
data in volume might stimulate others to use it in an undisciplined
fashion without first checking it against principles discovered in the
deductive process." This assertion is so elliptical in character that,
here again, it is hard to bring the charge out into the open. There
804 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
is an inference, however, that principles exist which can only be ar-
rived at through the so-called deductive process, and that must serve
as an authoritative basis of truth against which truths arrived at
through the inductive process should be subordinated. This is not
flatly stated but, in my opinion, it is clearly to be inferred.
In philosophic terms, if this statement means anything (and this,
of course, is debatable) Mr. Dodd is asserting that one theory con-
cerning the philosophy of knowledge is superior to another theory
concerning the philosophy of knowledge. He seems to be saying that
deductive thought is somehow superior to inductive thought. He
seems to identify inductive thought with the social sciences and thereby
suggest that their findings cannot be valid unless substantiated by the
principles discovered through the deductive process.
Now, I am not choosing of sides between these two. I am just trying
to get the issue before you.
In the first place, this line of reasoning discloses his ignorance of
the methods employed by the social scientists. Social scientists do not
limit themselves to either inductive or deductive reasoning, as such.
They employ deductive principles, for example, when they decide upon
the importance of subject matter for study. They tend to follow the
inductive method when they analyze their data. They are not, how-
ever, victims of any single school of thought, nor are they limited to
any single line of reasoning. They use whatever methods of logic
they, in their competence as scholars and research men, feel may help
with the job in hand. By and large, they tend to limit their inquiries
to topics that they regard as researchable : that is to say, they seek ques-
tions that they think are susceptible of systematic analysis and of sub-
ject matter that preferably can be observed. This leads them to study
the behavior of men and of institutions and of the activities of business
firms, labor unions, governmental agencies, and individuals, singly or
in groups. Some devote their attention to analyzing the beliefs that
people hold and the attitudes they take on various issues. Some social
scientists are more interested in the theories that men express than
in the activities in which they engage. But their general inclination
is to try to find out what is going on rather than what should take
place. Many students of social phenomena offer their interpretations
about desirable alternative courses of action, and some offer their in-
formed individual judgments on the basis of their studies.
By and large, this work in the social sciences tends to go from a
consideration of particular facts to the larger interrelationships
among these facts and the generalizations that might be offered con-
cerning them. In this sense, it is empirical and comes within a com-
mon American habit of mind. At the risk of oversimplification, I
would say that the views of Mr. Dodd might be characterized as ration-
alistic because of his alleged faith in principles deductively arrived
at, and the views perhaps of most social scientists tend to be arrived
at empirically. I repeat that it is difficult to restate with precision
just what Mr. Dodd's position is and that it is also difficult to general-
ize with any precision about fields of knowledge so varied, so dynamic,
and so fluid as the social sciences. The point I wish to make is that,
to the extent that the line can be drawn between empiricism and
rationalism, empiricism tends to be more in the American tradition
than rationalism. To sustain this view, it is necessary to recall that
the father of empiricism, as a distinctive field, is John Locke. Its
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 805
antecedents, of course, go back to Francis Bacon and can be clearly
traced to Aristotle. It was John Locke, however, who stated this
school of thought most clearly, and it was John Locke who also set
forth the philosophy most widely accepted by the Founding Fathers
of this country. Locke found himself in conflict with the philosophers
of rationalism in Europe. From the standpoint of the history of
thought, Locke's views were in conflict with those of Leibnitz and
Spinoza. Were Locke here today, he would probably repeat a com-
ment he made to a friend apropos of some rationalistic speculation of
Leibnitz, when he said : "You and I have had enough of this kind of
fiddling."
I respect the great contribution to Western thought made by Euro-
pean philosophers, but I know that they likewise would be critical of
much of the research that has been carried on in this country over
the last hundred years, or so. Descartes, Spinoza, and Leibnitz,
among others, championed the ability of the mind to know reality by
means of its faculty of reasoning which, for them, was independent of
experience. It was John Locke, the philosopher of the glorious revo-
lution of 1688 in Great Britain, who developed the political philoso-
phy so meaningful to the Founding Fathers of the United States who
also developed the doctrine that knowledge is derived from experience.
This faith that the future is not foreordained, and that man can
learn by doing, is the viewpoint that has motivated so much of our
history. It was in the Age of the Enlightenment at the end of the
18th century, that men began to nourish the hope that human institu-
tions might be brought within the scope of science. And it is not
surprising that this search for a science of society should have been
taken up and carried further in the United States than anywhere
else in the world. If we had time, it would be very interesting to
develop this further. Because if you think back to the attitudes of
the Founding Fathers, it was empiricists such as Benjamin Franklin,
who went out and flew a kite in order to find out what was going on
in the thunderstorm, and it was that kind of "let's get at the facts" atti-
tude that was in the minds of men like Washington and Adams and
Jefferson. They were people, in that period, who were enlightened
and informed by that attitude. And, as I say, if we had time to go
into the history of thought, it is a fascinating story, this contrast be-
tween the rationalists on the continent of Europe, the encyclopedists,
who found themselves at odds with the government at the time.
Contrast the problem that they faced there with what went on here,
where we had a meeting of minds and an understanding on the part
of scholars and scientists in this country, and our Statesmen. There
was no conflict of mind between the schools of thought. They were in
the same tradition. And the interest that George Washington ex-
pressed in a national university, for example, and the interest that
Alexander Hamilton expressed in subsidies to inventors and to the
encouragement of science at that time, the interests of Adams, all go
back into this same thing.
One could go on at a great rate about the very interesting historical
antecedents. But the point is that here was a new land, untrammeled
by old conflicts and ancient grudges, where man was offered an oppor-
tunity to realize his destiny. Nature conspired with human intelli-
gence and imagination to realize the potentialities before us as a
Nation. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness were to be achieved
806 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
if the individual but used his good sense and worked with his fellow-
citizens to maintain democracy.
The social sciences, as they have developed in recent decades have
contributed, within the limits of their capacity to the high purposes
set forth in the preamble to the Constitution ; namely —
* * * to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tran-
quillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and
secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity. * * *
Political science, by enabling us to understand the nature of our
Government and laws more clearly, has contributed greatly to good
government and the preservation of representative institutions.
Economics, by adding to our knowledge of the business cycle and
storing up great bodies of statistical and other data, has enabled
industry and government to find ways of achieving a more stable
economy. Industrial relations research has helped find methods for
reducing the conflict between management and labor. Sociology has
provided facts about family life, juvenile delinquency, and race rela-
tions that have time and again substituted reason and knowledge for
bias and prejudice. Demography has provided knowledge of popu-
lation trends of enormous practical importance. Penology has helped
us to deal more reasonably with the control of crime. This list could
be elaborated at great length. The main point is to emphasize the
American habit of saying, "Let's have a look at the record. Let's see,
in a given instance, what is practical and feasible. Let's see what
we can accomplish by taking thought together. Let's have done with
fiddling, with mere speculation, and see what can be done through
commonsense, fortified by whatever orderly array of facts can be
introduced, to find a reasonable solution."
In this endeavor, the principles of truth, freedom, and justice serve
as a guide. In these terms, I can ask no more of this committee than
an empirical approach to this inquiry into the activities of the founda-
tions and related agencies.
Since various references have been made to the social sciences and
specific allegations have been directed at the Social Science Research
Council, I respectfully request an opportunity to present to the com-
mittee statements on these matters, either orally or in writing, and
preferably in both forms. The council is not, in any sense, the formal
spokesman for either the seven associations that designate members
to our board of directors or for the 10,000 individuals engaged in the
social sciences over the country. Our focus is on the advancement of
research. If the committee wishes to pursue its inquiry about the
social sciences in this country, this might best be done by calling upon
leading social scientists to present their views.
I have before me brief statements from annual reports of the council
that describe our aims, organization, and general attitude, and data on
this has been distributed in advance to the committee, as a general
statement from our annual report about the organization. And I
would be glad further to supply whatever specific facts I can concern-
ing council activities that may be of interest to the committee. We
have also prepared a more extensive statement, dealing with certain
allegations that have been made.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 807
This statement to which I refer is entitled supplementary statement
A. It was distributed in advance to the committee and takes up and
offers specific replies to specific points.
I know you want to conserve your time, and I would not undertake
to read this document to you, since you have it.
The Chairman. It may be presented as part of your statement.
Mr. Herring. If I may offer, then, for the record, supplementary
statement A and supplementary statement B, I think it would be
helpful to the committee.
(The statements referred to are as follows:)
Supplementary Statement A on Behalf of the Social Science Research;
Council — Replies to Specific Points
There are a number of particular criticisms of the social sciences in the report
of the research director for the committee on which we offer comments. He
states :
"The broad study which called our attention to the activities of these organi-
zations revealed not only their support by foundations, but has disclosed a degree
of cooperation between them which they have referred to as 'an interlock,' thus
indicating a concentration of influence and power. By this phrase they indicate
they are bound by a common interest rather than a dependency upon a single
source for capital funds. It is difficult to study their relationship without con-
firming this. Likewise^ it is difficult to avoid the feeling that their common in-
terest has led them to cooperate closely with one another and that this common
interest lies in the planning and control of certain aspects of American life
through a combination of the Federal Government and education" (stenographic
transcript, ibid, p. 47).
If this statement intends to say that the organizations listed in the report are
able to exert such power as to bring about a combination of the Federal Govern-
ment and education so as to permit the organizations to plan and control some
aspect of American life, then the statement is absurd. Education is csntrolled
by local school boards and by departments of education in the 48 States, and the
Federal Government is controlled by a large number of competing interests among
which the influence of the organizations mentioned is certainly not great. With
respect to the specific objectives or effects attributed to the interlock the council
has had no part, or inclination, in bringing about such alleged changes through
education.
The council is concerned primarily with improving the quality of research in
the social sciences — that is, with the reliability, rigor, objectivity, and honesty
of social-science research. Necessarily related to this objective is a concern
with improving the quality of the research workers in these fields, with study-
ing the conditions under which research is carried on, and with intelligent dis-
cussion and understanding of what research can and cannot do. The council
is not engaged in developing or in advocating public policies or political programs,
or in directing or shaping educational objectives and policies.
The Social Science Research Council has not cooperated with similar agencies
in other fields of research for the purpose of planning or controlling certain
aspects of American life. It has not sought, nor does it seek, control over any
aspect of American life, including research in the social sciences. The council
has participated in encouraging various types of planning in research, particu-
larly with the intention of making research more productive. This has been done
through the preparation of publications which help to summarize the existing
accomplishments of research in a given field, and through efforts to help research
men find the most promising lines of future research on which they might con-
centrate their attention.
The Social Science Research Council accepts grants from several foundations
for the administration of fellowships and for other forms of financial support
for research in the social sciences. However, foundations make grants for simi-
lar purposes to other organizations concerned with research in the social sciences,
such as universities and research institutes of many kinds, and foundations also
administer fellowship programs of their own. In addition, individual research
men in universities are frequently financed by university committees from en-
808 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
dowment funds, and research institutes also are financed by funds from private
sources, such as business firms concerned with market research problems and
also by the Federal and State government. ( See, for example, the Directory of
Social Sciences Research Organizations in Universities and Colleges, published
by the Social Science Research Council in 1950.)
There is the allegation in the report that the staff's study of the foundations
and the organizations mentioned "seems to warrant the inference that they con-
stitute a highly efficient, functioning whole. Its development and production
seems to have been largely the work of these organizations engaged in research
such as the Social Science Research Council and the National Research Council"
(ibid., p. 47). This charge as worded here is a vague one. The inference that
such a "highly efficient, functioning whole" exists is not warranted. We admit
that in our operations we do seek to be efficient. The nature of this "whole"
and the extent of the "interlock," however, need some rigorous examination
if the committee is to have a fair and accurate view, of just what does and what
does not exist.
There is first of all the statement in the staff report that the council "acts as
spokesman for seven constitutent member associations," The fact is that the
council has never been designated as a spokesman by the seven associations which
elect part of the council's board of directors, that the council has never sought to
arrogate to itself the role of spokesman for these associations or for social science
as a whole, or for anyone except itself, and that actually save for an occasional
individual member of one or another of the associations no one has ever seriously
proposed that we or anyone else act as spkesman for them.
The suggestion that the council is such a spokesman rests upon a very funda-
mental misunderstanding of the way in which learned associations function as
well as of the entire academic population. It is only on very limited matters that
the associations try to act as spokesmen for their members as a whole. The pro-
grams of their annual meetings, the contents of their journals, or the nature and
substance of any other activities which they carry on are not cleared with the
council or conducted in accordance with policies discussed with the council or
influenced by the council as such in any other single way. Consultation does
occur occasionally in matters of mutual research interest but these occasions
have arisen with any particular association not more than about once in 3 or 4
years.
The one continuing relationship between the seven associations and the council
consists of the designation by each of them each year of a member of the council's
board of directors for the subsequent 3 years. The origins of this relationship are
very simple if one understands the situation in the social sciences at the begin-
ning of the twenties. There were then seven well-established associations some
of whose members wanted to see the establishment of an agency more actively
engaged in fostering better research. The associations themselves could not well
undertake this because they were not organized to carry on from month to month
and from year to year the tasks to be undertaken by the council, because of a
view that a single agency concerned with all seven fields was desirable, and be-
cause actually research always has been and must be only one of the concerns of
the associations many of whose members are interested primarily or solely in
teaching or in other vocations.
Leaving then the "spokesman" angle of this allegation as the committee may
reasonably be concerned with the extent to which the council and the other organ-
izations called to its attention cooperate. Ten years ago the conviction arose that
the councils (the American Council on Education, the American Council of
Learned Societies, the National Research Council, and the Social Science Re-
search Council) ought not to work in total isolation from each other and that
they ought occasionally to talk over ideas and activities which might be of
interest simultaneously to two or more of them. This led to the creation of the
Conference Board of Associated Research Councils, a body to which some prior
reference has I think been made in these hearings. Over its entire life it has
held an average of three meetings — sometimes a day in length, sometimes half a
day — a year. The conference hoard has no staff beyond the volunteer services
provided by the councils themselves. It is therefore certainly far short of a tight
"interlock." Some measure of criticism may well be justified and might better
be directed against the limited communication and cooperation which has oc-
curred between the councils. Close and more frequent consultation might assist
in making contributions of national benefit. S'o far, however, we have not found
a highly efficient way of achieving this close working together, and certainly no
funds for providing the conference board with even minimal staff resources.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 809
The four councils do cooperate under a contract with the Department of
State in the preliminary selection of postdoctoral lecturers and research scholars
to receive awards under the Fulbright Act. This process of selection is made
from among persons who apply in an open competition, publicly announced
throughout the United States. The committee of selection consists of 12 mem-
bers, usually university professors, appointed by the board, and 4 members of
the staffs of the councils, all of whom serve without compensation other than
expenses. The final selection of Fulbright grantees, however, is made by the
Board of Foreign Scholarships, the members of which are appointed by the
President of the United States.
The conference board has sponsored the Commission on Human Resources
and Advanced Training which has for the past 5 years been studying problems
of the supply of and demand for American professional persons over a wide range
of fields of learning. There are also other ways in which the four councils work
together. There have been over the past 15 years a number of joint committees
between 2 or more of the councils as such, and some 5 or 6 conferences sponsored
by 2 or more of them. For example, we and the National Research Council some
years ago set up a joint committee to try to foster more accurate ways of measur-
ing attitudes and consumer wants. A few months ago the Social Science Re-
search Council and the National Research Council jointly sponsored a small
conference to discuss whether significant studies of twins could perhaps be
worked out. Other examples are the formation by the National Research Coun-
cil and the Social Science Research Council of a temporary committee to make
arrangements for a conference on research in contemporary Africa, held in
October 1953, to which were invited some 50 specialists in biology, geography,
anthropology, sociology, economics, and political science.
With the American Council of Learned Societies we have had joint commit-
tees which tried to improve communication between scholars engaged on studies
of Latin America to ascertain whether something could be done to increase the
number of Americans with competent knowledge of India and its neighboring
countries, and to aid American scholars in critically analyzing such materials
as can be drawn out from behind the Iron Curtain. These joint committees
represented a recognition tl at there are problems on which humanists and social
scientists, or social scientists and natural scientists ought to have something
to contribute to each other. At the same time, however, the joint committees
have always been very minor elements in the current work of any one of the
councils concerned.
With the other organizations mentioned in the report, aside from the other
three councils, and the American Historical Association, which is one of its
affiliated societies, the Social Science Research Council has had almost no
formal contact, and little informal contact.
Another allegation in the report of the research director is given in these
terms :
"In what appears from our studies to have been zeal for a radically new social
order in the United States, many of these social science specialists apparently
gave little thought to either the opinions or the warnings of those who were
convinced that a wholesale acceptance of knowledge acquired almost entirely
by empirical methods would result in a deterioration of moral standards and a
disrespect for principles. Even past experience which indicated that such an
approach to the problems of society could lead to tyranny appears to have been
disregarded" (ibid. p. 48).
This statement contains a number of suggestions and charges which involve
questions of extended scope. What is the "radically new social order" sug-
gested? Has there been a wholesale acceptance of empirical knowledge which
has resulted in a deterioration of moral standards and a disrespect for prin-
ciples? In the experience of which countries has an empirical approach to
social problems led to tyranny? These questions raise broad and vague issues,
and the present report of the research staff provides an insufficient basis for
their analysis. However, there is a tone of accusatory implication in these state-
ments which may be noted at this time. It might be inferred by a casual or
predisposed reader of the paragraph quoted above that radical social scientists,
undeterred by criticism of their use of empirical methods, were responsible for
an alleged deterioration of moral standards, and disrespect for principles, and
might become responsible for a tyrannical regime in the United States.
Implications of this kind can only be met by positive statements, in order
to present the issues in their clearest light. For example, it may well be
noted that certainly very few social scientists have shown zeal for a radically
810 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
new social order in the United States. A second statement which may be
made to move the discussion to a plane more productive of a sharp definition
of real questions, is that, if there has been a reterioration of moral standards
and a disrespect for principles, and this statement should by no means be con-
ceded, social scientists have no greater share in such a development than have
the members of many other groups in society. Furthermore many persons with
deteriorated moral standards and a disrespect for principles have been totally
oblivious of knowledge acquired by empirical methods or by any other methods.
Finally, social scientists wish neither to be controlled by governmental restric-
tions on their freedom of inquiry, nor to exercise control over other human
beings. They wish, rather, to widen the area of free choice open to human
beings, by the discovery of knowledge. It is no accident that it is in the United
States that the social sciences have flourished more than in any other country
in the world ; it is in the freest of societies that the study of man can be most
freely made. Only where knowledge may be sought for its own sake, spurred
by curiosity and enthusiams of individuals, can research most fully contribute
to the widening of human horizons and the realization of man's best self.
It has been alleged that the foundations and the "accessory agencies" have
"directed education toward a new international frame of reference." I have
been unable to find in the hearings just what this new international frame of
reference is supposed to be. The council has not sought to direct education,
since this is not within its scope of operations, and its effectiveness in doing so
would certainly be limited if it mistakenly undertook such a mission. The
council has several times tried to find ways of encouraging more systematic
and more searching inquiry into problems relating to the economic and political
position of the United States and better knowledge of other areas of the world.
We shall undoubtedly make new attempts in this direction if and as construc-
tive ideas arise. The council's attempts to study the research which has gone
on and to figure out ways of doing better research have, however, had no rela-
tion which I can discern to any particular "international frame of reference" —
new or old. The choice of this country's International frame of reference has
been made and will we are sure continue to be made by its legislative and execu-
tive policymakers and by its citizens through established constitutional proce-
dures. Of course, the council will continue its interest in working out better
and more significant research plans relating to problems of international rela-
tions — not to any particular international frame of reference — in view of the
obviously increasing importance of these relations to the security and welfare
of the United States.
Here, for example, is a current council undertaking. Foundation officers be-
came concerned with problems of foreign students at American universities. As
a means of learning more about these problems, and how improved methods of
dealing with them might be found, three foundations have made grants to the
Social Science Research Council. A grant of this type is made to the council
for several reasons. The council has experience in the administration of funds ;
it has knowledge of Individual scholars engaged in various fields of research ; it
has their confidence, and is therefore able to enlist their collaboration in the
carrying out of research projects. The result of the council's development of
this research project will be several publications useful, we hope, to foreign
student advisers in universities, to Government officials planning exchange of
persons programs, and to teachers and others who have contacts with foreign
students. These publications will be primarily descriptive in nature ; they will
summarize the results of observation, of interviews and of different types of
psychological and other tests. They will also include some comments of a
summary character, which it is hoped may assist those responsible for policy
in choosing among alternate courses of action. The use of these findings will
of course depend on the judgment of those who have responsibility for policies
and activities directly connected with foreign students.
Nowhere in the report is the statement made flatly that social scientists, by
themselves or with others, are engaged in a concerted political movement to
modify the American way of life. Nevertheless, there are suggestions, some of
which have been quoted above, which when taken as a whole give the impres-
sion that Mr. Dodd feels that social scientists as a group exert a sinister in-
fluence on American social life and institutions. An additional hint of this
order is found in the following paragraph :
"We wish to stress the importance of questioning change only when it might
involve developments detrimental to the interests of the American people, or
when it is promoted by a relatively small and tightly knit group backed by a
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 811
disproportionately large amount of money which could threaten the American
ideal of competition" (ibid., p. 47).
In this and other parts of the staff report, a ease is sought to be made against
the social sciences, and against organizations in other fields, in terms of innu-
endos, or suspicions that social scientists may be desirous of exercising control
over some aspects of American life. Social scientists reject such an attack on
their work and on their motives.
The paragraphs which follow are offered in order to indicate to the committee
the nature of the fellowship program of the Social Science Research Council,
in view of the comments made by Dr. A. H. Hobbs, assistant professor of
sociology at the University of Pennsylvania, in his testimony at the hearings
on May 20-21, 1954.
Before answering these allegations, which reflect Mr. Hobbs' personal opinion
and not detailed knowledge of the purposes and operation of the council's fellow-
ship program, it may he well to state that the council is only one of a great
number of organizations, many supported by foundations, which offer fellowships
for training and research in social science. Therefore, the trends in types of
training and methods of research, if any, that may appear in the projects of
council fellows do not necessarily attest to the general character of training and
research in the social sciences.
Throughout its career the council has been concerned with developing more
rigorous methods, among which statistical procedures can be numbered. Few
scholars would deny that the social sciences have benefited greatly by the use
of quantitative methods. The council has been and will continue to be interested
in their development, as it would in the fostering of any productive approach.
Whether the council has overemphasized the quantitative approach is, and must
remain, a matter of opinion. To some reputable social scientists any use of
numbers is abhorrent; to others, of an opposite persuasion, work without a
quantitative basis seems of little value. It must be strongly emphasized, how-
ever, in spite of misconceptions prevalent in some places, that the council has
never been concerned exclusively with the development and promotion of only
one methodology; statistical or otherwise.
Even a casual reading of the appointments made in the council's programs
of faculty research fellowships and research training fellowships during the
past 2 years would reveal that projects of many kinds have been supported,
entailing a wide variety of research techniques. They range from problems
utilizing refined statistical analysis to inquiries of a theoretical or descriptive
nature in which quantification would be inappropriate. It is, in fact, exceed-
ingly difficult to determine the extent to which statistical methods will be
involved in any particular research. As one tool among many, the statistical
approach is used by scientists when they feel it will yield significant information
about the question under consideration. It is, on the other hand, scrupulously
avoided by scholars when the area of interest calls for other research methods.
Ordinarily, even the most devoted exponent of quantitative techniques finds
that certain aspects of his problem call for other strategy, for library research,
or interviewing or observation. Particularly in new areas of research interest
scientists often find that less rigorous methods are essential to describe th&
problem and explore its implications, perhaps using statistics at a later stage
of the research to pin down the more important features of the situation.
Although the research projects supported by the council embrace a wide
range of interests and methods, one can distinguish varying degrees of adherence
to a quantitative approach. The following classification represents the distribu-
tion of projects in the faculty research fellowship program since 1950, and in
the research training fellowship program for 1953 and 1954, according to their
use of statistical techniques :
Primarily quantitative
Mixed -.
Primarily nonquantitative_
Faculty
research
fellowship
5
14
Research
tralnin g
fellowship
13
27
27
Mr. Hobbs' principal allegation is that the council, in its fellowship program,
but especially in its announcement of awards for 1953 from which he quoted, has
49720—54 — pt. 1 52
812 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
overemphasized empiricism, specifically statistical computation (transcript, ibid.,
pp. 169-170). He further states that a social scientist reading the announce-
ment "would interpret it to mean that probably, almost certainly, what they
(SSRC) are interested in is only statistical computations."
The statement that "fellows will be selected on the basis of their actual and
prospective accomplishments in formulating and testing hypotheses concerning
social behavior by empirical and, if possible, quantitative methods" applied in the
1953 announcement, from which Mr. Hobbs quoted, to only one type of fellow-
ship, the faculty research fellowships. From Mr. Hobbs' statement one might
easily gain the impression that all of the five programs of the council described in
the 1953 circular are qualified by this emphasis on a quantitative approach. Not-
withstanding this stated preference for projects utilizing quantitative methods, a
number of appointments to faculty research fellowships, as already noted were
made for work of a nonstatistical nature. In selecting the recipients of fellow-
ships and grants primary importance has never been attached to the methods
to be employed, but rather to the intellectual promise or achievements of the
applicant.
The audience of professional social scientists and advanced students to whom
the announcement quoted is addressed certainly does not construe the term
"research" to mean "only statistical computation." This is demonstrated by the
variety of applications received and by the diversity of projects and methods for
which fellowships have been awarded. It should also be noted that Mr. Hobbs
himself was the recipient in 1946 of a council fellowship, a demobilization
award for the purpose of making a study of the "trend of emphasis in sociological
teaching : 1932-41." Presumably he would approve the subject of his own study
for which he sought and gained support from the council as well as the methods he
employed.
In one place in his testimony (transcript, ibid., p. 168) Mr. Hobbs states
that graduate students "are encouraged through the situation (the giving of
large foundation grants) to embark upon study projects which are extremely
narrow. * * * He also states (p. 169), "furthermore, these projects aid these
students to a disproportionate degree. Other students who, through differing
interests, through a broader viewpoint of society and behavior, who do their
work and who don't have such assistance, are handicapped in comparison with
the ones who receive the aid through foundation grants."
The council's research training fellowships, to quote the 1953 announcement
from which Mr. Hobbs also quoted, are intended precisely to afford persons an
opportunity "to obtain more advanced research training than that which is
provided in the usual Ph. D. program." We have been mindful of a tendency
at times to use graduate students essentially as clerical assistants on large
research projects. We have made our concern explicit in letters which accom-
panied many thousands of announcements mailed to social science colleagues in
recent years.
The following quotation is from one of these letters written by Elbridge Sibley
and dated November 1, 1951 :
"We often fail to get in touch at the right time with extremely able graduate
students and young Ph. D.'s who might profit greatly by a year's fellowship.
With distressing frequency we hear from academic friends that the best students
in their departments are not among the applicants for fellowships because they
are already employed in doing things which someone else wants to have done.
It is ironic that the ablest individuals seem to run the greatest risk of being
prematurely diverted from training for research by offers of employment which,
although attractively remunerative, do not foster the optimum development of
their research talents. A timely suggestion from you might well lead such a
person to take advantage of an opportunity for further training which would
in the long run greatly enhance his preparation for a more effective career."
The same point was made in a similar letter circulated the following year :
"To repeat what has been said in similar letters in past years, it is too often
true that the very persons whom we are seeking tend, precisely because they
are unusually able and hard working, to be diverted from achieving their own
maximum development or productivity as research scientists. If you can en-
courage one or more of these to become candidates for fellowships or grants,
you may be doing a significant service both to the individuals concerned and to
social science."
In brief, the research training fellowships are designed to give students a
broader type of training in methodology. Furthermore, the stipends are paid
directly to the fellow who is responsible himself for the conduct of his research
or study program.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 813
Supplementary Statement B- — Nature and Purpose of the Social Science
Research Council
In the first printed report of the Social Science Research Council, we find this
excellent statement about how the council came into being :
"For those unfamiliar with the Social Science Research Council, the following
statement of its genesis, aims, and organization is set down :
"As man's study of his physical and institutional surroundings has become
more intensive, the comfortable wholeness of his earlier world has disintegrated.
We no longer have 'natural philosophers' who 'take all human knowledge as their
province,' They have given place to troops of 'specialists,' whose achievements
are unquestioned, but who are painfully aware of how small a fraction any indi-
vidual knows of what mankind has learned. Men 'who know more and more
about less and less' are pushing forward the refined researches of today at every
point along the deploying line of scientific advance. But even as a device for
gaining more knowledge, specialization is acknowledged to have its drawbacks.
We are in danger of distorting our vision when we wrench a section of the world
loose from its context to facilitate its intensive scrutiny. We risk waste effort
when we use our narrowly limited individual resources in attacking problems
which might yield to joint endeavors. The mathematical, physical, and biologi-
cal sciences were first in this country to organize in an effort to see their problems
whole and to facilitate cooperation among specialists concerned with clusters of
problems. But shortly after the National Research Council was formed, several
representatives of political science, economics, sociology, and statistics came
together for a similar purpose. Out of this informal beginning the Social Science
Research Council developed in 1923. It was presently strengthened and
broadened by the accession of psychologists, anthropologists, and historians."
Wesley C. Mitchell, Chairman.
( Social Science Research Council, Third Annual Report, 1926-27. New York,
November 1927. Pp. 14-15.)
The following statement is reproduced from the 1952-53 annual report of the
Social Science Research Council :
"The council is organized as a private corporation, and governed by a board
of directors. The board meets twice a year to review all operations of the coun-
cil and related matters. The members pf the board are drawn from among out-
standing representatives of the various social sciences and closely related fields.
The content of the program of the council reflects their informed and responsible
judgment. The actual process of selecting topics and determining procedures is
carried on with the aid of a small professional staff, cooperating with committees
and consulting directly with many research workers. The suggestions and rec-
ommendations from council committees or from less formalized sources of advice
are examined and discussed by the council's committee on problems and policy.
This committee meets about six times in the course of the year to consider the
current work of the council and to develop further, with the aid of the staff,
proposed new projects, programs, and preliminary explorations.
"Most members of the council are active on 1 or more of the 30 or so committees
described in subsequent pages of this report. As the committee lists demonstrate,
the membership is drawn from a wide variety of institutions and disciplines and
in recent years has involved services annually by some 200 members of 50 or
more university and college faculties and of the staffs of scientific, business, and
governmental organizations. Committees concerned with the planning and
appraisal of research in different fields are appointed by the committee on
problems and policy, while administrative committees are elected by the board
of directors. Participation is based upon competence of individuals in their
fields, known interest in the subject at hand, and willingness to give time and
attention to cooperating with fellow scientists. Committees serve without com-
pensation, except for actual expenses in attending meetings. The appointments
are on an annual basis, and are usually reviewed and revised each autumn.
"The initial leads from which the council's research planning activities evolve
arise from the ideas and research goals of the research workers who identify
themselves with the objectives of the council, irrespective of whether they are
at the moment members of it, or of its committees. Research planning would
be artificial and sterile if it were not directly related to the motivation of re-
search workers to carry their own inquiries forward. The council endeavors to
fulfill its basic purpose through the process of selecting ideas and individuals
and providing opportunities for the development of whatever cooperative rela-
tionship will advance research in specific areas. In a sense, this process has an
3X4 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
architectural quality in that the council seeks to relate the skills and objectives
of the individual specialist to building a structure of ideas and knowledge of more
general significance.
"The foundations supporting the council over the years have recognized the
value and utility of an organization that can bring together the initiative and
judgment of social scientists on problems of research development directly related
to their own concerns. Fruitful leads for scholarly inquiry and constructive
suggestions for strengthening research personnel and improving their training
most appropriately come from the responsible academic leaders who are de-
voting their lives to these problems in the universities and colleges. The council
provides a means of ready communication among scholars in different institu-
tions who, because of the very fact of their specialized research interests, often
work in relative isolation among their immediate colleagues and hence welcome
an opportunity to discuss their problems with persons developing similar inter-
ests at other institutions. Education in the United States is not organized under
a unified national ministry of education ; rather, there are a considerable number
of national organizations, each dealing with distinctive facets of education and
research. The Social Science Research Council is one of perhaps a dozen or so
such organizations. Its distinctive contribution rests in its concern with the
advancement of research in the social sciences.
"The grants made directly to the council by foundations are usually for specified
purposes. Hence, the council is n®t in a position to consider many requests for
financial assistance that a foundation might find appropriate. The council's con-
cern is with ideas for research and with preliminary aspects of research which
may or may not lead to well-planned projects worthy of support. Many of the
council's appraisal and planning efforts are focused not on the development of
specific research projects but on calling attention to needed work. The publica-
tions of the council resulting from these efforts are fertile sources of suggestions
for research. In other cases, relatively precise plans for research may be out-
lined. If specific research projects are developed and funds are needed, the in-
dividual or group prepared and qualified to execute the plan may seek funds
directly from a foundation, and the funds, if made available, go directly to the
applicant or his own institution.
"Only in exceptional instances does the council accept funds for the direct
support or supervision of research. It sees its functions as those of planning,
stimulating, and initiating research rather than conducting projects than can
be done more appropriately by other organizations.
"At the September 1953 meeting of the board of directors, particular considera-
tion was given to the present status of the social sciences in the light of the
current demands upon them and prevailing methods of support. There was no
disposition on the part of the board to attempt to modify the objectives for which
the council was founded ; it reaffirmed its continued concern with basic research
and development of the social sciences.
"The trend of the times is toward increasing recognition that the social sciences
afford means for better understanding and analysis of many complex social,
political, and economic problems. The economists, the psychologists, the statis-
ticians, and members of all the other social disciplines are the specialists whose
aid is sought, because theirs is the relevant training. Many organizations offer
opportunities for social scientists to work on pressing current problems that
call for study by trained personnel. In attacking such problems, at the behest
of philanthropic, business, or other organizations, specialists from many fields
apply their knowledge and the techniques and theories of anatysis that are now
available in social science. But all will agree that valuable though such in-
quiries are — and indeed essential for bringing available thought and information
to bear — the complexity of the problems involved does not permit anything more
than a partial analysis.
"It is the council's primary function to provide for the development of better
methods of research, more effective means of gathering necessary data, and
more adequate theoretical formulations. Unless research men are encouraged
and stimulated to give some portion of their time and energies to these purposes,
the agencies that seek quick 'answers,' facile solutions, or practical judgments
may tend to crowd more fundamental problems from the forefront of con-
sideration.
"The council has long been concerned with improving the training of social
science research personnel ; but not enough attention is given to their opportuni-
ties for lifetime careers and to the frequent lack of research continuity in such
careers. As research institutes attain more financial stability they can offer
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 815
competent staff employees continuous careers in research, but most social science
research organizations in universities today lead a hand-to-mouth existence.
Moreover, well-qualified social scientists often follow a seemingly erratic career
line as they are attracted from one brief research opportunity to another at
different institutions.
"As the September discussion revealed, the increase in contract funds for re-
search has led to undue emphasis on developing special projects as distinct from
continued basic work. Basic research can be encouraged only by providing an
environment for research scholars conducive to continuity in their work. There
should be clearer recognition by the universities that research is just as much a
part of the professor's career as is teaching, and that provision of opportunities
and funds for research is just as important as for teaching. In order to obtain
university funds for research at the present time, there is too much emphasis
on shaping a project that has 'appeal.'
"The best working conditions for social scientists generally are to be found
in a university setting, and maintaining that setting with its original advantages
is of first importance. University personnel should not be dependent on funds
from contracts with outside agencies to sustain their research interests. Short-
term support for particular or limited research jobs results in the abuses that
liave been described as 'projectitis.'
"The council's concern with basic scientific research and with matters of
paramount interest to research workers, in accordance with the purpose for
which the council was incorporated, means that questions of public policy must
be left to other organizations. Of course, social scientists in their teaching and
writing pursue a variety of interests and concern themselves with a wide range
of problems. But within the council our common purpose is the advancement of
research in the social sciences.
"The decision taken 20 years ago with respect to current public problems still
holds : 'The council determined not to avoid current issues by reason of their
generally controversial character, but rather to give weight to the promise of
particular research to contribute to an understanding of contemporary ques-
tions. This decision involved no intention of abandoning more remote and
fundamental research in favor of that applied wholly to immediate ends. It
simply recognized that in research, as in so much human activity, a measure of
value is benefit to mankind.'
"In these terms, perhaps no greater benefit to mankind can be envisaged than
advance in our capacity to understand ourselves, our society, and the other cul-
tures and nations of the world. Such a capacity, we believe, rests significantly
in better methods of analysis. Recognizing the difficulties created by power con-
flicts and irreconcilable goals of human societies, still the challenge of improving
the means and methods of social science analysis offers wide and constructive
scope for continued research effort. Facts are to be preferred to guesses, and
knowledge to ignorance. More systematic ways of ordering knowledge about
human affairs are better than speculation or special pleading. It is upon such
obvious common assumptions that the structure of the social sciences is erected.
Technicalities and refinements sometimes make these fields appear confusing to
the layman. Misunderstandings now and then occur. But the social sciences,
as fields of knowledge, point to no particular form of society as ultimate, or
any prior set of public policies. These sciences are premised on the faith that
logical thought, established facts, and various forms of analysis can contribute
to a clearer understanding of human problems. The social sciences provide no
complete anwers to any practical problem, but they offer relevant facts and
ideas to all who would prefer to see human affairs worked out through reason,
through faith in their fellow men, and through methods of persuasion.
"There are various schools of thought within different social science disciplines.
There is disagreement and competition in these fields, just as in otber walks
of life. There are no authoritative groups to say with complete finality: This
is economically sound or that is socially valid. But there are more, and less,
rigorous methods of analysis and better — and less well-qualified analysts. Some
research workers are more objective than others. By keeping the competition
keen and free, some win the hard-earned recognition of having achieved a
scientific approach to the study of human behavior and social relations.
"The problems of the individual research worker remain of constant concern
to the council. No research team is better than its individual members, and no
research plan has much meaning beyond the capacity of individuals to carry it
through.
"The council has not produced a generalized blueprint for the overall develop-
ment of the social sciences, nor does it think that it would be desirable to do so.
816 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Rather, it seeks to stimulate inquiries into new fields of knowledge ; to discover
and encourage social scientists who wish to try to apply new methods to tradi-
tional studies ; to grasp and further opportunities provided when competent
people in widely separated places have similar research interests and the effec-
tiveness of their work may be enhanced through pooling of ideas and experiences.
The strategic employment of small funds in such circumstances may be productive
of research that otherwise might emerge only at a much later time, or not at
all. The council thus serves mainly as a cooperative agency through which
individual social scientists voluntarily collaborate to advance the progress of
research. The council does not seek to impose upon them a program of its own
but seeks to bring into focus and develop their interests and judgments. If the
council is defined in terms of its work, its effort is concentrated not in its offices
in New York and Washington but in the colleges and universities where a new
generation of social scientists is being trained and where persons associated
with council committees and other activities of the council engage in research."
Mr. Herring. I think if it suits your pleasure, the most helpful
thing I could do perhaps would be to say something about the council
and try to get some factual material before you that would give a clear
understanding of what it is we are doing.
The Chairman. Mr. Koch, did you have some questions ?
Mr. Koch. You just continue making whatever oral statements you
wish.
Mr. Herring. Mr. Chairman, I will go right ahead, but let me say
that I would be very happy indeed if any member of the committee or
of counsel would like to ask any questions. Because what I have here
are just rough notes. So I will go ahead, and if there is any point you
would like elaborated, or any question you would like to ask, I hope
you will do so.
Well, I assume that you have read or browsed through this state-
ment about the nature and purposes of the Social Science Research
Council. I don't want to repeat material. But I have identified a few
points that I would like to bring to your attention.
In preparing for this hearing, I read somewhat more of our past rec-
ords that I had, and I came across a very interesting statement by
Wesley Mitchell in the first council printed report. It is just a para-
graph, and I would like to read it, because I think it is illuminating.
In this first printed report, the following statement is made :
For those unfamiliar with the Social Science Research Council the following
statement of its genesis, aims, and organization is set down.
As man's study of his physical and institutional surroundings has become
more intensive, the confortable wholeness of his earlier world has distintegrated.
We no longer have natural philosophers who take all human knowledge as their
province. They have given place to troops of specialists, whose achievements
are unquestioned, but who are painfully aware of how small a fraction any indi-
vidual knows of what mankind has learned. Men who know more and more
about less and less are pushing forward to refined researches of today at every
point along the deploying line of scientific advance. But even as a device for
gaining more knowledge, specialization is acknowledged to have its drawbacks.
We are in danger of distorting our vision, when we wrench a section of the
world loose from its context to facilitate its intensive scrutiny. We risk waste
effort when we use our narrowly limited individual resources in attacking prob-
lems that might yield to joint endeavors. The mathematical, physical, and bio-
logical sciences were first in this country to organize in an effort to see their
problems whole and to facilitate an organization among specialists concerned
with clusters of problems. But shortly after the National Research Council was
formed — that is, for the natural sciences, several representatives of political
science, economics, sociology, and statistics came together for a similar purpose.
Out of this informal beginning, the Social Science Research Council developed
in 1923. It was presently strengthened and broadened by the accession of
psychologists, anthropologists, and historians.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 817
The interesting thing that I want to emphasize here is that this ob-
jective that I have just read, this statement of objective, reflects the
initiative of a group of leading social scientists. They had a sense of
need, this high specialization developing. There are things that we
share. We need some way of getting away and talking shop. How
can we get a better grasp of these problems % Here is a man working
as a specialist on a university faculty. The specialist who would
know most about his field might be 100 miles or 500 miles across the
continent. Isn't there some way in which we can get together and
talk about the common problems we share as specialists in these fields ?
Well, it was that sense of need that brought this organization into
existence.
The first point, then, that I want to emphasize, is that that is where
the initiative came from.
The second point I want to emphasize is the consistent attention
that the council has maintained to its objective.
Now, a little documentary quote on that is found in our decennial
report. In 1933, we published a somewhat smaller report on the com-
pletion of the first 10 years. And the director, in that report, repeats :
The council Is confident of the validity of its objectives of better and more
broadly trained personnel, the improvement of research materials, of the devel-
opment of research methods over the social field as an integrated whole.
This consistent interest in better training, helping able people to
develop, better data, a lot of technical problems there of how to get
at the facts, better methods, what to do with the facts after you get
them — it is that kind of thing ; and I can certainly sympathize with
perhaps the difficulty in the great array of organizations over the
country, of knowing, "Well, now, just what is this organization con-
cerned with?"
It has a unique interest in the advancement of research in these
particular fields. And there are a great many technical problems
there, of how to get at this subject matter more adequately.
Well, that is one point. Another point I would like to emphasize
about the organization is that in an organization of this character you
need to try to maintain, be aware of the importance of, continuity,
stability, on the one hand, and rotation of membership on the other.
How can you be sure that the organization is pursuing its ends ' l .
Well, you can only be sensitive to the problem.
But some of the questions that were raised as a result of this in-
vestigation prompted me to look at the record a bit here and see
just what the story is so far as the membership of our board of
directors is concerned.
Over the last 30 years, we have had about 160 members or 159
members on the board of directors, and at the present time only 4
members of the board have served more than 6 years and only 11
more than 3 years. But if you work out a little chart — 1 term, 2
terms, 3 terms or more of this membership— you will find that about
half of them served for 1 term and about 40 out of the 160 served
for 2 terms, and about 20 served for 3 terms. I just mention that
to indicate the problem of rotation and the problem of continuity of
attention.
Well, now, I can go on with further exposition about the organiza-
tion. If you would like to have me present to you information about
the selection of this board, I can do so.
818 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Koch. Why don't you do that? And also name the constit-
uent members, will you please '?
Mr. Herring. Well, the board of the council is composed of 30
individuals. We have seven associations that designate, from panels
that we submit to them, their selection for membership on our board,
and those associations are the American Anthropological Association,
the American Economic Association, the American Historical Asso-
ciation, the American Political Science Association, the American
Psychological Association, the American Sociological Society, the
American Statistical Association. And then we have 8 members at
large, and I am a member of the board, so that brings it up to 30 indi-
viduals. These members from the associations are appointed or
designated for terms of 3 years, so that we have a new designation
or reappointment each year.
Mr. Koch. When you said a panel — how many names are on the
panel ?
Mr. Herring. There have to be three names, under our bylaws, and
our practice is always to discuss this matter, and frequently there is
quite a roster of names.
The important thing to keep in mind here is that here is an or-
ganization that is meaningful if you have people serving on the board
who are interested in what we are doing, and who are interested in
the advancement of research and who are working on research rather
than other things. And therefore we have on these panels the names
of people any one of whom would have an interest in the sort of
tiling we are trying to do. It is pretty obvious that you would not
want to put on the panel the names of people who were interested in
something else. And this system has been in effect now since 1935,
and until some questions were raised here about it we never gave it
a second thought. It is a system that has proved quite workable and
satisfactory to all concerned.
Mr. Wormser. Why don't you permit the societies, the constituent
societies, to determine their own representatives ? Aren't they aware
of what the special purposes of your organization are ?
Mr. Herring. Well, that is a perfectly reasonable question, Mr.
Wormser. There are all sorts of ways in which this thing could be
done. I gather from some of the men who were around at the time
that it was suggested a good many years ago that this organization
ought to handle its members on some other basis.
Mr. Wormser. It was suggested that a panel would be named from
w r hich you could get the particular type of representative wanted.
Mr. Herring. We want the type who can give some time and thought
to the sort of work we are doing, and who has research interests rather
than interests of some other kind. And every now and then somebody
may serve on the board who is more interested in other things.
Mr. Wormser. Well, the suggestion has been made specifically that
you are interested particularly in not getting professors, let us say, who
might be more of the rational school than the empirical.
Mr. Herring. Well, you present that as a problem. It has not
been a problem, in my experience. I have not been aware of that
as a problem. And there is the freest interchange of opinion and
discussion about these matters.
Well, I think one way of getting before the committee fairly graphi-
cally, perhaps, the sort of thing we do would be to say to you first
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 819
that this board of directors meets twice a year. They review the pro-
gram. We have discussion on research problems. And our day-to-day
work is conducted through committees. We have about 30 com-
mittees that are quite active, and these committees are set up to con-
sider problems where we think there is some -research significance.
Mr. Hays. What sort of questions do these committees consider?
Mr. Herring. I have here before me types of questions considered
by my committees, because I thought that would be the most down-to-
earth way of getting at it. I will just sample this and offer for the
record a fuller statement, so that you can get the thing in that fashion.
Let us take, for example, agricultural economics. We have a com-
mittee on agricultural economics. And the membership of this com-
mittee is made up of agricultural economists in this instance over the
country, who are interested in doing a better job in that particular
field. The common practice in the organization is that whatever
member of our board is interested in whatever committee would de-
termine whether or not he would serve on it.
Agricultural economics, then, was in response to the opinion ex-
pressed over the country, particularly in our land-grant colleges and
other institutions where good work in agricultural economics is going
forward, that there be an opportunity provided for reexamining
some of the assumptions underlying research in the agricultural field,
and for critically restudying the research methods used ly agricul-
tural economists. So we brought together 20 of the younger outstand-
ing men in the field for a 2-day conference last January. They
talked shop for 2 days, and on the basis of their recommendations we
set up a committee which is currently concerned with two jobs: a
critical, fresh look at past research on low-income farms and farming
areas — its report is still in preparation — and an attempt was made
also to bring together the thinking of a larger number of experts on
the usefulness of various types of research, with particular emphasis
on finding the advantages of relatively simple methods over more
intricate ones for the analysis of agricultural problems.
What I am trying to emphasize here is that these men were ap-
proaching the problem essentially as technicians, and they wanted to
see how they could improve the methods of analysis. I do not know
whether I need to emphasize that greatly, but we are not^ interested
in talking about : what should agricultural policy be? This group is
talking about how to use better methods for doijig further research,
knowing what has already been done.
Mr. Hays. In other words, they would not be very helpful to Mr.
Benson in his present dilemma.
Mr. Herring. That is right.
Mr. Goodwin. What do you mean, "dilemma" ?
Mr. Hays. Mr. Goodwin, the only thing I think I could say chari-
tably is that if you had some farmers in your district you would know
what his dilemma is. I am very keenly aware of it. His dilemma
is either finding a reasonable solution to the farm problem, or finding
a new job.
Mr. Goodwin. I am sorry I started it.
Mr. Herring. I will offer you one or two other illustrations. Here
is a committee. I sat in on a few of its meetings. It is a committee
on economic growth. This committee brings together several econ-
omists, sociologists, and anthropologists to find how and under what
820 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
conditions economic systems grow. These include not only what are
thought of as purely economic factors, but also the customs and tradi-
tions and attitudes of people. We know that some parts of the world
have grown more rapidly economically than others, and this group is
interested in the questions : Why ? Why is that ? What is economic
growth ? Can you measure it ? Can you identify it, even ? What
are we talking about ?
One of the first problems is really to figure out how you can talk
about some of these matters.
Now, in the case of economic growth, there are not only the eco-
nomic factors of capital and so on, and credit, and whatnot, but there
are problems that involve motivation. Some peoples in some parts
of the world just seem to like to work harder than other peoples in
other parts of the world. Is there any way of better understanding
these motivational factors? In some parts of the world people put
their money in a hole in the ground. In others, they put it in the stock
market. What can you find out about the readiness of people to
invest? What do they do with their savings? That may suggest, in
a very crude way, the kind of concerns this group is interested in.
And I will say this, that where they can find any statistical data on
this, they have a hard look at it, a very hard look. Because the
statisticians on that committee want to know 7 whether these statistics
are any good or not. And if you w T ant criticism of statistics, I can
refer you to some statisticians who are the most critical minded people
when it comes to the quantitative approach.
Mr. Hats. I might ask you, right at that point: Is the council
interested in the individual, the so-called lone- wolf type of research,
that we have heard referred to here ?
Mr. Herring. Well, we are very much interested in that. And if
I have given you an adequate enough indication of the kinds of ques-
tions, I will just offer you this memo of illustrative questions.
Mr. Goodwin (presiding). In the absence of objection, it will be
admitted.
The Chair hears no objection.
(The material referred to is as follows :)
Types of Questions Considered by SSRC Committees
Agricultural economics. — For 2 or 3 years various agricultural economists at
State colleges and elsewhere urged that the council provide an opportunity for
reexamining some of the assumptions underlying research in the agricultural field
and for critically restudying the research methods commonly used hy agricul-
tural economists. We brought together about 20 of the younger outstanding men
in the field for a 2-day conference a year ago last January. On the basis of their
recommendations we set up a committee which is currently concerned with
two jobs :
(a) A critical fresh look at past research on low-income farms and farming
areas. Its report is still in preparation but it will, we understand, for instance,
question whether a failure to study closely enough the existing statistics of agri-
culture and of income has not exaggerated the extent to which low-income farms
really exist.
(6) An attempt to draw together the thinking of a large number of experts
on the usefulness of this or that type of research of a variety of research methods,
with a particular interest in pointing out wherever possible the advantages of
relatively simple methods over more intricate ones.
Business enterprise research. — Because psychologists and sociologists as well
as economists are turning to what they view as a more realistic view of the busi-
ness enterprise as an integral and essential part of the American system, it
seemed useful just a year ago to bring together a number of those most interested
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 821
for a preliminary conference. On the basis of that conference's discussion, we
set up a committee which is now in process of a critical stocktaking of the work
heretofore done by economists and others on the business enterprise, in the hope
that more significant and constructive directions for future work can be suggested.
(It shoujd be unnecessary to point this out, but the committee's discussions have
involved neither Marxism nor economic determinism, and instead are concerned
with promoting a better general understanding of the nature of and contributions
of American business enterprises. )
ECONOMIC GROWTH
This committee brings together several economists, a sociologist, and an anthro-
pologist in an effort to devise ways of better understanding how, and under what
conditions, economic systems grow. These conditions include not only what are
usually thought of as purely economic factors such as capital, raw materials,
and the like, but also the customs, traditions, and attitudes of the people. The
American tradition of free enterprise developed and flourished under conditions
of rapid economic growth. If it is to continue to flourish, or if economic progress
is to be fostered in so-called underdeveloped places, there is need for more ade-
quate knowledge of the complex factors which produce growth in some situations
and stagnation or decline in others, and for understanding of the reasons why
industrialization has taken root readily in some environments and failed to do so
in others. There is even need for an acceptable method of measuring economic
growth, whereby meaningful comparisons can be made between different econ-
omies. The committee, needless to say, does not presume that it will finally solve
these problems ; it serves to focus the interests and pool the experience of scholars
in many places who are working on these problems.
Historiography. — This is a committee of historians who believe that their
profession may be able to sharpen its insights and to make more significant in-
terpretations of historical events by drawing upon the skills and knowledge de-
veloped by other social disciplines. It is engaged in preparing a book for his-
torians, describing possible applications of the methods and data of such
disciplines as economics, political science, and sociology.
Identification of talent. — In view of the large sums devoted to scholarships
and fellowships for the education of youths who may become leaders of future
generations, it would be obviously desirable to be able to identify more confidently
than is now possible those boys and girls who possess in undeveloped form the
talents requisite for high-grade leadership. Already much progress has been
made in developing tests of intelligence which indicate with considerable relia-
bility a pupil's capacity for higher academic study, but it is a matter of common
knowledge that leadership in business, government, and civic affairs calls for
traits of personality other than the ability to make high grades in school. The
committee on identification of talent is sponsoring several research projects
on particular aspects of the broader problem of identifying at, say, high-school
age, boys or girls who may be capable, with suitable education, of becoming
business leaders or statesmen. It is characteristic of the scientific approach
to such a problem that the problem must first be analyzed into smaller under-
lying problems which can be effectively studied by scientific methods. A head-
long attack on the problem as a whole would be premature at this stage. Thus,
for example, one investigator sponsored by the committee is making intensive
studies of high-school boys of equal scholastic standing but from different
social backgrounds, in an effort to discern why some of them aspire to higher
goals than others ; another investigator is attempting, by observing the behavior
of participants in a community organization, to define more precisely a trait
of leadership which he calls social sensitivity — the ability of a leader, so to
speak, to sense the unspoken feelings of members of his group. Out of the
results of such limited but carefully controlled observations it is to be hoped
that gradually a more adequate solution of the complex practical question of
identifying undeveloped talent can be achieved.
Mathematical training of social scientists. — The field of interest of this com-
mittee is clearly indicated by its name. Its major projects thus far have been a
seminar in which a group of mathematicians and social scientists devoted the
summer of 1952 to preparation of teaching materials adapted to use in courses
for social-science students, and a summer institute in 1953, at which about 40
social-science teachers and graduate students received intensive instruction in
certain mathematical subjects. Not all branches of social science make use of
mathematical principles and methods, but their use is steadily growing, and there
is consequently an increasing need for mathematical instruction by which social
822 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
scientists can gain useful competence in specific areas of mathematics without
devoting years to curricula which are traditionally prescribed for professional
mathematicians.
Measurement of opinion, attitudes, and consumer wants. — This committee
exemplifies the council's role as a meeting place for research workers who have
common interests and problems but are separated geographically or by their dif-
ferent vocations and educational backgrounds. The committee, when it was
organized in 1945, brought together for the first time leaders in the use of
opinion and attitude surveys (polls, as they are popularly known) in govern-
mental, commercial, and academic organizations. While interested in different
kinds of subject matter, the members of the committee recognized many common
problems of method. All were interested in methods whereby the opinions and
attitudes of groups of people can be efficiently and economically ascertained,
and how to avoid the pitfalls which beset early ventures in public opinion polling.
Three major research projects were sponsored, touching on such matters as the
reliability of data obtained by questioning small samples of individuals, and the
kinds of bias which may be introduced by the interviewer who asks the questions.
When the final reports of all of these studies are completed and reviewed, it is
expected that the committee will be discharged in accordance with the council's
usual policy of maintaining each research planning committee only so long as it
appears to provide the most effective means of advancing research. The fron-
tiers of research are continually shifting, and each new forward thrust calls for
some special combination of skills, interests, and experience. When the Com-
mittee on Measurement of Opinion was established, it was almost alone in the
field; subsequently, two major professional associations have come into being,
which can be expected to serve on a wider scale many of the purposes for which
the council's group was set up.
Migration differentials. — About 15 years ago, the council issued a bulletin on
research on the migration of population. The present committee was estab-
lished in 1950 to review again the status of research on this subject, which is
of great timely importance in view of the tremendous volume of migration dur-
ing and following World War II. The committee, following a typical pattern
of council activity, is preparing a volume which will not only review and assess
the significance of previous studies of migration but also point to gaps in existing
knowledge of the subject which need to be filled if the causes and effects of
movement of people from place to place are to be understood. The committee is
interesting itself not merely in how many people have moved whence and
whither, hut also in the factors which prompt people to move, the kinds of per-
sons who move as compared with those who reside permanently in one place,
and the social and economic consequences of this continual reassortment of people
in different communities. Do people, for instance, move from their homes be-
cause business is poor where they are, or simply because they hope to achieve
greater satisfactions elsewhere? Is the average migrant a restlessly energetic
person, or a ne'er-do-well who drifts about in the vain hope of finding easy
success somewhere?
Labor market research. — This committee in the past 2 or 3 years has conducted
a highly significant research experiment in carrying through a major study of
labor mobility in 6 cities through the entirely voluntary cooperation of research
men and institutes in 7 different universities. It has, at the same time, sponsored
an entirely independent and critical study of the research which its members
and others have done on labor mobility, to ascertain what has and what has not
been proven, to raise questions about the research methods used, and to suggest
recommendations about future more efficient work in this field. The results of
this appraisal are being published this summer as a typical number in the coun-
cil's series of research bulletins, and the results of the first project are also cur-
rently being made available.
Scaling theory and methods. — This committee addresses itself to the highly
technical problem of devising methods by which the statements which people
make in everyday language about their opinions and attitudes can be translated
in quantitative terms. For example, if a number of persons are asked to state
their opinions on some public issue, their responses may range all the way from
strong approval, through indifference, to strong disapproval. In an election, the
voters may be required simply to vote "yes" or "no," but a social scientist seek-
ing to understand their attitudes needs some means of comparing the infinitely
variable degrees or shades of opinion which lie between these extremes. "Scal-
ing" is the term applied to what might loosely be called "measuring" such differ-
ences. It involves the use of various methods which are still in an experimental
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 823
stage. The committee, like many other council committees in other fields, is
critically reviewing the results thus far obtained, and endeavoring to encourage
research workers to make needed improvements in the "tools" which they use.
Mr. Herring. I am delighted to turn to some discussion of our con-
cern with the individual and what we have done to encourage in-
dividual research. It is' a topic that I find particularly congenial.
Mr. Koch. Mr. Herring, unless you were coming to it later, maybe
it is more curiosity on my part, but could you tell us from whom you
get your money, and roughly how much that is? Could you show
what other organizations support you? In other words, you get
moneys not only presumably from the seven constituent members, but
also from some of the foundations. If you were going into that later,
that is all right.
Mr. Herring. I will come to that. I would like to answer the Con-
gressman's question first.
I think it would be most informing perhaps if I could give you a
picture of what our activities were and then talk about the logistics.
Mr. Koch. All right.
Mr. Herring. Well, the aid to the individual through the fellow-
ship program, I suppose, is the most direct thing, the one that first
comes to mind. For many years, we have had grants from founda-
tions to administer in order to appoint people to fellowships.
Mrs. Pfost. Right there, Dr. Herring : What procedure do you fol-
low in granting fellowships %
Mr. Herring. Well, in the first place, these programs are national
competitions, and therefore it is exceedingly important to get the
word around that there are fellowships available.
So over the years we have developed ways of bringing the announce-
ment to the attention of possible candidates over the country. We have
bulletins that we send out and put on the bulletin boards of the uni-
versities and colleges, and we send leaflets by mail. In 1953 about
4,600 copies were distributed in the initial mailing and many hun-
dreds more were later sent in response to inquiries. The initial mail-
ing list includes the heads of all accredited universities and 4-year
colleges in the United States and leading institutions in colleges,
graduate school deans, heads of social science research organizations,
some fifteen hundred or more indivdual scholars believed to be in-
terested. That is a mail distribution of announcements. Then we
send a covering letter that urges the recipients of the letter to call the
offerings to the attention of their colleagues and students. An an-
nouncement is published in the* council's quarterly publication, that has
a circulation of 5,100 copies among our educational institutions. And
an advance release of the announcement is sent to the interested pro-
fessional societies, suggesting that it be published in their journals.
So that is a way of bringing it to the attention of at least 40,000 people
with especial interest in this field.
The persons apparently eligible to file applications are furnished
appropriate forms. The applicants give the names of references.
We carry on extensive correspondence with professors and others who
know these people. And then members of our staff travel over the
country and interview as many of the applicants as they possibly can
So we go into this very systematically, very carefully, and for each
fellowship program that we have— and the ones that we have vary over
the years — we have special committees set up. These committees are
824 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
composed of people from the universities and colleges, and we try
to get in the committee the array of knowledge that would enable the
members of the committee to pass on the qualifications of the scores of
applicants that they have to consider.
Mr. Hats. So you do, then, pay considerable attention to the indi-
vidual or lone- wolf type?
Mr. Herring. As for our interest, we have at the present time, I
am happy to say, a fellowship program that enables us to give some
attention to some men in their undergraduate work, and then we have
predoctoral, postdoctoral, and we have our faculty award fellowship
program. That is designed for a few people further along.
Now, I think it is important to get before you again some sense of
proportion about all this. This is a big country, and there are hun-
dreds and hundreds of educational institutions. We appoint some-
thing under 150 people, counting all of our fellowship programs at the
present time, and we have more annually, and we have about five fel-
lowship programs at the present time. In other words, under 1 of
these programs we would appoint 30 people. You can imagine, then,
that the competition is keen.
Mr. Koch. On that point, Mr. Herring, do they have a uniform
examination, or does each one present a thesis, or something? Just
what does the committee have before it in making their selection?
Just how hard is it to weed them down to those 30 ? That is what
I want to know.
Mr. Herring. If the committee would be interested, I can file with
you the forms that we use. We have them here, and you can look at
them. But essentially what we are getting at is the man's academic
record. We give particular attention to his plan for study. We want
to know what he would like to do under this program. We get a very
good line on his ability and his record from the people with whom he
has been working. I would say that the question would be what the
stage of the man is, what training would be most helpful. If it is pre-
doctoral, then he has completed the preliminary requirements for the
doctorate. What additional training would be helpful there ? The
criteria are broad and flexible. We are trying to find people of prom-
ise and ability, men who have some imagination and have an idea that
they want to pursue. We were interested essentially in finding able
people who have a dedicated interest in carrying forward their
research.
Mr. Koch. What I am getting at is : Do they submit any essay from
which you determine that they have imagination, or is it more from
their background record ?
Mr. Herring. No, whatever their publication record may be, or
some manuscript they might want to offer.
Mr. Koch. There is no uniform material that you distribute among
all of the applicants, is there ?
Mr. Herring. It is a very uniform picture. We get all the tangible
evidence we can and the committees read the writings and so on.
Mr. Hats. Dr. Herring, there has been frequent complaint from
previous witnesses, and apparently it is a complaint that a good deal
of cognizance has been taken of by those reporting on these hearings,
that these previous witnesses have made this complaint over and over
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 825
again. In fact, there was even an editorial in the June 11 edition of
the Chicago Daily News, in which they say, and I quote :
Frequent complaint against the foundations is that they have been more
generous to the liberal viewpoint than to the conservative.
If you have followed these hearings or have read any of the trans-
scripts, you will know that that has been made here. Would you care
to comment on that at all ?
Mr. Herring. Well, my comment would be that what we are inter-
ested in is the man's ability, his growth potential, his training in his
field ; and what his personal political views are or whether he is to
the left or the right is just something that isn't relevant to this sort of
consideration.
Mr. Hays. Well, the editorial goes on and gives their solution,
which I wish were original with me. I love this phrase, but I have
to give credit where credit is due. I wish I thought it tip. They say :
"Perhaps the only way the foundations could overcome conservative
objections to this would be to label such studies as research into
'psychoceramics' ; in simpler English, the study of crackpots." They
feel there are specimens in both camps.
You don't have to comment on that. I really don't think it needs
any. It sums up my feeling. In other words, as I see it, the kind of
people you are looking for are people who are going forward into new
fields, not reworking fields that have already been plowed.
Mr. Herring. And in the fields of their professional competence
and development. It is within the context of their professional
growth and development that we approach these things.
I don't want to forget Mrs. Pfost's question, and if I may, I will
offer for the record a 2^ -page description of the procedure followed
in the administration of these fellowships, which might be useful.
(The material referred to is as follows :)
The following procedures are involved in the administration of fellowships and
grants-in-aid of research by the Social Science Research Council.
1. In the early autumn of each year offerings of awards for the ensuing year
are publicly announced through several channels. The published announcement
briefly describes each type of award and the eligibility requirements for candi-
dates, and sets a closing date (early in January) for acceptance of applications.
It is explained that later applications will be considered only if time permits
after prior attention is given to those filed on time.
(a) Leaflets are widely distributed by mail. In 1953 about 4,600 copies were
distributed in the initial mailing, and many hundreds more were later sent in
response to inquiries. The initial mailing list includes the heads of all accredited
universities and 4-year colleges in the United States and leading institutions in
Canada ; chairmen of social science departments in the larger institutions ; grad-
uate school deans ; heads of social science research organizations and institutes ;
and some 1,500 or more individual scholars believed to be interested.
A covering letter urges recipients to call the offerings to the attention of their
colleagues and students.
(&) An announcement is published in the council's quarterly publication,
Social Science Research Council Items, which has a circulation at present of
about 5,100 copies.
(c) An advance release of the announcement is sent to the interested profes-
sional societies suggesting that it be published in their journals.
2. Persons apparently eligible to file applications under the announced terms
of the fellowship and grant programs are furnished appropriate application
blanks at their request. The council staff routinely declines to furnish blanks to
persons who clearly do not meet the announced objective requirements with
respect to age, previous education, permanent residence in the United States or
Canada, and the nature of the project or study for which aid is sought ; but the
826 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
staff does not refuse to accept applications from candidates who are technically
eligible, even though they appear to be unlikely to receive awards.
3. Applicants are invited to name sponsors from whom letters of recommenda-
tion can be had (three in the case of most types of awards). In addition, the
council staff frequently solicits written reports from other scholars whom it
believes to be qualified to offer informed and honest judgment. The form used
for references on fellowship applicants includes questions concerning both the
applicant's character and his qualifications as a social scientist.
4. Between the closing date for filing applications and the time of meetings of
the selection committees in March, an effort is made to arrange an interview with
a member of the council staff with each candidate for a research training or
faculty research fellowship who is not so obviously unqualified that favorable
committee action is out of the question, or so far away that the time and expense
required would be prohibitive.
In 1954 about 90 percent of all applicants for these 2 types of -awards were
interviewed. Applicants for undergraduate research stipends or for grants-in-aid
of research (both of which involve much smaller sums than the fellowships) are
not routinely interviewed by the staff, but the procedures are similar in other
respects. When traveling throughout the country to interview candidates, staff
members endeavor also to secure from teachers and associates of the applicants
such additional insight as can be gained into their qualifications and personal
characteristics. It is our experience that more incisive appraisals are often
made in these conversations than in written communications. Long-distance
telephone calls to mutually acquainted scholars of known insight and judgment
often add significantly to our information about candidates.
5. I'n the case of applicants who have not completed their formal education,
official transcripts of college and university records are required. Under the
faculty fellowship and grant-in-aid programs, candidates are routinely asked
to submit specimens of their publications or writings for scrutiny by the com-
mittees ; the same is done under the other programs in individual eases in which
such further evidence seems desirable.
6. About 2 weeks before the meeting of each fellowship or grant committee
copies of applications and letters of reference are sent to each committee member
for study. When large numbers of applications must be acted upon by a single
committee, it has been our practice to distribute in advance copies of clearly
inferior applications to 1 or 2 committee members rather than to all. This is
done in such a way, however, that the member or members receiving such appli-
cations are not aware that they are the only readers and are therefore not
prejudiced by the staff's action. Unless the committee member or members
reading these applications immediately recommend their rejection, copies are
made available for review by the whole committee.
7. Each committee meets for 1 or 2 days, depending on the volume of work
to be done. Each application is taken up and voted upon after as much discus-
sion as appears necessary. Usually a substantial proportion of applications are
quickly rejected by unanimous consent on a first reading of the names in alpha-
betical order.
Members of the council staff who have interviewed candidates attend the com-
mittee meetings and are called upon to supplement by their comments the docu-
mentary materials. (In a minority of cases someone other than a member of the
Washington office staff of the council interviews candidates in remote parts of the
country but cannot attend the committee meetings. His comments are sub-
mitted in written form.) It can be said that committee members have, almost
without exception, conscientiously studied the documents before coming to meet-
ings ; and that proceedings of the committees are in no sense a perfunctory rati-
fication of selections made by the staff. In fact, it is a well established and fre-
quently reiterated policy that the staff shall not attempt to prejudge the com-
mittee's decisions.
8. As quickly as possible after each committee meeting each candidate is
notified by mail of the action taken. If an award has been recommended, the
conditions governing tenure are enclosed, and must be agreed to in writing before
the award may become effective.
9. Shortly after each meeting minutes are circulated to all committee members
and to the president of the council.
Mr. Wormsee. Ycm do, then, consider the project offered by the
applicant without regard to the man himself. In other words, you
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 827
might find an exceptionally able candidate and yet turn him down
because of the project which he suggests.
Mr. Herring. I wouldn't say that at all, no.
'Mr. Wormser. No, I am asking you that.
Mr. Herring. Well, we are interested in the man and his promise
and the way he goes about his planning of his own research, and I
would say that his plan for study is a very important indication of
his competence as a potential research man, as to what is researchable
and what further training he needs. But I would not use the term
"projects" in this context, because this is not the financing of projects.
It is the financing of men and women, individuals.
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Herring, I don't mean to be obscure in any of
my 'questions, and my reason for asking that is again the criticism
that has been made, that has various facets, that an organization of
your kind does to a certain extent exercise control over the direction of
research. Now, if you had an exceptionally able man, would you turn
him down merely because you did not like the nature of the project
which he suggested ? Or would you perhaps try to turn him to an-
other type of program ?
Mr, Herring. As I say, the judgment is on the man and his develop-
ment. And if you want a pointblank answer to the question, "Would
we turn a man down because we don't like his project ?" I would say
"No." The answer isn't a particular project. The only way I can
answer your question responsively, Mr. Wormser, is to say we are
interested in the individual and his growth and his training and how
he can become a better worker in his professional field.
Mr. Wormser. He suggests the subject for research. And you may
think that is an entirely inadequate or impossible or useless piece of in-
vestigation. What do you do in a case like that, where he is an awfully
good man?
Mr. Herring. Well, in a case of that sort, you see, there is really an
internal contradiction there. If he is an awfully good man and has
an awfully bad subject, I don't see how he could be an awfully good
man.
Mr. Wormser. You may think it is awfully bad.
Mr. Hats. Well, Mr. Wormser, we are getting back to thought con-
trol there, are we not ? You cannot sit here and pick out any witness's
thoughts as to good or bad. There has to be some standard.
The Chairman. As I understand it, Mr. Wormser, if you will per-
mit me to clarify the question, from the brief time that I have had an
opportunity to assimilate it, we have a very good man, recognized as
capable. He comes up with a project. There might be a difference
of opinion about the project. He thinks it is good. Another good
man, Mr. Herring, would not think it a good project. There is a
difference of opinion. Does Mr. Herring's view with reference to the
desirability of the research project prevail, or that of the man who
initiated it?
Mr. Wormser. Merely to pinpoint what I meant : Is the emphasis
upon the man or upon the subject ?
Mr. Hats. Of course. But you are getting into a field where I don't
think anyone can give you a specific answer to a general question.
Suppose someone came up with a project to do research into the fer-
tility of ostrich eggs.
49720— 54— pt. 1 53
828 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Koca. But you may exercise thought control by refusing to let
him go ahead with it.
Mr. Hays. You can tell him to go ahead with it if he can find some-
body to finance it, but you do not happen to feel you should. I think
you have to have some responsibility as to how you hand out this
money. Or else if you want us to pass a law saying you have to give
the money to the first 150 applicants who come in, that is about the
only other way you could do it.
Mr. Wormser. I want to explain my question. I am just interested
in the methods you used. I am not trying to attach any significance to
them.
Mr. Herring. I would like to spend all the time on this that you
will permit, because I think it is important to clarify it. We are talk-
ing now about fellowships. And in the administration of fellowships,
we have committees of men drawn from universities who are com-
petent to deal with the fields under consideration. So it is a committee
judgment. That is one thing.
Secondly, we are thinking of young men and women in their pro-
fessional training. We are not thinking of projects. So we want to
know what the previous academic record has been, what further train-
ing is needed, and what research interests the man has. So that we are
not pasisng judgment on whether this project or another is good in
the abstract. We are looking at the man's interest, and we w T ant to
see what will help him most.
Now, I will tell you one proposal of a candidate that rather attracted
my attention. As I say, I don't sit on these committees, but I was
rather interested in this, as a human interest facet. We heard of a
young chap at the University of Texas who had thumbed his way
to the eastern seaboard because he wanted to look at some of the records
that Charles Beard had looked at when he wrote his Economic Inter-
pretation of the Constitution. And we were interested in this young
man as a research man. He got a fellowship. But what impressed
me there was the eagerness and the zest and the energy of this chap,
w T ho was thumbing his way to archives. I have heard of people thumb-
ing their way to various people, but the picture of a young fellow
thumbing his way to the archives in order to have a look at the record,
I thought was a rather interesting picture.
Well, now, may I go back to this interest in the individual ? Because
fellowship is one thing, and it is a long story. We have directory of
fellowships that we can offer as an exhibit, giving you the record of
the over 1,200 people over the years who have had these fellowships,
But mark you, that is a 30-year period. So that keeping the sense of
proportion again, this organization is dealing with a very small num-
ber. I could not give you the total number of graduate students in the
United States in these fields. I tried to get it, but we are not suffi-
ciently organized here from the national standpoint even to have fig-
ures of that sort.
But there are other ways of helping the individual. For many
years we have had a very modest grant-in-aid program, $25,000;
up to date, that has been the size of that sum, and we have a little bit
more for next year.
Grants-in-aid to help people complete some work engaged in are
allocated by a committee, again, of competent scholars, and they do
the best they can in dividing up $25,000 in $500 or $1,000 grants.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATION'S 829
So you can see how far that money goes. We really need more money
for that sort of thing ; and we have a bit more money for next year,
and I hope I can scratch around, and I hope we can find some more
foundations for this grant-in-aid, because it is very helpful indeed to
get that few hundred dollars to do the final typing or consult the docu-
ments or get the manuscript ready for publication.
Now, within the last few years we have had summer seminars. The
idea there is to find out whether there are a number of people, younger
men again, who have some common research interests. They want to
improve some method, or they want to discuss some theory in their
field. What normally happens ?
Well, the summer recess, as the traditional period when the scholar
could do further study and catch up on his reading, and so on, is fad-
ing. Economic necessity, balancing the family budget, comes into it,
so that more and more you find professors teaching in summer school.
Well, now, we have a little grant that enables us to offer to research
men who participate in these seminars the equivalent of what they
might otherwise get if they taught summer school, a few hundred
dollars, and that enables them to work together through the summer
and talk through some problem.
Mrs. Pfost. Dr. Herring, why don't the foundations just divide up
their money among the universities and colleges of the country and let
them spend it, instead of setting about it in this way ?
Mr. Herring. I guess the quick answer to that would be that there
isn't enough money. If you took all the colleges and universities, you
would have about 1,700 institutions, and it is awfully hard to say with
precision just how much foundation money goes into the social
sciences, but the best figure I can arrive at by consulting annual re-
ports, and so on, would be: somewhere in the neighborhood of $12
million.
Mr. Koch. Annually?
Mr. Herring. Annually, yes. And you would divide $12 million,
let us say, by 1,700 institutions, and you would come out at about
$7,000 per institution. In other words, you could divide and dissi-
pate. You could escape responsibility. You could say, "Well, we will
just leave it to the other fellow and spread it thin." Or you can face
up to the difficult decision of saying, "Well, this institution is doing
better work, in our judgment, than the other institution."
The Chairman. But, Doctor, if the idea of working through the
established universities, as raised in the question by Mrs. Pfost, should
be favorably considered by the foundations, do you think it is logical
to conclude that they should adopt purely an empirical attitude and
divide it evenly among the 1,700 colleges of the United States? That
would not be the method by which they would go about it ; would they ?
Mr. Hats. Would you permit me to interject there? If they did
not, that would be about the only way in the world they could keep
from being investigated at some time in the future by somebody who
said they were not dividing it up the way it ought to be. The people
who did not get it would be the people complaining ; would they not ?
The Chairman. They have made substantial grants for buildings
and for the general funds of educational institutions.
Mr. Hays. But $7,000 a year would not build a Chic Sale for them
at today's prices.
830 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The Chairman. But, in the first place, when they make a grant to
a college or university, that institution has to meet certain require-
ments, as I understand it, that show that it is in a position to utilize
the money advantageously.
Mr. Herring. Mr. Chairman, that is where the money goes. It
goes to universities and colleges. But some foundations have to make
responsible decisions as to which ones.
The Chairman. But do you not think the suggestion is not quite
fair, that they would be put in a position where they would have to
divide the money between the 1,700 colleges of the United States ?
Mr. Herring. I confess I just offered that by way of emphasis. I
concede you would not want to see them do that.
Mr. Wcrmser. Do you think your organization is more capable of
selecting these desirable fellows than their own universities?
Mr. Herring. I think the first point to emphasize there, Mr.
Wormser, is that, as I recall my days at Harvard, there were more
fellowships at one institution there — you know. They had scores of
fellowships. I wish we had it here with us. There are so many
scholarships and fellowships available through so many organizations
and so many requests and endowments over the years that it is a book
about that thick. In other words, we have to get this thing in
perspective again. There are just scores and scores of ways for able
young men to get fellowship and scholarship support ; and most of it
is through our colleges and universities.
Mr. Hats. Dr. Herring, right there : The point is that you do not
handle all of the fellowships or any major part of them in the social
science field ; is that not true ?
Mr. Herring. That is right.
Mr. Hats. You handle a very minute number, and various colleges
and universities have some of their own, and the foundations perhaps
make some directly. I don't know.
Mr. Herring. That is right. The foundations would make a grant
to an institution, perhaps four fellowships. The institutions have an
array of scholarships and fellowships. The point I would like to
emphasize, that I think might be helpful here, is that our programs in
fellowships offer opportunities perhaps to people who are not at some
of the institutions that may have larger funds. It is a national com-
petition, whereas the fact is that most young people get their fellow-
ship support from the colleges and universities. And we have a total
of around 150 appointees a year for the whole United States.
Now, just put that little corporal's guard in the perspective of the
phalanxes of American students, and you can see that it is a very
limited thing. I wish we had substantially more. I think it is very
important that we do have greater fellowship resources. I think it
is rather wasteful when we have twice as many qualified people ap-
plying as we can take care of.
The Chairman. Do you have any other questions ?
Mr. Koch. You were going to continue, Mr. Herring.
Mr. Herring. I am still hammering away at helping the individual
through fellowships.
Mr. Goodwin. Do you ever have to meet the criticism that favori-
tism is shown? If some bright young fellow gets an award, and
somebody discovers that he is a nephew of Dr. Black at Ivy College,
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 831
who holds down the Chair of Sociology, and somebody says, "Uncle
William may have put in a word for him" ?
Mr. Herring. No, sir, I can't think of any such cases.
Mr. Goodwin. You keep very clear of that, do you ?
Mr. Herring. You see, it is kind of competitive. In this spirit of
competition, you have these self-correcting things, you see. You
have people on the different committees from these different institu-
tions, and there is a good deal of competition among our various
colleges and universities. So you can imagine that Professor Y from
Si wash keeps an eye on the situation, and there is a certain competi-
tive element there that is a protection against the kind of dangers
you refer to.
Well, there is still another one of these summer programs we are
getting under way. That is to present to groups of people who share
some interest an opportunity to get a little better research training.
We had an experience that was encouraging along that line, in the
field of mathematical training, not statistical training but mathemati-
cal training. And we had a seminar, a training institute, if you will,
that brought together 40 or more people. And the summer was spent
in getting a very intensive training in mathematics, so that men could
apply that in their work as they saw fit later on.
Now, there may be some other training methods that we can work
cut, and offer this opportunity for men to spend the summer recess
at that sort of thing.
Mrs. Pfost. Dr. Herring, do you concentrate on the so-called
empirical research, or the quantitative, to the exclusion of the other
kinds ?
Mr. Herring. I could perhaps indicate the range of topics. The
answer is "No." We do not. But I would like to develop that
thought a bit by giving you some illustrations of the varieties of
topics.
And I will say, Mr. Wormser, that here we are talking not about
fellowships and the training of the young man as he goes forward,
but we are talking about this grant-in-aid program, where people are
further along. And it might be of interest to the committee if I just
gave you some illustrations of the sorts of things.
Mr. Wormser. Does your answer "no" apply only to the grants-in-
aid, or all these fellowship grants % You said "no," that you do not
specialize in empiricism.
Mr. Herring. That is right. I want to come to this facility re-
search fellowship that has been mentioned. I think you might be
interested in some further light on that.
Here is a man at Mount Holyoke : Study of the Influences in Roman
Life and Law. Here is a professor at the University of Toledo:
Study of the Latin American Philosophy of Law. A man at North-
western : Preparation of a Revised Edition of a Guide to the Study
of Medieval History. Here is a man at Louisiana State University :
History of Political Ideas.
Here is a professor of sociology at the University of Notre Dame :
Theoretical Study of Ethnic Groups. Another man, at Wells Col-
lege, Research on the Organiation of Medieval Trade. A man at
Oglethorpe: Study of the Conditions of Political Freedom. And
so on.
832 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Now, in our annual report each year, we have a list of the topics
and names of individuals. It is all spread in the record here, and
if I may offer as an exhibit, Mr. Chairman, copies of our annual
report, you would find this spelled out in the variety of institutions
and so on indicated.
The Chairman. It will be accepted.
(The Social Science Research Council Annual Report, 1952-53,
was filed for the information of the committee.)
Mr. Herring. Another way the individual is helped is through the
conferences that we sponsor from time to time. We had quite an
interesting conference at Princeton, a meeting place for some 60 or
more people over the country who had some kind of special interest
in Africa as an area. And that brought together people who could
sit around a big table and say "All right. This is what I am inter-
ested in." And they could exchange views that, it seems to me, would
fall in this same category of encouragement of the interests of indi-
viduals. We have a study Mr. Sibley did of Aid to Individuals. We
made a study of the problems there, of getting financial support, and
if you would like to have that as an exhibit, that also could be offered
for the record.
I have just a seven-line statement that I rather like as expressing
the spirit of this thing. It was written back in 1926, but I think it
reflects the spirit we try to adhere to.
Nothing is more certain that that individual insight, flash of genius, brilliant
statement of a problem, a patient pursuit of an obscure trail to a great truth,
will be an indispensable part of the development of the social sciences if they
are to attain the goal toward which we all look. The whole purpose of the
council will be lost if we cannot aid those creative spirits, if we cannot provide
for them better facilities, if we cannot help thern in the discovery and solution
of problems.
I just offer that, going back many years, as a statement of the faith
that we have that if you can help the individual develop, you have
come a long, long way.
Mrs. Pfost. Dr. Herring, right there: How many social scientists
would you say there are today ? And could you tell us where they are
employed ?
Mr. Herring. Well, I could offer you an estimate. If you take the
membership of the associations in these fields, it adds up to around
40,000. Now, that figure may err on the large side, because there are
some duplications. Some people belong to more than one association.
Our chairman belongs to two of the associations, for example, so he
would be counted twice in this figure of 40,000. And there are some
that belong to the associations but are not actively engaged in the work,
though well disposed toward the field, you see, and holding member-
ship.
So with those qualifications, I would say roughly there are probably
about 40,000. There are some people, of course, that are active in these
fields but don't belong to the association ; however, I think that would
probably be the exception.
Mr. Goodwin. At this point, what does social science embrace ? I
assume it is sociology, philosophy
Mr. Herring. Some aspects.
Mr. Goodwin. Economics
Mr. Herring. Economics, yes.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 833
Mr. Goodwin. Political economy.
Mr, Herring. That is right. Anthropology, statistics. We feel
that the seven associations that I mentioned before are those that are
most directly concerned, and then there are others, so that would be
economics and political science and anthropology and statistics and
psychology and history.
Mr. Goodwin. I would think history would be more of an exact
science. History is a statement of facts, things that happen. On the
16th day of June, the gentleman from Tennessee presided over a hear-
ing of the Banking and Currency Committee. Certain things hap-
pened on a certain day. I am curious to know why that comes to
sociologists. .
Mr. Hays. It comes in this way, if you will permit me to interject.
Mr. Goodwin. I would just as soon have your opinion as the doctor's.
Mr. Hays. I am not trying to be facetious, either.
Mr. Goodwin. Neither am I.
Mr. Hays. Ten people witnessed a hearing of the House of Kepre-
sentatives, and all 10, of them write down to the best of their ability
what- they saw. You might get considerable variation in the historical
account of it. And that is why history, although apparently it would
be in some phases— I am speaking as one who has done research in it-
is not an exact science. You cannot tie down specific dates, every-
thing about it, because some of the individuals who observed or wrote
about it saw it one way, and others another way, so there are certain
areas that you have to evaluate.
Mr. Goodwin. I am a little at a loss, here. My few associates have
had experience in the teaching field. And if Mrs. Pfost has not, she
should have had.
Mr. Hays. I did not mean to take the answer away from you, Doctor.
I would just be interested to see whether you agree generally.
Mr. Herring. That indicates that it is a subject that not only here
but elsewhere one can discuss. As far as we are concerned in the
Council, we include history as one of the social sciences, but it also is
included as one of the humanities, and I do not think you can draw
any precise line. There are historians and historians. Some would
be concerned more with the chronicle of dates, and some would be con-
cerned more with efforts of interpretation. But we feel that the time
factor is terribly important and the sense of perspective that you get
through approaching matters historically. And over the years there
have always been historians who have found it congenial to work
with their colleagues in other fields. So that we do not treat it as a
matter that you settle in either/or fashion. The historian may take
up economic history as a special field. Some historians go at matters
more in terms of a literary approach, an artistic approach.
Mr. Goodwin. That brings up one question I had, another one per-
haps to expose my ignorance or the fact that I may not have followed
closely the prior hearings. But you mentioned in your statement the
empirical approach and the rational. Now, you say that the empiricist
says, "Look at the record." Now, I can grasp that. I know what that
means. Can you put into easy English and into a phrase equally
succinct a definition of the rationalist?
Mr. Herring. Well, Mr. Goodwin, I will try, but I didn't bring the
rationalistic approach into this, so I don't think I can qualify too well.
834 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATION'S
But what I think we are talking about : If you are going back to the
rationalistic school of philosphy, and that is how this got in, that was
a school of thought that emphasized the capacity of the human reason
to grasp reality directly, through ratiocination rather than through
sensation. It is a little bit mystical, perhaps, but there was an im-
portant school of thought. So most of us sort of compromise on say-
ing, "Experience has been quite a teacher, and we will be as rational
as we can, but we won't worry ourselves about a philosophy of knowl-
edge that gets into these intricacies."
Now, that is really something for the seminar room rather than for
this hearing room, I suppose.
Mr. Wormser. Could I interject something there? Because this
may help Mr. Goodwin. In the sense that empiricism has been used
here, we have been using it in relation to research.
Is it not essentially and plainly the inductive method as against the
deductive method ? And before you answer, I want to make one state-
ment in regard to your statement, in which I think you rather gave
the impression that the staff or Mr. Dodd or someone connected with
the committee meant to derogate empiricism as a method of inquiry.
I want to assure you that the staff is fully aware that empiricism is
not only desirable but a necessary component of scientific research.
We quite realize that. Our only concern in that area is whether there
has been an excess, in the sense that empirical studies which did not
take into account what you might speak of as some of the premises in
a sound syllogism. But to illuminate Mr. Goodwin further, aren't
we talking about primarily research methods ? And there, isn't it in-
duction against deduction %
Mr. Herring. I tried to develop that in my statement. I don't
think I would agree with that. I tried to spell it out in the statement.
I think that would be an oversimplification.
Mr. Wormser. An oversimplification?
Mr. Herring. Well, I don't see quite, Mr. Chairman — pardon my
saying so, but there is a question that Mrs. Pfost raised some time
ago, and I haven's gotten through with it. We are getting over to
philosophy of knowledge, and she was saying, "Where are these
people living?"
You remember, she said, "Where are these social scientists, and
where are they employed?"
So, if I may go back to that original question, I would like to do so.
Well, they are employed in our universities and colleges in teaching,
and we may think of that first. But I want to emphasize that while
you cannot say with precision just what percentage are employed
outside of our universities, I think it would be reasonably accurate to
say about 40 percent of these people are engaged in activities where
they apply their training as social scientists not in the classroom but
in the market place. They are employed by business, in market analy-
sis. They are employed by Government, and a whole host of agencies
where economic analysis and other forms of analyses are necessary.
So I do ftot want you to think of this group as strictly a professional
group. They are engaged in many businesses and public agencies.
The Chairman. If I might interject, with reference to procedure,
it is now 4 o'clock, and some members of the committee have some
engagements, and some work has to be done in the offices.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 835
Mr. Koch. I think Mr. Herring is willing to be here tomorrow. As
far as we are concerned, w T e recognize that we have a real expert as
a witness today, and also he is a very agreeable witness to deal with,
and w T e feel that if we go into these various criticisms with him
thoroughly, maybe the examination of succeeding foundations may
not be so long. And we would like very much to get the benefit of all
of the education that he can give us on this. All of which adds up to
this : that I would like to examine him for a couple of hours tomorrow
at least. That is why we can't finish with him tonight.
The Chairman. It is convenient for you to be here tomorrow ?
Mr. Herring. Quite convenient. And if it is as pleasant an expe-
rience as today, I would be delighted.
Mr. Hays. Then you have 2 hours of questioning ?
Mr. Koch. Yes.
Mr. Hats. We had better plan on being here all day, then.
The Chairman. I think you have made a very splendid presenta-
tion. I know you are a man of very great ability, with a splendid
background and training.
There was just one sentence in your statement that I thought was
out of cast, Doctor.
Mr. Herring. I would appreciate knowing what it is.
The Chairman. You have made an analytical study of the state-
ment that was presented by a member of the staff. One is impressed
by it. But what appeared to me to be out of cast in your statement was
your characterization of the individual.
For example, beginning with the last sentence on page 5 :
The most charitable explanation that comes to mind is that they speak from
ignorance rather than malice.
That is not like you.
And the other is on page 3, referring to the work of the staff as —
symptomatic of a troubled state of mind on the part of a few persons * * *
I do not think that is characteristic of a man of your position and
great capacity. Because you are interested in analyzing what was
presented, and not analyzing the individuals who presented it. And
I rather regret that you permitted those two sentences to creep into
your statement.
As you grow older you become more understanding of people who
differ, and I seldom take exception to people differing with me.
The committee will meet in this same room tomorrow morning at
10 o'clock.
Mr. Hats. May I make a minute statement about Dr. Herring'a
statement ?
I would just like to compliment you on your statement, Doctor, and
say that I was especially pleased to see that you took a positive ap-
proach to this problem rather than a negative approach; that you
did not spend a lot of time quoting a lot of paragraphs in answer to
a lot of allegations that have been made about the foundations. And
I do not really refer so much to the staff's reports as I do to some of
the witnesses who have made, some fantastic charges, which have
failed to stand on their own feet, because of the absence of any fact.
I am very happy that you did not waste any time refuting those
things, which had already fallen flat on their face, but that you did
take a positive approach.
836 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Now, I am sure that from what little I know about you and have
been able to find out, you did not mean to hurt anybody's feelings
by any statement that you made, and as far as saying something about
someone's troubled state of mind, I do not feel there is any implica-
tion involved there. As a matter of fact, I was rather amazed to
notice that one of the great dailies picked up a phrase that I had
more or less pulled out of thin air. I called some 1 , of this testimony
"a plot psychosis," in which some people apparently could see a great
plot on the part of some of these foundations to reorient the whole
social-science field. And I certainly meant no implication by that.
It was just an effort on my part to try to describe the situation as
I saw it. And I am certainly not trying to put words in your mouth.
And I feel, for the benefit of the staff, Mr. Eeece, Mr. Goodwin, or
anyone else, that the words "troubled state of mind" were simply
an attempt on your part to describe the picture as you saw it, and
that you certainly did not mean any implication or bad connotation
or unfavorable impression to be left.
The Chairman. I would not take exception to being said to have
"a troubled state of mind." A man who does not have a troubled
state of mind in these days is abnormal, I think.
The committee stands adjourned until tomorrow morning at 10 a. m.
(Whereupon, at 4 : 10 p. m., the hearing was adjourned until 10 a. m.,
Thursday, June IT, 1954.)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
thursday, june 17, 1954
House of Representatives,
Special Committee To Investigate
Tax-Exempt Foundations,
Washington, D. 0.
The special committee met at 10 a. m., pursuant to adjournment, in
room 1301, New House Office Building, Hon. B. Carroll Reece, chair-
man of the special committee, presiding.
Present : Representatives Reece, Goodwin, Hays, and Pf ost.
Also present : Rene A. Wormser, general counsel ; Arnold T. Koch,
associate counsel ; Norman Dodd, research director ; Kathryn Casey,
legal analyst ; John Marshall, chief clerk.
The Chairman. The committee will come to order, please.
You may proceed, Mr. Herring.
TESTIMONY OF PENDLETON HERRING, PRESIDENT, SOCIAL SCIENCE
RESEARCH COUNCIL, ACCOMPANIED BY PAUL WEBBINK, VICE
PRESIDENT, SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH COUNCIL, AND TIMOTHY
PFEIiTER, ATTORNEY, NEW YORK, N. Y.— Resumed
Mr. Herring. I am very happy indeed that I can go forward, call-
ing to the committee's attention the facts and principles that seem to
me relevant and that I hope will be helpful in this inquiry.
There were one or two points raised by members of the committee
yesterday that I would like to go back to, because there was insufficient
time to develop the interesting points that were mentioned.
The first point relates to Congressman Hays' inquiry about the
Soviets and their attitudes toward the social sciences and the founda-
tions, and the second point relates to the interesting line of comment
opened by Congressman Goodwin in his references to history. So
if it is your pleasure, I would like to take up those two points and
proceed.
I have before me, and I have copies that I would like to place in
the hands of the committee, a brief memo that was prepared by a
Russian specialist, a man who spends his time reading all that we can
get out from behind the Iron Curtain about what the Russians are
doing. He wrote this memo, and there are a few paragraphs that I
think are interesting and relevant, and you have the whole thing
before you. So I will just read 2 or 3 paragraphs.
This memorandum is meant to implement any suggestion to you that the
Reece committee might be interested in learning something of how the general
problem it has under investigation is treated and viewed behind the Iron Curtain.
837
838 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
In drawing up this memorandum I have not undertaken a systematic survey, but
have merely drawn on my notes and on items which were easily recalled by me
or my colleagues. A systematic survey of Soviet sources would yield an enormous
number of violent attacks on the foundations and the accessory agencies in
Communist sources.
FOUNDATIONS AND ACCESSORY AGENCIES BEHIND THE IRON CURTAIN
By way of background the committee may be interested to know that in Com-
munist-controlled countries the existence of organizations like the great Ameri-
can foundations and the accessory agencies is unthinkable. Where they existed
at the time of the Communist seizure of power they were always among the
first institutions to be broken up and to have their funds confiscated by the Com-
munist dictatorship. This is because the Communists recognize that such funds
and agencies are sources for centers of free thought and opinion which is always
mimical to Communist rule. In the Soviet Union, for example, professors,
scientists, and other scholars are not permitted to organize associations like the
American Historical Association. They may belong only to trade unions and to
officially sponsored grovernmentally organized institutions such as the Academy
of Pedagogical Sciences.
Not only does the Communist world look askance at the existence of founda-
tions and agencies of the accessory type in its own domain, but it also take** a
very hostile view to those which exist in the free world and particularly those
which operate in the United States.
Then I skip to the next paragraph, on page 2.
The rule of the foundations on the American scene is not too well understood
by Communist propagandists, however, and they concentrate most of their fire on
what the Reece committee has defined as the "accessory agencies." Our great
educational associations, for example, are constantly attacked in Soviet educa-
tional journals as instruments of capitalism, spreading its ideology, teaching hos-
tility toward the Soviet Union and toward communism, and misleading our youth
by "reactionary" teaching methods. To cite another example, from odd notes
at hand which could be matched many times over through a careful survey, we
might consider the American Economic Association.
In a book entitled "Ideologists of the Imperialist Bourgeoisie," published by
the Academy of Sciences of the U. S. S. R. in 100,000 copies, the American Eco-
nomic Association is attacked for allegedly fomenting propaganda designed to
incite a new world war against the Soviet Union. The members of the asso-
ciation are described therein as "bourgeois economists {who are) in the service
of monopolistic capital" and whose theories are designed solely for the purpose
of defending the American business interests of their "capitalist masters."
Then there is further data in the following paragraph, but perhaps
we could skip to the middle of page 3.
SOCIAL SCIENCE IN THE SOVIET UNION
Since the Reece committee appears to be particularly interested in the support
given by the foundations to social science in the United States, they may wish
to know that in the eyes of Communist leaders social science is regarded as one
of the worst and most dangerous enemies of Communist ideology and Com-
munist expansion. Indeed, so strong is the feeling against sociology that it is
not permitted to teach it as a subject in the Soviet Union. Sociology is defined
there as a strictly "bourgeoise" and "capitalist" science of society and is re-
garded by the Soviets as directly opposed to and contradicting Marxism. Con-
sequently they forbid the teaching of sociology in Soviet Russia and have substi-
tuted Marxism-Leninism instead as the only "true" science of society. Com-
munist hostility to sociology is reflected in the fact that the Soviet press has in
recent years been full of attacks on American sociology, and in addition at least
two special books on the subject have been put out by official Soviet publishing
houses. One of these, issued in 1951 by the State Political Publishing House
of the U. S. S. R. in 100,000 copies, bears the title "American Bourgois Philosophy
and Sociology in the Service of Imperialism" ; the other, was issued in 1952 by
the Academy of Sciences of the U. S. S. R. in 10,000 copies under the title "Con-
temporary American Bourgeois Sociology in the Service of Expansionism."
TEis latter is apparently a revised edition of a book by the same author pub-
lished under a slightly different title in 1949, and at the time severely criticized
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 839
In a review in Culture and Life (Kultura i Zhizm), the official publication of
the Department of Propaganda of the Soviet Communist Party. The criticism
held that the author was "too easy" on American sociologists and failed to expose
the full degree to which American sociologists play "the odious role of servants
and lackeys to the imperialist * * * capitalists of the United States." You may
rest assured that on the second time around this author did not fail to drive
home the point.
The individual American social scientists brought under attack in these polemi-
cal Soviet writings read like a Who's Who of American sociology and social
science in general. Among them are many men who were prominent in the
councils of the foundations and the accessory agencies or who have received
support from them.
But I think we can skip the names of individuals, however, since one
name has already been brought into the discussion, and we might turn
to page 5, where at the beginning of the second paragraph, I read :
Since the name of Stuart Chase has or will probably come before the commit-
tee his name might serve for one last illustration. In one of the Soviet books
cited above Chase is violently attacked as a long time spreader of "reactionary"
ideas, even in the time when he was regarded as a liberal in the thirties. It is
charged by the Communist press that after the recent World War he openly
joined the "shrill chorus of American atom-bombists" in their "openly Fascist"
attacks on world peace. Specifically, he is accused of "fulfilling the orders of
monopolistic bosses" by preaching the saving of capitalism through resort if
necessary to war and atomic destruction.
Since the report by the staff to the Reece committee seems concerned about
the possibility that the foundations and the accessory agencies have fostered
changes in the basic American way of life, it might be appropriate to conclude
that this is hardly the Soviet view. On the contrary, they see American social
scientists as "propagandizing the antiscientific idea of America's uniqueness"
and of spreading the "false" idea that under American capitalism there are
such things as "enduring prosperity" and "a harmony of interests between labor
and capital."
Mr. Wormsee. May I interrupt you just to say that in this memo-
randum, it is stated that the Soviet Union has a hostile attitude toward
United States foundations. I suppose you are aware of the fact
that in the Cox committee hearings it was brought out rather con-
clusively that the Communists had by direct order from the Kremlin
determined to infiltrate American foundations for their own purposes,
and there is evidence that to some extent they had been successful.
That doesn't look like a hostile attitude in that sense, does it ? They
are very ready to use the American foundations when they can for
their purposes.
Mr. Hays. Well, I would say that doesn't indicate any friendly atti-
tude. They don't have a friendly attitude toward a lot of American
institutions that they would like to infiltrate.
Mr. Herring. It has been charged that they have been trying to
infiltrate the American Government. I wouldn't interpret the Ameri-
can Government as friendly.
Mr. Hats. If you wanted to use that type of logic, you could prob-
ably arrive at the conclusion that because at the same day the staff
attacked the Kinsey report, the Soviets attacked it, and the same day
the Communists attacked empirical research, the staff attacked empiri-
cal research, that the Communists and the staff are against empirical
research, and if you wanted to arrive at some kind of an analogy you
could say there was some sort of a liaison between the staff and the
Communists.
The Chairman. I think the gentleman is in error when he says the
staff attacked the Kinsey report. As one member of the committee,
840 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
I don't have much interest in the Kinsey report. Any interest that
the committee might have in the Kinsey report arises out of whether
that was a desirable undertaking for a foundation, which is quite a
different matter. In my observation, if I may make one, with ref ernce
to the attitude of Soviet Russia toward foundations, I am not in any-
wise surprised, myself, because Soviet Russia is against private
enterprise of all types. Everything is centered in the government
there, both major industrial activities, and, of course, as we have
learned, to our great regret, practically all research and ideological
forces are directed by the government. So it is quite understandable
that the government of Soviet Russia would not permit the establish-
ment of great foundations which would be free of government
influence.
Would you mind identifying for the record Alex Inkeles ?
Mr. Herring. Alex Inkeles is on the staff of the Russian Research
Center at Harvard University. He has published studies of Russian
problems, and he is recognized as a leading specialist in the field of
Russian studies.
The Chairman. But with reference to the question raised by Mr.
Wormser, the mere fact that Soviet Russia is against private founda-
tions, as it is against all other types of private enterprise does not
mean that Soviet Russia might not be desirous of utilizing any forces
in America or elsewhere which might exist, to their advantage, if it
was possible to do so— without indicating that they are able to do so,
that would be an illogical conclusion.
Mr. Hays. That raises an interesting question in view of wdiat Mr.
Wormser said. Does the staff have any evidence that they have in-
filtrated in these foundations ?
The Chairman. His question was based altogether on the findings
and report of the committee with which Mr. Goodwin and I worked.
Mr. Hays. But there have been charges made again and again in the
presence and otherwise and even in the Congressional Record that
there are Communists in these foundations. But I haven't yet seen the
staff bring out any evidence of it. I think it is time that the staff either
said they are there and are going to bring them out, or else they say
they are not there. We have these insinuations and allegations with-
out any proof.
Mr. Wormser. I am not insinuating or alleging anything. I am
referring only to the Cox committee report which showed conclusively
that there had been Communist penetration in the foundations. In
fact, two substantial foundations have lost their tax exemption, be-
cause they had been sufficiently penetrated.
Mr. Hays. Then they are not foundations anymore. But the ones
I am talking about are the ones still in existence. Charges were made
as to the Ford Foundation. Have you any evidence that there are
Communists
The Chairman. I assume you are referring to my speech. I made
no such allegations myself. I made allegations that undesirable in-
fluences were to be found in the foundations, but not that there were
Communists there ; or that at least is as I recall my speech.
But that doesn't help us get along with the hearings.
Mr. Herring. Mr. Chairman, I think I could be most helpful by
commenting on some of the things I know something about, and I
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 841
have just brought this in to sharpen our sense of contrast between our
great free institutions here and the way they go about things.
The Chairman. I think that is a very fine expression you are mak-
ing! There are no free institutions in Russia of any type, character,
or description, whether educational, whether philanthropic, or whether
industrial, financial, or any other way. There all power is vested in
the Government when it desires to exercise it.
Mr. Herring. I just wanted to nail that point down.
The Chairman. So there is nothing unusual, as I see it, in Eussia
taking the attitude it does toward foundations within the borders of
Russia. _ . .
Mr; Herring. Now, may I follow up with just one additional points
And then I would like to come back to the good old United States of
America, if I may. But just one other point on this Russian side.
I have here an article that appeared m Culture and Life, this same
Soviet Russian publication, the 21st of June 1949, by M. Rubenstein.
The article is entitled "Science in the U. S. A. in the Service of Monop-
olies and Militarists." And there are just a few sentences from this
article that I think are of particular interest. This is a Russian speak-
ing now, and I am quoting :
The American press has currently been giving a great deal of lip service to the
"independence" and "impartiality" of science in the United States, which allegedly
is outside the realm of politics. But one needs only to become familiar with the
incontrovertible facts of reality to dispel this myth of the impartiality and inde-
pendence of American science and to make it more than apparent that science in
the United States serves as an obedient instrument of the forces of reaction and
the capitalist monopolies that are militarizing it— putting it at the service of its
aggressive aims.
Then he goes on to say :
A considerable role in the American, scientific-research network is played by
universities and colleges which prepare cadres for all scientific institutions and
which at the same time are centers of theoretical research.
Due either to a profound fallacy or by conscious design, a widespread concep-
tion is being circulated in America that science in the universities as distinct
from research work done in the laboratories of the industrial corporation is
"independent" of the policies of the monopolies.
It will suffice to mention that 200 of the largest United States corporations
control the governing board literally : academic councils of almost all the Ameri-
can universities, which, in consequence, are controlled directly by Wall Street.
And this Soviet author continues :
The monopolies' influence on the social science is displayed with cynical candor.
Not;only do the monopolies not object to the professors' dealing with current
problems ; on the contrary, they demand that this be done— but on the condition
that their studies and all written and oral statements must clearly be aimed at
defending the interests and policies of the monopolies. Anyone disagreeing with
this policy is ruthlessly driven out and, in effect, blackballed.
And just one final sentence. I can't stand much more of this
myself.
Long ago Lenin has shown that there can be no "impartial" social science
in a society torn by class struggle, that in one way or another, bourgeois science
always defends wage slavery.
And, quoting Lenin's work — and mark you, I suppose a reputable
Russian author has to work in a quote from Lenin. So he has one,
to make it legal.
To expect science to be impartial in a wage-slave society is as silly and naive
as to expect impartiality from manufacturers on the question of whether work-
ers' wages should be increased by decreasing the profits of capitaL
842 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
That is from Lenin's Works, volume 19, page 3.
At present, when the United States has become the primary force in the
imperialist camp, the social sciences in America have been placed completely in
the service of imperialist expansion.
If anyone wants to have this, they are welcome to it.
The Chairman. Would you like to put it in the record as a part
of your remarks ?
Mr. Herring. We would like to do so.
The Chairman. Without objection.
(The document referred to is as follows:)
Science in the; U. S. A. in the Service of Monopolies and Militarists
(By Mr. Eubinshtein in Kul'tura i zhizn', Culture and Life, June 21, 1949, p. 4)
The American press has currently been giving a great deal of lip service to-
the "independence" and "impartiality" of science in the United States, which
allegedly is outside the realm of politics. But one needs only to become familiar
with the incontrovertible facts of reality to dispel this myth of the impartiality
and independence of American science and to make it more than apparent that
science in the United States serves as an obedient instrument of the forces of
reaction and the capitalist monopolies that are militarizing it, putting it at the
service of its aggressive aims.
Despite the extreme diversity and chaotic state of the scientific-research net-
work in the United States, one can delineate three basic and definitive groups:
Scientific-research laboratories operated by industrial corporations, the univer-
sities, and scientific institutions run by the government. Each of these groups
of scientific-research institutions is completely dependent on the capitalist
monopolies, and on the policies of finance capital prevailing in the United States.
*******
Clearly, it would be laughable to expect scientists who are directly subservient
to the monopolies to be impartial toward and independent of the policies of
these monopolies. It should be noted that even in the most specialized areas
of research these scientists do not have the right to publish their own works
unless permitted and censored by the appropriate corporation.
A considerable role in the American scientific-research network is played
by universities and colleges which prepare cadres for all scientific institutions
and which at the same time are centers of theoretical research.
Due either to a profound fallacy or by conscious design, a widespread concep-
tion is being circulated in America that science in the universities as distinct
from research work done in the laboratories of the industrial corporations is
independent of the policies of the monopolies.
It will suffice to mention that 200 of the largest United States corporations
control the governing boards literally: academic councils of almost all the
American universities, which, in consequence, are controlled directly by Wall
Street.
The monopolies' influence on the social sciences is displayed with cynical
candor. Not only do the monopolies not object to the professors' dealing with
current problems ; on the contrary, they demand that this be done— but on the
condition that their studies, and all written and oral statements must clearly
be aimed at defending the interests and policies of the monopolies. Anyone
disagreeing with this policy is ruthlessly driven out and in effect, blackballed.
In carrying out the instructions of their masters, university presidents make
reactionary speeches on burning political and economic issues— and then these
speeches are widely circulated by the press and radio, which are in the hands
of these same monopolies.
Long ago Lenin has shown that there can be no "impartial" social science in a
society torn by class struggle, that in one way or another, bourgeois science
always defends wage slavery. "To expect science to be impartial in a wage-
slave society is as silly and naive as to expect impartiality from manufacturers
on the question of whether workers' wages should be increased by decreasing
the profits of capital" (V. I. Lenin, Soch., vol. 19, p. 3) .
At present, when the United States has become the primary force in the im-
perialist camp, the social sciences in America have been placed completely in
the service of imperialist expansion.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 843
In many American universities special centers for "research" have been
formed which have become veritable hornets' nests of scholarly instigators of
a new war. Such, for example, is the Institute of International Studies at
Yale University, which has become one of the centers for American geopoliticians
who propagate the idea that the whole world must become a Lebensraum for
American monopolies, and who glorify the "absolute weapon" of atomic and
bacteriological warfare.
American economists, who, for the most part, are in the immediate service
of the capitalist trusts, are coming out more and more frequently with odious
and mendacious "theories" concerning the inevitability and even the desirability
of a new world war as the sole means of saving American capitalism from crises
and unemployment. These economists are striving to convince the American
people. In response to the demand of the monopolies, that the growth in ex-
penditures for armaments is "stimulating a rise in business activity" and that
the Marshall plan expenditures enable "unemployment to be exported" beyond
the borders of the United States of America. America's bourgeois historians
brazenly distort the history of the United States as well as the history of inter-
national relations in an attempt to portray American imperialists as "bene-
factors" of humanity.
American scholars— ethnographers and sociolgists — are outdoing themselves in
their efforts to repaint the Hitlerite racial theory in American colors, to poison
the consciousness of the masses with this odious form of the Fascist ideology.
They propogate the demented ideas of a "chosen" Anglo-Saxon race elected to
rule the world, call for intensified racial discrimination, and factually justify
the lynching of Negroes, annihilation of Indians, and the ruthless exploitation
of colonial peoples. This dissemination of the poison of nationality differences,
beneficial to the monopolies, is aided in every way by many American biologists
who base themselves on the unscientific theses of the Weismann-Morgan school
of genetics.
Mr. Hats. Dr. Herring, do you have any knowledge of Prof. Ray-
mond Bauer at Harvard ? He is also in the Russian field.
Mr. Herring. I have met him ; yes.
Mr. Hats. He has a book called, The New Man in Soviet Psychology.
Mr. Herring. I have browsed through that book.
Mr. Hats. I would just like to read a couple of paragraphs which
he has written, which continue to prove the thesis we are on here of
the antagonism of the Soviets toward American-type independent
research. He says :
It is particularly striking that certain criticisms made before this committee —
this is a letter from Dr. Bauer —
exhibit the same fear of findings of empirical social research that prompted the
Bolsheviks to repress, eo much of the work of Soviet psychologists. You will
And an account of this in chapter 7.
That is of his book, which I have read, and which is outlined in
great detail.
Here you will see that the findings of psychologists were criticized and the
work ultimately stopped, because their conclusions did not please the Bolshevik
politicians.
He said :
I would recommend to you also chapter S, which deals with one of the most
drastic instances of Soviet political interference in education and psychology.
And I have also read that.
It is ironic that progressive education in this country should have been labeled
"communistic" by its critics, when, as this chapter and other sections of the book
show, all traces of progressive education were violently rejected by the Com-
munists in the period between 1931 and 1936. Finally, if you have the time and
patience certain portions of the last chapter may prove rewarding, particularly
pages 186 and 189—
49T20— 54— pt. 1 54
844 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
and I am citing these in case anyone who reads this record would be
interested —
and pages 191 and 196. Here —
says the author —
I have tried as objectively as possible to draw the distinctions between our own
and the Soviet political systems as regards the role the social sciences play in
the two societies.
And this whole book of his is an indictment of the Soviet system,
because they have repressed all free and independent research of
any kind.
The Chairman. Will the gentleman yield ?
Mr. Hays. Yes.
The Chairman. Any interest, as I see it, which has been expressed
here since the study began has been toward maintaining free and inde-
pendent research, independent both from government and any other
great sources of power. And one of the things, as I understand, that
the staff is desirous of the committee studying is whether there is too
great concentration of power that directs research, so as to keep it
from being free and independent, just as the learned doctor states
from whom the gentleman from Ohio quotes. If there is great con-
centration of power, it doesn't make a great deal of difference whether
it is in the government or whether it is in some outside agency. So
that is one of the very questions that the committee desires to explore.
And in exploring, there is not an indication of any unfriendliness
whatever, but simply a disposition to learn and develop the facts.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Chairman, I think that calls for a statement. I
might say that your statement is a very heartening and encouraging
thing to me.
The Chairman. That has been the very key, as I understand it, of
practically all the questions that have been raised by the staff, Mr.
Hays. And I am not unaware of the fact, as Mr. Herring has observed
in the press, that various implications have been put on the work of
the committee. But that is the very key or one of the principal keys to
the purpose of the work that has gone on so far.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Chairman, as I said, that is a very heartening thing,
to hear you say that, and I am glad to hear you say it. But putting
your statement up against the very bare words of the reports of the
staff, the two just don't correspond. Anyone who can read Mr. Mc-
JSTiece's report or Mr. Dodd's report and say they are in any way
friendly toward the foundations, or who can say their reports are not
a very damning indictment didn't understand English the way I do.
Maybe there is something wrong with the way I do understand it.
The Chairman. I regret very much that we should have to monop-
olize the time of the committee, including Mrs, Pf ost and the very able
fentleman from Massachusetts, who is a member of the Ways and
feans Committee, which may ultimately have responsibility concern-
ing legislation as to the tax-exempt status of foundations, but I don't
want the wrong impression to go in the record with reference to any
statement the staff of the committee has made. The whole purpose of
the chart that Mr. McNiece displayed to the committee was to raise
the question with reference to the concentration of power in a few
places, which had over-all supervision over research.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 845
Now, he was not stating that as a fact but simply raising the ques-
tion for the exploration of the committee. And, as chairman, I would
like to leave Russia and get back to the United States and proceed
with our hearing.
Mr. Goodwin. I think that is most desirable, Mr. Chairman. We
have a very eminent gentleman here who is a witness. It may be
that he is very much interested in discussions from the rostrum here,
which I think might very well be confined to executive session. If
he should be, and desires to take from his valuable time some portion
of it to listen to discussions here, very well, but it seems to me that
we should go on with the hearing and listen to the witness here.
Mr. Hays. Well, Mr. Goodwin, I am in general agreement with
you, but I don't think you can let any blanket statement go unchal-
lenged, from my point of view, and I don't intend to. I am not going
to let these rather peculiar statements of the staff go into the record,
and then, as to any criticisms I have to make of them, make them
in executive session, where nobody knows I made them.
Now, the chairman desires to end this colloquy, but he always keeps
bringing in new material. Now, he brought in this chart. And I
am impelled to say something about that chart, because I think that
chart came about as near being nothing as anything that anybody
could have spent much time on, and I am going to tell you why. It
is a lot of nice, little pretty boxes with a lot of nice black lines running
here and there, and according to its author it was supposed to show
some sort of an interlock. Now, suppose I went over to the blackboard
and made a chart and said, "That is the White House," or "the State
Department." I will put in the White House, and then I will put
the State Department underneath it and run a line down.
Then I will make another box, and it says, "The Kremlin," and I
run a line from the State Department to the Kremlin. We have an
Ambassador there. And another one says, "The Ambassador to
Poland." And we run a line there, where there is a Communist gov-
ernment. And another to the Government of Czechoslovakia. And
then I could say, "Look, we have lines running out to all these places,
so there must be some kind of an interlock between our Government
and these Communist governments." It is just about that factual.
The Chairman. Do you have any other statements you wish to
make before we proceed ?
Mr. Hays. None right now.
The Chairman. Were you proceeding with your questioning?
Mr. Koch. Well, Mr. Herring had a few more remarks. Or I won't
even restrict him to a few. He wanted to complete his oral presenta-
tion before we started questioning.
Mr, Heeeing. I thought Congressman Goodwin made an interest-
ing point yesterday that we didn't have time to develop, and if I may
pick up there, I think it may add something to the problems we have
under consideration.
He pointed, I thought with real discernment, to the importance of
historical fact, what is historically so. And it brought to mind a
] ittle piece of American history that I think is quite relevant.
Let's go back to the Franklin Institute in Philadelphia in 1832. In
those early years, with steamboats getting under way, unfortunately
a good many boilers burst. Bursting steam boilers were a problem.
And the Franklin Institute, in its empirical, pragmatic, down-to-
846 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
earth way, said, "What can we do about bursting steam boilers?" So
they turned to a professor at the University of Pennsylvania, a pro-
fessor of chemistry and moral philosophy, old Professor Bates. He
was the grandson of Benjamin Franklin. And they said, "Will you
try to find out why steam boilers burst?"
So he got a grant from the Government. The Secretary of the
Treasury got hold of $1,500 — probably the first money used for
scientific inquiry. And in American fashion : "If steam boilers burst,
Jet's get some explanation." So they set up a little group to investi-
gate, and they went into all the scientific aspects. And when they got
through, I must confess to you that this group of scientists did come
up with a recommendation for action. They did say that "maybe if
we had some way of inspecting steam boilers, we might protect the
public from bursting steam boilers."
So the Steamboat Inspection Service, as a result of this empirical
investigation, was established in 1836, and it was the first Government
regulatory agency. And I submit to you that the reason for the
Government getting into regulation was not socialism. It wasn't any
bursting Socialist with his ideas. It was the down-to-earth fact that
sometimes steam boilers burst, and we want to know why.
So the grandson of old Ben Franklin went in there, and he found
out the reason, and he said, "One of the reasons, that goes beyond the
sheer chemical side, is that maybe there is a little carelessnes in stoking
the fire." In other words, you have got to get the human factor in
there. You have to keep an eye on the people who are running the
steamboats. And we have the Steamboat Inspection Service as the
first regulatory agency.
And I think, Mr. Goodwin, there is an illustration where if you go
back to the record, if you look at American history, if you say, "What
causes these things?" — now, suppose that group had gone at it intliis
rationalistic fashion. The first thing you do is get an armchair, and
you sit down and say, "Let's speculate about this. Why do these
boilers burst?" And you go about it through doing a lot of abstract
reasoning.
The steam boilers, I submit, will still be bursting. But when you
look at them and you say, "How can we stop this?" and if it takes a
little Federal regulation to protect the public from bursting steam
boilers, the American way to do it is to get at the actual situation.
And I don't want to overemphasize this thing, but I must speak with
a bit of emphasis, because I think, as you say, sir, if you look at the
historical development of things, you often find the reasons.
The Chairman. You intended for this memorandum from Mr.
Inkeles to go in the record as part of your statement, although you
only read portions of it ?
Mr. Herring. Yes, please,
(The document referred to is as follows :)
From : Alex Inkeles.
To : Pendleton Herring.
This memorandum is meant to implement my suggestion to you that the Reece
committee might he interested in learning something of how the general prohlem
it has under investigation is treated and viewed behind the Iron Curtain. In
drawing up this memorandum I have not undertaken a systematic survey, but
have merely drawn on my notes and on items which were easily recalled by me
or my colleagues. A systematic survey of Soviet sources would yield an enormous
number of violent attacks on the foundations and the accessory agencies in
Communist sources.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 847
FOUNDATIONS AND ACCESSORY AGENCIES BEHIND THE IRON CURTAIN
By way of background the committee may be interested to know that in
Communist-controlled countries the existence of organizations like the great
American foundations and the accessory agencies is unthinkable. Where they
existed at the time of the Communist seizure of power they were always among
the fiBst, institutions to be broken up and to have their funds confiscated by the
Communist dictatorship. This is because the Communists recognize that such
funds and agencies are sources for centers of free thought and opinion, which
is always inimical to Communist rule. In the Soviet Union, for example, pro-
fessors, scientists, and other scholars are not permitted to organize associations
like the American Historical Association. They may belong only to trade unions
and to officially sponsored governmentally organized institutions such as the
Academy of Pedagogical Sciences.
Not only does the Communist world look askance at the existence of founda-
tions and agencies of the accessory type in its own domain, but it also takes a
very hostile view to these which exist in the free world and particularly those
which operate in the United States. Unfortunately I have not maintained a
file of the attacks on the foundations as such, but I recall from time to time
having seen violent attacks on them in the press of the Iron Curtain countries.
The general line has been that the American foundations are simply thinly dis-
guised devices whereby the "monopoly capitalists" of the United States hide
behind the disguise of charity and the pretense of advancing the public interest,
whereas in fact they are pursuing the goals of spreading the ideology of capi-
talism, continuing to oppress the workers, and "buying out" the services of
American scholars, scientists, teachers, etc.
The role of the foundations on the American scene is not too well understood
by Communist propagandists, however, and they concentrate most of their fire
on what the Reece committee has defined as the "accessory agencies." Our
great educational associations, for example, are constantly attacked in Soviet
educational journals as instruments of capitalism, spreading its ideology, teach-
ing hostility toward the Soviet Union and toward communism, and misleading
our youth by "reactionary" teaching methods. To cite another example, from
odd notes at hand which could be matched many times over through a careful
survey, we might consider the American Economic Association. In a book en-
titled "Ideologists of the Imperialist Bourgeoisie," published by the Academy
of Sciences of the U. S. S. R. in 100,000 copies, the American Economic Asso-
ciation is attacked for allegedly fomenting propaganda designed to incite a new
world war against the Soviet Union. The members of the association are de-
scribed therein as "bourgeois economists [who are] in the service of monopolistic
capital" and whose theories are designed solely for the purpose of defending the
American business interests of their "capitalist masters."
The American Philosophical Association is repeatedly attacked in much the
same terms. An example that is typical comes from the June 1949 issue of
the official Soviet journal, Problems of Philosophy (Vopresi Filosofii). The
American Psychological Association has also often been treated in much the
same way. I find in my notes, for example, that the American journals Psycho-
logical Abstracts, the Journal of Social Psychology, and the Journal of Genetic
Psychology are described in the 1951 official Soviet Literary Gazette (issue 106)
as being merely "screens behind which lies hidden a reactionary antiscientific
and antipopular propaganda. These journals, one of which is published by the
Psychological Association, are further charged by the Communist propagandists
with containing not science but only pseudoscience which seeks to justify "the
merciless exploitation of the workers, the advent of Fascist regimes, colonial
brigandage, and aggressive wars" for which the Communists hold capitalist
society responsible.
SOCIAL SCIENCE IN THE SOVIET UNION
Since the Reece committee appears to be particularly interested in the
support given by the foundations to social science in the United States, they
may wish to know that in the eyes of Communist leaders social science is
regarded as one of the worst and most dangerous enemies of Communist ideology
and Communist expansion. Indeed, so strong is the feeling against sociology
that it is not permitted to teach it as a subject in the Soviet Union. Sociology
is defined there as a strictly bourgeois and capitalist science of society and
is regarded bv the Soviets as directly opposed to and contradicting* Marxism.
Consequently 'they forbid the teaching of sociology in Soviet Russia and have
substituted Marxism-Leninism instead as the only true science of society.
848 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Communist hostility to sociology is reflected in the fact that the Soviet press
has in recent years been full of attacks on American sociology, and in addition
at least two special books on the subject have been put out by official Soviet
publishing houses. One of these, issued in 1951 by the State Political Publishing
House of the U. S. S. R., in 100,000 copies, bears the title "American Bourgeois
Philosophy and Sociology in the Service of Imperialism" ; the other was issued
in 1952 by the Academy of Sciences of the IT. S. S. R,, in 10,000 copies, under
the title "Contemporary American Bourgeois Sociology in the Service of Expan-
sionism." This latter is apparently a revised edition of a book by the same
author published under a slightly different title in 1949, and at the time severely
criticized in a review in Culture and Life (Kultura i Zhizm), the official
publication of the Department of Propaganda of the Soviet Communist Party.
The criticism held that the author was too easy on American sociologists and
failed to expose the full degree to which American sociologists play "the odious
role of servants and lackeys to the imperialist * * *" capitalists of the United
States. You may rest assured that on the second time around this author
did not fail to drive home the point.
The individual American social scientists brought under attack in these
polemical Soviet writings read like a Who's Who of American sociology and
social science in general. Among them are many men who were prominent
in the councils of the foundations and the accessory agencies or who have
received support from them. Amongst those of an earlier or older generation.
Ross, Bernard, and Bogardus and Ogburn are prominently named by the Soviet
hatchetmen as "tools of monopoly capital." Bernard is violently attacked for
allegedly having held up Henry Ford and John D. Rockefeller "as being true
representatives of progress. Ogburn is repeatedly castigated as the "sociologist
of the atom bomb," and despite minor differences, all are held to be "apologists
for imperialism" ; Blumer, Reuter, Becker are a few among many others on a
list of names which could be spelled out almost indefinitely. Pravda (July 17,
1952), for example, held Otto Klineberg, Talcott Parsons, David Reisman, and
others to be agents of the American military engaged in psychological warfare
against the Soviet Union and acting as learned servants of American imperialists,
capitalists, and monopolists. In the same issue Harold Lasswell is described
as having been l< a hardened intelligence agent since the times of World War I."
In the journal October directed to Soviet intellectuals, F. Lundberg and
Weininger have been charged with an attempt "to carry out the order of their
masters, the Wall Street magnates, by shamelessly slandering the women's
democratic movement * * *" Lewis Mumford is also numbered among the evil
sociologists of the United States, as, indeed, is former Senator Bilbo, of Missis-
sippi, the former being accused of being a "mercenary servant of the warmongers."
Since the name of Stuart Chase has or will probably come before the com-
mittee, his name might serve for one last illustration. In one of the Soviet
books cited above Chase is violently attacked as a longtime spreader of reaction-
ary ideas, even in the time when he was regarded as a liberal in the thirties.
It is charged by the Communist press that after the recent World War he openly
joined the "shrill chorus of American atom bombists" in their openly Fascist
attacks on world peace. Specifically, he is accused of "fulfilling the orders of
monopolistic bosses" by preaching the saving of capitalism through resort, if
necessary, to war and atomic destruction.
Since the report by the staff to the Reece committee seems concerned about
the possibility that the foundations and the accessory agencies have fostered
changes in the basic American way of life, it might be appropriate to conclude
that this is hardly the Soviet view. On the contrary, they see American social
scientists as "propagandizing the antiscientific idea of America's uniqueness"
and of spreading the false idea that under American capitalism there are such
things as enduring the prosperity and a harmony of interests between labor and
capital.
Mr. Herring. I would like to come down to the present time, because
Congressman Goodwin's point as to this phraseology, "new and inexact
sciences," came back to mind. And 1 would just like to comment on
that one. And I could comment at some length on it, but I will try
to restrain myself to one rather symmetrical little illustration here.
I have before me a statement that Wesley Mitchell made 35 years
ago. Wesley Mitchell was one of the founders of the Social Science
Eesearch Council, and he was the man who developed the National
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 849
Bureau of Economic Research. And his successor in the National
Bureau of Economic Research is now the author, Burns, that was
referred to yesterday, who is the President's adviser on the Economic
Council.
Thirty-five years ago, Wesley Mitchell said :
While I think that the development of the social sciences offers more hope
for solving our social problems than any other line of endeavor, I do not claim
that these sciences in their present state are very serviceable. They are im-
mature, speculative, filled with controversies. Nor have we any certain assurance
that they will ever grow into robust manhood, no matter what care we lavish
upon them. Those of us who are concerned with the social sciences are engaged
in an uncertain enterprise. Perhaps we shall win no great treasures from
mankind, but certainly it is our task to work out this lead with all the intelli-
gence and energy we posses until its richness or sterility is demonstrated.
That was 35 years ago.
Let's turn from that to a current editorial in the New York Times
dated June 7, 1954.
And I will just read two brief paragraphs from it. It is entitled
"Economic Geiger Counters," and the editorial says :
In the field of economics, the Geiger counters —
we all know what Geiger counters are —
are the, statistics of production, income, inventories, and the like, on which
economists, businessmen, and public officials depend for signals on the health
of the economy. If our economic data are sound we can gage whether we are
going uphill or downhill, whether the business prognosis is good or bad. If our
economic data are bad we can be lulled into complacency when action is needed
or be stampeded into needless Government intervention which may do more
harm than good.
Against this background it is disturbing to learn that top officials of our
Government feel that many of our key economic indexes have better reputa-
tions than they deserve. Even worse studies have shown that some data in
the inventories and profits field have been so far wrong at times in the postwar
period that they have shown movements contrary to the actual change. Only
a few months ago the wide discrepancy between two Government efforts ta
measure unemployment excited wide attention.
A joint congressional committee is apparently planning to look into this
situation in an effort to learn what improvements are needed. On the basis
of information already available, it is likely that the committee will find that
much of the fault can be laid at the door of a false economy which has prevented
adequate resources from being devoted to keeping our statistical Geiger counters
in good shape. Economic statistics are not the dull, lifeless, unimportant
ciphers too many laymen believe them to be. They are the indispensable tools
for understanding the operation of our complex economy. Any congressional
action to Improve these tools would repay our people a hundredfold.
And I think it is interesting to note that one member of this com-
mittee is very directly concerned with the Joint Committee on the
Economic Report, and maybe he is so busy working on it today that
he is not here with us. But here the point I want to make is that we
have developed within a generation from a time when a leading au-
thority in the field can say, "These are premature; we don't know
whether it is going to work out or not," to 35 years later, when we sit
here today and see that by directing attention to an empirical study
of the business cycle and going at it statistically and getting out of
armchairs and getting the facts together, it has become an integral
part of our Government. So that we have the Council of Economic
Advisers continuing from one administration to another as a function,
as a way of using this Geiger counter in determining the economic
health of the Nation.
850 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Well, if I may continue, I would like to go right ahead, then.
Keeping in mind Mr. Goodwin's point and the historical approach
to this thing, it has been suggested that this stuff is new and inexact.
Well, as I say, it is a big subject. It seems to me that as we look at
science, science should be new, and often must be inexact. The point
is that you try to go from the inexact toward the exact. It is the
process that is important. And the newness is important. We don't
want old sciences. We want science to ever renew itself. If you turn
to cancer research, that is new, and that is inexact, and it is no less
important because it is. It is the newness, it is the growth, it is the
ever-changing character of science that preserves its vitality and
strength.
Well, you can get scientists in different fields to hold forth on this
one, but I would like to come back to the historical record again.
I have before me a foreword by the President of the United States
prepared for Eecent SocialTrends in the United States — the report of
the President's Research Committee on Social Trends. And the
President to whom I refer is Herbert Hoover. I would like to read
his brief letter for the record.
Hoover writes :
In the autumn of 1929 I asked a group of eminent scientists to examine into
the feasibility of a national survey of social trends in the United States, and in
December of that year I named the present committee under the chairmanship
of Dr. Wesley C. Mitchell to undertake the researches and make a report. The
survey is entirely the work of the committee and its experts, as it was my desire
to have a complete, impartial examination of the facts. The committee's own
report, which is the first section of the published work and is signed by members,
reflects their collective judgment of the material and sets forth matters of opin-
ion as well as of strict scientific determination.
Since the task assigned to the committee was to inquire into changing trends,
the result is emphasis on elements of instability rather than stability in our
social structure.
This study is the latest and most comprehensive of a series, some of them
governmental and others privately sponsored, beginning in 1921 with the report
on waste in industry under my chairmanship. It should serve to help all of
us to see where social stresses are occurring and where major efforts should be
undertaken to deal with them constructively.
Signed "Herbert Hoover, The White House, Washington, D. C,
October 11, 1932."
It is rather interesting, from a historical standpoint, and to give
some sense of proportion about our present problems at midcentury,
to go back, as I did. the other day, to these volumes and browse through
them a bit. And you will find there, in these volumes, some references
to the fact that there were problems back there in the thirties, too.
And many of those problems are still with us.
I don't want to take your time to read a whole list of the problems
of the 1930's, because we have got our hands full at the present time.
But they had their problems. And —
even a casual glance —
we read, in this foreword to the social trend study —
at some of these points of tension in our national life reveals a wide range of
puzzling questions. Imperialism, peace or war, international relations, urbanism,
trusts and mergers, crime and its prevention, taxation, social security, the plight
of agriculture, foreign and domestic commerce, governmental regulations of
industry, shifting moral standards, new leadership in Government and business,
and the stanch status of womankind, labor, child training, mental hygiene, the
future of democracy and capitalism, et cetera.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 851
But one last sentence here :
Democrats, statesmen, and servants and propagandists have attacked these
problems, but usually from the point of view of some limited interest. Records
and information have been and still are incomplete and often inconclusive.
But Herbert Hoover, that great social engineer, was a man who
said, "Let's have a look at the record." And these volumes were pre-
pared under his sponsorship. And Congressman Goodwin, I sub-
mit to you, that having a little historical sense about the past and
about the continuity in these things is a way of — well, it helps one's
blood pressure a bit perhaps.
Mr. Goodwin. That is very, very interesting, and I think very il-
lustrative, too, sir.
Mr. Herring. Well, now, Mr. Chairman, there are a variety of
things I could turn to. I want to keep constantly in mind, if I may
say so, the fundamental point that the chairman raised a few minutes
ago. I would leave this room satisfied indeed if I could help to
clarify that problem, because if it is a serious problem in your minds,
let's have a look at the facts and see if we can develop it. Maybe
a few minutes on that would be helpful testimony.
Let's start with the fact that in this great country of ours we have
1,700 colleges and universities spread across the breadth of the Na-
tion. We know how they came into being. Some of them are great
State institutions. I needn't rehearse the story there. The churches
started gineat private benefactions. But you see the story j all over
the country, of these institutions. They weren't developed from a
Paris or a Berlin in accordance with a ministry of education in a na-
tional system. They grew up like the wheat on the prairies. They
grew up out of our native soil. They grew up because — well, you
could Start with Harvard, if you like. I keep William and Mary
in mind, too. There was the importance of training the clergy in the
old days, getting an enlightened clergy. There was a practical need.
And our great land- grant colleges were started. This is a subject
I fear I get a little eloquent on, because it is such a dramatic and
beautiful piece of American history, I feel.
The Chairman. Would you permit a little interruption there? I
want to associate myself in my very feeble way with your eloquence
and deep feeling about these colleges and universities. And there is
no apprehension on anyone's part so long as the colleges and univer-
sities are used as the medium for the research. There will be no
dangerous concentration then. It is when the generating force is
centered in other agencies, which haven't risen up in the same way
that the colleges and the universities have, and use intermediary agen-
cies as the channel that gives rise to apprehension; if you will just
permit that, in order to keep the direction clear.
Mr. Herring. I just wanted to start with the grassroots and take a
historical direction in this, so that we could see the broad sweep of
American life.
Mr. Hats. Right there, Doctor, isn't it true that the colleges and
universities are always the generating force in any research, or always
at least the propelling force, and that the most that any foundation
has done has been to simply provide the fuel, the gasoline, for the en-
gine, you might say, the money, which in this case is the fuel, to see
852 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
that these fellowships could be granted and that the colleges and uni-
versities could have the funds available to have people to do research %
Isn't that the way it has been handled ?
Mr. Herring. That is right. We start with this magnificent de-
velopment in our country.
Now, within those institutions, you have the professors. And let
me mention a point that we sometimes forget.
We have a system in American education, of tenure. When a man
has proved his capacity, he is given an appointment with tenure. That
means you can't fire him. He has a job that is a secure job. It is at
a modest salary, but he has independence. And I don't know any
group of citizens that have the same degree of independence, because
they have this economic support. They are secure in their jobs, and
they are expected to express their opinions and to develop their
thoughts and to teach their students to the best of their ability. And
our great tradition is : Leave them alone to do that job.
So the tenure on the economic side is shored up with the great princi-
ple of academic freedom.
So here again, in our practical way, we have both the practice of
tenure and the principle of academic freedom. So that means you
have, then, men who have, in a sense, these privileges to exercise their
thoughts and to contribute to the education of the youth of the country
and to the furtherance of knowledge.
Now, these men have their own interests. The chemists get together
with the chemists and the sociologists with the sociologists.
As I indicated in my opening statement, they often get together re-
gionally. We are a great people for getting together. And they get
together on their professional matters, just as in all other walks of life,
in chambers of commerce and Rotary clubs and so on, congenial people
get together.
All right. Let's build up from that. In the fields with which I
am familiar you have these associations of historians and economists.
They get together in the sense that once a year they meet here in
Washington or somewhere else where there are appropriate hotel
accommodations, and they read papers and talk, and some of the
younger men look for jobs, and they renew old friendships, and they
have their annual conventions. And the other thing they do together
is to sponsor and publish a learned journal, where the articles can be
published and the books in the field reviewed.
Now, this is a part of the great associational activity of the United
States. D'Toqueville, when he came here in the middle of the 19th
century, looked around, and he saw this rich associational life — no
monolithic state. The problem was to give the Government enough
leeway at times to do some of the minimal jobs. The problem here
of the associational life of the country was of the essence of freedom.
Well, the same pattern holds for industry and labor, and so on, this
freedom to associate and to share common interests.
Well, now, without going into a long history of the foundations,
we know that as wealth accumulated, around the turn of the century,
a great industrialist such as Andrew Carnegie faced the problem of
what to do with his wealth, whether to follow the European pattern of
just willing it all to his descendants. That, obviously, is in the feudal
tradition. But over here this peculiar, unique American phenome-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 853
non, the foundation, started off most dramatically, most importantly,
with Carnegie, and a few years later with the Rockefeller Foundation.
The point that is so important here is to see that you have a large
and diverse group of people, with great independence of mind, and
"with their own interests; and the foundations want to advance some
aspect of social welfare.
Now, in our great foundations, the terms under which they operate
are very broad. The advancement and dissemination of knowledge,
or the welfare of mankind. The problem is : How do you move from
that broad mandate into something tangible, something particular?
Who is going to do what ? And the problem of the foundation officer
and the problem of the foundation trustees is to go from these broad
objectives of human welfare down to something particular, specific,
defensible, understandable, something that will advance the broader
purposes.
Now, the foundations have a problem, in exercising judgment, and
in deciding, with their limited resources, which of the various oppor-
tunities for investing some of this money in good ideas and social pur-
pose can be selected. So that you have on the one hand people who
"have various things they want to do in their own research and their
teaching, and on the other hand you have quite limited foundation
resources.
As I was saying, I think one of the important points brought out
in the inquiry thus far is that there are a great many foundations in
the United States, some six or seven thousand, I believe. I was
scarcely aware there were that many. But here again, I want to talk
out of my own experience. And over the years of the council's life,
we have received support, grants, from about a dozen or so founda-
tions. In other words, the number of foundations with an interest
in the social sciences is a very limited number of foundations.
So let's get that sense of perspective into the picture.
Mr. Koch. Could you at this time name the principal ones ? I was
going to that later, but why don't we get it now ? The principal con-
tributors to your organization.
Mr. Herring. Well, I filed that with you, and you have a list of
all the money we have gotten from all the sources.
Mr. Koch. I do not have a list here.
Mr. Herring. Yes. Well, I have it before me. I have before me :
"Summary of disbursements under appropriation, by donors, from
-June 1924 through April 30, 1954," and that goes back to the beginning
of the organization. I have 24 items on this list. If I pick out the
principal ones, which are the ones you wanted
Mr. Koch. And would you mind then offering the list as part of
the record ? Mine doesn't go up beyond 1951.
Mr. Hays. I suggest, Mr. Chairman, that the witness offer the list
and make it part of the record, and if there are any specific questions,
they can be asked, but I don't think we want to take the time to read
all these statistics.
Mr, Koch. No ; we don't. I agree with you. I just thought he could
mention a few of the important foundations, and not go into dollars
and cents.
Mr. Hats. I think it would be well to have the entire list incorpo-
rated into the record at this point, and then the witness can make any
■comments he desires.
854 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Koch. All right. You offer the entire list, and then just men-
tion the top five that you can think of that have contributed.
Mr. Herring. In looking over this list, I see the Laura Spelman
Rockefeller Memorial, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Carnegie Cor-
poration, the Julius Rosenwald Fund, the General Education Board,
the Ford Foundation. Does that Suffice ?
Mr. Koch. That is all right.
Mr. Herring. So we herewith offer the list for the record.
Mr. Goodwin (presiding). It may be admitted.
(The list referred to is as follows :)
Summary of disbursements under appropriation, by donors, through Apr. 30, 1954
Disbursed
Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial $2,340,512.22
Rockefeller Foundation 6, 120, 935. 05
Mr. John D. Rockefeller, Jr 15, 559. 06
Russell Sage Foundation 113,551.66
Carnegie Corporation of New York 2, 111, 575. 58
Commonwealth Fund 5, 000.00
Mr. Julius Rosenwald 50,000.00
Mr. Revell McCallum 1,489.55
Julius Rosenwald Fund 68,407.88
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching 10, 000. 00
Maurice and Laura Falk Foundation 3,000.00
General Education Board 242, 182. 37
Spelman Fund 67', 500. 00
W. E. Upjohn Unemployment Trustee Corporation 23, 745. 65
Committee of Trustees on Experimental Programs 76, 326. 19
Scri-pps Foundation for Research in Population Problems 3, 332. 21
The Grant Foundation 11,583.63
American Philosophical Society : 7,500.00
The John and Mary R. Markle Foundation 181, 137. 47
U. S. Bureau of the Census 128, 219. 86
Ford Foundation 390, 392. 19
Twentieth Century Fund „_ 150,000.00
Rockefeller Brothers 8, 042. 86
Total 12, 135, 993. 43
Mr. Herring. The picture I am trying to get before you then in
terms of my own experience is the fact that there are a limited number
of these foundations with an interest in these social-science fields.
And let me survey briefly for you this problem of the relations between
an organization such as the council and the foundations.
In the first place, the foundations make substantial grants directly
to universities.
A point that I want to emphasize, in order again to get some sense
of proportion into this thing is this : Our best estimate is that probably
about $12 million from foundation sources goes annually to social-
science research, broadly construed. The Council has funds that
amount to about one-tenth of that. Now, I wish Mr. Reece were here,
because I think this relates to a problem on his mind. We are one of
many organizations. We are a part of this great associational life
of the United States. And we have a special focus on the advancement
of research. There are many other organizations dealing with many
other problems. We have our problem, our interest, our focus, and
we have these resources.
JNow, I would like to offer this as an exhibit. I wouldn't want to
burden the record with this, but we could pass it up to you. Here is
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 855
A Directory of Social Science Research Organizations in Universities
and Colleges, prepared by the committee on organization for research,
Social Science Research Council, June 1950 ; and in this publication
you will find listed the names and addresses of 281 organizations con-
ducting or financing research in the social sciences in 104 universities
and colleges. And here are their names and addresses. And I think
this a fairly concrete illustration of the fact that we are dealing with
a great many organizations, and here are the ones in the universities
that are concerned with this field.
Mr. Goodwin. You are not offering these for the record, but just by
reference ?
Mr. Herring. Yes; just as an exhibit, Mr. Chairman.
(The document referred to was filed for the information of the
committee. )
Mr. Herring. The Social Science Research Council has demon-
strated its capacity over a 30-year period as a highly responsible group
to consider the leads, the ideas that individuals have, and their re-
search ability, their possible significance for the advancement of the
field. The council provides an opportunity for specialists, working
at the growing edges of knowledge, to identify new leads, to appraise
existing state of knowledge, to work out concrete next steps, to evaluate
research holding out the most promise. That is where we focus our
attention.
Maybe one way to get the matter before you more vividly would be
to offer an illustration. Let's take the history of an idea and how it
goes through our procedures.
A few years ago, one member of the council, a member of our board
of directors, who was trained both in psychiatry and in anthropology,
came to me, and he said, "I am very much interested in"
Mr. Goodwin. We will recess at this point and will resume, sub-
ject to the call of the Chair, I should say in about 8 or 10 minutes.
(Short recess.)
The Chairman. The committee will resume.
If you will permit a diversion before you proceed with your testi-
mony, Mr. Adams, who had expected to be called in this morning, has
prepared a statement, which has been given to the press. If there
is no objection, that statement will be admitted into the record to
appear at the conclusion of the statement and questioning of Mr. Her-
ring ; and then Mr. Adams will appear and take up from there.
Mr. Koch. Could we ask Dr. Adams whether that is agreeable to
him?
The Chairman. I had so understood. That is agreeable with Dr.
Adams.
Mr. Adams. Mr. Chairman, I am at your disposal, sir.
The Chairman. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. Herring. Mr. Chairman,, when we broke for the recess, I was
about to embark on a description by way of illustration of how an
idea that is brought up by an individual research ban is discussed and
developed, and so forth. But I think rather than pursuing that, I
would just like to say that with reference to this general point we
were discussing, namely, the problem of whether there is control of
research, the problem is rather one of recognizing a good idea when
you see it, deciding whether to encourage a man with one idea or not.
856 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
It is not a matter of control. It is a matter of recognizing and
assisting.
So that I think, since the time goes by so rapidly here, it might be
better for me to pause at this stage, because I could go on for quite
a while, and say to you that if there are questions the counsel would
like to raise, or anybody else, it might be better, and then if I have
further ideas I could bring them in. But I would like to complete
my visit with you today, so that if there are questions you want to raise,
I want to be sure we allow ample time for any questions.
The Chairman. You may proceed, Mr. Koch.
Mr. Koch. Mr. Herring, first let me point out what my problem
and Mr. Wormser's problem is ; that is, to get the benefit of your points
of view — and, of course, we have already covered a lot of it — as to these
criticisms or suggestions that have been raised by previous witnesses.
I want you to know that there was no intention on our part to make
any charges. Frankly, I don't think we have a right to. We have a
right to bring before the committee, who are the judges, such criticism
or arguments as have been made, arid we now welcome your help in
helping us try to appraise whether some have merit or whether they
have not.
Now, in that connection, I would like to review the particular points
that we are concentrating on, so that when we ask you questions:
and I am going over your statement — you will have those in mind and
can give me whatever you like.
For instance, we have, as you have heard before, the possible concen-
tration of power caused by united or concerted action on the part of the
larger foundations, thus tending toward conformity or a threat to a
free interplay of ideas. Always listen to the "possible" part, because
that has been mentioned by people who come as professors of eminent
universities. It has been raised, and there is the possibility, as far as
I am concerned — and certainly until all the facts are in I wouldn't
attempt to appraise the matter as to whether that is on the road to
control or it isn't.
Then the possible creation of an elite group of social scientists who
are called upon from time to time to advise the Government on prob-
lems of importance in their field. And then, of course, whether certain
types of social-science investigations are not the proper subject of
grants ; that is, the results might be too questionable, or the particular
thing is too hard to appraise or too hard to control. You will recall
that that type of criticism has come before the committee.
Then, of course, and you mentioned it before, but I will come to it
later, the presence of an interlock of directors and administrative heads
among the various foundations, which might lead to uniformity and
ideas or concerted motion in favor of certain types of action.
And finally, even if nothing has been done by the foundations in the
past which was detrimental to the public, is there a latent power in the
foundation setup which, falling into hands less respectable than those
of yourself and the many others we have identified as the heads of
the foundations today, if that power gets into bad hands, would be of
danger to the public ? And if so, is there anything we can do to protect
ourselves %
Mr. Hays. Are you asking those questions en bloc ?
Mr. Koch. No, Mr. Hays. I wanted to point out the particular
specific questions I am going into in an attempt to cover those points.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 857
I am certainly not asking him now to give us an answer on that.. But
those are the questions I feel he can be very helpful to us on, and those
are the things I feel eventually the committee will have to appraise-
So with that in mind, I will go into your statements, and certain of
the questions won't follow the order of these general propositions.
Now, I am referring to your introductory statement, Mr. Herring.
Near the bottom of the first page there is this sentence :
; In view of the references to collectivism, I am sure that we share of a feeling
of caution concerning governmental intervention and control over education and
research.
Now, if that control might be something .other than governmental,
but still control, we would likewise be concerned about that, wouldn't
we, Mr. Herring ?
Mr. Herring. That is right. There is no question about that.
Mr. Koch. Now, let's skip to page 4. A little bit more than half
way down on page 4 :
I know of no reliable method of analysis for establishing cause and effect
relationships between such ideas and what has happened in our recent history.
Now, for my help, do you believe that as a general statement we
cannot establish a clear causal relationship between an idea and what
has happened ?
Mr. Herring. Well, I think problems of historical causality are
exceedingly difficult ideas to work with. I recall we had a commit-
tee on historiography, and one of the problems discussed by that com-
mittee was the problem of causality. What causes what ? This group
of eminent historians went into that at some length, and just made the
point that we tend often to be much too superficial in attributing
causal relationships. You can offer interpretations. It goes back to
Congressman Goodwin's point again, that there are certain historical
facts. You can say a certain thing happened on a certain date. But
as Congressman Hays pointed out when they discussed this matter :
How do you get at any one definitive final causal statement? There
are these matters of interpretation.
Mr. Hats. Well, you might ask this question. Back in the 1930's,
I very well remember that there were farmers with pitchforks out
threatening tax collectors, and notably in the very conservative State
of Ohio. Do you know whether there is any way you can figure out
whether any idea caused them to go out there, or the economic condi-
tions of the time ?
Mr. Herring. That is right. I get my sensitivity by associating
with historians, who are even more sensitive about it. But how can
you get at these sweeping generalizations ? It is said, for example,
that a decline in the production of wheat would cause certain political
repercussions. That is a sweeping assertion that is made. The his-
torian has to go to the place of wheat at a certain place at a certain
point in time and see whether it was that price of wheat at that point
in time that bore some relationship to this hypothesis as to cause.
The Chairman. Insofar as we members of the committee can re-
strain ourselves, I am inclined to think that it would make for expe-
dition and orderly procedure if we were to let the counsel conclude his
questions, and then we will have ample opportunity to raise any ques-
tions that we want io raise. That does not mean that we should not.
interrupt, but I am just throwing out a caution in that respect.
858 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hats. I will try to abide by your wishes, Mr. Chairman,, but I
fear that it is going to be very difficult for me at times to* restrain
myself.
The Chairman. But the depression and pitchforks against? tax col-
lectors is not now particularly pertinent.
Mr. Hats. It is very pertinent, if you will read from the portion on
page 4, as to whether or not you have any —
reliable method of analysis for establishing cause and effect relationship between
such ideas and what has happened in our recent history.
Now, if you can think of a more pertinent example, Mr. Chairman,
I would be glad to have it.
There may be one coming up in November, if you want to go out
and be a prophet, about the price of wheat, as somebody has men-
tioned, and what may happen next November. There might be a
very interesting possibility for some research there.
Mr. Goodwin. You will have some others under strong temptation
to make speeches here if you continue.
Mr. Hays. My best political advice, Mr. Goodwin — and I wouldn't
care to offer it to you, but to anyone coming from a district in New
England, where there isn't much wheat raised — would be just to, stay
out of that wheat argument and try to get elected on some other
ground.
Mr. Koch. Now, Mr. Herring, isn't it part of the claim of the
social scientists, particularly those that specialize in the empirical
research, that by observing the behavior of man and what is going on
in society, one can establish such a cause-and-effect relationship?
Mr. Herring. I am very glad you raised that question, Mr. Koch,
because it gives me a chance to explain a point.
Mr. Hays. Right there, would you mind repeating the -question ?
I didn't hear the first part of it.
Mr. Koch. Yes. Isn't it a part of the claim of the social scientists,
especially those that are specializing in the empirical research, that
by observing the behavior of man and what is going on in society, one
can establish such caUse-and-effect relationship %
Mr. Hays. Thank you.
Mr. Koch. Now, will you help us out ?
Mr. Herring. Take your own language, Mr. Koch : Observing the
behavior of man and what goes on in society. Social scientists do
not attempt to observe the behavior of man. "Man" is an abstract.
You can observe the behavior of Mr. Koch.
Mr. Koch. I would rather you would not. But go ahead.
Mr. Herring. You can analyze the words he uses. You can observe
his gestures. You can give him certain tests. You can measure his
I. Q. with a fair amount of certainty. In college, if you take scholastic
aptitude tests, you would find over the years that those tests would
indicate pretty clearly whether you are going to be a pretty good
student or not.
The important thing to nail down here is that this empirical work
doesn't operate at this range of generality about man and society.
It deals with men that you can observe, doing things that you can
observe, and then figuring out if there is some way, in this particular
instance, with respect to the particularities, under which hypothesis
can be adumbrated with reference to the observed behavior. It is not
man in the abstract.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 859
Mr. Koch. Isn't it possible then for the social scientist to know as
well whether I am going to explode, as whether Mr. Franklin's boiler
is going to explode ? Those scientists have a much easier job to check
on the social effects, don't they, in the physical sciences?
Mr. Herring. I am much impressed with advances that have been
made in fields dealing with human tensions and mental illness. It is
one of the most important problems before us at the present time.
As a matter of fact, it was the illustration I was going to offer earlier,
because I think it is so important.
"We have in our hospital beds in this country about half a million
mentally disturbed patients, and the problem of what to do with
that great burden of the mentally ill is not only a problem of a human
sort. It is a terrific tax problem. It is one of the great drains on
our resources.
Mr. Hays. Yes, but, Dr. Herring, I am trying to be helpful, and
I don't think you are quite specifically getting at the question Mr.
Koch asked. I will rephrase it in my own words as I see it. Maybe
I am not, either. What he is saying, I think, is that you can put
a pressure gage on a steam boiler that will tell you within a few
degrees of the probability that that thing will explode if it goes be-
yond a certain range, but you can't put any gage up to a human brain
to tell you at what point it is going to be so overtaxed that it becomes
necessary for the possessor of it to become a patient in one of these
beds.
Mr. Koch. That is right. And by merely counting the number of
patients in the hospitals and also finding out that so many came from
the slums and so many came from the union of first cousins, that still
won't tell you the whole story. I mean, you may have to go into their
religious background, the background of the patients, and what not.
And so that is the problem. How accurate can they be in the social
sciences?
Mr. Herring. Well, you haven't even started to ask the questions
that have to be gone into. You haven't even scratched the surface.
If you want to get involved in psychoanalysis, there is just no end to
the matter of what you go into. But the point that I would defend
here and try to explain to the committee is that when you are faced
with a problem such as mental illness, you want to use every device that
you can think of for understanding the character of the mental dis-
order. But obviously you haven't gotten very far if you have just
counted the number of sick people you have. But you want to under-
stand all you possibly can about their personalities and their develop-
ment as individuals and their family relations and the whole history.
And you want to go beyond those superficial matters and get some
understanding at a deeper level of them as human beings. And what
I wanted to say was that I think that a very encouraging amount of
work is going forward in trying to penetrate further and further
into the nature of human personality.
Mr. Koch. Now, on page 5, Mr. Herring, at the bottom, with respect
to this sentence :
The staff has tried to call into question the efforts of the very individuals and
institutions who are devoting their resources and energies to the increase and
dissemination of knowledge and the protection of the American way of life.
The picture that has been presented to the committee does not accord with my
own observation and experience.
49720— 54-4>t ■i-*r-^55-
860 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Well, now, you wouldn't claim, however, that the social scientists
have a monopoly on the dissemination of knowledge and the protec-
tion of the American way of life ?
Mr. Herring. Not for a moment.
Mr. Koch. I imagine to a very minor extent the lawyers may have
their ideas, the ministers theirs, and you don't claim that you have a
monopoly on the part of your social scientists ?
Mr. Herring. Not for a minute.
Mr. Koch. Page 6 :
We are told, in effect, that a few organizations constitute an efficient inte-
grated whole, tending to work against the public interest.
Would you agree with me that if we were to find that there are a
few organizations who constitute an efficient integrated whole, and
further find that they are harmless, or even beneficial— do you, as a
political scientist agree it is against public policy in the United States
to let such an efficient integrated group become too powerful ?
Mr. Herring. Well, as a political scientist, if you want to drape
that cloak around me, which I haven't had the privilege of wearing
professionally and actively, I would, going back, be very hesitant
indeed to offer any unconsidered horseback judgments on a highly
hypothetical question. So don't rouse my professional instincts here
with that kind of a question.
If you phrase it, perhaps, in more down-to-earth terms, and say,
"As a man in the street, what do you think of," whatever it is, I
will try to give you a horseback judgment.
Mi>. Koch. You go around with a lot of people who have probably
voiced their opinions on matters of this sort. If you have no opinion
whatsoever, we, of course, will skip it. But if you have, it is a problem
that interests me, and if you have an opinion, I would respect it,
even though you don't.
Mr. Herring. Well, now, let's get it clear. "A few organizations
constitute an efficient integrated whole." Well, I don't know what
they are and never heard of them, and if you can name them to me,
I can respond. But I can't give any answers in general about un-
named organizations. So you name them, and I will respond.
Mr. Koch! No. The theme is this : And as I say, whether the facts
support it, I am a long way off from deciding. But there evidently
is this fear expressed that through the social-science group we may
be creating an elite group of social scientists, who are very capable
men and are very honorable men, but they are so capable that when
we have problems in government, the Government, being busy as
it is, the Congressman, et cetera, would naturally run to the experts.
Now, if it is only one group, without a competing group, and that
one group isn't elected by the people, isn't removed by the people,
isn't appointed by governors or presidents, would you say, and I am
speaking merely as a matter of good government, that that might be
an unwholesome situation ?
Mr. Herring. In the first place, I don't know who the "we" is;
whether you are using an editorial "we" or speaking for the staff or
the committee, or these disgruntled people. So, first, tell me the "we."'
But in the second place, who are fhese few, this elite ? I don't get it.
Mr. Koch. I said "if there were."
Mr Herring. Well, if vour question is. "If there is a bad elite, and
they get power and handle it badly, would that be bad"
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS §61
Mr. Koch. No. My question is : If there is a good elite, and it
gives excellent advice, is it still a matter of good government to have
those people give advice which is eagerly sought, though they are
not elected by the people ?
Mr. Herring. I didn't know that we carried our history back to
Plate.
Mr Koch. I didn't know I was talking on that subject.
Well, what would Plato say if you didn't seem to want to say it?
Mr. Herring. Plato came out in favor of guardian kings, but he
hedged around it with a lot of philosophical safeguards so that it
worked out pretty well.
If what you are trying to ask me is if I would approve of the
Government in the United States of America by some unnamed elite
of intelligent, well-meaning people, I would say : I prefer the Con-
gress of the United States.
Mr. Koch. Well, Plato might not agree with you, but I do.
Mr. Herring. The more I have studied the Congress over the years
and observed them, the more impressed I am that it is a great country.
And I don't share a good many of the animadversions that go around.
Now, as to these few organizations, I don't know what few organi-
zations you are talking about here.
Mr. Hats. Are you disagreeing with this praise of the Congress,
Mr. Koch?
Mr. Koch. That is not a charge that has been made by the staff
in their report, that there was a bad Congress.
Mr. Herring. I don't know whether you are agreeing with Plato.
Mr. Koch. I would never take him out of context.
Mr. Hats. I don't believe I have quoted from the Bible today, and
at this time I think it would be a good place to quote from the Bible,
the Book of Job, chapter 15, verse 2 : "Should a wise man utter vain
knowledge, arid fill his belly with the fciast wind ?"
The Chairman. I think that has but little place here, but we are
very glad to have it in the record, to indicate the gentleman's wide
expanse of knowledge.
Mr, Hays. I will admit I can't quote the Bible verse by verse, but
I am sure that verse had a very distinct application to the particular
hypothetical question in mind. And I would recommend to the chair-
man of the committee that he might be able to take the Book of Job
and recall some more applicable verses in it.
The Chairman. When I quote from the Book of Job, I quote on
the basis of my own reading of it.
Mr. Hats. Perhaps if the gentleman is insinuating that I got the
verse from someone else, I might go further with that insinuation
and say : Is he trying then to make some excuse for the fact that he
hasn't participated very much in the questioning so far?
You have a staff of 16. They ought to be able to furnish som^
questions.
I want you to understand one thing. With the exception of one
staff member, any help I get, Mr. Keece, is purely voluntary. Some-
body furnished me with about 30 editorials, very critical of you and
this committee, from some of the most prominent papers in the United
States. I can't afford a clipping service. I don't have a staff to ©Ifp
them. But somebody, thank God, volunteered to send them to me.
I expect to us;e them from time to time.
862 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The Chairman. In answer to the implications that you have many
times made, the Chairman doesn't consider the staff as his staff. They
have given him no questions. He has asked for no questions. He
has asked for no personal service from the staff, and I am sure Mr.
Goodwin hasn't. The only member of the committee that has a mem-
ber of the staff assigned to him personally is the gentleman from
Ohio, and I am glad that the committee is in a position to do that.
I think it is all right. But at times I do have some question whether
the committee rostrum up here ought to be made a clearinghouse for
people who have personal interests involved in the audience, to have
their views transmitted to the record, and take up the time of the
witnesses that might be appearing.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Eeece, you can question it all you please, but this
committee rostrum will be a clearinghouse at any time I feel like
making it one to get at the truth or to make any pertinent observa-
tions I want to make. And I want to say to you right here and now
that it is going to be a little difficult without that to get at the truth,
because if there was ever a loaded staff report, the ones we have had
from this staff have definitely been loaded. And it is significant to
me that out of 30 editorials I have in my possession, starting with the
New York Times and going down to one editorial that was requoted
in numerous papers, from Twin Falls, Idaho, to Lima, Ohio, and
Attleboro, Mass., there hasn't been one single editorial in any news-
paper that I have come across that hasn't been critical of the staff
report. Now, maybe the staff is right and everybody else in the
United States is wrong, including me, Mr. Eeece, but I am willing to
take my chances.
The Chairman. As the chairman said initially, he is undertaking
and I am satisfied the majority of the committee is undertaking to
make an objective study. I am satisfied that the staff has no other
purpose in mind except to help the committee make an objective study.
But influences outside of the committee do not have the responsibility
for the work of the committee. While we are very glad to have, the
views of the editors of the various papers, they are not matters of great
Concern so far as determining the direction of the study is concerned.
Mr. Hats. It is very indicative, however, of how far the gentleman
has been able to impress the reliable editors of the country with his
objectivity. And without burdening the record with any more at this
point, I might just quote from the Denver Post of May 7. The lead
editorial says:
We must keep an eye on Mr. Reeee.
Mr. Goodwin. Mr, Chairman, might I inquire if anybody knows
where we were at the detour ?
Mr. Koch. With the wind from the east.
The Chairman. By all means, I think we should continue. I am
satisfied that the witness who is now appearing before us does not feel
that he has been harassed, as have some witnesses with whom the
fentleman from Ohio has disagreed. He is not going to be harassed.
Ee is not going to be unduly burdened, I am satisfied, by anyone.
And I join in the wish of the gentleman from Massachusetts that we
might proceed without unlimited interruptions.
Mr. IIats. Well, I will have to make a little statement before that.
Of course, the gentleman isn't going to be harassed, arid of course he
isn't going to be picked on, because he is the first witness who has
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 863
come before this committee who had a sensible statement. And you
can't pick any flaws in it, or any very significant ones, and if you
could, you would be undertaking to do it. Now, let's face the facts.
That isn't the reason he isn't going to be harassed much. In other
words, in plain down-to-earth language, he isn't dealing in that little
phrase that I like so much, psychocer amies. That is high-class
English for "crackpots."
The Chairman. Before we deal with the facts, they will have to be
presented, and the gentleman from Ohio is not presenting the facts.
The witness is dealing with factual matters.
Mr. Hats. He certainly is. That is what I am trying to say, that
he is the first witness who has dealt with factual matters. I agree
with you, Mr. Chairman, on that.
The Chairman. The gentleman from Ohio is not the only one inter-
ested in facts, and I will put the reputations of the other members of
the committee up with that of the gentleman from Ohio.
Mr. Hats. You don't have to come to the defense of the other mem-
bers of the committee. Let them speak for themselves. I am sure
they are interested in the facts, some of them. The gentleman from
Massachusetts has indicated that he is interested in getting at the
facts, and I wouldn't even say but what the chairman may have had
a change of heart.
The Chairman. He has not had a change of heart, he has been inter-
ested in getting the facts all the time. The gentleman from Ohio is just
incapable of visualizing and analyzing a situation when he sees it.
Mr. Hats. Oh, I am capable of analyzing the kind of people that
you have gone out and dragged up and dredged up. And, Mr. Reece,
you must have had to dredge to find Mr. Sargent, and I could mention
1 or 2 more. You really had to dredge. You went way down with
your dredge to get them. They are not reliable, responsive. [The
chairman used the gavel.] Go ahead and hammer. I will keep right
on talking when you get through.
Mr. Goodwin. Now, Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman from Ohio
indicates that he is not going to respect the gavel, as he just indicated,
I am going to bring up here the question of whether or not these
hearings are being conducted according to the rules of the House
of Representatives, which are the rules of this committee.
Mr. Hats. Well, I have brought that question up before and been
overruled.
Mr. Goodwin. I am rather tired of this. We have an eminent wit-
ness, who must, I suspect, or he may in his innermost consciousness*
be coming to the realization that he spoke a little too early in his praise
of Congress, if this is an example of the way congressional hearings
are conducted.
Mr. Hats. I heard you say you are getting tired. Do you know
what I am getting tired of ? I am tired of you taking one position
in public with pious speeches and then running to me in secret and
saying, "You know whose side my sympathies are on." Why don't
you act like a man ?
Mr. Goodwin. Now, Mr. Chairman, I am going to ask for the rules
of the House, and I am going to say that the gentleman from Ohio
is out of order. He is impugning the motives of the chairman and the
members of this committee.
864 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hays. You wouldn't say I am not telling the truth, would
you ?
The Chairman. The gentleman is out of order. He has impugned
the integrity of every man about whom he has talked.
Mr. Hats. No, Mr. Chairman, don't make the statement that I
have impugned the integrity of every man I have talked about.
The Chairman. The other members of the committee.
Mr. Hats. No, not the other members of the committee.
In the first place, I haven't talked about any other members of the
committee than two.
The Chairman. Whether you impugn my motives is immaterial.
Mr. Hats. I wouldn't try to impugn your motives. Your motives
have been clear from the beginning. Anybody who read your diatribe
in the committee would know what your motives are.
The Chairman. The committee will proceed. Or, if not, we will
liave a motion to proceed.
Mr. Hats. I suggest that we recess for lunch. It is past 12 o'clock.
Maybe by 2 : 30, or so, we can get our motives straightened out.
The Chairman. I would regret to have the impression go out that
the committee was incapable of orderly procedure, and if the gentle-
man from Ohio wants to create a situation which brings about such
a course of action, of course, it is his responsibility and not that of
the committee.
Mr. Hats. Well, now, Mr. Chairman. What are you getting at
now? Do you want to proceed for another 20 minutes, or do you
want to adjourn now, or do you want to try to impugn my motives?
Just let me state that I wasn't the one who dreamed up the idea of
spending $150,000 of the taxpayers' money for an Alice in Wonder-
land investigation which came out with the verdict before it heard
the evidence. You did that.
The Chairman. Well, it is generally known that I was the author
of the resolution. If you think there ought to be a witness brought
in to establish the fact that I authored the resolution in the House,
I would be very glad to have a witness called to that effect. But it is
my responsibility, and I am pleased to admit it without its being
brought into evidence.
You may proceed.
Mr. Koch. We had been talking about the unknown elite, and then
you said something with respect to the unknown social scientists.
They have dedicated their lives to research or teaching, or both. They have
an extraordinarily high sense of civic duty and respect for truth.
Are you putting them up a little higher than the others in your state-
ment there ?
Mr. Herring. There is my statement, Mr. Koch.
Mr. Koch. It wasn't your intention, then, to set them up above any-
one else ?
Mr. Herring. Clearly not.
Mr. Koch. All right. On page 7, the first sentence of the first full
paragraph :
This development was possible in the United States —
comparing it with Europe —
because of our greater willingness to experiment. Our expanding universities
could give opportunity to research men who wished to explore new leads.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 865
Well, of course, in addition to that is the fact that in America the
magnetic power of money made experimenting and research more
possible here than in some of our starving European governments;
isn't that true ? I mean, the fact that there was a lot of money avail-
able here might have provided some cause for that greater research
over on this side.
Mr. Herring. You certainly can't build a cyclotron without money j
and research is costly.
The Chairman, borne of the members have noon engagements. If
there is no objection otherwise, the chairman will recess the hearing
until 2 o'clock to meet in this same room.
(Whereupon, at 12 : 10 p. m., a recess was taken until 2 p. m.)
AFTERNOON SESSION
(The hearing was resumed at 2 : 15 p. m.)
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
The chairman wishes to make a statement.
The chairman feels very deeply the responsibility which he has to
protect the witnesses who appear before the committee, the employees
of the committee, and the members of the committee, and to maintain
the dignity of the committee, the dignity of the House, and to uphold
the rules of procedure of the House and of the committees which oper-
ate under the procedures of the House. In view of the very un-
fortunate incident that happened this morning, following similar
incidents, coupled with the fact that Mr. Goodwin cannot be here
at this time due to another very important engagement which has
developed, and also to give time to reflect upon this very serious situa-
tion that confronts the committee, the committee will stand in recess
until 10 o'clock Tuesday morning.
(Whereupon, at 2 : 15 p. m., the hearing was recessed until 10 a. m.,
Tuesday, June 22, 1954.)
Note. — On Friday, June 18, 1954, the chairman notified the mem-
bers of the committee that matters requiring his absence from the city
had arisen, and the hearings scheduled for Tuesday, June 23, 1954,
was postponed until Thursday, June H4, 195 Jp. At the request of Mr.
Wayne Hays, a member of the official delegation leaving June 24 to
accompany the body of Mr, Farrington to Hawaii, the chairman again
postponed the hearings until a later date.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
FRIDAY, JULY 2, 1954
Hotjsb of Representatives,
Special Committee To Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations,
Washington, D. G.
The special committee met in executive session, pursuant to call of
the chairman, Hon. Carroll Reece, and the following resolution was
passed :
Now be it resolved that in lieu of further public hearings and m
order to expedite the investigation and to develop the facts in an
orderly and impartial manner, those foundations and others whose
testimony the committee had expected to hear orally be requested to
submit to the committee through its counsel within 15 days sworn
written statements of pertinence and reasonable length for introduc-
tion into the record — such statements to be made available to the
press — and that the committee proceed with the collection of further
evidence and information through means other than public hearings.
867
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
FRIDAY, JULY 9, 1954
House of Representatives,
Special Committee To Investigate
Tax-Exempt Foundations,
Washington, D. C
Pursuant to resolution of the committee on July 2, 1954, at the in-
struction of the chairman, the balance of the staff report prepared by
Kathryn Casey, legal analyst, on the Carnegie and Rockefeller Foun-
dations, was incorporated in the record of proceedings.
(The report follows :)
Summary or Activities or Carnegie Corp. or New York, Carnegib
Endowment for International Peace, the Rockefeller Founda-
tion
PREFACE
Comments made following presentation of the first part of this
summary of the activities of the Carnegie and Rockefeller philan-
thropic trusts indicate a rather widespread misconception among
foundation executives both as to the purpose of chronicling their
activities in certain fields, and also as to the requirements of House
Resolution 217 — under which this and all other staff reports have
been prepared.
While varying somewhat in phraseology and manner of persen-
tation, the theme of these comments was essentially the same, namely :
Why has the staff disregarded the many "good things attributable to
the foundations?
The best — and the only answer — is that the work of the staff, includ-
ing both research and the preparation of reports, has been carried out
in the light of the language in the enabling resolution by which the
committee
* * * authorized and directed to conduct a full and complete study of educa-
tional and philanthropic foundations * * * to determine if (they) are using
their resources for purposes other than (those) * * * for which they were
established, and especially * * * for un-American and subversive activities ; for
political purposes ; propaganda, or attempts to influence legislation.
There is no distinction here as between so-called good or bad activi-
ties of the foundations- — nor is there a direction to scruitinize the
activities of foundations generally and report on them — only an
admonition pinpointed toward specified types of activities.
It has been with that in mind that reports and statements of the
Carnegie and Rockefeller organizations have been carefully studied,
as well as books written about them.
869
870 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
It has been with that in mind that the summary of their activities
has been prepared.
At the same time that Carnegie and Rockefeller agencies were con-
centrating on the "chaotic condition" of education in the United States
(discussed in I), organizations bearing the same family names
were focusing attention on other types of conditions which in the opin-
ion of the trustees required improvement. While these so-called prob-
lems covered such varied fields as public health, malaria in Africa,
and exchange of profesors and students of international law, there was
an indirect relationship between them, and also between them and
education : namely, all of them were on the periphery— if not directly
in the center — of international relations and governmental activities.
That both the foundation and the endowment did carry on activities
which would directly or indirectly affect legislation is borne out by
their own statements, as found in their annual reports.
That they both engaged in propaganda — as that word is defined
in the dictionary, without regard to whether it is for good or bad
ends — -is also confirmed by the same source.
That both had as a project forming public opinion and supplying
information to the United States Government to achieve certain ob-
jectives, including an internationalist point of view, there can be no
doubt.
None of these results is inherent in the purposes of either of these
organizations.
Attached to this are abstracts from the yearly reports of both
organizations (identified as Exhibit — Carnegie Endowment for Inter-
national Peace and Exhibit — Rockefeller Foundation and arranged
chronologically), to which reference will be made from time to time
in support of statements as to the type of activity carried out by the
endowment, and occasionally short material of this nature will be
incorporated into the summary. This method has been chosen because
it will materially shorten the text of the summary itself, and still
give the members of the committee the benefit of having before them
statements made by both the endowment and the foundation.
As in part I, this portion of the summary of activities is concerned
only with stating what was done by the Carnegie and Rockefeller
agencies, the time of such activity, and the results, if any.
Purposes
The endowment by its charter was created to :
* * * promote the advancement and diffusion of knowledge and understanding
among the people of* the United States; to advance the cause of peace among
nations ; to hasten the renunciation of war as an instrument of national policy ; to
encourage and promote methods for the peaceful settlement of international
differences and for the increase of international understanding and concord ; and
to aid in the development of international law, and the acceptance of all nations
of the principles underlying such law.
To accomplish its objectives the endowment had three divisions,
each having distinct fields of activity, particularly when originally
established, but as will be seen some of their operations have become
somewhat interwoven.
The primary objective of the division of international law was the
development of it, a general agreement — accepted by all nations — as
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 871
to its rules, accompanied by establishment of better understanding of
international rights and duties, and a better sense of international
justice.
The division of economics and history had its program outlined at a
conference at Berne which laid out a plan of investigation to reveal the
causes and results of war. Many of the topics bear a rather close
resemblance to effects now found in the national life.
The purposes for which the division of intercourse and education
was instituted were the diffusion of information, and education of
public opinion regarding, not only the causes, nature, cultivation of
friendly feelings between people of different countries and effects of
war, but also means for its prevention; maintenance, promotion, and
assistance of organizations considered to be necessary or useful for
such purposes. It was first referred to as the division of propa-
ganda 1 — a name changed at the time it was formally established.
This division from the beginning expended much more money than
did the other two divisions, or the office of the secretary.
Compared with the activities of the other two divisions in these early
years those of the division of economics and history were fairly routine,
although with the outbreak of the First World War it was to start on
what developed into some 30 volumes of the economic history of that
war. While some of the economic measures which were covered in
that history and in other phases of the divisions were significant in the
light of the types of controls which were established in this country
during the Second World War, it is really with the work of the other
two divisions that this summary will primarily concern itself, since
their activities were more often in the international relations, propa-
ganda, political, and government relations areas. ,
The Rockefeller Foundation has a much more general and more
inclusive purpose : "To promote the well-being of mankind through-
out the world. " There is scarcely any lawful activity which would not
come within that classification, and undoubtedly some proscribed by
various statutes in this country might conceivably still be construed
as for the "well-being of mankind" elsewhere.
Before 1929, as mentioned in the earlier portion of this summary,
the Rockefeller Foundation confined its activities primarily to the
fields of medical education and public health, with some attention
being given to agriculture. Except in the sense that activities in each
of these fields were carried on outside of the United States, they had
relatively nothing to do with "international relations," but in the light
of later activities of the foundation in connection with "one-world"
theories of government and planning on a global scale there seems little
doubt that there is at least a causative connection.
The activities of the foundation are now (and have been for some
time) carried on by four divisions : Division of medicine and public
health, division of natural sciences and agriculture, division of social
sciences (including a section entitled international relations), and
division of humanities. ,
It is impossible to discuss the activities of the endowment and the
foundation entirely by subject headings, because one merges into the
other, and therefore they will be discussed in relation to the following :
International relations, governmental relations, political activities, and
propaganda.
1 Finch History.
872 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
As mentioned earlier, the primary interests of these organizations
were in divergent areas, but from 1929 the activities of both the endow-
ment and the foundation were along more or less parallel lines —
although again the descriptive phraseology of the endowment is usually
much more direct than that of the foundation as will be seen by quota-
tions from annual reports of each organization.
Because of the characteristic similarity, graphically illustrated by
the chart at the end of this summary, the activities of both organiza-
tions from 1929 on will be discussed together. However, since the
endowment's program began prior to that time, details of it will be
included first.
Endowment activities — 1911-29
The endowment was dedicated to achieving world peace and in
doing that it utilized every method it deemed appropriate and effective.
One method chosen was international law — and it immediately set
about to establish a coordinated national system of instruction through-
out the country in that subject. The 1930 yearbook, page 108, refers
to a meeting of international law and international relations professors
who met "in conference in order to discuss and to agree upon the best
methods to reach and educate the youth — primarily of the United
States — in the principles of international law and the basis of foreign
relations."
In addition to international law, another method selected by the
endowment as a means of achieving international amity, was what
throughout the years is referred to in such terms as "education of
public opinion," "development of the international mind," "enlighten-
~ ment of public opinion," and "stimulation of public education." This
* last phrase it may be noted was used by Alger Hiss in his Recom-
mendations of the President, pages 16 and 17 of the 1947 yearbook,
in which he also recommended "most earnestly" that the endowment's
program for the period ahead be constructed "primarily for the sup-
V port and assistance/ of the United Nations." At times these phrases
were coupled with "diffusing information" or "dissemination of in-
^ formation" but more frequently they were not. This part of the
endowment's work was not confined to the United States — it also
selected material to be distributed abroad through various means,
and circulated foreign pamphlets on various subjects in this country.
There is little doubt that the endowment regarded its work as educa-
tional and as fostering world peace — and there is equally little doubt
that the work was in the international relations field, and consistently
of a propaganda nature. For example, as far back as June 1917 it
cooperated with the Academy of Political Science on a National Con-
ference on Foreign Relations of the United States, the stated purpose
being "to organize a campaign of education among the people of the
United States on the international situation then existing."
Again in 1926 the endowment sponsored a conference on interna-
tional problems and relations — the aim being to "create and diffuse in
the United States a wider knowledge of the facts and a broader and
more sympathetic interest in international problems and relations."
Several of the topics assume significance in the light of later events —
•"International cooperation in public health and social welfare" and
'"Economic adjustments."
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 873
Viewed in the light of what the endowment did then and later in
its campaign of education, and "to create and diffuse * * * a wider
knowledge" as well as the agencies it chose to carry them out, these
early ventures seem rather significant.
Throughout the years the reports cover such subjects as inter-
' national relations clubs, international mind alcoves, international re-
lations centers, international economic cooperation, exchange profes-
sors, international visits, and the like. Its relationship with the
American Association of International Conciliation continued until
1924 when its activities were merged with those of the division.
According to Dr. Finch that organization was selected by Dr. Butler
as "the chief propaganda agency of the division" (p. 446 of Finch
History).
The endowment was really just getting started when the First
World War raised serious obstacles to its work abroad. However, be-
fore that event it had selected as "agencies of propaganda" (a name
later discarded) various of the peace societies, in which Mr. Carnegie
had been intensely interested.
However, some projects of importance were underway. The divi-
sion of international law had surveyed the situation existing with re-
gard to the teaching of that subject in colleges and universities in the
United States, and by the time war broke out in 1914 compiled a tabula-
tion showing the professors, instructors, and lecturers on international
law and related subjects during the collegiate year 1911-12.
The immediate result of this was placing the subject of fostering
"the study of international law" on the agenda of the American
Society of International Law in 1914, at the request of the endowment.
From that beginning grew the great influence of the endowment in
this field's increased facilities for the study of international law, uni-
form instruction differentiation between undergraduate and graduate
instructions, and inclusion of a host of "related" subjects. According
to the Carnegie Endowment History by Dr. Finch, a check by the divi-
sion on the effects of its efforts showed the material increase both in
number of hours and the enlargement of classes which he estimates as
45 percent from 1911 to 1922, and a still further increase by 1928. He
also mentioned that in 1928 there were six former holders of the en-
dowment's international law fellowships teaching in foreign univer-
sities (p. 319 of the Finch History) .
Fellowships in international law
At the recommendation of the American Society of International
Law (made December 1916) the endowment established fellowships
for the study of international law and related subjects. There were
5 awarded annually to graduate students holding the equivalent of a
bachelor's degree and 5 to teachers of international law or related sub-
jects with 1 year of previous teaching experience.
A total of 212 fellowships were awarded from 1917 to 1936 (about
one-sixth being renewals), of which 128 were to students and 84 to
teachers. Dr. Finch states that while complete records are not avail-
able, information in the files and in Who's Who as well as personal
contacts show that two-thirds entered the teaching profession and he
then continues (pp. 323 et seq.) :
As the years went by, most of these teachers improved their positions. Some
became senior professors or heads of departments. Three became university
874 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
presidents : Colgate W. Darden, Jr., is president of the University of Virginia ;
Norman A. M. MacKenzie became president of the University of New Brunswick
and later of the University of British Columbia ; Henry M. Wriston, after serving
as president of Lawrence College, is now president of Brown University;*
Bessie C. Randolph became president of Hollins College, Virginia, and Bernice
Brown (Cronkhite) is dean of Radcliffe College. Frederick S. Dunn, of Johns
Hopkins University, is now director of the Yale Institute of International Studies.
Two former fellows were elected to the United States Congress, Charles West, of
Ohio, and Colgate W. Darden, of Virginia. Mr. Darden then served as Governor
of Virginia before he accepted the presidency of the university of his State.
Leadership has been assumed by former international law fellows in the
organization and direction of community and regional centers in different areas
of the country for the promotion of international understanding and cooperation
in international organization. Keener C. Frazer, professor of political science of
the University of North Carolina, became director of the Southern Council on
International Relations. J. Eugene Harley, professor of political science at the
University of Southern California, became director for the Center for Interna-
tional Understanding at Los Angeles, and chairman of the Commission to Study
the Organization of Peace in the southern California region ; Charles E. Martin,
professor of international law and head of the department of political science
of the University of Washington, is chairman of the Institute of Public Affairs
of Seattle, and of the Northwest Commission to Study the Organization of Peace.
Brooks Emeny, of Cleveland, Ohio, was director of foreign affairs council of
that city, and then became president of the Foreign Policy Association in New
York. Another former endowment fellow, Vera Micheles (Dean) is the director
of research of the same organization.
Some 16 former fellows are now in the service of the Department of State
occupying positions of varying responsibilities. The most outstanding of this
group is Philip C. Jessup, now Ambassador-at-Large, and representing the Gov-
ernment of the United States in the United Nations and other important inter-
national conferences attempting to restore peace to the world. At least two
former endowment fellows who entered the military service were appointed to
responsible positions requiring a knowledge of international law. Hardy C.
Dillard, of the University of Virginia, was director of studies of the United States
Army's School of Military Government located at that university, and later occu-
pied the same position at the National War College in Washington. Charles
Fairman, of Stanford University, was Chief of the International Law Division of
the Office of Theater Judge Advocate in the European Theater of Operations.
Several former endowment fellows were selected by the Government to go on
cultural and educational missions to the occupied areas, and two of them served
as consultants to General MacArthur in Tokyo (Claude A. Buss of the University
of Southern California, and Kenneth W. Colegrove of Northwestern University).
A former endowment fellow, Francis O. Wilcox, is chief of staff of the Senate-
Committee on Foreign Relations, assisted by another former fellow Thorsten
Kalijarvi.
Of special interest is the career of John H. Spencer, of Harvard, after studying .
under a fellowship. He was appointed legal adviser to Emperor Hailie Selassie,
of Ethiopia before World War II. He returned to the United States and served
in the State Department and United States Navy while the Italian Army occu-
pied that country, and then returned to his former post in Addis Ababa at the
urgent request of the Emperor, supported by the Department of State. John
R. Humphrey, an international law fellow from McGill University, Montreal,
became Director of the Division on Human Rights of the United Nations Secre-
tariat.
He concludes with this statement :
The immediate objective, namely, to provide an adequate number of teachers
competent to give instruction in international law and related subjects, and thus
to aid colleges and universities in extending and improving the teaching of these
subjects, was demonstrably achieved. From this selective educational group
have emerged leaders of opinion as well as of action in the conduct of inter-
national relations directed toward the goal for which the endowment was
founded. ■'■-.'
2 Dr. Wriston was elected a trustee of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
In 1043. He is also a trustee of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching
and of the World Peace Foundation. He holds membership in several learned societies, is
a former president of the Association of American Colleges and president of the Association
of American Universities.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 875
At the same time, the division of intercourse and education was set-
ting out on a policy stated by Dr. Butler to be :
To lay little stress upon those aspects of peace propaganda that are primarily
rhetorical and feeling in character, but rather to organize throughout the world
centers of influence and constructive policy that may be used in the years to
come as the foundation upon which to erect a superstructure of international
confidence and good will and therefore of peace.
In view of the division's activities later in behalf of the League of
Nations and the United Nations, this has a somewhat prophetic ring.
Compared with the activities of the other divisions, the activities of
the division of intercourse and education were much more varied, and
the yearbooks contain innumerable references to its activities which
indicate that they were more concentrated in the fields covered by this
summary.
One of the very first actions of the division in 1911 was the appoint-
ment of special correspondents throughout the world to report on con-
ditions in their respective countries and on public opinion here regard-
ing international problems between their governments and other
nations. When, in the opinion of the division, it was proper, extracts
were given to the American press. The decision of which to give and
which to withhold was entirely within the discretion of the division,
and that undoubtedly meant Dr. Butler. In view of his intense desire
to achieve peace, and his equally firm conviction that an international
organization could best accomplish that, it is entirely conceivable that
his judgment as to the material to be released might be influenced by
his own convictions and desires — and this would be equally true in the
case of any human being.
The correspondents also made the endowment's work known in their
countries through the press, interviews and speeches, and officially
represented it at undertakings of international cooperation and under-
standing.
This system was discontinued in 1930 because by that time the di-
vision had established —
such a network of worldwide connections involving continuous correspondence
as to make it no longer necessary to employ the services of special correspondents.
Just after the war started in 1914, the division engaged prominent
persons to lecture before colleges, chambers of commerce, clubs, and
similar audiences on the subject of past and present history as it related
to current international problems. Among the speakers were David
Starr Jordan; Hamilton Wright Mabie, and George W. Kirch wey.
Dr. Butler instructions as to the endowment's purpose in sponsoring
these lectures were,
This work is to educate and enlighten public opinion and not to carry on a special
propaganda in reference to the unhappy conditions which now prevail throughout
a large part of the world. It is highly important that purely contentious ques-
tions be avoided so far as possible and that attention be fixed on those underlying *
principles of international conduct, of international law, and of international or-
ganization which must be agreed upon and enforced if peaceful civilization is to
continue (letter to Dean Frederick P. Keppel, May 28, 1915-16 yearbook, p. 67) .
International mind alcoves
These were described in the yearbook of the endowment and typical
references are given in the exhibit. Following the entry of the United
States into World War I "a systematic purchase and distribution of
books and pamphlets dealing with international relations generally
49720— 54— pt. 1 56
876 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
and the causes and effects of war, as well as the possible terms of peace,
was begun by the division of intercourse and education. Dr. Butler
is generally credited with coining the phrase "international mind" and
from the time the distribution to libraries was begun they were known
as "international mind alcoves" and so referred to in the annual
reports.
The endowment has described the books selected and distributed by
it as "authoritative and unbiased books of a type suitable to interest
the general reader dealing with the daily life, customs and history of
other countries." In that connection, among the books distributed to
these alcoves and to the international relations clubs (and interna-
tional relations centers) are those referred to in a memorandum which
forms an exhibit to this summary, and is entitled "Exhibit — Carnegie,
Books Distributed." The endowment has contributed $804,000 to
this activity. Dr. Colegrove's comments on some of these volumes
indicate there was only one viewpoint presented — that of the one
world internationalist — and books written from a strictly nationalist
point of view were not included.
International relations clubs and conferences
These clubs in the United States were in part, an outgrowth of
groups of European students organized by the World Peace Founda-
tion, and known as Corda Fratres. The endowment at the request
of the World Peace Foundation contributed to the Eighth Interna-
tional Congress of Students, and the following year (1914) the di-
vision of intercourse and education began to actively organize what it
described as International Polity Clubs in colleges and universities
throughout the country, for the purpose of stimulation of interest in
international problems in the United States. The name was changed
in 1919 to International Relations Clubs, and while interest diminished
for a few years after World War I, the clubs began a steady annual
increase before too long, which has been sustained to the present time.
About 1924 the first conference was organized of a federation of
clubs in the Southern States, which became known as the Southeast
International Relations Clubs Conference. The idea quickly spread
and a dozen such regional centers were formed. (From 1921 until 1946
the endowment contributed $450,425 toward this program.)
Here again the purpose of the endowment is stated (International
Relations Club Handbook, 1926) to be :
to educate and enlighten public opinion. It is not to support any single view
as to how best to treat the conditions which now prevail throughout the world,
but to fix the attention of students on those underlying principles of interna-
tional conduct, of international law, and of international organization which
must be agreed upon and applied if peaceful civilization is to continue.
However, mere statement of purpose as frequently pointed out by
.the Bureau of Internal Revenue is not sufficient — the activities must
follow the purpose ; and those of the endowment do not bear out its
statement "not to support any single view." Throughout its reports,
by the books it has distributed, by the agencies it has used for various
projects, by the endowment graduates which have found their places
in Government — the endowment has put forward only one side of the
question, that of an international organization for peace. It has not.
sponsored projects advocating other means.
TAX^&XEMPT FOUNDATIONS 877
The endowment's evaluation of these clubs is contained in frequent
references in its reports, only one of which is included in the Exhibit —
Carnegie, that from the yearbook for 1943, pages 37-38.
Dr. Johnson in response to a letter requesting information as to
the formation and activities of these clubs, wrote the committee on
April 29, 1954, and both the request and the reply are included in
Exhibit— Carnegie.
These clubs were formed in 1914 and have operated for 40 years in
colleges, universities, and high schools. In 1938 according to Dr.
Johnson there were 1,103 clubs: 265 in high schools and 685 in col-
leges and universities throughout the United States ; with 11 scattered
in the Philippines, Hawaii, Alaska, Canal Zone, and Puerto Rico ; 24
in the United Kingdom, 34 in 14 Latin American countries, 22 in
China, 9 in Japan, 2 in Korea; and the remaining 51 in Canada,
Egypt, Greece, Iran, Iraq, Siam, New Zealand, Australia, South
Africa, Syria, and India.
Dr. Johnson's concluding statement that "a contribution was made
to a better understanding of the responsibilities which our country
now bears as a world power" is quite understandable under the cir-
cumstances. Some of the other aspects of these clubs will be discussed
in connection with the Foreign Policy Association.
Visiting Carnegie professors
In addition to the exchange professors of the division of interna-
tional law the division of intercourse and education in 1927 initiated
its own plan of exchange professors. It was inaugurated by sending
abroad the directors of the other two divisions as visiting professors
that year, Dr. James Scott Brown going to lecture at universities in
Latin America and Spain, and Dr. James T. Shotwell being sent to
Berlin. The other prominent Americans closely identified with this
field who went abroad to represent the endowment were Dr. David P.
Barrows, former president of the University of California, and an
elected trustee of the endowment in 1931; and Dr. Henry Suzzalli,
former president of the University of "Washington at Seattle and
chairman of the board of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advance-
ment of Teaching. The exchange professors were not restricted to
international law and political science, but included professors of
public law, history, and other subjects.
The endowment also arranged for European tours for newspaper
editors, and a reciprocal tour of the United States for a group from
Europe.
Political activities
In addition to these projects already described, the endowment quite
early in its career (1913-14) had a brush with the United States Sen-
ate regarding Senator Root's statements on the floor of the Senate
during the controversy over exemption of American coastwise vessels
from payment of Panama Canal tolls.
The Senate Committee on Judiciary was directed to investigate
the charge that "a lobby is maintained to influence legislation pending
in the Senate." (Pt. 62, March 13, 1914, pp. 4770-4808.) Apparently,
there had been some question as to whether the exceedingly widespread
distribution of : *tfte' Senator's speeches by the endowment had been at
J*
878 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Government expense. In his history, Dr. Finch discussing the incident
says:
There was little real need for any outside investigation of the work of the
endowment. From the beginning the trustees regarded themselves as the admin-
istrators of a quasi-public trust fund. Complete accounts of all activities and of
expenditures detailed as much as practicable within reasonable printed limits,
were published annually in the yearbook beginning with 1911. In it were given
the names of the trustees, officers and membership of committees, and the full
texts of the reports of the executive committee, the Secretary, the treasurer,
and of the directors of the three divisions. Summaries were published in thfr
yearbook of the meetings of the board of trustees, with the texts of their
resolutions and the amount and general purposes of their appropriations. Lists
with bibliographical data were added of all endowment publications up to that;
time. The yearbook was obtainable free of charge upon application. It had a
regular mailing list of 5,000 to 10,000 addresses, which included all the important
newspaper offices in the United States and many in foreign countries.
The endowment also actively advocated passage of the reciprocal
trade agreements legislation, adherence to the Anglo-American agree-
ments and carried on various other activities of a political nature, as
the extracts from their annual reports confirm.
After World "War I the endowment's trustees seemed to have been
divided in their ideas on how best to begin anew their efforts to build
a peaceful world. . Some members of the board were still of the opinion
that international law, arbitration treaties and the like offered the
greatest hope, while others looked to an "international organization'
of nations, as the best means to accomplish this objective.
The matter was resolved, officially at least, by the endowment putting
its strength behind the League of Nations or failing that, adherence to
the World Court. Here again, the attitude and activities of the
endowment can be readily ascertained by reference to the exhibit in
which only a few of the many such statements have been included.
Early in its career the endowment began the close working arrange-
ments with the Federal Government which have continued down to
the present time. Immediately after the United States entered World
War I the trustees passed a resolution offering to the Government "the
services of its division of international law, its personnel and equip-
ment for dealing with the pressure of international business incident
to the war."
The Secretary of State first asked that the division translate and
publish the complete text of the proceedings of the two Hague Con-
ferences and preliminary copies were made available to the American
Commission to 'Negotiate Peace at Paris in 1918. The division also
aided in the preparatory work for the peace conference, and the mate-
rial for the use of the American delegation was selected (at a cost of"
$30,000 paid by the endowment) by a committee of three appointed by
the Secretary of State — the director of the division of international
law, the Solicitor of the Department, Lester H. Woolsey, and a special
assistant in the Department, David Hunter Miller. Much of the
material was the work of regular division personnel and all manu-
scripts were edited by it.
The director of the division of international law was one of the two-
principal legal advisers of the American Commission to Negotiate
Peace, the assistant director, Dr. Finch, was assistant legal adviser, as
were the chief division assistant, Henry G. Crocker, and Prof. Amos.
S. Hershey (who was added to the professional staff to aid in the work
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 879
for the State Department) ; and George D. Gregory accompanied the
American group as secretarial-assistant translator.
, The endowment also took part in the conference on the limitation of
armament and pacific relations in 1921-22, Elihu Root then president
of the endowment being one of the official United States delegates and
James Brown Scott, director of the division of international law, one
of the legal advisers.
Here again, the endowment offered the Secretary of State its co-
operation, which was accepted and a few weeks later Secretary of
State Hughes suggested that the endowment issue a series of pam-
phlets on the principal problems coming before the Conference.
President Root reporting to the board on April 21, 1922 said :
I really do not know how the far-eastern work of the late Conference Upon
the Limitation of Armament could have been done without McMurray's book
which had just a few months before been published by the endowment. The
whole process of ranging the nine nations represented in the Conference upon
a basis of agreement for the treatment of Chinese questions so as to facilitate
the heroic efforts of the Chinese people to develop an effective and stable self-
government would have been exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, if we had not
had those two big volumes published by the endowment upon our tables for
access at any moment. We were continually referring to them and the members
could turn to such a page and find such a treaty and such an agreement and have
the real facts readily accessible.
When the Rockefeller Foundation turned to the social sciences and
the humanities as the means to advance the "well-being" of humanity,
the section entitled "Social Sciences" in the annual report was set up
under the following headings, which remained unchanged until 1935 :
General Social Science Projects : Cooperative Undertakings.
Research in Fundamental Disciplines.
Interracial and International Studies.
Current Social Studies.
Research in the Field of Public Administration.
Fundamental Research and Promotion of Certain Types of Organization.
Fellowships in the Social Sciences.
The report states that the arrangement was for the purpose of
"simplification and in order to emphasize the purpose for which ap-
propriations have been made."
In the decade 1929-38 the foundation's grants to social-science
projects amounted to $31.4 millions and grants were made to such
agencies as the Brookings Institution, the Social Science Research
Council, the National Research Council, the Foreign Policy Associa-
tion, the Council on Foreign Relations, and the Institute of Pacific
Relations in this country as well as a dozen or more in other countries,
and the Fiscal Committee of the League of Nations.
The original plunge of the foundation into the field of social science
was at the instigation of Beardsley Ruml, according to Raymond
Fosdick (The Story of the Rockefeller Foundation, p. 194), who in
1922 was appointed director of the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Me-
morial when consolidation of that organization with the foundation
was already being considered. During the 7 years, 1922—29 the me-
morial operated under Ruml's guidance it concentrated on the field of
social sciences and spent $41 million. Referring to the work of the
memorial Dr. Fosdick writes :
He (Ruml) always insisted that his job was with social scientists, rather than
with social science. The sums which, under his leadership, were used to stimulate
880 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
scientific investigation were perhaps not large in comparison with aggregate
expenditures for social sciences, but they represented a new margin of re-
sources, and they were employed dramatically at a strategic moment. Chan-
cellor Hutchins of the University of Chicago, speaking in 1929, summed up the
verdict in words which a longer perspective will probably not overrule: "The
Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial, in its brief but brilliant career, did more
than any other agency to promote the social sciences in the United States."
Dr. Ruml was the head of the memorial for all but the first 4 years
of its existence.
Since the foundation absorbed the memorial's program and carries
on all its activities relating to government and international relations
under the heading of social sciences, these comments by Dr. Fosdick
and Dr. Hutchins have equal applicability to the work of the founda-
tion in these fields.
There is ample evidence from the foundation's yearbooks that it
carried on activities in the field of government of a political and
propaganda nature, as well as in the field of international relations,,
and examples of this will be found in the "Exhibit — Rockefeller.' 7
Included in that exhibit also are the statement of Mr. Chester I.
Barnard in the Cox committee hearings, page 563, speaking of his
work as "the consultant of the State Department * * * on different
things from time to time," and quotations from Dr. Fosdick's book on
the foundation.
In 1935 the foundation's activities again were reorganized, and that
year the section "Social Sciences" begins: "In 1935 the foundation
program in the social sciences were reorganized along new lines with
emphasis upon certain definite fields of interest."
Major changes were termination of financial aid to general institu-
tional research in the social sciences here and abroad, elimination of
grants for "the promotion of basic economic research," for community
organization and planning (unless within the scope of one of the new
fields of interest) , cultural anthropology, and schools of social work.
From then on the foundation was to concentrate on three areas of
study: Social security, international relations, and public adminis-
tration.
Subsequent statements made by the foundation concerning its work
in each of these fields will be discussed in the concluding portions of
this summary.
The same year that the foundation publicly announced that its
activities in the field of social science would be confined to interna-
tional relations and relations with government, the endowment was
engaged in a project related to both which exemplifies the methods
frequently used by the endowment in attempting to achieve world
peace. This project was the calling of an unofficial conference in
March of 1935 to consider possible steps to promote trade and reduc-
tion of unemployment, stabilization of national monetary systems, and
better organization of the family of nations to give security and
strengthen the foundations on which international peace must rest.
From this grew the reorganization of the National Peace Confer-
ence, composed of 32 newly organized city and State peace councils,
with its committees of experts appointed to supply factual data and
analyses of international affairs. Among the commissions were ones,
on economics and peace, national defense, the world community, and
the Far East.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 881
Of particular interest is the fact that the director of the League of
Nations Association, Clark M. Eichelberger, later to occupy the same
position with the Association for the United Nations, was placed in
charge of the endowment's educational program. Dr. Finch's com-
ment on this indicates the extensive nature of Dr. Eichelberger's
contacts through this assignment.
* * * He traveled extensively throughout the United States developing con-
tacts which resulted in the adoption of programs within numerous organizations,
some not hitherto reached by the endowment. Among them were : United States
Department of Agriculture Extension Service through its county and home-
demonstration agents and discussion specialists in the field ; extension services
of State agricultural colleges; American Farm Bureau Federation and Asso-
ciated Women of the Federation ; National Farmers Educational and Cooperative
Union of America; Junior Farmers Union; 4r-H Clubs; National Grange; in-
formal community forums and Federal forums sponsored by the United States
Bureau of Education; classes and forums conducted by the Works Progress
Administration ; adult education ; workers' education and labor unions ; churches,
women's clubs, university groups, Rotary, and other service clubs. Leadership-
training conferences were established for the training of organizational repre-
sentatives from which the best qualified were selected for discussion leaders.
Literature was prepared by the division and supplied for use in discussion
programs. Basic pamphlet material of the Department of State was also used.
The radio played an important part. Local stations were supplied with electrical
transcriptions of addresses on world economic problems.
Dr. Finch has another comment as to the methods used in carrying
on this "educational program" :
The educational program did not necessarily start with the subject of
international relations as such, but with topics which would help the member-
ship of these groups to recognize and analyze the economic, social, and educa*
tional problems within their own organizations and communities, and to under-
stand the factors, local, national, and international which create these problems ;
to discover to what extent each economic group could contribute toward the
solution of their common problems, and to what extent solutions of local prob-
lems were dependent upon national and international relations; to know and
use the sources of information on public and international problems.
The National Peace Conference extended this "educational" work
in 1938 by undertaking "an educational campaign for world economic
cooperation," using Peaceful Change — Alternative to War, published
by the Foreign Policy Association, as the basic handbook. According
to Dr. Nicholas Murray Butler (1938 yearbook, p. 48) this campaign
was undertaken to emphasize the importance of putting into effect
the recommendations of the joint committee of the endowment and
the International Chamber of Commerce, and had two phases. The
first, from September 1937 to March 1938, was on education in the
fundamentals of world economic cooperation followed by a nation-
wide conference scheduled for March 1938 in Washington, D. C., to
appraise the campaign up to that time, "to consider recommendations
of practical policy prepared by a committee of experts under the direc-
tion of Prof. Eugene Staley, and to formulate conclusions on specific
Government policies." The second phase was another campaign of
education from March 1938 to January 1939.
It is apparent merely from reading the Rockefeller Foundation's
list of its "fields of interest" that in all probability it would frequently
contribute to the identical project and the identical organization, re-
ceiving contributions from the endowment. This is exactly what hap-
pened, and while in the amount of time available it is not possible
to itemize the projects, it is possible to select typical examples from
the agencies to which it contributed.
882 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
As a matter of fact, the endowment and the foundation concen-
trated their grants among the same agencies in practically every case.
Moreover, as it will become apparent, at times a joint activity (in the
sense that both contributed funds to a particular project or organ-
ization) was related to both Government and to international rela-
tions. Several of such organizations aided by both organizations will
be discussed separately because they are particularly pertinent to the
relations of the foundations to both Government and international
relations.
Institute of International Education
This was one of the first agencies to receive contributions from the
foundation when it enlarged its sphere of activity to include the
social sciences, and it has continued to make grants every year since
then.
The institution was authorized by the executive committee of the
endowment at Dr. Butler's instigation in 1919, as an integral part
of the Division of Intercourse and Education for the—
purpose of fostering and promoting closer international relations and under-
standing between the people of the United States and other countries, to act
as a clearinghouse of Information and advice on such matters and to systematize
the exchange of visits of teachers and students between colleges and universities
of the United States and those of foreign countries.
It arranged itineraries and lecture tours for visiting prof essors and
circuited the visiting professors among the colleges and universities
of the United States, including visits to the International Relations
Clubs.
In Department of State publication 2137, page 9, entitled "The
Cultural Cooperation Program, 1938-43," there is the following state-
ment as to the place the institute came to occupy in international
education :
The Institute of International Education in New York, a private organization,
began after the First World War to persuade universities in the United States
and in Europe to offer full scholarships (tuition, board, and lodging) for exchange
students. More than 100 universities in the United States and a similar number
in Europe cooperated. The institute reported that during the period' 1920-38
approximately 2,500 foreign students were brought to the United States under
this plan, and 2,357 American students were placed in foreign universities.
The cash value of scholarships given by American universities to this group
of foreign students was $1,970,000, and the scholarships to American students
abroad were valued at $917,000. This plan is especially significant because it
won support from so large a number of private institutions, each of which was
willing to invest its own funds in the exchange of students.
The endowment also continued its contributions to this institute —
funds from both organizations amounting to approximately $5
million.
Foreign Policy Association
This organization received grants from the endowment, and, in
addition, many of its pamphlets were distributed to the International
Mind Alcoves and the International Relations Clubs.
In that connection, one of the persons whose books were distributed
by the endowment was Vera Micheles Dean, who is referred to later in
this summary. Mrs. Dean was given an international law scholarship
by the endowment in 1925-26.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 883
The Rockefeller Foundation between 1934 and 1945 (when it made a
tapering grant of $200,000) contributed $625,000 to the research, pub-
lication and educational activities of the Foreign Policy Association^
In 1950, when it terminated aid to the association, the foundation in its
annual report indicated that its reason for doing so was that it was
operating largely on a stable and self-supporting basis. However, in
1952 the Adult Education Fund of the Ford Foundation gave $335,-
000 to the association.
The Rockefeller Foundation in addition to contributing funds to the
Foreign Policy Association has referred to the Headline Series in its-
annual reports, and, while not fulsome in praise, there is no doubt that
the foundation approved of them — the 1950 annual report (exhibit —
Rockefeller) refers to these books as the "popular Headline Books,"
with details on problems of importance to Americans and to the world.
Dr. Johnson, after describing the International Relations Clubs
(exhibit — - Carnegie) adds that these clubs have now become associ-
ated with the Foreign Policy Association. In that connection, the
McCarran committee hearings contain frequent references to the inter-
locking association of that organization with the Institute of Pacific
Relations, and includes, among other exhibits, No. 1247, which dis-
cussed the Headline book, Russia at War, and refers to the good job
Eerformed by the Foreign Policy Association of promoting Mrs.
>ean's pamphlet, through the regular channels.
Time has not permitted extensive inspection of the volumes pub-
lished by the Foreign Policy Association, but Vera Micheles Dean who
was the research director of the Foreign Policy Association and editor
of its research publications is referred to frequently in the McCarran
committee reports on the Institute of Pacific Relations. She is the au-
thor of Russia — Menace or Promise? one of the Headline Series, as
well as the United States and Russia (1948) .
While the Association refers to itself as a nonprofit American organ-
ization founded to carry on research and educational activities to aid
in the understanding and constructive development of American for-
eign policy which does not seek to promote any one point of view to-
ward international affairs, this statement is somewhat equivocal both
in view of the nature of its publications, and also because in those re-
viewed little attention was paid to the possibility of a nationalist
point of view as opposed to an internationalist one.
Another of the Headline Series, World of Great Powers, by Max
Lerner (1947) , contains the following language :
There are undoubtedly valuable elements In the capitalist economic organi-
zations. The economic techniques of the future are likely to be an amalgam of
the techniques of American business management with those of Government
ownership, control, and regulation. For the peoples of the world, whatever their
philosophies, are moving toward similar methods of making their economic
system work.
If democracy is to survive, it too must move toward socialism — a socialism
guarded by the political controls of a State that maintains the tradition of in-
tellectual consent and the freedom of political opposition. And the imperatives
of survival are stronger than the winds of capitalist doctrine.
This is an arduous road for democracy to travel, and it may not succeed. But
it is the only principle that can organize the restless energies of the world's
peoples. * * * .
884 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Lerner's attitude insofar as Russia is concerned is indicated by
this language on pages 34 and 35, after stating that both Russia and
the United States merely want world peace and security :
The successive layers of fear and suspicion on both sides can be stripped away
only when both show a creativeness in approaching each other halfway. This
would mean, for America, reopening the question of granting Russia a loan
or credits for the purchasing of machines and machine tools. These the Soviet
Union sorely needs for peacetime production and for lifting the terribly low
standards of living of the Russian people. For Russia it would mean a com-
mitment to return to the world economic and trade councils from which it with-
drew after Bretton Woods.
Moving from the economic to the political level, it would mean a willingness
on America's part to grant greater United Nations control of Japan and the
former Japanese island bases in the Pacific, and on Russia's part to be less
truculent about her sphere of influence in eastern Europe. Given such economic
and political agreements, a meeting of minds would become possible on the
international control of atomic energy, which is the central question both of
disarmament and peace.
One further illustration of the internationalist trend of the Foreign
Policy Association will be found in another Headline Series volume,
Freedom's Charter, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, by
Dr. O. Frederick Nolde, which deals with the covenants on human
rights without referring to the criticisms made of their possible effects
on the Constitution and its Bill of Rights, and the entire tone of the
pamphlet is one of praise for the universal declaration. By a tech-
nique frequently found in pamphlets which are pro-United Nations
and its activities, Dr. Nolde obliquely places those who disagree with
the universal declaration — for whatever reason — in a category with
the Soviet Union who also object to certain phases, for example : "So-
viet emphasis on state sovereignty appeared in other contexts, also.
Many delegates contended that the universal protection of man's rights
will require a measurable yielding of national sovereignty. As previ-
ously pointed out, the U. S. S. R. took radical exception to this
contention."
Up to the time this summary was written no book or pamphlet of
a contrary point of view (published by the association) has been
found — which raises the question of a comparison between the theory
expressed by the association not to seek to promote any one point of
view and of the type of books and pamphlets it sponsors and publishes.
Council on Foreign Relations
Here again the two organizations — the Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace and the Rockefeller Foundation — have been
substantial contributors to the work of an agency in the international
field. And again, as in the case of the Foreign Policy Association, it
is evident from the publications of the council that its approach is not
an unbiased one.
The Council has published studies by the following :
Public Opinion and Foreign Policy — Lester Markel and others.
International Security — Philip C. Jessup.
World Economy in Transition and Raw Materials in Peace and War— Eugene
Staley.
The Challenge to Isolation, 1937-40— William L. Langer and S. T. Everett
Gleason.
Dr. Langer was later selected by the Council and the foundation to
prepare a history of American foreign policy from 1939 to 1946, which
has been stated to be a one-sided interpretation rather than an objec-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATION'S 885
live history of American foreign policy. No grants have since been
made (so far as can be ascertained from their records) by either the
'Council or the foundation for preparation of a contrary evaluation
-of this subject — and neither organization supported the volume by
Professor Tansill published a year or so ago, which gives the other side
-of the picture.
It is interesting to note that shortly after World War II exploded
in September 1939, representatives of the Council visited the Depart-
ment of State to offer its assistance on the problems the conflict had
-created and offered to undertake work in certain fields, without formal
assignment of responsibility on one side or restriction of independent
action on the other. A tentative outline was prepared for four groups
of experts to undertake research on: Security and Armaments Prob-
lems, Economic and Financial Problems, Political Problems, and Ter-
ritorial Problems. These came to be known as the War and Peace
Studies, and were financed by the Rockefeller Foundation under the
Council's committee on studies.
About February 1941, the informal character of the relationship
between the State Department and the Council ceased The Depart-
ment established a Division of Special Research composed of Eco-
nomic, Political, Territorial, and Security Sections, and engaged the
secretaries who had been serving with the Council groups to partici-
pate in the work of the new Division.
Following that, in 1942, a fifth group was added to the War and
Peace Studies, called the Peace Aims Group. This group had been
carrying on discussions regarding the claims of different European
nations, the relation of such claims to each other as well as to the cur-
rent foreign policy of the United States, and their relationship to
-eventual postwar settlements. 3 The State Department particularly
commended the work of this last group. That same year the rela-
tionship between the council and the Department became even more
close — the Department appointed Isaiah Bowman and James T. Shot-
well as members of its newly organized "Advisory Committee on
Postwar Foreign Policies." In addition to their association with the
Council of Foreign Relations both had also been associated with
'Carnegie organizations.
Particular interest attaches to this activity on the part of the coun-
cil. First of all, the action of the council in offering its services
closely parallels the action of the Carnegie endowment in both the
First and Second World Wars, and in view of Mr. Shotwell's back-
ground it seems likely that it was somewhat a case of taking a leaf
from the same book.
The second reason is because the research secretaries of the War
and Peace studies of the council progressed to other work related to
the organization of peace and the settlement of postwar problems :
Philip E. Mosely, research secretary of the Territorial group, ac-
companied Secretary Hull to Moscow in 1943, when representatives
of Great Britain, the United States, the Soviet Union, and China
issued the Moscow Declaration, the text of which had been prepared
previously in the Committee on Postwar Foreign Policies. Mr.
Mosely later became political adviser to the American member of the
3 The endowment had conducted a similar study before World War I.
886 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
European Advisory Commission in London, and more recently has
been with the Eussian Institute of Columbia University.
Walter E. Sharp, research secretary of the Political group, served
as Secretary General of the United Nations Food Conference at
Quebec in 1945.
Grayson Kirk, research secretary of the Security group, was among
the experts at the Dumbarton Oaks Conference and was executive
officer of commission III at the San Francisco Conference.
Dwight E. Lee, research secretary of the Peace Aims group, was as-
sistant secretary of committee I, commission III at the San Francisco
Conference.
The outside experts also reappeared in other work :
Dr. Isaiah Bowman was a member of the United States delegation
at the Dumbarton Oaks Conference, special adviser to the Secretary
of State, member of the Department's Policy Committee, and adviser
to the American delegation at the San Francisco Conference.
Hamilton Fish Armstrong served as adviser to the American Am-
bassador in London in 1944, with the personal rank of minister, also
as special adviser to the Secretary of State, and as adviser to the
American delegation at the San Francisco Conference.
Walter H. Mallory, secretary of the Steering Committee which
directed the War and Peace Studies, was a member of the Allied Mis-
sion to Observe the Elections in Greece, with the personal rank of
minister, a mission which grew out of the Yalta agreement to assist
liberated countries to achieve democratic regimes responsive to the
wishes of their people.
This does not include any of the several dozen members of these
council groups who were called into the Government in wartime
capacities not connected with formulation of postwar policies. Nor
is any implication intended that pressure was brought to secure-
placement of any of these individuals in particular posts. It is self-
evident, however, that the research secretaries as well as the others
referred to later attained positions of influence in relation to the
foreign policy of the United States, and were instrumental in formu-
lation of the United Nations Organization.
During its operations the War and Peace Studies project held 362
meetings and prepared and sent to the State Department close to
700 documents, which were distributed to all appropriate officers, and
also reached other departments and agencies of the Government, since
representatives of many such agencies were informal members of
council groups. With a few exceptions these documents are now
in the council library and available for study.
The endowment also had direct association during this period
with the State Department, in addition to its association through
the work of the council just described, through its Division of Inter-
national Law. This association arose following Pearl Harbor in
1941, when the endowment offered and the Department accepted the
services of that Division, thus again establishing an informal basis
of cooperation.
At that time Philip Jessup, who was director of the division of inter-
national law from 1940 to 1943, resigned to devote his entire time to
Government service.
Following several exploratory conferences to determine what could
be learned from the experience of the League of Nations, the division
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 887
"established relations with many highly qualified and experienced
experts making it possible to plan and arrange for the preparation
of * * * series of studies on international organization and admin-
istration. * * *"
The first was International Law of the Future, Postulates, Prin-
ciples, and Proposals. It was followed by :
International Tribunals, Past arid Future
The International Secretariat : A Great Experiment in International Admin-
istration
Guide to the Practice of International Conferences
League of Nations and National Minorities
The Economic and Financial Organization of the League of Nations
Immunities and Privileges of International Officials
International Drug Control
Mandates, Dependencies, and Trusteeship
The Customs Union Issue
The 1944 yearbook, pages 67-70 of the report of the director of the
division of international law, in a section devoted to the work program
of the division, refers to this statement of the International Law of the
Future, a second part containing "Principles," and a third part con-
taining "Proposals," and in the extract from this yearbook (complete
text is included in ''Exhibit — Carnegie") there are these statements:
* * * In line with the Moscow Declaration, the Postulates envisage a "general
international organization for the maintenance of international peace and
security." The principles are offered as a draft of a declaration which might be
officially promulgated as the basis of the international law of the future. The
proposals for international organization are not offered as- a draft of a treaty
but as suggestions for implementing the principles.
The following year, 1945, the yearbook has the following statement,
page 84 :
It is apparent from a reading of the proposals for the establishment of a
general international organization adopted at Dumbarton Oaks that their
drafting was influenced to some extent by the contents of the Statement of the
International Law of the Future which was published and given widespread
distribution on March 27, 1944.
(Moreover, while the endowment makes no reference to them, there
is great similarity also to the proposals for international cooperation
drafted many years earlier, in which the endowment participated both
financially and through its personnel. )
According to Dr. Finch these documents were published "having
in mind" the objectives Mr. Churchill expressed in February 1945,
namely, that the former League of Nations would be replaced by a far
stronger body but which —
will embody much of the structure and the characteristics of its predecessor.
All the work that was done in the past, all the experience that has been gathered
by the working of the League of Nations, will not be cast away.
Dr. Finch's further comments (p. 435) are:
Advance copies of all but the last of the studies were made available to officials
of the United States and other governments in Washington, They were in
constant use at the conference of jurists held in Washington to revise the statute
of the International Court of Justice, at the United Nations Conference on
International Organization in San Francisco, the United Nations Relief and
Rehabilitation Administration Conference, the Interim Commission of the United
Nations Conference on Foqd and. Agriculture, the United Nations Monetary and
Financial Conference and at the "series of meetings held by the f United Nations
in London, including the Preparatory Commission, the General Assembly, and
the Security Council, as well as the meeting of foreign ministers held in the
same city. The limited advance editions printed for these purposes were inade-
888 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
quate to meet the demand. The division also prepared special memoranda under
great pressure for use in connection with some of the foregoing conferences.
The portions of Dr. Finch's History quoted earlier on pages 9, 10,.
and 11, tell the story of former fellowship holders who have entered
various fields, including Government service, but there were others
who went from the endowment to places in public life :
James T. Shotwell, who was director of the division of economics
and history for many years, was also chairman of the international
research committee of the American council, Institute of Pacific Re-
lations; and while attending a conference of the institute in 1929 de-
livered a number of addresses on American foreign policy and prob-
lems in international organizations. In 1930 he became director of
research in international affairs of the social science research council
and many of the publications in which his division took an interest-
originated in research in Europe arranged for him by that organiza-
tion. Among these were :
International Organization in European Air Transport — Lawrence C. Tomb
Maritime Trade of Western United States — Elliott G. Mears
Turkey at the Straits — Dr. Shotwell and Francis Deak
Poland and Russia — Dr. Shotwell and Max M. Laserson
Dr. Shotwell was chairman of an unofficial national commission of
the United States to cooperate with the Committee of the League of
Nations on Intellectual Cooperation, and he later accepted member-
ship on the State Department's Advisory Committee on Cultural Re-
lations (1942-44).
Dr. Finch, referring to the invitation extended to Dr. Shotwell to-
serve on the Advisory Committee on Postwar Policy, goes on :
* * * He was later appointed by the endowment its consultant to the Ameri-
can delegation to the United Nations Conference on International Organization
at San Francisco, April 25 to June 28, 1945. These official duties placed Dr.
Shotwell in a position of advantage from which to fbrm'urate the changing pro-
gram and direct with the greatest effectiveness the operations of the commis-
sion to study the organization of peace.
The associate consultant was Dr. Finch himself, then director of
the division of international law.
Professor John B. Condliffe, associate director of the division of economics;
and history (Berkeley branch office) edited a series of pamphlets dealing with
tariffs and agriculture. They covered, in addition to a general study of pro-
tection for farm products, cotton, dairy products, wheat, corn, the hog industry,
and sugar; and were circulated to all county agricultural agents throughout
the country and were officially supplied by the Department of Agriculture to
every director of agricultural extension work in the United States.
Ben M. Cherrington, who was elected trustee of the endowment in
1943, was the first Chief of the Division of Cultural Relations of the*
State Department, serving until 1940. Before that he was director
of the Social Science Research Council and professor of international
relations at the University of Denver.
Upon leaving the State Department he became chancellor of the
university where he remained until 1946, when he became a member of
the national committee of the United States for the United Nations
Scientific and Cultural Organization. Dr. Cherrington was an asso-
ciate consultant of the United States delegation to the United Nations;
Conference in San Francisco.
Philip C. Jessup was another endowment contribution to the field of
public service. His first assignment was in the Department of State,
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 889
as Assistant Solicitor in 1 924-25, followed by his service as legal assist-
ant to Elihu Root, in 1929 at the Committee of Jurists on the Revision
of the Court Statutes, called by the League of Nations Council. Dr.
Jessup was assistant professor of international law at Columbia Uni-
versity and later became Mr. Root's biographer. He was elected a,
trustee of the endowment in 1937, succeeded Dr. James Brown Scott
as director of the division of international law in 1940 and 1943
resigned because of the pressure of Government work during the war.
He was Assistant Secretary General of UNRRA and attached to
the Bretton Woods Conference in 1943-44 ; assistant on judicial or-
ganizations at the United Nations Conference in San Francisco, where
he helped to revise the statutes of the Permanent Court of Inter-
national Justice to the present form in the United Nations Charter.
He was also secretary of a national world court committee, organized
in New York, of which two trustees of the endowment were also
members.
The list of such individuals is long — and to include all the names
would merely lengthen this summary to no particular purpose.
Henry Wriston, Eugene Staley, Isaiah Bowman, John W. Davis,,
Quincy Wright, John Foster Dulles, Robert A. Taft, and others —
either during their association with the endowment or at some other
time — also were in the public service.
United Nations
Both the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and the
Rockefeller Foundation aided this cause. In the case of the endow-
ment it was a natural outgrowth of its deep interest in the League of
Nations and the World Court, and its disappointment when the United
States failed to join the League, intensified its activities in connection
with the United Nations.
The close association between the endowment and the State Depart*
ment, even before World War II actually enveloped this country, has
been discussed, and it is apparent that the idea of achieving peace
through a world government arrangement was still the goal of the
endowment as indicated by the character of its representatives and
the nature of their activities.
While Dr. Jessup was director of the division of international law,
it undertook an investigation of the numerous inter- American sub-
sidiary congresses and commissions which are part of the pan- Ameri-
can system and a&a result amassed a considerable amount of incidental
and extraneous information of a technical and administrative char-
acter concerning the composition and functioning of permanent inter-
national bureaus and commissions. In collaboration with the public
administration committee of the Social Science Research Council, Dr.
Jessup began a study of this subject and the project later broadened
to include not only official administrations and agencies established
by American governments, but private international organizations
operating in specialized fields, special emphasis being given to the
structural and administrative aspects of these organizations.
The work covered approximately 114 organizations, supplied the
names and addresses ox each organization along with a brief account
of its history, purpose, internal administrative structure, membership,
finance, publications, and activities, and was intended primarily to
890 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
serve government officials and officers of international administration,
students, teachers, and finally the public.
At this point it is appropriate to say something about the Commis-
sion To Study the Organization of the Peace, which while not a part of
the endowment's direct program was treated as work through another
agency to which the endowment was willing to grant financial support.
The policy of the endowment in such instances is discussed in the
concluding portion of this summary.
The commission in actuality was merely a continuation of the
National Peace Conference referred to on pages 880 and 881. It came
into being under that name in 1939, under the aegis of Dr. Shotwell
and Clark M. Eichelberger — guiding lights of the peace conference —
and immediately began organization of regional commissions and
monthly discussion meetings.
It too had an "educational program," carried to rural communities,
and furnished to press services, editors, educational writers, column-
ists, and commentators.
On June 6, 1941, the commission issued a document entitled "State-
ment of American Proposals for a New World Order."
In February 1942, this was augmented by "The Transitional Period."
A year later, 1943, the commission followed these with a statement
dealing with steps that should be taken during the war to organize
for the transition period.
Between then and 1944 these were added :
General Statement and Fundamentals
Part I — Security and World Organization
Part II — The Economic Organization of Welfare
Part III — The International Safeguard of Human Rights
A recapitulation of the principles laid down was issued after Dum-
barton Oaks, entitled : "The General International Organization —
Its Framework and Functions,"
According to Dr. Finch (p. 248) :
During the following Dumbarton Oaks Conference the commission kept the
work of the conference before the public. and organized an educational program
in behalf of its proposals. It also directed its studies to subjects inadequately
covered by or omitted from the proposals, such as human rights, trusteeship,
and economic and social cooperation. Separate committees were set up on each
of these subjects and their studies and conclusions were later published.
At the San Francisco Conference the commission was able to promote its objec-
tives through many of its officers and members who were connected with the
Conference in an official or consultant capacity. Following the signature and
ratification of the charter;and the establishment of the United Nations, the Com-
mission To Study the Organization of Peace planned its studies and educational
program with two purposes in view : Making the United Nations more effective
by implementation and interpretation, and making it the foundation of the foreign
policy of the United States.
The commission became the research affiliate for the American Association for
the United Nations, with joint offices and interlocking officers in New York. It
is estimated by Dr. Shotwell in his annual report of March 27, 1&45, to the endow-
ment that over 600,000 copies of the commission's reports had been distributed
and distribution of over 3% million pieces of Its popular material numbers.
In "Exhibit— Carnegie" statements taken from the endowment's
yearbooks trace the steps taken by the endowment to advance the cause
of the United Nations. The 1944 volume tells of the conferences
attended by former officials of the League of Nations^ as well as by
government officials, and says the third "will be of interest to a much
wider group, including not only officials but educators and others
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 891
deeply concerned with the need of adequate training for the staffs of
many international agencies which are either in process of formation
or are contemplated for the postwar period." The first of these con-
ferences was held in August 1942 — less than 9 months after Pearl
Harbor — and the last was held in August 1943 — 2 years before the
San Francisco Conference.
That same yearbook describes the activities of the endowment as
having placed it "* * * in a peculiarly strategic position to cooperate
with official agencies preparing to undertake international functions"
and states that while the Office of Foreign Relief and Rehabilitation
Operations was engaged in preparing for the organizing conference
of UNRRA it "* * * frequently called upon the division to assist by
various means in these preparations."
The endowment supplied special memoranda to the conference, as
well as copies of its various publications relating to international
organization and administration. The special memoranda covered
such subjects as International Conferences and Their Technique,
Precedents for Relations Between International Organizations and
Nonmember States, and the like.
The following year, 1945, the work of the Commission To Study the
Organization of the Peace was again referred to (pp. 112-114) and a
quotation concerning it has been included in "Exhibit — Carnegie."
The endowment had two other projects which fall into the inter-
national field — the International Economic Handbook and Commer-
cial and Tariff History and Research in International Economics by
Federal Agencies. The latter disclosed the extent to which the
Government of the United States engaged in the study of economic
questions and the resources of economic information at its disposal.
It also cooperated with the International Chamber of Commerce
and Thomas J. Watson, a trustee of the endowment, was chairman of
a committee established in 1939 by the chamber called a committee for
international economic reconstruction. Dr. Finch described one of
the first projects of the committee (p. 243) as "a program of public
adult education in this country." Later the committee was renamed
the committee on international economic policy and set about enlisting
54 leaders of national, business, industrial, education, and religious
groups. These included Mr. Winthrop W. Aldrich, President Nich-
olas Murray Butler, Mr. Thomas J. Watson, Mr. Leon Fraser, Mr.
Clark H. Minor, Mr. Robert L. Gulick, Jr., Eric A. Johnston, Robert
M. Gaylord, Paul G. Hoffman, Eliot Wadsworth, A. L. M. Wiggins,
J. Clifford Folger, E. P. Thomas, and Fred I. Kent.
According to the yearbook, a public-relations committee was organ-
ized and professional news services were employed to reach American
grassroots, in order to secure the widest possible distribution of the
pamphlets produced by the committee, among which were:
World Trade and Employment, by the advisory committee on economics to the
committee on international economic policy.
The international Economic Outlook, by J. B. Condliffe, associate director, divi-
sion of economics and history, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Industrial Property in Europe, by Antonin Basch, department of economics,
Columbia University.
Price Control in the Postwar Period, by Norman S. Buchanan, professor of
economics, University of California.
Economic Relations With the U. S. S. R., by Alexander Gerschenkron, Inter-
national Section, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
49720— 54— pt. 1 57
892 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
A Commercial Policy for the United Nations, by Percy W. Bidwell, director of
studies, Council on Foreign Relations.
International Double Taxation, by Paul Deperon, secretary of the Fiscal Com-
mittee, League of Nations.
Discriminations and Preferences in International Trade, by Howard P. Whidden,
economist, Chamber of Commerce of the State of New York.
Principles of Exchange Stabilization, by J. B. Condliffe.
International Commodity Agreements, by Joseph S. Davis, director of the food
research institute, Stanford University.
Import Capacity of the United States, by J. B. Condliffe and R. L. Gulick.
World Production and Consumption of Food, by Karl Brandt, Stanford
University.
International Cartels, by A. Basch.
Export Policy, by Robert L. Gulick, economist, Carnegie Endowment for Inter-
national Peace.
The Relation Between International Commercial Policy and High Level Em-
ployment, by Sumner H. Slichter, Harvard University.
Thousands of copies of the committee's pamphlets on international
economic problems were distributed to business executives, agricultural
leaders, diplomatic representatives, students, Government officials,
servicemen, Members of Congress, and to congressional committees.
A special project in this field was the work done at the time the recip-
rocal trade-agreements program came before Congress for renewal,
when special literature in support of the program was prepared and
distributed by the endowment.
The Rockefeller Foundation was working shoulder to shoulder w T ith
the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in furthering
"agencies devoted to studies, to teaching, to service to government and
to public and expert education" on the assumption that while "it is
not possible to guaranty peace * * * the way to work toward it is
to strengthen the 'inanity of threads that bind peace together.' " It
selected many of the same agencies which had been chosen by the
endowment for studies and related activities. In the international-
relations field grants went to agencies which conduct research and
education designed to strengthen the foundations for a more enlight-
ened public opinion and more consistent public policies (1946 annual
report) .
This same foundation report (p. 40) mentions the appropriation to
the Institute of Pacific Relations of $233,000, much of whose work "is
related to the training of personnel, the stimulation of language study,
and the conduct of research on problems of the Far East. It is part
of the pattern by which, from many different directions and points of
view, efforts are being made to bring the West and East into closer
understanding."
Two years earlier, the 1944 report of the foundation said: "China
is the oldest interest of the Rockefeller Foundation, 1 ' and it has spent
more money in that country than in any other country except the
United States. In addition to direct grants to China and Chinese pro-
jects of various sorts, the foundation also contributed to the Institute
of Pacific Relations, including the American institute.
In that connection, it is interesting to note that 7 years before (1937
report, pp. 57-58) the foundation deplored the events of the previous
year in China which "have virtually destroyed this proud ambition,
in which the foundation was participating." The report praised the
work accomplished up to that time by the Chinese National Govern-
ment in their attempts "to make over a medieval society in terms of
modern knowledge" but was somewhat pessimistic as to the oppor-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 893
tunity "to pick up the pieces of this broken program at some later
date/'
From 1937 until 1950 the grants of the foundation to the Institute
of Pacific Relations were $945,000, compared with $793,800 during
the years prior to that (from 1929 to 1936, inclusive) .
The Institute of Pacific Relations has been the subject of exhaus-
tive hearings by other congressional committees, and mention is made
of this particular comment only because as recently as 1952 (if finan-
cial contributions are one criterion) the foundation apparently con-
sidered the institute an agency "designed to strengthen the foundations
for a more enlightened public opinion and more consistent public
policies."
A section entitled "Conference on American Foreign Policy" in
the 1 91 6 endowment yearbook (pp. 24-25) begins: "To assist in in- £~ —
forming public opinion concerning the foreign policy of the United /&
States, the endowment sponsored a conference at Washington * * *." ^C.
Some 80 national organizations sent 125 representatives to hear from y -
James F. Byrnes, then Secretary of State ; Clair Wilcox, Director of *"?,■, ^
the Office of International Trade Policy ; Gov. Herbert Lehman ; Dean r\
Acheson, Under Secretary of State; AlgerJ3isSj Secretary Generalof h^fJ's'
the United Nations Conference at San "Francisco ; ancTWTlTiam Benton, /~
Assistant Secretary of State in Charge of Public Affairs. CL* 5
From then on the endowment bent every effort to "reach public
opinion" and particularly people not reached by any organization
"since they have not been interested to join, and who do not realize
that they too constitute public opinion and have to assume their re-
sponsibilities as citizens not only of the United States but of the
world." This phraseology is strikingly similar to that found in the
Handbook on International Understanding of the National Education
Association.
It does not appear whether the foundation contributed to the Com-
mission to Study the Organization of the Peace, but the annual re-
ports refer to studies carried on by Brookings Institution, the Rus-
sian institute of Columbia University's School of International Affairs,
the Institute of International Studies at Yale, all "aimed at the single
target of world peace" (Dr. Fosdick's Story of the Rockefeller Foun-
dation, p. 219) .
In 1945 it aided in the publication of the reports and discussions
of the various committees of the San Francisco United Nations Con-
ference because "with respect to many crucial issues the really signifi-
cant material is not the formal language of the articles of the charter,
but the interpretation contained in the reports and discussions * * *."
It also contributed to the United Nations Economic Commission f or
Europe which in 1949 began a study of long-run trends in European
economy, covering the period 1913-50 (1951 annual report, pp.
355-356).
This, the final part of the summary of activities of Carnegie and
Rockefeller agencies, has been devoted to substantiating the state-
ments made in its opening paragraphs; namely, that the Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace and the Rockefeller Founda-
tion had —
Admittedly engaged in activities which would "directly or
indirectly" affect legislation;
894
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Admittedly engaged in "propaganda" in the sense defined by
Mr. Dodd in his preliminary report ;
Admittedly engaged in activities designed to "form public
opinion" and "supply information" to the United States Govern-
ment, calculated to achieve a certain objective, as for example,
"an international viewpoint."
Quotations on each of these points, taken from the yearbooks of the
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and from the annual
reports of the Rockefeller Foundation, as well as from other sources,
have been referred to and are attached in separate exhibits.
Because of the method of reporting used by the endowment, it is
frequently difficult to distinguish specific projects and organizations
in its financial statements — disbursements in most instances being
reported merely by divisions. In addition, the corporation worked
closely with the endowment on certain types of projects, and also
made lump-sum grants to the endowment.
An analysis of grants by these two Carnegie agencies and by the
Rockefeller Foundation is shown below.
Because it is frequently stated by these foundations as well as
others that the purpose of their grants is to serve as a catalytic force
in getting a project underway, or provide support to an organization
until it is well established, the period during which the foundation
contributed funds to a particular organization is shown under the
grants made.
Grantee organization
American Council of Learned Societies
(1924)
American Historical Association (1884) _ .
Brookings Institution (1916)
Council on Foreign Relations (1921)
Foreign Policy Association (1918)
Institute of International Education
(1919)
Institute of Pacific Relations (1925)
National Academies of Science
National Research Council (1916)
National Bureau of Economic Research
(1920)
New School for Social Research (1919) ...
Public Administration Clearing House
■.(1931)
Royal Institute of International Affairs..
Social Science Research Council
Encyclopedia of Social Science
Carnegie
Corporation
$901,850
(1921-52)
38*, 000
(1926-35)
2, 493, 621
(1922-50)
1, 826, 824
(1921-52)
204, 000
(1938-51)
2,073,013
(1922-52)
390,000
(1936-47)
5, 406, 500
3, 059, 18G
(1920-52)
S 1 8, 503
(1921-52)
95,000
(1940)
£8, 182
(1931-52)
244, 100
(1938-51)
2, 014, 275
269, 124
Endow-
ment
$11, 500
(1940-44)
4,000
(1951-52)
12.000
(1937-42)
16, 000
(1934^0)
200.000
(1941)
184, 000
(1927-41)
Rockefeller
Founda-
tion
Spelman
fund
($169,000 General
Education Board)
$11,069,770 I $30,000
(1925-52)
190,830 | 55,000
(1925-37)
1, 848, 500 | 3, 211, 250
(1921-52)
1,170,700 1 150,000
(1927-52)
900,000 |
(1933-50)
1,406,405 [ 240,000
(1928-52)
1,885,400 | 165,000
(1925-50)-
110,000 I
11, 555, 500 I 447, 900
(1922-52)
6, 647, 500 I 125, 000
(1931-52)
208,100 |_.__
(1940-44)
10,740 I 8,058.000
(1931-52)
906,580 |-
(1938-52)
8, 470, 250 j 4, 044, 000
600, 000 100, 000
Total con-
tribution
$12, 182, 120
629, 830
7, 557, 374
3, 159, 524
3, 189, 524
3,847,148
11,407,320
2, 449, 400
5, 516, 500
15, 062, 580
7,621,003
300, 100
8,126,922
1, 150, 680
14, 528, 525
969, 124
• International relations clubs, regional centers, etc.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 895
The projects for which these grants were made — in addition to those
made for general support — covered such projects as:
A Handbook for Latin American Studies
Developing a training center for far eastern studies at the Congressional Library
(both by the American Council of Learned Societies)
Study of major aspects of Government finance for defense (by the National
Bureau of Economic Research)
Study of problems relating to training of leaders among free peoples (by the
Council on Foreign Relations)
Research on American foreign policy
Foreign relations
Political implications of the economic development of industrialized areas (all
by the Council on Foreign Relations)
Support of experimental educational program, publicizing the conflicting issues
of economic nationalism and internationalism.
Program for development of community centers of international education
(Foreign Policy Association)
Another statement frequently made by foundations, including both
the endowment and the foundation — particularly when the actions
of benefiting organizations or individuals arouse criticism — is that as
a matter of policy no attempt is or should be made to supervise, direct
or control organizations or individuals to whome these tax-exempt
funds are given, because to do so would restrict the productivity of the
grantees, and (it is inferred) be an attack on academic freedom. This
attitude of objectivity, however, is at variance with other statements
also found in the records of both the endowment and foundation.
In describing the administration of his division (Intercourse and
Education) Dr. Butler's report in the 1928 year book (p. 38) states
that, in addition to other work —
a large part of the activity of the division is devoted to the carrying out of
specific, definite, and well-considered projects of demonstrated timeliness * * *
those in which the work is directed and supervised from the headquarters of the
division and those which are carried out by the organizations or individuals to
whom allotments are made from time to time. * * * It is not the policy of the
division to grant subventions continuing from year to year to organisations or
undertakings not directly responsible to the administration of the division it-
self. * * * [Italics supplied.]
This statement — included in its entirety in the exhibit of quotations
from endowment records — is susceptible to only one interpretation:
Unless a project, whether carried on by a particular organization or
by a particular individual or group of individuals is under the direct
supervision of the Division of Intercourse and Education, and reports
thereon are satisfactory to that division, continued support will not be
forthcoming from the endowment.
As mentioned earlier, the foundation does not use quite as dogmatic
language in its reports, yet from its statements the same contradictory
attitude is discerned, particularly when related to the activities and
organizations to which it has continuously granted funds.
There is nothing ambiguous about the warning on page 9 of the
1941 annual report of the foundation :
If we are to have a durable peace after the war, if out of the wreckage of the
present a new kind of cooperative life is to be built on a global scale, the part
that science and advancing knowledge will play must not be overlooked.
896 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
This statement appears in the report for the 12-month period end-
ing December 31, 1941 — not quite 4 weeks after 'Pearl Harbor — yet
there can be no doubt that, as far as the foundation was concerned,
only "a cooperative life * * * on a global scale" could insure a
"durable peace."
In the light of this attitude some of the individuals and organiza-
tions benefiting from foundation funds in the years since 1941 may
seem a trifle unusual to say the least, particularly when a few pages
further on, page 12, the report follows up this warning with :
A score of inviting areas for this kind of cooperation deserve exploration.
Means must be found by which the boundless abundance of the world can be
translated into a more equitable standard of living. Minimum standards of
food, clothing, and shelter should be established. The new science of nutrition,
slowly coming to maturity, should be expanded on a worldwide scale.
It is only natural to wonder about the agencies selected to work in
these inviting areas to build "a cooperative life on a global scale."
Among those to which the foundation gave funds were agencies also
selected by the endowment to be directly responsible to the administra-
tion of its divisions,and some of these are sketched briefly now in rela-
tion to these declared policies.
The Public Administration Clearinghouse, the creation and financ-
ing of which Dr. Fosdick (page 206) calls "the great contribution of
the Spelman Fund," is also a grantee of the foundation.
Composed of 21 organizations of public officials representing func-
tional operations of Government (such as welfare, finance, public
works, and personnel) the clearinghouse is designed to keep public
officials in touch with "the results of administrative experience and
research in their respective fields" which he describes as having re-
sulted in "wide consequences" which "have influenced the upgrading
of Government services at many technical points — in the improve-
ment of budgetary and personnel systems, for example, and the reform
of State and local tax structures."
The National Bureau of Economic Research, again quoting from
Dr. Fosdick's book, page 233, has brought within reach —
* * * basic, articulated, quantitative information concerning the entire econ-
omy of the Nation. This information has influenced public policy at a dozen
points. It was one of the chief tools in planning our. war production programs
in the Second World War and in determining what weights our economy could
sustain. It underlies our analyses of Federal budgeting: and tax proposals and
projects like the Marshall plan. This same type of research has now spread
to other countries, so that international comparison of the total net product
and distribution of the economy of individual nations is increasingly possible.
After stating with some pride that the books and other publications
of this organization "influence to an increasing degree the policies
and decisions of governmental and business bodies" — page 213 — Dr.
Fosdick in the following chapter — page 232 stresses that its —
* * * publications do not gather dust on library shelves. Its findings are
cited in scientific and professional journals, treatises, and official documents.
They are used by businessmen, legislators, labor specialists, and academic econ-
omists. They have been mentioned in Supreme Court decisions. They are
constantly employed in Government agencies like the Department of Commerce
and the Bureau of the Census*. Increasing use is being made of them by prac-
ticing economists in business, by editorial writers in the daily press, and by
economic journalists in this country and abroad. Practically all of the current
textbooks in either general economics or dealing with specific economic problems
draw a great deal of their material from the publications of the Bureau or from
data available in its flies. It can be truly said that without the National Bureau
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 897
our society would not be nearly so well equipped as it is for dealing with the
leading economic issues of our times.
The Institute of Pacific Relations has been the subject of exhaustive
hearings by other congressional committees in which its subversive
character has been thoroughly demonstrated.
The Foreign Policy Association has been discussed at length in
the narrative portions of this report and reference has been made to
Mrs. Vera Micheles Dean's citation in appendix IX. Also active in
this association have been : Roscoe Pound, Stephen P. Duggan, Max-
well Stewart and his wife, Marguarite Ann Stewart (educational
secretary in the association's department of popular education),
Lawrence K. Rosinger, writer for the headline series, Stuart Chase,
Alexander W. Allport (membership secretary of the association) ;
Anna Lord Strauss, Philip E. Mosely, and Brooks Emeny (members
of the editorial advisory committee), and Blaire Bolles and Delia
Goetz, director and assistant director of the Washington bureau of
the association.
The Council on Foreign Relations has also been discussed in detail,
and while additional information could be included on specific activi-
ties it would be merely cumulative.
Two brief excerpts from the 1936 annual report of the foundation
are, however, of particular pertinence in relation to the question of
influencing governmental activity :
The program in social security has two central interests: (1) The improve-
ment of the statistical record of structural and cyclical change and sharper
identification of the causal factors involved; and (2) the analysis and adapta-
tion of social measures designed to mitigate individual suffering due to unem-
ployment which may be a result of economic change, or due to illness, accident,
and old age, which are ordinary hazards of human life. The underlying assump-
tion of this twofold program 4 is that economic and social changes are to an
appreciable extent manmade and hence controllable, and that, pending adequate
understanding of the causes of disruptive change, the individual must be pro-
tected in the interest of political and social stability. * * * The ameliorative
aspect of the program is at present concerned with questions centering upon
the social insurances and relief in the United States.
The program in public administration is designed to bridge the gap that exists
between practical administrators in the Government service and scholars in the
universities in the field of the social sciences. Aid had been given to the Social
Science Research Council's committee on public administration, which itself
sponsors research upon key problems of public administration, * * * The foun-
dation supports a number of such research enterprises together with a variety
of projects designed to recruit and train a higher type of personnel for career
service in the Government.
The objectives of the program in international relations are the promotion of
understanding of, and greater intelligence in regard to, world problems among
larger sections of the public, and the creation of more competent technical staffs
attached to official or nonofficial organizations dealing with international affairs.
The greater part of foundation interest is in enterprises concerned with the
study of international problems for the purpose of informing and guiding public
opinion. Three types of organizations are receiving foundation support: (1)
Those like Chatham House in England and the Foreign Policy Association in the
United States, which carry on the two functions of study and dissemination
with almost equal emphasis; (2) those concerned primarily with research and
the creation of personnel for technical and advisory service in connection with
international problems; and, (3) those which focus upon coordinated research
undertakings and periodic conferences with international representation, as the
Institute of Pacific Relations and the International Studies Conference. (Pp.
230, 231, 232.)
'The foundation's twofold program in social security.
898 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The Social Science Research Council, which sponsored the 4- volume
Study of the American Soldier, as well as a project entitled "Study
of American Public Library." This actually deals with the public
library inquiry, a project relating to educational films and their dis-
tribution that has been received with considerable criticism.
Moreover, the council's committee on government (through a spe-
cial committee on civil rights) was selected to "encourage and aid
competent scholars to record and analyze the management of civil
liberties during the war and immediate postwar period" (Foundation
Annual Report for 1944, p. 202) . Prof. Robert E. Cushman of Cornell
was chairman of the special committee, and in the 1948 annual report
his assignment is referred to as a "factual examination of the civil-
liberties issues" caused by "the actions taken to eliminate subversive
individuals from Government service." "Rigid loyalty requirements"
and "the work of the House Committee on Un-American Activities"
are among the problems to be studied "to reconcile, if possible, the
claims of national security and civil liberty." Practically the first
official act of Dr. Cushman as chairman was to place Dr. Walter Gell-
horn in charge of the project for all practical purposes.
Based on their own records the Carnegie Corporation, the Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace, and the Rockefeller Foundation,
have —
1. Contributed substantial sums of money to some or all of -tide
organizations described in this and other portions of this
summary.
2. Have or should have been aware that the stated purpose of
many of the projects of these organizations has been to achieve
certain objectives in the fields of international relations, foreign
policy, and government.
There has been a singular lack of objectivity and a decided
bias toward a socialized welfare state in the proposals of these
organizations, and every effort has been made by them to advance
the philosophy of "one world" to the complete disregard of com-
parable effort on behalf of a more nationalistic viewpoint.
3. Not only made grants to these organizations for general sup-
port, but have made specific grants for projects described in the
preceding numbered paragraph.
The foundation has contributed $63,415,478 since 1929 to projects
which it classifies as in the field of social science, while grants it con^
siders as in the field of the humanities total $33,292,842 during the
same period. 5
The endowment, since it was organized, has expended approxi-
mately $20 million, divided as follows : Division of intercourse and
education, $12.1 million; division of international law, $4.8 million;
division of economics and history, $3.1 million.
Certainly, in justice to the endowment and the foundation it would
be unfair to say that the amount of money so expended by them during
the period described did not have some effect — at some point — on
some matters. To accept the statement that there were no effects — or
only coincidental ones— from such expenditures would indicate mental
astigmatism at the very least, and would in a sense seem to accuse
these foundations and their trustees of a somewhat careless, if not
actually wasteful, attitude toward the funds entrusted to their care,
* Through 1952.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 899
when (as is undeniable) the foundations continued to select the same
or similar organizations, continued to make grants for the same or
similar projects presented by such organizations, and continued to
make grants to the same or similar individuals.
In addition, the reports of both the endowment and the foundation
contain statements indicating both felt there were definite results
from their activities as well as the activities of organizations to Whom
grants were made.
The 1934 yearbook of the endowment has one of these on page 22 :
* * * A review of the activities of the endowment since the World War,
carried on separately through three main divisions, but operating as a unit in
behalf of the great ideal of its founder, seems to justify the observation that the
endowment is becoming an unofficial instrument of international policy, taking
up here and there the ends and threads of international problems and questions
which the Governments find it difficult to handle, and through private initiative
reaching conclusions which are not of a formal nature but which unofficially
find their way into the policies of governments.
Similar sentiments are expressed a decade later in the 1945 year-
book, page 28 :
A reading of this report will make it plain that every part of the United States
and every element of its population have been reached by the endowment's work.
The result may be seen in the recorded attitude of public opinion which makes
it certain that the American Government will be strongly supported in the
accomplishment of its effort to offer guidance and commanding influence to the
establishment of a world organization for protection of international peace and
preservation of resultant prosperity.
The foundation, when it reorganized in 1929 to extend its work to
include the social sciences, apparently anticipated some recognizable
results (p. 258 of its annual report) :
From research in the social sciences there should result modifications in gov-
ernmental organization, in business practices, in social activities of all kinds
which may further general well-being. As numerous functions of great signifi-
cance are being assumed by governmental bodies through Federal, State, county,
and municipal organization, the development of effective techniques becomes a
necessity. Research which is closely tied up with practical activities is expected
to furnish the basis of sound governmental policy.
There is no indication of a change of opinion in 1940, when describ-
ing its support of the National Institute of Public Affairs' "experi-
mental program of recruiting and training personnel for the Federal
services," the foundation reports (pp. 273-274 of annual report), 6 "the
program has involved the annual placement of approximately 50 grad-
uate students preparing for public- service careers, in agencies of the
Federal Government for a year of practical apprenticeship" and adds
with evident satisfaction that "60 percent of its 'interns' are now in
the Federal service ; several are in State and local or other government
services, and a number are continuing graduate study."
Two years later the section dealing with the public administration
committee begins :
The agencies through which society will seek to meet its diverse problems are
multiform, and total effort, whether for defense or for the postwar world, will
receive its primary direction through the agency of government * * *.
^Referring to its support of this committee during the preceding 7
years, the report gives the major studies of the committee, and ends
with this paragraph : 7
8 Entire extract included in exhibit.
1 Entire extract included In exhibit.
900 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
More recently the committee has focused its resources and attention mainly
on planning and stimulating rather than on executing research. A broadening
of the program to include the field of government, with public administration as
one sector, is now contemplated. Such a program would deal less with the
mechanics of administration than with the development of sound bases for
policy determination and more effective relations in the expanding governmental
structure.
It is only commonsense, moreover, to conclude that, since the endow-
ment and the foundation as a means of accomplishing their purposes
had deliberately chosen certain organizations consistently as "agents,"
the trustees of those foundations would be entirely aware of the activ-
ities of the organizations selected, as well as the views expressed by
their executives. Assuming such awareness — no contrary attitude
being demonstrated — it could be concluded further that the results of
such activities — whatever their nature — were not only acceptable in
themselves to the trustees but were regarded by them as the proper
means to accomplish the declared purposes of the foundations.
It is appropriate, therefore, to examine some of the results, among
which have been :
The Headline Books of the Foreign Policy Association
Many were written by persons cited to be of Communist or Commu-
nist front affiliation and are questionable in content. They have been
distributed widely and are used as reference works throughout the
educational system of this country.
The Cornell studies
This project is under the direction of two individuals (described
further on) who can scarcely be considered sufficiently impartial to
insure a "factual examination" or an "objective finding."
Development of a u post-war 'polieif
The means selected was an extragovernmental committee, many of
whose members later held posts in governmental agencies concerned
with economic and other problems, as well as those concerned with
foreign policy.
The sponsorship of individuals who by their writings are of a
Socialist, if not Communist philosophy, dedicated to the idea of world
government.
Among the individuals sponsored have been :
Eugene StcHey
He is the author of War and the Private Investor, in which he recom-
mended a "World Investment Commission" which along other sugges-
tions presented bears a striking resemblance to the World Bank and
present monetary policies of the world, including the United States.
He is also the author of World Economy in Transition, a report pre-
pared under the auspices of the American Co-Ordinating Committee
for International Studies, 8 under the sponsorship of the Council on
Foreign Relations, and financed by a Carnegie grant. The book ex-
pounds the theory that modern technology requires its materials from
an international market, makes use of internationally discovered scien-
tific information, and itself is international in viewpoint. According
to Mr. Staley, we have a "planetary economy," and to reach the goal
8 Mrs. Dean was a member of this committee at the time.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 901
of international social welfare, the international division of labor re-
quires a free flow of goods.
Vera Mickeies Deem
Eeference has already been made to Mrs. Dean who, according to
the New York Times a few years ago, made a "plea for socialism" to*
600 alumnae at Vassar College, saying our quarrel with communism:
must not be over its ends but over its methods, and urging a foreign
policy backing Socialist programs.
Speaking of her book Europe and the U. S. in the book review
section of the ISTew York Herald Tribune of May 7, 1950, Harry Baehr,
an editorial writer for that paper, wrote: "In other words, she con-
siders it possible that the world may not be divided on sharp ideo-
logical lines but that there may yet be at least economic exchanges
which will temper the world struggle and by reducing the disparity in
standards of living between Eastern and Western Europe gradually
abolish the conditions which foster communism and maintain it as
a dangerous inhumane tyranny in those nations which now profess
the Stalinist creed."
Mr. and Mrs. Maxwell Stewart (Marguerite Ann Stewart)
According to the 1947 California Eeport (p. 314) both of these
people taught at the Moscow Institute in Kussia. He praised "Soviet
marriage and morals," and has been connected with tourist parties
to the U. S. S. E., under Soviet auspices. He urged recognition of
the Soviet Union, was a member of the editorial board of Soviet Eussia
Today, and endorsed the Hitler-Stalin pact.
Lawrence K. Bosinger
He declined to answer when asked by the McCarran committee
whether he had ever been a member of the Communist Party, after
being named as a party member by a witness before that committee.
He was a writer of the Headline Series of the Foreign Policy Asso-
ciation, among his contributions being "Forging a New China," "The
Occupation of Japan," and "The Philippines— Problems of Inde-
pendence." In February 1952 — after he had refused to answer the
question of the McCarran committee — he jointed the staff of the
Ehodes School.
Dr. Robert Cushman
Chairman of the special committee on civil rights of the Social
Science Eesearch Council's committee on government, Dr. Cushman's
career before his association w 7 ith the Cornell studies would indicate
a rather one-sided viewpoint on civil rights. Prior to 1944, when the
first Bockefeller Foundation grant was made to this project, Dr. Cush-
man had written occasional pamphlets (edited by Maxwell S. Stew-
art) for the public affairs committee, for example —
One written in 1936 suggested constitutional amendments to
limit the powers of the Supreme Court (following its adverse
decision on the New York minimum wage law), or else a dele-
gation of specific powers to Congress to obtain passage of New
Deal legislation ;
One written in 1942 favored the "modernization" at that time
achieved by the "new" Court after Eoosevelt's appointees had
been added;
902 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
A third written in 1940 recommended the writings of George
Seldes and Arthur Garfield Hays, as well as publications of the
American Civil Liberties Union.
Between 1944 and 1947 when the second grant was made by the
foundation, Dr. Cushman wrote another pamphlet for the public
affairs committee (in 1946), which was along the line of views ex-
pressed by the Commission on the Freedom of the Press.
In 1948, the year the foundation made a grant of $110,000 to the
project, Dr. Cushman again contributed a public affairs committee
pamphlet, New Threats to American Freedom, specifically concerned
with the anti- Communist drive. Because the abridgment of the civil
liberties of any group (apparently even those of Communists in his
opinion) endangers all civil liberties, Dr. Cushman argued, patriotic
and loyal Americans cannot permit such a thing to happen, par-
ticularly since the difficulty of defining "communism" menaces the
civil liberties of all liberals and progressives. He pilloried the House
Un-American Activities Committee, and labeled the Mundt-Nixon
bill and the Smith Act as threats to civil liberty.
In January 1947, in a paper presented to the American Academy
of Political Science, Dr. Cushman characterized as "nonsense" the
theory of guilt by association ("good boys may associate with bad
boys to do good") . Also nonsense, according to Dr. Cushman, is des-
ignating as a fellow traveler, one who —
Joined organizations in which "there turn out tq be some
Communists,"
Signed petitions supporting policies "also supported by
Communists,"
Sympathized with the Spanish Republicans, "some of whom
were Communists,"
Professed a strong admiration of Russian culture and achieve-
ments.
More than a year later, in October 1948, he presented a dissertation
on the repercussions of foreign affairs on the American tradition of
civil liberties, included in the proceedings of the American Philo-
sophical Society. There is little difference between this and the
preceding paper, except that he used the technique of presenting
supposedly the opinions of others, always unnamed. He repeated
that "critics of the program" believe loyalty tests violate due process ;
requiring clearances for atomic scientists, "he has been told," impairs
the quality of their work and leads to resignations j "many have said"
that the House Un-American Activities Committee is politically
minded — treats cases in the press — fails to define "un-American"
and "subversive."
Concluding, he stated as his own belief that there is need for "an
objective study" to avoid "heavy inroads" into traditional civil lib-
erty. As mentioned, this was the year the foundation gave the largest
grant— $110,000.
In the 1951 annals of the American Academy of Political Science,
Dr. Cushman referred to the work of congressional investigating com-
mittees as similar to a "bill of attainder," and again unhesistatingly
defined a "Communist front" as an "organization in which there turn
out to be some Communists." He "found" that social and humani-
tarian causes are weakened by guilt by association theories, because
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 903
people fear to support such causes lest later Communists also be found
supporting them ; national security also is weakened "because the
"ordinary citizen" is confused by the idea of guilt by association.
Non-governmental antisubversive measures were also criticized — he
referred particularly to the dismissal of Jean Muir by General Foods —
and in Dr. Cushman's opinion, "it is hard to find any evidence that
loyalty oaths of any kind serve any useful purpose beyond the purging
of the emotions of those who set them up."
Walter Gellhorn, of Columbia University
A second collaborator in the Cornell studies, Walter Gellhorn, is
apparently actually their director, and the author of a major volume in
the studies, Security, Loyalty, and Science.
Dr. Walter Gellhorn is listed in appendix IX, page 471, as a "con-
scious propagandist and fellow traveler," and is in a group including
Fields, Barnes, Jerome Davis, and Maxwell S. Stewart.
He was a leading member of some 11 Communist fronts.
He was a national committeeman of the International Juridical
Association, whose constitution declares :
Present-day America offers the example of a country discarding the traditions
of liberty and freedom, and substituting legislative, administrative, and judicial
tyranny.
The American section's purpose is —
To help establish in this country and throughout the world social and legislative
justice.
He is cited as an "active leader" of the National Lawyers Guild.
Appearing before the House committee in 1943, he denied the
International Juridical Association and several other fronts with
which he had been associated were communistic, had extreme dif-
ficulty remembering just what documents he might have signed,
including a declaration of the National Lawyers Guild and a cable-
gram protesting Brazil's detention of an agent of the Communist inter-
national, a man named Ewert.
Dr. Gellhorn (Harvard Law Review of October 1947) prepared
a Eeport on a Report of the House Committee on Un-American Activ-
ities, specifically defending the Southern Conference for Human
Welfare, exposed as a Communist organization, and violently attack-
ing the House committee. His book for the Cornell studies indicates
Dr. Gellhorn had not changed his opinion either of the southern
conference or the House committee.
The Daily Worker, March 15, 1948, under a heading "Gellhorn
Raps 'Un-American,' " quoted from an article by Dr. Gellhorn (Amer-
ican Scholar — Spring 1948), in which he likened the House Un-
American Activities Committee to a "thought control" program,
and declared, "More important than any procedural reform, however,
is conscious opposition to the House committee's bullying."
Dr. Gellhorn begins Security, Loyalty and Science, by expressing
his fear that strict security regulations "would immobilize our own
scientific resources to such an extent that future development might
be stifled while more alert nations overtook and surpassed us." In spite-
of a lack of reciprocity on the part of others, Dr. Gellhorn believes that
the fruit of our work should be fully published and not restricted,
even if, as he offhandly puts it, there is "no neat balance between the
904 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
outgoing of our information and intake * * *". which in his opinion
may"* * * be entirely irrelevant."
His theme is that security regulations and loyalty programs are use-
less and dangerous. He cites particularly category B of the Atomic
Energy Commission, covering "undesirables" — those having sym-
pathetic interests or associations with subversive ideas, friends, rela-
tives, or organizations. Like Dr. Cushman, Dr. Gellhorn found it
even "more alarming" that nongovernmental agencies are increasingly
requiring clearances ; he dismissed the House Un-American Activities
Committee as indulging in repetition and exaggeration and added that
they are responsible for scientists refusing to work for the Govern-
ment. He belittled the Attorney General's list, its designations to
him to have no pattern, and he questioned the reliability of the con-
fidential information frequently used.
He concluded that the loyalty program originated in anti-New Deal
politics (beginning with the Dies committee in 1938), that it is in-
effective against "the furtive, the corrupt, the conspiratorial," and "the
country will be stronger for discovering that the restraints of the pres-
ent loyalty program exceed the needs of national preservation."
Denial of AEC fellowships to Communists is unwarranted, in Dr.
Gellhorn's opinion, and he quoted approvingly statements of others
that deplored the atmosphere of distrust and suspicion; thought
loyalty checking brought into being a "police state" and the use of
methods "far more dangerous than the small risk of having an occa-
sional Communist on the fellowship rolls."
As evidence that security files are misleading anyway, Dr. Gellhorn
cited the fact that the Army in 1949 classified as "unemployable"
Gordon R. Clapp of TVA, Professor Counts, and Roger Baldwin.
Dr. Gellhorn is also responsible for other books in this project. He
is coauthor of a study on States and subversion (with William B.
Prendergast, assistant professor of government at the Naval Acad-
emy), and of a study on the Tenney committee (with Edward Bar-
rett, Jr., professor of law, University of California, who stated, "I
am particularly grateful to Walter Gellhorn of Columbia University
for his constant advice and suggestions and for his careful reading
of the manuscript in two of its preliminary versions") .
These statements of Dr. Cushman and Dr. Gellhorn both prior to
und after their association with the Cornell studies cannot be con-
sidered as those of "unbiased" and "objective" individuals. Dr. Gell-
horn's appearance before the House Committee on Un-American
Activities in 1943 was a matter of record. It is difficult if not far-
fetched to believe that no inkling of these matters reached either the
Social Science Research Council or the Rockefeller Foundation — be-
fore or after the grants were made by the foundation. Yet as far as
can be ascertained neither organization has had anything but praise
for the studies, and the personnel associated with it.
These then are some of the organizations selected by the Carnegie
Corporation of New York, the Carnegie Foundation for International
Peace, and the Rockefeller Foundation :
To promote the advancement and diffusion of knowledge and understanding
among the people of the United States and the British Dominions.
To promote the advancement and diffusion of knowledge and understanding
ja.taoug the people of the United States ; to advance the cause of peace among
nations ; to hasten the renunciation of war as an instrument of national policy ;
to encourage and promote methods for the peaceful settlement of international
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 905
differences and for the increase of international understanding and concord ;
and to aid in the development of international law and the acceptance by all
nations of the principles underlying such law.
To promote the well-being of mankind throughout the world.
These then are among the individuals — directly or indirectly —
designated by these Carnegie and Rockefeller foundations as those not
only best qualified to accomplish the noble purposes set out in their
respective charters, but also those most likely to do so.
These are a few of the individuals who have gained prominence and
whose reputation has been built up by the sponsorship and employ-
ment of foundations — either directly or through organizations re-
ceiving foundation funds to carry out projects approved if not selected
by them.
No indication appears in the annual reports of these tax-exempt
organizations—- certainly not in those made available to the public —
that the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the Carnegie Endow-
ment for International IJeace, or the Rockefeller Foundation has
disavowed the individuals, the organizations, or the results thereof,
except in a few isolated instances reported in the Cox committee
hearings.
Nor is there any indication that any one of these tax-exempt organi-
zations has taken any measures — either before or after the Cox
committee hearings — to insure that organizations as well as individ-
uals receiving their funds in the future will use such funds to make
studies which are in fact objective, not only with regard to the
material considered, but also as to personnel ; studies which will faith-
fully present facts on both sides of the issue or theory — particularly
when it is of a controversial character. Nor have any measures been
taken to prevent two equally improper uses of tax-exempt funds :
first, under the guise of "informing public opinion" — propagandizing
for a particular political philosophy or viewpoint ; and second, again
under the cloak of "supplying information to the Government" — pre-
senting only information upholding a particular philosophy, or view-
point, and which if accepted will tend to influence Government
officials more and more toward socialistic solutions of current
problems.
If any such precautions have been taken then discussion and de-
cision as to them does not appear in the published reports, nor has any
publicity been given to the fact.
Kathrtn Casey,
Legal Analyst.
July 1, 1954.
Exhibit — Part II. Carnegie
Excekfts From the Yearbooks of the Carnegie Endowment for International
Peace and Material Taken Prom Other Sources From 1911-1952
(Source: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1916 Yearbook:)
Page 33 : "* * * The publications of the endowment may be divided generally
Into two classes : first, those of a propagandist nature, which the general public
is not expected to purchase but which the endowment desires to have widely
read."
* * * * * * *
Page 34 : "* * * There are several other phases of the subject of the proper
distribution of the endowment's publications which the Secretary believes should
receive further consideration.
906 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
"The proposed charter of the endowment places upon an equal footing with its
scientific work the education of public opinion and the dissemination of informa-
tion. This is the proper light in which to view this branch of the work ; unless
the results of its efforts are read, appreciated, and utilized, the time, energy,
funds of the endowment will be wasted. The problem therefore is deserving
of the same serious thought as the problems of scientific work, which have here-
tofore received the chief consideration, but which now appear to be fairly solved.
"In speaking generally of educating public opinion and diffusing information,
the trustees no doubt had in mind two distinct classes of people :
"(1) Those who are already of their own accord interested in the sub-
jects which come within the scope of the endowment ;
"(2) Those not now interested but who may be and should be made to
take an interest in the work."
EDUCATIONAL WOEK IN THE UNITED STATES
Page 71 : "That very important portion of the educational, work carried on in
the United States, which is conducted through the American Association for
International Conciliation, has already been described.
"In addition to this the Division of Intercourse and Education has directly
conducted work of an educational character of three kinds — publicity through
the newspaper press, lectures, and preparation and distribution of material for
use in schools and by writers of school textbooks.
Publicity
"With a view to spreading an interest in international affairs and a new
knowledge of them among the people of the United States, articles on subjects of
international interest based on interviews with men of prominence in public
and business life have been prepared and offered to a large list of newspapers
throughout the country on a business basis. The opinion has been expressed: fry
a number of editors and conductors of newspapers that these articles have been
of the highest value and have exerted a large influence on public opinion."
(Source: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1917 Yearbook.)
DIVISION OF INTERCOURSE AND EDUCATION
Page 53 : "The continuance of the world war which broke out on August 1, 1914,
has caused the Division of Intercourse and Education to confine its activities to
two fields. The first includes the informa,tion and education of public opinion, in
the United States as to those underlying principles of national policy and national
conduct that are most likely to promote an international peace which rests upon a
foundation of justice and human liberty. The second includes those activities
which have as their purpose the bringing of the peoples of the several American
republics more closely together in thought and in feelings *> *■ *"
* * * * * * «
EDUCATIONAL WORK IN THE UNITED STATES
Page 72: "In addition to the highly important educational work conducted
for the division by the American Association for International Conciliation, two
methods of reaching and instructing public opinion in the United States have
been followed: publicity on international affairs through newspapers, and the
preparation and distribution of material for schools and writers of school text-
books."
Publicity
"Syndicated articles mainly consisting of interviews with leaders of opinion in
both American and European countries have been furnished to the newspapers
on a commercial basis. These articles have not always been directly concerned
with questions of international peace, but have furnished unusually valuable
information on the public opinion, the political life, and the intellectual develop-
ment of many nations. Their main object has been to increase in the United
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 907
States the amount arid accuracy of knowledge of other countries and of their
peoples. It is believed that the best foundation for international friendship
and international justice is to be found in a thorough knowledge of our neighbors
and a true appreciation of their institutions and their life."
CONCLUSION
Page 82 ; "It is probable that the greatest war in all history is approaching its
end. At this moment no one can predict just when or how this end will come, but
there are plain signs to indicate that a crisis has been reached beyond which
human power and human resources cannot long hold out. It will be the special /
privilege and the unexampled opportunity of the Carnegie Endowment for Inter-
national Peace to take active part in the work of international organization which
must closely follow on the conclusion of the war. For that task this division is
making itself ready by study, by conferences, and by persistent effort to prepare
public opinion to give support to those far-reaching projects based on sound
principle which if carried into effect will do all that present human power can to
prevent a recurrence of the present unprecedented calamity."
( Source : Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1918 Yearbook, p. 65 : )
DIVISION OF INTERCOURSE AND EDUCATION
"The instruction of public opinion in this and other countries, the sympathetic
cooperation with established effective agencies for the spread of accurate knowl-
edge of international relations and international policies, and the cementing of
those personal and national friendships which the war with all its separations
has so greatly multiplied, have solely occupied the attention of the division. To
these purposes its resources have been exclusively devoted."
(Source : Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1920 Yearbook, p. 62 :)
EDUCATIONAL WORK
"A wide distribution of books, pamphlets, and periodicals has been made from
the offices of the division, with the definite aim of informing public opinion on
questions of international significance, and the educational activity of the policy
clubs, together with the limited but important work in summer schools, have
proved an effective means of developing the international mind."
( Source : Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1923 Yearbook, p. 58,,
division of intercourse and education : )
"It is the established policy of the division to try to keep important person-
alities in various lands informed as to influential expressions of opinion on
foreign affairs made in this country. With this end in view a list of the names
a,Bd addresses of over 500 persons eminent in their own countries is maintained
at the division headquarters. This year the list has been extended to include
representatives of Germany and Austria. Among the expressions of American
ojrinion circulated by the division during the period under review were : Shall
Our Government Cancel the War Loans to the Allies? by Justice John H. Clarke;
The State of Our National Finances, by Edwin R. A. Seligman ; Intelligence and
Politics, by James T. Shotwell; Toward Higher Ground, by Nicholas Murray
Butler; and What of Germany, France, and England f by Herbert Bayard Swope.
That such pamphlets are carefully read and discussed in this country, it is the
judgment of the division that it is of sufficient importance to be brought to the
attention of representative personalities in other lands to be read and discussed
by them. The division assumes no responsibility for the contents of any books
or articles so circulated save such as appear authoritatively over its own
jiajag * * *" [italics supplied.]
49720— 54— pt. 1—58
908 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
(Source : Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1925 Yearbook, division
of intercourse and education, pp. 49-50 : )
"In respect of the general problem of international peace, public opinion is now
almost everywhere persistently in advance of the action of governments. Only
in rare cases do existing governments fully represent and reflect either the noblest
ambitions or the highest interests of their own people in the discussions which
are going forward throughout the world. * * *
"Few proposals could be more futile than that merely to outlaw war. Such
outlawry would only last until human passion broke down its fragile barrier.
The neutrality of Belgium was amply protected by international law, and the
invasion of the territory of that country on August 4, 1914, was definitely and
distinctly outlawed. Nevertheless it took place. Precisely the same thing will
happen in the future, no matter what the provisions of international law may be,
if the springs of personal and national conduct remain unchanged. Forms do
not control facts. Laws must reflect, but cannot compel public opinion * * *."
If such laws are to be truly effective, they must be not enforced but obeyed.
They are only obeyed, and they only will be obeyed, when they reflect the over-
whelming public opinion of those whom they directly affect. Once more, there-
fore, the path of progress leads to the door of conduct, both personal and national.
"It is beyond the limits of practical education or practical statesmanship to
convince public opinion that there is not, and never can be, any cause for which
men should be ready to lay down their lives if need be. The history of human
liberty and the story of the making of free governments offer too many illustra-
tions to the contrary. What is practicable is so to instruct, to guide, and to form
public opinion that it will insist upon such national conduct and such public
expressions on the part of representatives of governments as will promote inter-
national understanding and international cooperation, as well as reduce to a
minimum those incidents, those policies, and those outgivings, whether on the
platform, on the floor of parliaments, or in the press, that constantly erect such
effective and distressing obstacles to the progress of international concord and
cooperation."
*******
Page 52 : "Underneath and behind all these undertakings there remains the task
to instruct and to enlighten public opinion so that it may not only guide but com-
pel the action of governments and public officers in the direction of constructive
progress. There must be present the moral conviction that a peace which rests
upon liberty and justice is an ideal so lofty that no effort and no sacrifice may
properly be spared in the task of securing its accomplishment. When this stage
is reached it will not be necessary formally to limit armaments ; they will atrophy
from neglect and disuse.
"It is from precisely this point of view that the work of the division of inter*
course and education has, from the beginning, dealt with the problem of inter-
national peace. The division has studiously refrained from mere sentimental
expressions, and from participation in those futile acts which repel much more
than they attract the support of right-minded men and women. The division has
devoted itself for 15 years, and it will continue to devote itself, to the develop-
ment among men and nations of the international mind. 'The international
mind is nothing else than that habit of thinking of foreign relations and business,
and that habit of dealing with them, which regard the several nations of the
civilized world as friendly and cooperating equals in aiding the progress of civili-
zation,- in developing commerce and industry, and in spreading enlightenment
and culture throughout the world'." [Italic supplied.]
(Source: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1928 Yearbook, p. 38,
division of intercourse and education : )
ADMINISTRATION OF THE DIVISION IN THE UNITED STATES
"In addition to this stated work a large part of the activity of the division is
devoted to the carrying out of specific, definite, and well-considered projects of
demonstrated timeliness, such as those to be described in the following pages.
These projects might be subdivided to include, on the one hand, those in which
the work is directed and supervised from the headquarters of the division and
those which are carried out by the organizations or individuals to whom allot-
ments are made from time to time. For instance, not only was the European trip
of editorial writers planned by and details arranged from the division offices, but
two members of the staff, the assistant to the director, and the division assistant
accompanied the party for the entire trip and were,in charge of all administrative
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 909
details. The correspondence and careful arrangements necessary in connection
with the work of the visiting Carnegie professors of international relations are
also done from the division offices. On the other hand, when an allotment is
made by the executive committee to such organizations as the Interparliamentary
Union, the Institute of Pacific Relations, or Dunford House Association, the
work is administered by these organizations who report to the division upon the
work when completed. As has already been said, these allotments are always
made in support of definite projects. It is not the policy of the division to grant
subventions continuing from year to year to organizations or undertakings not
directly responsible to the administration of the division itself. * * *" [Italic
supplied.]
(Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1930 Yearbook, p. 108 :)
"* * * But it is not enough to have academies of this kind. The youth of each
■country should be instructed in international duties as well as in international
rights in the colleges and universities of the nations at large. Therefore it is
that the professors of international law and of international relations in the
colleges and universities of the United States have met in conference in order
to discuss and to agree upon the best methods to reach and to educate the youth —
primarily of the United States — in the principles of international law and the
bases of foreign relations. There have been four meetings: The first in 1914,
the second in 1925, the third in 1928, and the fourth in 1929."
( Source : Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Yearbook, 1934 : )
Page 22: "* * * The attitude of the endowment toward applications from
other organizations was fully explained in the secretary's report 2 years ago,
where it was stated that 'The attitude of the endowment with reference to its
support of other organizations in the same field presented a difficult question
during the first half of the endowment's existence, but its experience has resulted
in the definite policy of applying the revenue at its disposal to work carried on
with the approval of its trustees and under the direct supervision of its own
officers or agents,' What could not be undertaken during the earlier years of
the endowment's existence, because of the war and its aftermath, so soon as
the echoes of the war had died away was vigorously undertaken. A worldwide
organization has been built up at a minimum of administrative cost, through
which the endowment is in contact with the public opinion of nearly every land.
The endowment is consequently not a money-granting, but an operating, body,
and it operates through its own agencies either directly or through those which
become substantially its own through their spirit and method of cooperation."
* * * * * . * ■ «
Page 22 : A review of the activities of the endowment since the world
war, carried on separately through three main divisions, but operating as a unit
in behalf of the great ideal of its founder, seems to justify the observation that
the endowment is becoming an unofficial instrument of international policy,
taking up here and there the ends and threads of international problems and
questions which the governments find it difficult to handle, and through private
initiative reaching conclusions which are not of a formal nature but which
unofficially find their way into the policies of governments."
*******
DIVISION OF INTERCOURSE AND EDUCATION
Page 44: "* * * If the world is to return, and without delay, to the path of
progress, it must be given leadership which is not only national but international.
It must find minds and voices which can see the whole world and its problems,
and not merely those of one neighborhood since important problems which are
purely national have almost ceased to exist."
*******
REPORT OF DIVISION OF INTERCOURSE AND EDUCATION
Page 47: "The work of the division during the year shows definite progress
along the path of constructive work for the education of public opinion through-
■ out the world. This advance could not have been accomplished had it not been
for the efficient and well ordered work of the central office where cost of over-
910 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
head is reduced to a minimum and where the staff, in full conformity with the
NJRA regulations, is faithfully carrying on its tasks."
*******
Page 53 : "While in the broadest sense all the work of the division is educa-
tional there are certain items which fall definitely under this head in making
a report on the year's work. They have all been carried on with a view to the
general enlightenment of public opinion and to encourage further study along
international lines rather than as definite and continuing projects, such as
those to be described later, which are an integral part of the work of the
division."
*******
Page 96 : "It is plain from what has been written that the year has been one
of constant study and vigorous work despite the fact that the world atmosphere
has been distinctly discouraging. That economic nationalism which is still
running riot and which is the greatest obstacle to the reestablishment of pros-
perity and genuine peace has been at its height during the past 12 months. If
it now shows signs of growing weaker it is because its huge cost is beginning to
be understood. It is only by such education of publie opinion as that in which
the division of intercourse and education is so largely engaged that this violently
reactionary movement can be checked and there be substituted for it such inter-
national understanding, international cooperation, and international action as
the needs and ideals of this present-day world so imperatively demand."
( Source : Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1937 Yearbook : )
Page 180 : "* * * The major portion of the present work of the division of inter-
course and education is devoted to educating public opinion in the significance of
this forward-facing and constructive program for international cooperation.
"What I want to point out to the newer trustees is that what has been going
on for 18 years is the result of most careful study and reflection, a result of
consultation with leaders of opinion in every land, and is justifying itself not
in any quick action by governments, but in the very obvious growth of public
opinion."
***** * *
Page 182: "As to the work of the division of international law, that is a
business of instruction, a business of education, a business not to make all
members of a democracy international lawyers, but to put everywhere possible
the material by means of which the leaders of opinion in all communities may
know what are the real rights and duties of their country, so that it may be
possible for the people who do not study and are not competent to understand,
to get a source of intelligent and dispassionate information. And that process
has been going on steadily.
"We had one very important illustration of the advantage of it during the
past year. I really do not know how the Far-Eastern work of the late Con-
ference upon the Limitation of Armament could have been done without Mac-
Murray's book which had just a few months before been published by the
endowment. The whole process of ranging the nine nations represented in
the conference upon a basis of agreement for the treatment of Chinese ques-
tions so as to facilitate the heroic efforts of the Chinese people to develop
an effective and stable self-government would have been exceedingly difficult,
if not impossible, if we had not had those two big volumes published by the
endowment upon our tables for access at any moment. We were continually
referring to them and the members could turn to such a page and find such
a treaty and such an agreement and have the real facts readily accessible. If
the tentative arrangement towards helping the Chinese in their struggle works
out, as I think it will, the publication of those books, at the time when they
were published, will be worth to the world all the money that has been spent
on the division of international law from the beginning. There were a dozen
other books to which we continually referred."
Source : Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1941 Yearbook, Report
of the Division of Economics and History, p. 117 : )
"* * * All history shows, however, that these appeals to man's higher nature
have had no permanent effect except where substitutes for war have been found
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 911
-which could be used effectively in the settlement of disputes. The peace move-
ment of the twentieth century owed whatever real strength it might have
possessed to the fact that for the first time it concentrated upon this constructive
aspect of the problem. Unfortunately, however, this method of approach was
too new to be fully understood, with the resultant failures culminating in the
present war. The events of the last 5 years, since Japan tested the peace
machinery in the Far East, and then Italy and Germany followed its example
in Africa and Europe, have clearly shown that if civilization is to survive
somehow or other the peace machinery must be brought back into operation.
The problem which confronted the makers of the League of Nations has again
become a vital issue. The increasing awareness of this fact, not only here
but in Great Britain and in the Dominions of the Commonwealth, is evidenced
by the growth of a considerable number of bodies for research and discussion.
Of one of these, the Commission to Study the Organisation of Peace, the Director
of this division was chairman, although in a purely personal capacity. Men-
tion is made here of this effort because of the light which it throws upon the
nature of the problem itself. It would be hard to find a greater contrast than
between the background of the thinking of today and that of the vague and
uncertain beginnings of similar discussions in 1917. The experiences of the
League of Nations has after all taught us much, its failures equally with its
successes. The most surprising feature, however, is the record of the Interna-
tional Labor Organization in the field of social welfare, a unique and wholly
new experiment in international legislation. It is this kind of planning for a new
world order on a cooperative basis which furnishes the constructive program of
the peace movement at the present time. It is therefore important to ensure
the preparation of careful and thoughtful monographs in the various fields
covered by these surveys in order to prevent a recurrence of the superficiality
which marked so much of the peace movement of the 1920's. It is here that the
division of economics and history continues to offer the contribution of specific
objectives and definite studies such as those indicated below." [Italics supplied.]
( Source : Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1942 Yearbook : )
DIVISION OF INTERCOURSE AND EDUCATION
Page 27 : "The aims which the division pursues and which it urges constantly
and steadily upon public opinion in the United States, in the Latin American
democracies and in the British Commonwealth of Nations are definite and
authoritative. They are three in number.
"The first is the formal proposal for world organization to promote peace made
by the Government of the United States in 1910. This was contained in the
joint resolution passed by the Congress without a dissenting vote in either the
Senate or the House of Representatives and signed by President Taft on June
25, 1910."
Page 28 : "The second is the statement of principles adopted by the interna-
tional conference held in London at Chatham House on March 5-7, 1935. This
conference, called by the Carnegie Endowment, remains the outstanding interna-
tional conference of recent years."
Page 29 : "The third is the important Atlantic Charter as declared by the
President of the United States and the Prime Minister of the Government of
Great Britain on August 14, 1941, which may be regarded as an endorsement
of, and a suppement to, the principles proposed by the conference held at Chat-
ham House."
Page 30 : "It is these three declarations of policies and aims which are the
subject of the worldwide work of the division of intercourse and education.
They are the outgrowth of war conditions and of the threat of war. They are
constructive, simply stated and easy to understand. As rapidly as other nations
are set free to receive instruction and information in support of this three-
fold program, that instruction and information will be forthcoming. The war
may last for an indefinite time or it may, through economic exhaustion, come to
912 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
an end earlier than many anticipate. In either case, the division of intercourse
and education is prepared to carry on in the spirit of Mr. Carnegie's ideal and
of his specific counsel."
Page 91: "The division likewise cooperates with various Government offices
and with international organizations. Thus during the past year it has aided
the Department of State in editing the many papers submitted to the ninth
section (on international law, public law, and jurisprudence) of the Eighth
American Scientific Congress. Such cooperation is appropriate because officers
of the division served as chairman and secretary, respectively, of section IX, and
the division's staff acted as the section's secretariat. Cooperative relations are
also maintained with the Office of the Coordinator of Inter- American Affairs and
with other Government agencies. Of a somewhat similar nature are the rela-
tions maintained with such international organizations as the Pan American
Union and the Inter- American Bar Association. The assistance thus rendered
to organizations official and unofficial, often requires the expenditure of much
time, but it should be added that the relationship is not infrequently of mutual
benefit since the division is often in a position, as a result thereof to obtain data
which might not otherwise be readily accessible to it."
(Source: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1943 Yearbook.)
Pages 29-30 : "The policies which were put in operation a quarter of a century
ago, with the approval of more than 200 of the leading statesmen and intellectual
leaders of the whole world, have proved to be most satisfactory and most impor-
tant. Literally millions of human beings have been led to read together and to
discuss the facts and the forces which constitute international relations and which
make for peace of the country. Thousands of groups in the United States and
hundreds of groups in other lands gather regularly to discuss the books that are
provided by the endowment and to hear the lectures which are offered by visiting
Carnegie professors.
"The work of the division has carefully avoided the merely sentimental or
that sensational propaganda for peace which is all too common. It has based
its work, and will continue to do so, upon the intellectual forces which alone
can guide the world in the establishment of new and constructive policies of
international cooperation to make another war such as now rages practically
impossible."
Page 36 : "Preparation of Programs for Secondary Schools : Special inquiry
into the needs of secondary schools in the field of international relations study,
under the direction of Professor Erling M. Hunt, of Teachers College, Columbia
University, was carried on in cooperation with the Commission to Study the Or-
ganisation of Peace. A group of New York City high school teachers took part
in a summer working conference for a week. They planned and drafted an 80-
page booklet which included reading and study suggestions for the use of senior
high school students entitled Toward Greater Freedom: Problems of War and
Peace. This has been published and distributed by the Commission to Study the
Organization of Peace.
"The School of Education of Stanford University, California, was assisted by
the division in bringing together, in July, a group of high school teachers and
administrators from schools in the Pacific Coast and Mountain States. The
group devoted 2 weeks to intensive analysis of war issues and postwar problems
as they affect the curriculum and the individual teacher. As a result a report,
Education for War and Peace, embodying the findings of the groups and in-
tended as a pamphlet for immediate use in schools, has been published by the
Stanford University Press." [Italics supplied.]
*******
Page 37-38 : "Any doubts which might have been entertained as to the value of
the International Relations Club work in colleges and universities, during the long
years in which the endowment has been operating, must have been completely dis-
pelled by the magnificent response that has come from both faculty advisers and
students during this period of disruption and confusion caused by the present
worldwide catastrophe. Each of the 12 regional conferences was carried through
during the calendar year 1942. This is the more remarkable since difficulties
have increased rather than lessened as the war progresses. Almost every letter
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 913
received at the opening of the academic year announced that faculty advisors
were leaving their respective campuses to serve in the armed forces or to support
in advisory capacity Government defense projects, but even when called away
summarily these faculty members have found time to appoint successors and to
write a heartening letter as to the importance of carrying on. The drain upon
the student body through induction into the Army has been overwhelming. In
many of the colleges students are using their .spare time in local war industries
or in defense work if they have not actually left college, and most of the studies
have been directed along engineering and other lines closely connected with the
war effort. But even the boys who know that within a few weeks they will be
in a military camp have tried to learn the deeper causes of the war through con-
tinued attendance at the club meetings, and at many of the conferences uniforms
have been in evidence, worn by ex-club members who have been granted permis-
sion to attend. In fact, the clubs have continued with more enthusiasm and
vigor than ever before.
( Source : Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1944 Yearbook, pp.
70-74:)
"Many problems of international organization and administration are confront-
ing the United Nations authorities, and problems of that nature will assume far
greater importance as the war draws to an end and postwar activities undergo
the large-scale development now anticipated. Foreseeing such a trend, the di-
vision has given much attention to this field during the past 2 years.
"There is, of course, no international civil service to evolve formal rules, prac-
tices, and precedents for future guidance in international administration; and
although there has been encouraging progress in methods of international organi-
zation, those methods are not as yet beyond the trial-and-error stage. Moreover,
the literature in these fields is extremely inadequate. Yet valuable experience has
been acquired in both administration and organization, especially by the Secre-
tariat, of the League of Nations, the International Labor Office, and other inter-
national agencies, some of which have functioned successfully over a considerable
period of years. This experience however, is contained partly in unpublished
records and, to an even greater extent, in the memories of those who have
served in the organizations in question ; and it is therefore not available for the
guidance of the many officials and agencies now actively concerned in planning
and setting up the machinery for future international cooperation.
"With a view to making available the most important features of such expe-
rience, the division has held a series of conferences which have been attended by
officials and former officials of the League of Nations and of other international
bodies, and in some instances by government officials and others especially inter-
ested in the fields of the conferences. The first of these meetings, held in New
York on August 30, 1942, was of an exploratory nature, its chief purpose being to
determine what particular aspects of the experience of the League of Nations
Secretariat might be further studied and recorded in usable form. At the end of
the following January a second conference was held at Washington, which was
devoted specifically to a survey of experience in international administration.
And some 6 months later, on August 21-22 of last year, a third conference was
held in Washington to discuss the problem of training for international admin-
istration. The proceedings of the first two conferences were issued in confidential
mimeographed editions and given a restricted distribution, chiefly among govern-
ment agencies and their personnel. The proceedings of the third conference,
■however, will be of interest to a much wider group, including not only officials
but educators and others deeply concerned with the need of adequate training for
the staffs of many international agencies which are either in process of forma-
tion or are contemplated for the postwar period. For this reason, the proceedings
of the third conference have been carefully edited and supplemented with docu-
mentary materials, and printed for a wider distribution."
*******
"As a result of the conferences and related activities, as well as of the studies
made by its staff, the division has established useful relations with many highly
qualified and experienced experts, and this in turn has made it possible to plan
and arrange for the preparation of a series of studies by a number of these
experts on international organization and administration. The studies, more
fully described below, record both experience and precedents in the fields in
question and constitute a rich source of information which, in the main, has
hitherto been inaccessible.
914 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
"These activities of the division have placed it in a peculiarly strategic posi-
tion to cooperate with official agencies preparing to undertake important inter-
national functions. At the outset, such agencies are, of course, confronted with
problems of organization and administration, and it is a matter of urgent neces-
sity for them to obtain materials which will assist them in meeting these prob-
lems. It is a source of great satisfaction to the director that the division has
been in a position to supply such-materials. Without attempting to list these
instances of cooperation in detail, mention should be made here of a few ex-
amples by way of illustration.
"For some months, the Office of Foreign Relief and Rehabilitation Operations
(OFRRO) was engaged in preparations for the organizing conference of the
United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration (UNRRA) held at
Atlantic City, November 10 to December 1, and it frequently called upon the
division to assist by various means in these preparations. Thus, in August, the
division was able to arrange to have several officials of the League of Nations
come to Washington to take part in discussions of plans for the administrative
budget of the new organizations. In a letter to the endowment former Gov.
Herbert H. Lehman, then director of OFRRO and recently chosen director of
UNRRA, wrote expressing his 'great appreciation for the very real contribution
which you and the Carnegie endowment made to our preparations for a United
Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Organization.'
"Members of the staff of OFRRO were early supplied by the division with
the materials assembled as the result of the several conferences on international
organization and administration above mentioned. As the date of the confer-
ence in Atlantic City approached, the division received numerous additional and
more urgent requests for assistance from OFRRO. In compliance with these
requests, several special memoranda were prepared under great pressure for use
in connection with the UNRRA conference. These dealt with the following
subjects :
"International Conferences and Their Technique
"Precedents for Relations Between International Organizations and Nonmember
States
"Status of Observers at International Conferences!
"Seconding by International Organizations and from National Services to In-
ternational Agencies
"The Creation, Composition, and Functioning of Standing Committees of UNRRA
"The appreciation with which these contributions from the division were
received can hardly be overstated. As an illustration, mention may be made
of a personal note of November 17 received by the director from Dr. Philip C.
Jessup, a member of the endowment's board of trustees, and then serving as
Assistant Chief of the Secretariat of UNRRA. After describing one of the
documents as having proved 'most helpful in the solution of some troublesome
problems' ; and expressing amazement that it had been possible to supply 'so
thougbful and so complete a document under such enormous pressure of time,'
Dr. Jeesup referred to other materials supplied by the division as being 'also
very much appreciated,' and added: 'I think the endowment is certainly entitled
to congratulate itself upon the contribution it has made to the smooth func-
tioning of international organizations which, to a large extent, must be the
mechanical means of developing international peace.'
"It should be added that, in addition to these special memoranda, the division
supplied several copies of its various publications relating to international
organization and administration to the library of the conference at Atlantic
City. Shortly after the conference met, an urgent request was received from the
American delegation at Atlantic City for additional copies of these publications,
to be sent to the conference by special courier. The division was, of course,
glad to meet this request. Of a somewhat different nature were the numerous
urgent inquiries for specific information received from officials connected with
the conference. These inquiries dealt with such topics as relations of former
enemy governments after the last war with the American Relief Commission,
•diplomatic immunities of members of international organizations, and staff regu-
lations of such organizations. In each instance, the division was able either
to supply the information requested, or to indicate the best source from which
it could be obtained.
"Similarly, though to a somewhat lesser degree, the division has cooperated
with the recently created Interim Commission of the United Nations Conference
on Food and Agriculture. Copies of the endowment's publications on interna-
tional organization and administration were supplied to the Commission ; the
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 915
director and other members of the division staff have conferred with the
executive secretary of the Commission on problems relating to the constitution,
organization, and staffing of the newly created body ; and the division has
supplied the Secretariat with data on inter-American agencies dealing with
problems in the fields of food and agriculture.
"In addition to such special inquiries, the division receives from day to day,
often by telephone, requests for information from government offices on techni-
cal subjects in the international field. Although these are too numerous to list
here, it may be said that they are answered as fully as possible and as promptly
as is consistent with scrupulous accuracy. The assistance rendered by the
division has not been limited, however, to American and international agencies.
It maintains cordial and often mutually helpful relations with the diplomatic
missions in Washington and frequently supplies them with published materials
and other data.
"These studies, mentioned on a previous page, are in fact competently written
monographs. Because of the urgent demand for such materials, they are being
issued in preliminary form in small mimeographed editions. It is the Director's
belief, however, that they have much more than a transitory value, and that as
soon as is practicable some of them should be published in revised and permanent
form. The folowing list comprises the studies already issued in mimeographed
form :
"Memorandum on the Composition, Procedure, and Functions of the Committees
of the League of Nations
"International Conferences and Their Technique— a handbook
"International Drug Control, a Study of International Administration by and
through the League of Nations
"The League of Nations and National Minorities, an Experiment
"The following studies are now being prepared and will be published during
the coming year :
"The Situs of International Organization
"Diplomatic Immunities and Privileges of Agents and Staff Members of the
International Organization
"Relations Between International Organizations and Nonmember States
"The Participation of Observers in International Conferences
"The Bcoomic and Financial Organization of the League of Nations
"The League of Nations' Mandates System
"The League of Nations' Secretariat
"Financing of International Administration
"The names of the authors of these studies are being withheld for the present.
They are all, however, present or former officials competent from actual expe-
rience to deal with the subjects involved." [Italics supplied.]
* * * * * & *
( Source : Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1945 Yearbook : )
THE LIBRARY AND INFORMATION BUREAU
Page 25 : "The work of the library has continued along the same general lines
described in previous reports. In accordance with the policy adopted in 1942,
governmental agencies were given precedence in the use of the library's mate-
rials. In addition, its resources have been used by numerous foreign embassies
and legations and by the participants of such international meetings as those
at Dumbarton Oaks. Scholars, press representatives, professors, and interna-
tional, national, and local organizations have also been served.
"The ever-increasing discussion of the peace to follow the present war has
brought renewed demands for information on the subject. The endowment's
library is known in Washington for its wealth of material on peace and inter-
national organization and for its services in making these materials available.
As a result, library staff members have spent an increasingly large proportion of
their time in reference work with visitors. At the same time, due to the accel-
erated publication program in the Division of International Law, reference work
for the endowment staff has been tremendously increased."
Page 30 : "The proposals of statesmen and of public leaders for United Na-
tions organization and the formation of general opinion on these plans have
been the basis of growing action during the past year in the extension of the
division's work. Both by continuous contact with central groups operating pro-
grams of study in the main regions of the country and by collaboration with local
institutes and councils, this important interest has been pursued. The announce-
916 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
ment of the Dumbarton Oaks proposals heightened its significance in the last
quarter of the year and gave immediate political reality to it as an issue facing
our people.
"The development of centers in many part of the country, for organizations
associated with the endowment, has been described in preceding reports. The
brief summary of their expanding activities which can be given here demon-
strates that, although the programs and methods of the various centers differ,
there is agreement as to their fundamental purpose: to educate public opinion
in regard to the underlying principles essential to security after the war and to
welfare throughout the world."
* * * * * $ *
Page 103 : "As this report goes to press, the interest of the civilized world cen-
ters upon the United Nations Conference on International Organization meeting
at San Francisco on April 25. As this event promises to be the culmination of
much in the program of planning and policy advocated repeatedly in the annual
reports of this division and in its work and that of its director in affiliated organi-
zations, it is fitting to comment upon it and the nature of the peace settlement
at the end of the Second World War, of which it is so important a part. There-
fore,- without in any way attempting to anticipate what may or may not be done
at the San Francisco Conference, it seems not only valid but necessary to link
it up with the outlook and activities of the Endowment.
"During the past 5 years, both within the program of the division itself and in
connection with the research work for the International Chamber of Commerce
and the Commission To Study the Organization of Peace, the director has been
engaged upon a comprehensive series of studies dealing with postwar economic
policies and international organization * * *.
*******
Pages 105-106 : "The provision of the Dumbarton Oaks proposals for the erec-
tion of an Economic and Social Council under the Assembly, a provision unfortu-
nately absent from the Covenant of the League of Nations, has not yet received
anything like the attention which it deserves. Naturally the provisions for
security take the precedence in all discussions of the plan for world organization,
but in the long run the provision for the economic organization is more important,
if the security organization succeeds in the establishment of peace for even a
generation. The advancement of science will ultimately outlaw war, if it has not
already done so, but creates vast new problems in the field of economic relation-
ships.
"This inescapable conclusion is now widely shaded by thoughtful people, but
its application in practical politics is by no means assured in the most enlightened
countries. Here, therefore, is the area of international relations in which the
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace should continue to concentrate.
The affiliation with the International Chamber of Commerce should be strength-
ened through the Committee on International Economic Policy. At the same
time the interplay of all these forces making for peace and international under-
standing is translated into concrete form by the Commission to Study the Organ-
ization of Peace with which this division of the endowment has also been closely
associated.
"It is, however, fitting and proper now to record the fact that the director of
the division was consultant in the State Department for a year and a half during
all of the earlier phases of the planning of the General International Organiza-
tion agreed upon at the Moscow Conference and finally developed in the Dumbar-
ton Oaks proposals. The plans of the small subcommittee on postwar organiza-
tion, meeting under the chairmanship of the Under Secretary, Mr. Sumner Wells,
of which the director was a member, have remained basic throughout the period
of negotiation. The director was also a member of the Security Committee, the
agenda of which covered, among other things, the problem of armaments, and
the Legal Committee, concerned with American participation in an International
Court of Justice, and other problems of international law. More important, from
the standpoint of practical politics was the political committee in which some
members of the technical committees sat in conference with some of the leading
Senators and Congressmen under the chairmanship of the Secretary of State.
These formal discussions, which were held almost every week for several months,
have borne good results in strengthening the relations between the executive
and legislative branches of the Government with reference to the postwar settle-,
ment. It goes without saying that Secretary Hull, aware from long experience
of the need of cooperation between the State Department and Congress, did not
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 917
by any means limit his contacts to these formal meetings. Nevertheless, they
were of real importance in the clarification of policy.
"In the field of cultural relations, the director resigned his chairmanship of
the National Committee on International Intellectual Cooperation, an office which
he had held by virtue of his membership of the Organization of International
Intellectual Cooperation of the League of Nations. At at conference of repre-
sentatives of the various national committees of the Latin-American countries
held in Washington, he was elected member of a small international committee
created to give effect to the resolution of the Havana Conference of 1941. Prog-
ress of the war, however, has interrupted this development and the organizing
committee is happily faced with a new and much more developed plan for post-
war organization in cultural relations under the auspices of the State Depart-
ment, than the advisory committee of which the director was a member until
its dissolution."
PUBLICATIONS
Page 112: "* * * General International Organization: This is a statement
prepared by the Commission To Study the Organization of Peace which sum-
marized the conclusions of past reports and recast them with reference to the
plans then under consideration for the Dumbarton Oaks Conference. It is grati-
fying to note the many points of this statement which parallel the proposals of
that conference. Upon the conclusion of the conference, the commission issued
a statement to the press which was commented upon in a letter to the director
by Edward R, Stettinius, Jr., then Under Secretary of State, as follows: 'The
statement is another indication of the notable service in working for an objective
and scientific approach to the problems of international organization which has
marked the publications of the Commission To Study the Organization of Peace
in the past.' "
* * $ * * # #
EDUCATION
Page 114 : "When the Dumbarton Oaks proposals were made public, the com-
mission called together the heads of 75 national organizations to discuss a wide-
spread educational program to bring the proposals before the American public.
These groups have been meeting regularly in New York City, discussing both
publications and education techniques. Representatives from the Department
of State have been attending the meetings.
"The commission has cooperated also in the regional conferences at which
representatives of the State Department have met with organizational leaders
in off-the-record discussion of the proposals. Meetings were held in Portland,
Salt Lake City, Detroit, Salina, Dallas, St. Paul, and Atlanta. Large public
conferences on the proposals were held in New York City and other key centers,
the meetings being arranged by the commission's regional offices. In addition,
the commission continued its regular educational program, working with other
national organizations, schools and colleges, labor, farm, and business groups,
and concentrating considerable attention on rural areas and small towns.
"Special institute meetings were held in cooperation with the World Alliance
for International Friendship Through the Churches in Dallas, Tex. ; LaFayette
College, Pa. ; Miami and Winter Park, Fla. ; Chicago, 111. The regional commis-
sions have held other public conferences and institutes throughout the year."
The series of lectures which the commission has been sponsoring at the New
School for Social Research has now covered a considerable number of problems
of postwar international organization, dealing with labor, cultural relations,
mandates, plebiscites, the World Court, public health, minorities, moving of
populations, human rights, international education, and an analysis of the Dum-
barton Oaks proposals. The lecturers included Clark M. Bichelberger, Prof.
Carter Goodrich, Dr. Walter Kotschnig, Prof. Oscar I. Janowsky, Prof. Quincy
Wright, Dr. C. E. A. Winslow, Dr. Frank L. Lorimer, Mr. Beryl Harold Levy,
Dr. Hans Simons, Dr. Sarah Wambaugh, Dean Virginia C. Gildersleeve, and the
director of the division.
Over 600,000 copies of the commission's reports have been distributed and the
distribution of its popular material numbers 3% million pieces. A number of
basic pamphlets were published in 1944, including a guide to community activity
and discussion entitled, "The Peace We Want" ; a third revision of a high-school
pamphlet, Toward Greater Freedom ; a revised edition of a farm pamphlet, Win-
918 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
ning the War on the Spiritual Front ; a picture book of full-page illustrations by
the artist, Harry Sternberg, of the commission's statement of fundamentals, a
project undertaken with the cooperation of the Committee on Art in American
Education and Society ; an analysis and comment on the Dumbarton Oaks pro-
posals, prepared by Clark M. Eichelberger. In 3 months 50,000 copies of this
pamphlet were distributed, it being used by many groups as a basic text. A
third printing is now being made.
(Source : Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Yearbook 1946:)
Pages 24-25 :
UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
"The endowment was invited by the Secretary of State to send representatives
to serve as consultants to the American delegation at the United Nations Con-
ference on International Organizations held at San Francisco, April 25-June 26,
1945, at which the charter of the United Nations was drafted and signed. In
response to this invitation, the endowment was represented at the conference by
Dr. James T. ghotwell, director of the division of economics and history, who
served as a consultant, and Mr. 'George A. Finch, secretary of the endowment
and director of its division of international law, who served as associate con-
sultant. A number of other trustees were present at the conference in an official
or consultative capacity. Mr. John Foster Dulles was an official adviser to the
American delegation, and Mr. Philip C. Jessup was a technical expert on judicial
organization. Endowment trustees representing other organizations were
Messrs. David P. Barrows, W. W. Chapin, Ben M. Gherrington, and Harper Sibley.
Mr. Malcom W. Davis, associate director of the division of intercourse and educa-
tion, was the executive officer of the first commission of the conference."
CONFERENCE ON AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY
"To assist in informing public opinion concerning the foreign policy of the
United States, the endowment sponsored a conference at Washington on No-
vember 26-27, 1945, of representatives of national organizations who took part
in a discussion program with officers of the Department of State concerning
America's Commitments for Peace. The secretary of the endowment acted
as its representative in carrying out the details of the conference. Eighty na-
tional organizations accepted the endowment's invitation and were represented
by its 125 delegates. The conference was greeted in person by Secretary of
State James F. Byrnes. There were four sessions. The first was devoted to
World Trade and Peace. The official statement on the subject was made by
Mr. Clair Wilcox, director of the Office of International Trade Policy. The
second session dealt with Relief and Rehabilitation. Governor Herbert H.
Lehman, Director General of UNRRA, laid the facts of the situation before
the conference.
"At the third session, Hon. Dean Aeheson, Under Secretary of State, ex-
plained the official policies toward Germany and Japan. At the concluding ses-
sion, Mr. Alger Hiss, Secretary General of the United Nations Conference at
San Francisco, made a progress report of the United Nations Organization.
Following the presentation of the leading address or paper at each session,
a panel of experts from the Government offices chiefly concerned answered ques-
tions propounded by the assembled representatives of the national organizations.
At a luncheon tendered by the endowment at the close of the conference, Hon.
William Benton, Assistant Secretary of State in charge of public affairs, ex-
plained the International Information Program of the Department of State.
Letters of commendation have been received from many of the national repre-
sentatives who were in attendance, and a letter expressing appreciation of
the cooperation of the endowment was sent by Secretary of State Byrnes to
President Butler under date of December 7." [Italics supplied.]
* * * * * * *
Page 45 : "As a result of the continued educational program which the Minne-
sota United Nations Committee at St. Paul has conducted for the division
throughout the year, there is reason to believe that public sentiment in Minne-
sota is favorably inclined toward the United Nations Organization and other
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 919
forms of international cooperation. This is shown by an inspection of editorial
comment in the State."
SURVEY OF PROGRAMS OF THE UNITED NATIONS
Pages 38-39 : "Following the ratification of the United Nations Charter by the
number of nations required to put it into effect, and in furtherance of a sug-
gestion originally made by a trustee of the endowment for a survey of peace
organizations as to their functions and effectiveness in reaching public opinion
in the United States, the division sent out inquiries to national organizations as
to what they were doing to bring to the attention of their members the commit-
ment of the United States to the United Nations. 'Peace' organizations as such
form only part of the program for reaching public opinion in the United States.
A questionnaire was forwarded to 150 organizations in October, of which 29
were 'peace' organizations, and the division was gratified to receive answers
from 100 of them.
"The report, compiled from this survey by Miss Cathrine Borger, of the divi-
sion staff, showed that practically every organization engaged in popular educa-
tion of various types, regardless of particular field — scholastic education, citi-
zenship education, religious, service clubs, women's organizations, youth, busi-
ness, farm, labor, specialized interests — is devoting some part of its programs to
making its membership aware of the commitment of the United States to the
United Nations.
"Among the suggestions received as to methods which should be emphasized
in developing popular knowledge of international organization were the need of
preparing single ilustrated booklets, more use of motion pictures and radio,
forums and discussion groups, as well as development of suitable publications for
schools and colleges. Education of young people was mentioned by a number of
organizations. Sis organizations maintained that personal contacts and leader-
ship provided the most effective method, and another stressed the need for divid-
ing efforts between raising the general level of 'where people are' and working
with interested groups willing to join in concerted activities. Of major impor-
tance were those stressing the necessity of developing material showing what the
United Nations Organization cannot do as well as what it can do, and of full
publicity for every activity of the United Nations, and more especially for the
activities of the United States and its delegates.
"The greatest lack in public education with regard to the American commit-
ment concerns people who are not reached by any organization, since they have
not been interested to join, and do not realize that they too constitute public
opinion and have to assume their responsibilities as citizens not only of the
United States but of the world. The Carnegie Endowment, as an institution
seeking neither members nor maintenance by dues and contributions, is in a
position both to work with other organizations and also to respond to this need
of primary education."
Pages 50-52 :
WORK THROUGH RADIO AND MOTION PICTURES
"During the past year Beyond Victory has been presented each week under
the combined auspices of the World Wide Broadcasting Foundation and the
endowment, over nearly a hundred stations in all parts of the United States
and Canada. This nationally known series of programs, now well into its third
year, has established itself with an audience of discriminating listeners through-
out the country as offering interest and authoritative comment or many phases
of postwar adjustment.
"In the spring of 1945 a special group of programs centered around the San
Francisco Conference of the United Nations. Two members of the American
delegation, Dean Virginia G. Gildersleeve and the former Governor of Minne-
sota, Harold E. Stassen, spoke of the general issues which the conference
faced. Dr. James T. Shot-well and Dr. Raymond Fosdick contrasted the San
Francisco conference with the Paris Conference of 1919. The problem of
security was discussed by Dr. Quincy Wright, and colonial issues by Dr. Arthur
W. Holcombe and others. The Charter of the United Nations was discussed
by the executive officers of the four commissions at San Francisco : Mr. Malcom
W. Davis, executive officer of the First Commission, spoke on the People Write a
920 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
World Charter; Mr. Huntington Gilchrist, executive officer of the Second Com-
mission, on The Charter — Jobs for All ; Prof. Grayson Kirk, executive officer of
the Third Commission, on The Security Council — How It Works ; and Prof.
Norman J. Pabelf ord, executive officer of the Fourth Commission, on The Charter
and International Justice. The essential purpose in this group of programs
was to clarify the development of the charter in the conference at San Francisco-
and to explain the functions and powers provided by its sections, for security
and welfare.
* * * * * * *
"During the past year many libraries in the United States have asked to
be put on a special list to receive copies of Beyond Victory scripts every
week. About 50 libraries in all parts of the country are now receiving this
weekly service, and many have applied for its renewal for another year. Oc-
casional Beyond Victory scripts appear on the reading tables of nearly a
hundred additional libraries which request them from time to time. They
are also sent to several leading universities and a substantial number of second-
ary schools in the United States. In addition, shipments of transcriptions of
Beyond Victory broadcasts were forwarded to Army camps and hospitals in
the United States, averaging from 10 to 12 in each shipment, and to the Mari-
anas, Saipan, and the Guadalcanal commands and the European theater. Many-
letters of appreciation live been received from officers telling how these records
were used in orientation programs and convalescent wards, and describing the
favorable reaction and resulting value. A letter from the Finney General
Hospital, Thomasville, Ga., says in part, 'Tour selection of subject matter
seems to be just what we have been looking for in our orientation program,
and I wish to compliment you on the wide selection available on postwar activi-
ties.' The transcriptions were also used by the Office of War Information up
to the time that organization was dissolved."
THE ANGLO-AMERICAN FINANCIAL AGREEMENT
Page 111 : "The executive committee concluded that many goals of the commit-
tee were at stake in the proposed Anglo-America financial agreement. It was
therefore decided to publish an objective statement concerning the British loan.
"Dr. Nicholas Murray Butler wrote the foreward to the resulting brochure,
Fifteen Facts on the Proposed British Loan, which was edited by Robert L.
Gulick, Jr. There was a first edition of 200,000 copies, and a second of 100,000
is now being printed. Hon. W. L. Clayton, Assistant Secretary of State, has
this to say about the Fifteen Facts : "Permit me to congratulate you on an excel-
lent job which I am sure will be most helpful in placing the loan before the
public in proper perspective." Margaret A. Hickey, president of the National
Federation of Business and Professional Women's Clubs, Inc., writes in similar
vein: 'In my opinion this is excellent material, presented in a fashion which
simplifies and clarifies the principal points involved in the legislation now
pending before Congress.'
"The board of directors agreed, without dissent, to sponsor a campaign of
public education relating to the agreement. A special committee was formed
under the chairmanship of Hon. Charles S. Dewey, former Congressman from
Illinois, and a vice president of the Chase National Bank. Other members of
this committee include : Robert W. Coyne, National Field Director, War Fi-
nance Division, United States Treasury ; Ted R Gamble, Special Assistant to the
Secretary of the Treasury ; William Green, president of the American Federa-
tion of Labor ; Eric A. Johnston, president, Chamber of Commerce of the United
States ; Philip Murray, president, Congress of Industrial Organizations ; Edward
A. O'Neal, president, American Farm Bureau Federation ; Philip D. Reed,
chairman of the United States Associates of the International Chamber of
Commerce : Anna Lord Strauss, president, National League of Women Voters ;
and Robert L. Gulick, Jr."
(Source: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1947 Yearbook.)
Pages 16-17:
RECOMMENDATION OF THE PRESIDENT
* * * * a >> ■■?
"Among the special circumstances favorable to an expansion of the endow-
ment's own direct activities, the most .significant is. the establishment of the
United Nations with its headquarters in New York and with the United States
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 921
as its leading and most influential members. The United States was the chief
architect of the United Nations and is its chief support. The opportunity for an
endowed American institution having the objectives, tradition, and prestige of
the endowment to support and serve the United Nations is very great. No other
agency appears to be so favorably situated as is the endowment for the under-
taking of such a program. So far as we have been able to ascertain, no other
agency is contemplating the undertaking of such a program. Consequently, I
recommend most earnestly that the endowment construct its program for the
period that lies ahead primarily for the support and assistance of the United
Nations.
"I would suggest that this program be conceived of as having two objectives.
First, it should be wide y educational in order to encourage public understanding
and support of the linited Nations at home and abroad. Second, it should aid
in the adoption of wise policies both by our own Government in its capacity as a
member of the United Nations and by the United Nations organization as a whole.
"The number and importance of decisions in the lield of foreign relations with
which the United States will be faced during the next few years are of such
magnitude that the widest possible stimulation of public education in this field
is of major and pressing importance. In furthering its educational objectives
the endowment should utilize its existing resources, such as the International
Relations Clubs in the colleges, and International Conciliation, and should
strengthen its relationships with existing agencies interested in the field of
foreign affairs. These relationships should include close collaboration with other
organizations principally engaged in the study of foreign affairs, such as the
Council on Foreign Relations, the Foreign Policy Association, the Institute of
Pacific Relations, the developing university centers of international studies, and
local community groups interested in foreign affairs of which the Cleveland
Council on World Affairs and the projected World Affairs Council in San
Francisco are examples.
"Of particular importance is the unusual opportunity of reaching large seg-
ments of the population by establishing relations of a rather novel sort with the
large national organizations which today are desirous of supplying their members
with objective information on public affairs, including international issues. These
organizations— designed to serve, respectively, the broad interests of business,
church, women's, farm, labor, veterans', educational, and other large groups of
our citizens — are not equipped to set up foreign policy research staffs of their
own. The endowment should supply these organizations with basic information
about the United Nations and should assist them both in selecting topics of
interest to their members and in presenting those topics so as to be most readily
understood by their members. We should urge the Foreign Policy Association
and the Institute of Pacific Relations to supply similar service on other topics of
international significance.
"Exploration should also be made by the endowment as to the possibilities of
increasing the effectiveness or the radio and motion pictures in public education
on world affairs." [Italics supplied.]
(Source: Staley, Eugene, War and the Private Investor, Doubleday, 1935,
pt. Ill : Towards a Policy, cb. 18, Alternate Courses of Action, pp. 470-471 : )
"The search for the underlying causes of international investment friction has
revealed that capital investment is a form of contact peculiarly apt to occasion
conflict, while the existing institutions for the adjustment of these conflicts are
not only inadequate but are fundamentally ill-adapted to the task. The defec-
tiveness of the institutions of adjustment arises largely from the fact that the
areas of political loyalty and political organization on which they are based, are
smaller than the area of conflict-producing contact, which today includes prac-
tically the whole world. * * *"
■I* * * *P 5jS *P !p
"With these general considerations in mind we now turn our attention to
the appraisal of various policies which have been practiced or which may be sug-
gested in connection with the problem of reducing the political friction con-
nected with international private investment. These policies may be grouped
according to their basic characteristics under three general headings, and will be
so discussed: (1) mere anti-imperialism, (2) national supervision of investments
abroad, (3) denationalization and mondial 1 supervision of international invest-
ments. * * *"
i The meaning of this special term will be explained later.
922 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
(Pt. Ill: Towards a Policy, ch. 19: Specific Suggestions:)
A WOELD INVESTMENT COMMISSION
Pages 498-499 : "The functions which might be discharged by a world commis-
sion on permanent economic contracts between nations are plentiful and import-
ant enough to justify the creation of such an agency. The World Investment
Commission, if we may give it that name, should begin the development of that
effective supervision by the world community which must gradually undermine
national diplomatic protection and render denationalization of investments
possible."
* * * * * * *
Pages 500-501: "How would the World Investment Commission operate? It
should have the following powers and duties :
"To register international loan agreements and concessions; to make their
terms public ; to regulate their terms in certain respects.
"To collect continuous and accurate information respecting international In-
vestment operations and all their ramifications and effects — social and political
as well as economic.
"To call general conferences on a world or regional basis, or conferences of
certain industries (e. g., concession holders, consumers, and states granting
concessions in the oil industry). These conferences would consider problems
raised by international capital migration, and out of them something akin to
world investment legislation might emerge.
"To cooperate with the Mandates Commission of the League of Nations, the
International Labor Organization, commissions on codification of international
law, and other international agencies whose work has a bearing on the setting
of standards for protection of capital-importing regions against ruthless exploi-
tation.
"To examine and report on the financial condition of borrowing states 2 and
private enterprises ; to make observations on the political and social implications
of specific capital transactions.
"To call attention to any conditions likely to intensify international investment
conflicts or to occasion political friction over investments and to make recom-
mendations with respect thereto.
"To endeavor to conciliate disputes, calling conferences of lenders and bor-
rowers for this purpose, mediating, arbitrating, seeking to work out compro-
mises, employing the services of disinterested experts to provide full social and
economic information on the basis of which equitable adjustments might be
sought.
"To make a public report of its findings where a party to a dispute before the
Commission refuses to come to an agreement which in the opinion of disinterested
conciliators is just and reasonable.
"To publicly advise, after hearings, against further provision of capital to
a state or corporation which has failed to observe a contract obligation without
just cause. This would presumably make the flotation of loans difficult any-
where in the world for such a state or corporation. Here is one of the 'sanctions'
which would enable the Commission to take over the function (now exercised by
national diplomatic protection) of protecting investors abroad — that is, of
guaranteeing minimum standards of fair treatment for the investment interests
of aliens in all countries. If organized on a worldwide basis, this sanction would
be sufficient in many cases to accomplish more in the way of protection than is
now usually accomplished by diplomatic protection. At the same time, it would
tend to remove investment protection as a pretext for national aggression and
remedy other defects of the system of national diplomatic protection.
"To refer legal questions to the Permanent Court of International Justice or to
the World Commercial Court (suggested below) for an advisory opinion or final
settlement.
"To cooperate with regional organizations like the Pan American Union in the
establishment of regional subcommissions for handling investment problems that
affect mainly one part of the world."
*******
Page 504: "This proposal would obviously involve the creation of an inter-
national corporation law, probably through an international treaty to be framed
and adopted under the auspices of the League of Nations. * * *"
* The Commission would probably deal with State loans as well as with the private
investments upon which the discussions of this volume have been focused.
Tax-exejSpt foundations 923
A WOULD INVESTMENT BANK
Page 509 : "As a means of filtering out the national interest in world capital
movements and thereby promoting the dual process of denationalization and
mondial supervision, a World Investment Bank might perform useful functions.
Such a bant would sell its bonds to governments or to private investors and in-
vest the funds so raised in long-term construction projects, such as railways in
South America and China, airways over the world, canals, harbor works, inter-
national river improvements, and the like. * * *"
*******
Pages 512-513 : "A useful contribution to the denationalization of international
investment (and also trade) relationships would therefore be made by the
development of a world 'consular service' for the provision of detailed economic
information and the encouragement of world commerce. Such a service could
best be built on the foundation already laid by the excellent work of the League
of Nations and the International Labor Organization in the field of economic
information. * * *"
Pages 515-516 ; "The League of Nations : It is worthy of note that practically
all the specific measures proposed in this chapter for dealing with the political
problems raised by international investments depend in some fashion upon the
presence of a world political organization. If the League of Nations did not exist
it would be necessary to create it, or something like it, before investment prob-
lems could be attacked with any hope of success. The League should be sup-
ported, strengthened, and developed. Its legislative powers should be increased
and its authority enlarged. Just as the loose league of sovereign States first
established under the Articles of Confederation developed into the Federal
Government of the United States of America, so the League of Nations must
be developed from a confederation of sovereign states into a federal world
government. Of course the United States, which has such a large stake in the
orderly supervision of international investment relationships, should actively en-
courage this process. An essential step is entry into the League. * * *"
* * * * * * *
Pages 517-518: "International civic training: It is all too evident that the
measures and devices proposed in this chapter can never succeed, cannot even be
tried, unless there is a sufficient sense of world citizenship among the different
peoples of the earth and among their leaders. Such a sense of world citizenship
may be stimulated by a rational appreciation of the worldwide interdependence
of economic, social, and political life, but to be politically effective the emotions
must also be touched and loyalties to new supranational symbols must be devel-
oped. Can such loyalties be achieved short of an international working-class
revolution, or can they be achieved by such a revolution? That is one of the most
fundamental questions affecting the future form of social life on this planet. The
development of international attitudes in the schools, world intellectual co-
operation, adult education on the interdependence of the modern world, celebra-
tion of the heroes common to all mankind — all these things, and many more at
first sight quite unrelated to international investments, have an important
bearing on the specific problem of investment friction. 3 * * *"
exchange of correspondence regarding international relations clues
April 20, 1954.
Mr. Joseph E. Johnson,
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace,
New York, Jf. Y.
Dear Mk. Johnson : My contacts with you and the other member of the endow-
ment staff were so pleasant that it is with a keen sense of disappointment that
I now resign myself to writing for certain information instead of visiting you
in person. However, it is becoming increasingly evident that our activities
will require me to spend all my time here.
In the confidential reports, as well as the yearbooks, there are references
to "international polity clubs" which were, as I recall, established by the Car-
negie Endowment for International Peace in colleges and universities, starting
back in the early days of your organization. However, as you know time
8 Consult Charles E. Merriam, The Making of Citizens (Chicago, 1931), pp. 310-318,
348, 356.
49720— 54^pt. 1 50
924 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
did not permit me to read all the material you made available to me, and there
are gaps in my notes on this item. Would you, therefore, have someone on your
staff answer the following questions :
1. Were these clubs an outgrowth of or connected in any way with the Ameri-
can Association for International Conciliation, the Institute of International
Education, or any other organizations? (And if so, how did this come about?)
2. Were they a development from the "international mind" alcoves?
In the back of my mind there is a vague recollection that during a conversa-
tion with Dr. Avirett he mentioned that these clubs resulted in organization of
the Foreign Policy Association or the Council on Foreign Relations. If I am
correct, how did this develop and when?
3. How many such clubs were there in 1938 and how many are there today,
if they still exist? If they no longer exist, is that due to positive dissolution
as an activity of the endowment, or due merely to student and faculty disinterest
or to some other factors?
4. I gather that each year books were sent by the endowment to each of
these clubs. Were these volumes sent without charge, at cost, or at a discount?
5. Were all books selected for distribution in any 1 year sent to all the
clubs? If not, what secondary method of selection was employed, such as the
size of the college or university, or the club membership?
6. How did these clubs come into being at the college or university — in other
words, did the endowment either by suggestion to the faculty or one of its
members, or through other methods foster the formation of such clubs ?
7. Were lists of books available periodically sent to the colleges and universi-
ties, from which the club or faculty adviser made a selection? Or were books
automatically distributed at intervals throughout the year to all institutions?
I hope this will not place an undue burden on your staff — but since I cannot
foresee a time when a visit to your office might be possible I shall appreciate
very much your sending the information as soon as it is convenient.
With kindest regards, I am,
Sincerely yours,
Ka*heyn Casey,
Legal Analyst.
Carnegie Endowment foe International Peace,
Office of the President,
New York, N. Y., April 29, 195%.
Miss Kathkyn Casey,
181 Indiana Avenue NW, Washington, D. C.
Dear Miss Casey: I, too, regret that you, yourself, could not come to see us
again. In any event, here is the information on the International Relations
Clubs which you requested in your letter of April 22. For your convenience, the
numbers correspond to those of the questions asked in the letter.
1. The first student groups in colleges and universities for the serious study
and objective discussion of international affairs — known as international pol-
ity clubs— were organized in the autumn of 1914 under the direction of the
American Association for International Conciliation which, in turn derived
financial support from the Carnegie Endowment. In the fall of 1920 when di-
rection of the clubs was transferred to the Institute of International Education
(organized largely under the leadership of Dr. Nicholas Murray Butler with
substantial financial support from the endowment), the name of the clubs was
the endowment in 1924, and the clubs were taken over by the endowment which
changed to international relations clubs. The institute became independent of
the endowment in 1924, and the clubs were taken over by the endowment which
continued actively in charge of them until the spring of 1951. At this time
the Association of International Relations Clubs, established in 1948, assumed
supervision of the club program under a grant-in-aid from the endowment.
Although no longer actively directing the club work, the endowment maintained
a relationship with it through having a representative on the association's
executive board.
2. The clubs were in no way a "development" from the international mind
alcoves, which were an entirely separate phase of the endowment's program.
At no time in the past have the clubs had any organizational connection with
the Foreign Policy Association, the Council on Foreign Relations, or anv other
organization except those indicated under "1."
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 925
3. Ill 1938 there were 1,103 dubs as follows : 265 in high schools in the United
States ; 685 in colleges and universities in continental United States ; ; 7 in the
Philippines ; 1 each in Hawaii, Alaska, Canal Zone, and Puerto Rico ; 24 in the
United Kingdom ; 34 in 14 Latin American countries; 22 in China; 9 in Japan;
2 in Korea ," and the remaining 51 in foreign countries including Canada, Egypt,
Greece, Iran, Iraq, Siam, New Zealand, Australia, South Africa, Syria, and India.
In January, 1948, the National Education Association in Washington assumed
leadership for the high school clubs. Information regarding them since then
may be obtained from the association.
In 1954 (April 26) there are 476 clubs in colleges and universities in con-
tinental United States; 1 in Hawaii, and 28 in foreign countries including
Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Egypt,
India, Japan, Pakistan, Philippine Islands, and Thailand, making a total of 505.
4. The materials sent to the International Relations clubs in high schools, col-
leges, and universities were a gift from the endowment, with the understanding
that they would be kept together as a -special IRC collection, in the library or
elsewhere, readily accessible to the club members.
5. All clubs — large or small, in universities and junior and 4-year colleges, in
the United States and foreign countries — received the same books in English
with the exception of some of the groups in Latin American countries which
were sent Spanish translations of some of the English publications or original
Spanish publications. Cooperation with the Latin American clubs was discon-
tinued during the academic year 1947-48. Pamphlets and mimeographed mate-
rials, less specialized and better suited to the age level, were sent to the high
school clubs.
6. Although the endowment never had a field worker as such to -stimulate
interest in the club movement, it maintained a competent "secretariat" in its.
offices which carried on correspondence with the clubs, offering encouragement
to both club members and faculty advisers in carrying on the work, as well as
advice when sought, and suggestions for vitalizing club programs. It cooperated
closely with the host clubs in the 12— in 1948 increased to 14 — -regions through-
out the country where annual conferences were held, by helping to set up the
programs, furnishing speakers, and arranging for an endowment representative
to be in attendance at each conference. In the early 1930's letters were sent at
the beginning of the academic year to faculty members at a few selected insti-
tutions, informing them of the club work and its advantages. The clubs in-
creased to such an extent in number, however, that this procedure soon became
unnecessary. A great deal of the credit for this growth must be given to the
continued interest of students and faculty members alike, who, upon trans-
ferring to a campus without a club, proceeded to organize a new one or reactivate
a former one, and also to the establishment of clubs by students and/or faculty
people who were told about the work by enthusiastic members or advisers of
clubs on other campuses. On receiving an inquiry about the work, the endow-
ment furnished materials descriptive of the club program and suggestions for
organizing a club. The principal requirements for affiliation with the endow-
ment were that the group would meet regularly with a faculty adviser for the
study and discussion of world affairs from an unprejudiced and objective point
of view and that the books should be kept together as a permanent collection.
Upon notification that a club had completed its organization, it was placed upon
the mailing list to receive all club materials.
7. Two installments of books were automatically distributed to the clubs each
academic year. The books were initially selected by a member of the endow-
ment staff and then submitted for approval to a committee of which Dr. Butler
was chairman. In the first semester the books were sent to clubs which notified
the endowment that they were fiinctioning and ready to receive them, and in
the second semester only to the clubs which had formally acknowledged receipt
of the first, or fall, installment. The distribution of books was discontinued
entirely in the spring of 1947.
In this connection, you will be interested to know that the Association of
International Relations Clubs has just concluded its Seventh Annual Con-
ference. At the final business session on April 23, the association voted to
affiliate with the Foreign Policy Association, which is better equipped than the
endowment to aid them in planning their programs for objective study of inter-
national problems. At the same time the association passed a resolution thank-
ing the endowment for past services. It was with very real regret that the
endowment came to the end of a long chapter, in which we like to think that a
926 TAX-EXEJIPT FGlEfcfMTIONS
contribution was made to the better understanding of the responsibilities which
our country now bears as a world power.
Sincerely yours,
Joseph E. Johnson.
Memorandum
June 30, 1954.
Subject : Books distributed by Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Since it was impossible to check every volume distributed by the endowment
through the international mind alcoves or through the international relations
clubs and centers, a random sampling by year mentioned in the yearbooks was
taken. When De. Kenneth Colegrove was in Washington, D. C, to attend the
hearings before the committee, he was asked to look over the books distributed
in the following years : 1918, 1926, 1928," 1931, 1932, 1933, 1938, 1939, 1941, 1943,
1944, 1947.
The authors and books for those years are given below. Those on which Dr.
Colegrove commented are in italics.
1918 Yearbook, page 86 ("distributed principally to college libraries and Inter-
national Polity Clubs") :
C. It. Ashbee : American League To Enforce Peace
E. W. Clement: Constitutional Imperialism in Japan
Cosmos : The Basis of Durable Peace
Robert Goldsmith : A League To Enforce Peace
J. A. Hobson : The New Protectionism
Roland Hugins : The Possible Peace
Harold J. Laski: Studies in the Problem of Sovereignty — "Opposed to the
'national interest'; inclines toward extreme left"
Ramsay Muir : Nationalism and Internationalism
Henry F. Munro, Ellery C. Stowell : International Cases
H. H. Powers : The Things Men Fight For
Bertrand Russell : Why Men Fight
Walter E. Weyl : American World Policies
1926 Yearbook, page 56 ("distributed principally to college libraries and
International Polity Clubs") :
Carlton J. H. Hayes: A Political and Social History of Modern Europe
(2 vols.)
Prof. Schille Viallate : Economic Imperialism
George Matthew Dutcher : The Political Awakening of the East
Raymond Leslie Buel: International Relations — "Globalist"
1931 Yearbook, page 67 :
Butler, Nicholas Murray : The Path to Peace
Eberlein, Marks, and Wallis : Down the Tiber and Up to Rome
Ellis, M. H. : Express to Hindustan
Keenleyside, Hugh L. : Canada and the United States
Larson, Frans August : Larson, Duke of Mongolia
Olden, Rudolf : Stresemann
Patrick, Mary Mills : Under Five Sultans
Phillips, Henry A. : Meet the Germans
Read, Elizabeth F. : International Law and International Relations — "Rather
leftist"
Redfield, Robert: Tepoztlan (Mexico)
de la Rue, Sidney : Land of the Pepper Bird (Liberia)
Russell, Phillips: Red Tiger (Mexico)
Ryhd, Hanna : Land of the Sun-God (Egypt)
Sassoon, Sir Philip : The Third Route
Sheng-Cheng : A Son of China
Street, C. J. C. : Thomas Masaryk of Czechoslovakia
Waldrom, Webb: Blue Glamor (the Mediterranean)
TAX-EXEMFT FOUNDATIOKS 927
1932 Yearbook, pages 75, 80 : •. „.. , ■, ;: ? , r)
Ateley, Delia JT. : Jungle Portraits' .'■: r i r ,i;; ;A. hi'--- ,.'•-■ :>m '
Buck, Pearl 8.: The Good Earth+-"Slightly leftist". : -;yM:'
Chase, Stuart : Mexico— "Mildly left"
Colum, Padraic : Cross Roads in Ireland
Forbes, Rosita : Conflict
Hindus, Maurice: Humanity Uprooted— "Marxiati slant"
Ilin, M.: New Russia's Primer ;'.'.' ;! ! : ;
McBride, Robert M. : Romantic Czechoslovakia
McMullen, Laura 17.: Building the \W.oM Somety-^'Globalist" '
Morton, H. V. : In Search of Scotland : ' '"■;.'
Ross, Sir. B. Denison: The Persians :.'■
Strong, Anna Louise: The Road to the Grey Pamir — "Well Known Communist"
Van Dyke, John C. : In Egypt
Wagner, Ellasue : Korea
Wortham, N. E. : Mustapha Kemal of Turkey ,
Andrews, Fanny Fern : The Holy Land Under Mandate ", ' '
Arendtz, Herman F. : The Way Out of Depression
Bratt, K. A. : That Next War?
de Madariga, Salvadore: Disarmament— "Ultra globalist and aimed at sub-
mergence of 'national interest' "
Harper, Samuel G.: Making Bolsheviks
Hudson, Manley O. : The World Court
Ilin, U. : New Russia's Primer
League of Nations : Ten Years of World Cooperation
Lefebure, Victor : Scientific Disarmament
MacNair, Harley F. : China in Revolution
Mitchell, N. P. : Land Problems and Policies in the African Mandates of the
British Commonwealth
Moulton, H. G. : Japan : An Economic and Financial Appraisal
1933 Yearbook, pages 77, 80 :
Angell, Norman: The Unseen Assassins — "Globalist"
Casey, Robert J. : Baghdad and Points Bast
Cohen-Portheim, Paul : England, the Unknown Isle
Desmond, Alice Curtis : Far Horizons
Hedin, Sven : Across the Gobi Desert
Hudson, Manley O. : Progress in International Organization
Jones, Amy Heminway : An Amiable Adventure
Mackall, Lawton : Portugal fpr Two
Monson, Ronald A. : Across Africa on Foot
Morton, H. V. : In Search of Ireland, In Search of Wales
Patterson, Ernest Minor: America: World Leader or World Led? — "Glooalist"
Phillips, Henry Albert: Meet the Japanese
Raiguel and Huff : This Is Russia
Thomas, Valentine : Young Europe
Tsurumi , Yusuke : The Mother
Angell, Sir Norman: The Unseen Assassins
Clark, Grover : Economic Rivalries in China
Cory, Ellen : Compulsory Arbitration
Escher, Franklin : Modern Foreign Exchange
Morley, Felix : The Society of Nations
Morse and MacNair : Far Eastern International Relations
Moulton and Pasvolsky : War Debts and World Prosperity
Salter, Sir Arthur: Recovery, the Second Effort — "Globalist"
Patterson, Ernest Minor: America — World Leader or World Led?
Ware, Edith E.: Business and Politics in the Far East — "Doubtful"
1938 Yearbook, page 55 : "This material is directed in some instances only to the
trustees of the endowment, in other cases to a wider though limited circle of those
directly connected with the endowment and in still other cases to a comprehensive
list of those interested in international questions * * * Among the books so
distributed may be cited : * * *"
James T. Shotwell: On the Abyss — "Globalist"
William T. Stone and Clark M. Eichelberger: Peaceful Change — "Globalist
and leftist. Regarding W. T. Stone, see the report of the McCarran subcom-
mittee. Stone was closely associated with Edward Carter of I. P. R."
928 TA30-KO3MPT FOUNDATIONS
1938 Yearbook, page 62 :
Dulles, Allen W., and Armstrong, Hamilton Blah: Can We be Neutral?
Dunn, Frederick Sherwood: Peaceful Change ■
Florinsky, Michael T. : Fascism and National Socialism
Horrabin, J. F. : An Atlas of the Empire
Lichtenberger, Henri: The Third Reich
Miller, Spencer, Jr. : What the I. L. O. Means to America
Peers, B. Allison : The Spanish Tragedy
Staley, Eugene : Raw Miterials in Peace and War
Salter, Sir Arthur: World Trade and Its Future— "Globalist"
Vinacke, Harold M. : A History of the Far East in Modern Times
Willert, Sir Arthur and others : The Empire in the World
1939 Yearbook, page 62 :
Angell, Norman : The Defense of the Empire
Angell, Norman : Peace with the Dictators t — "Globalist"
Butler, Nicholas Murray: The Family of Nations
Davies, E. C. : A Wayfarer in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania
Fergusson, Erna: Venezuela
Fry, Variah : War in China
Hamilton, Alexander, and others : The Federalist
Jackson, Joseph Henry : Notes on a Drum
Lewis, Elizabeth Foreman : Portraits from a Chinese Scroll
Loewenstein, Prince Hubertus Zu : Conquest of the Past
Lyons, Eugene : Assignment in Utopia
MacManus, Seumas : The Rocky Road to Dublin
Miller, M. S. and J. L. : Cruising the Mediterranean
Parmer, Charles B. : West Indian Odyssey
Roberts, Stephen H. : The House That Hitler Built
Sterne, Emma Gelders: European Summer
Streit, Clarence K.: Union Now — "Globalist and submersion of national inter-
est. Fallacious in his analogy of Union of American States in 1181 with
world federation"
Strode, Hudson : South by Thunderbird
1941 Yearbook, page 54 :
Benes, Eduard : Democracy Today and Tomorrow
Bisson, T. A.: American Policy in the Far East, 1931-19 — "Pro-Communist"
Butler, Nicholas Murray: Why War?
Dulles, Allen W., and Armstrong, Hamilton Fish: Can America Stay Neutral? —
"Ultraglobalists"
Florinsky, Michael T. : Toward an Understanding of the U. S. S. E.
Ford, Guy Stanton (editor) : Dictatorship in the Modern World
Lippmann, Walter : Some Notes on War and Peace
Marriott, Sir John A. R. : Commonwealth or Anarchy ?
Patterson, Ernest Minor: Economic Bases of Peace
Saerchinger, Cesar : The Way Out of War
Shotwell, James T.: What Germany Forgot
Viton, Albert : Great Britain, an Empire in Transition
1939 Yearbook, page 39: "Among leftist speakers sent to conferences by the
Carnegie Endowment were Vera Micheles Dean and Dr. Eugene Staley. Mrs.
Dean and Max Lerner also were included in the 1941 list."
1944 Yearbook, page 103 :
Hunt, Dr. Erling {Teachers College) : Citizens for a New World, yearbook of
Commission for Orzanization of Peace — "Ultraglobalist"
1944 Yearbook, page 48 :
Clark, Evans (editor): Wartime Facts and Postwar Problems: A Study and
Discussion Manual
Committee on Africa : Africa
Duffett, W. E., Hicks, A. R. and Parkin, G. R. : India Today
Hambro, C. J. : How to Win the Peace
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 929
Hornbeck, Stanley K. : The United Sta tes and the Far East " - " '
Inman, Samuel Guy : Latin America : Its Place in World Life
Kohn, Hans : World Order in Historical Perspective
Maclver, R. M.: Toward an Abiding Peace — "Extremely globalist and careless
of the American 'national interest' "
Mowat, E. B. and Slosson, Preston : History osf the English-Speaking Peoples
Pares, Sir Bernard: Russia
Peffer, Nathaniel: A Basis for Peace in the Far East
Reves, Emery : A Democratic Manifesto
Stembridge, Jasper H., An Atlas of the U. S. S. R.
Thomas, Elbert D. : Thomas Jefferson : World Citizen
Welles, Sumner : The world of the Four Freedoms
1944 Yearbook, page 52 :
Broderick, Alan H. : North Africa
Chiang Kai-shek, Generalissimo : All We Are and AH We Have
Chiang Kai-shek, Madame : We Chinese Women
Follett, Helen : Islands on Guard
Gatti, Allen and Attilio : Here is Africa
Goodell, Jane : They Sent Me to Iceland
Hambro, C. J. : How to Win the Peace
Henley, Constance Jordan : Grandmother Drives South
Hutchison, Bruce : The Unkonwn Country
Lanks, Herbert C. : Pan American Highway through Sonth America
Lattimore, Owen: America and Asia — "Subtle propaganda along Communist
line. Lattimore cited in McCarran subcommittee report as part of Commu-
nist cell in the Institute of Pacific Relations"
Maisel, Albert Q. : Africa : Facts and Forecasts
Massock, Richard G. : Italy from Within
Pares, Sir Bernard : Russia
Peffer, Nathaniel: Basis for Peace in the Far East — "Leftist. See McCarran
subcommittee report"
Representatives of the United Nations : The People's Peace
Welles, Sumner : The World of the Four Freedoms
1947 Yearbook, pages 48, 51 :
The Soviet Union Today, An Outline Study: American Russian Institute —
"Favorable to V. S. S. R."
The United Nations Economic and Social Council : Herman Finer.
America and the New World : The Merrick lectures, 1945.
Perpetual Peace: Immanuel Kant.
Political Handbook of the World, 1946 : Walter H. Mallory, editor.
Germany Is Our Problem : Henry Morgenthau, Jr.
The Atomic Age Opens : Editors of pocket books.
America's Stake in Britain's Future : George Soule.
Peoples Speaking to Peoples: Llewellyn White and Robert D. Leigh.
The United Nations in the Making : Basic Documents : World Peace Founda-
tion.
The Soviet Union Today: American Russian Institute
The Chrysanthemum and the Sword : Ruth Benedict.
The World Today : Nicholas Murray Butler.
Sun Yat-sen : 'Stephen Chen and Robert Payne.
Britain: Partner for Peace: Percy E. Corbett— "Extremely globalist"
The United Nations Economic and Social Council : Hferman Finer.
Brazil: An Interpretation: Gilberto Freyre.
Greece : A. W. Gomme.
Our Son, Pablo : Alvin and Darley Gordon.
France, Short History : Albert Guerard.
Iran : William S. Haas.
And the Bravest of These : Katharine Roberts.
New Zealand : Philip L. Soljak.
Peace Atlas of Europe : Samuel van Valkenburg.
The Story of the Dutch East Indies : Bernard H. M. Vlekke.
The French Canadian Outlook : Mason Wade.
Originally it had been intended to have others in addition to Dr. Colegrove
make notations on these and other books distributed by- the Carnegie Endowment
930 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
for International Peace, either through the International Mind Alcoves, the
international relations clubs and centers, or other means. However, up to this
time, it has not been possible to proceed with this particular project.
Kathryn Casey,
Legal Analyst.
,:'■:'.■■ Exhibit— Part II. Rockefeller
Excerpts From Annual Reports of the Rockefeller Foundation and Materia*
Taken From Other Sources From 1929 to 1952
(Source: The Rockefeller Foundation, 1932 annual report, pp. 274-275:)
ECONOMIC PLANNING AND CONTROL
"Events of the past 3 years have made strikingly evident the tremendous
social losses occasioned by the ups and downs of modern business enterprise.
Much physical suffering, illness, mental disorder, family disintegration, crime,
and political and social instability trace their origin to economic causes. In a
time of depression, when enterprise is halted and millions of the unemployed are
unable to command the necessities of life, the question is insistently heard, Why
does this distressing situation arise in a country where raw materials exist in
plenty, where technological equipment is of the best, and where workers are
eager to apply their productive capacities? The opportunity and need for
scientific attack on the problem of economic maladjustment are unmistable. The
foundation views this field as highly important and well adapted to research.
"For several years various studies and organizations concerned with economic
stabilization have been supported. It is believed that a more complete knowl-
edge of the working of our present economic system — e. g., of conditions as
revealed by realistic, statistical studies of unemployment ; the characteristics,,
methods, and hazards of specified industrial enterprises; the complex forces
operating in a competitive society in a number of specific situations — must sup-
ply the necessary basis for planning an effective economic organization."
( Source : The Rockefeller Foundation, 1936 annual report, pp. 55-56 : )
"* * * As one reviews the history of the men and women who, over the last
20 years, have received fellowships from the foundation, the record appears
most gratifying. Today, they are occupying positions of importance and dis-
tinction in nearly every country of the world. They are on university faculties ;
they are connected with research laboratories; they hold strategic governmental
positions ; they are carrying on significant and productive work in wide fields
of knowledge. Some of them, indeed, have gained outstanding recognition, such
as the award of the Nobel prize. It would be idle to assume, of course, that
their leadership and their contribution to scientific thought are the results solely
of their fellowship experience. Doubtless, many of them would have gained
eminence without this experience, or would have obtained the experience in
other ways. But it is a satisfaction to record the subsequent success of highly
promising men and women, picked largely from the younger generation, to whom
the foundation is proud to have been of some assistance."
( Source : The Rockefeller Foundation, 1937 annual report, pp. 57-58 : )
THE DEBACLE IN CHINA
"Last year, in the Review, the following sentence appeared : 'China today
stands on the threshold of a renaissance. The Chinese National Government, to-
gether with many provincial and county authorities and private organizations,
are attempting to make over a medieval society in terms of modern knowledge.'
"This proud ambition, in which the foundation was participating, has been
virtually destroyed by the events of the last. 6 months. The program was
primarily a program of rural reconstruction and public health. It was rooted
in promising Chinese institutions like Nankai University in Tientsin, and the
National Central University and the National Agricultural Research Bureau, both
in Nanking. It was promoting studies in subjects like animal husbandry and
agriculture ; it was carrying on broadly based field experimentations ; and it was
training men and women for administrative posts in rural and public health
work.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 931
"Nankai University was completely destroyed last July. Tne universities and
institutions in Nanking, where they are not too badly damaged, are serving today
as army barracks. The field units in mass education and public health are so
completely scattered that it is practically impossible to locate them. The work,
the devotion, the resources, the strategic plans of Chinese leaders for a better
China, have disappeared in an almost unprecedented cataclysm of violence.
"At the moment there is nothing further to report. The foundation still main-
tains its office in Shanghai. Whether there will be an opportunity to pick up
the pieces of this broken program at some later date, no one can foretell."
(Source: The Rockefeller Foundation, 1940 annual report, pp. 273-277:)
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS
"The foundation continued its support of the national institute's experimental
program of recruiting and training personnel for the Federal services by a grant
of $105,000 for the 3-year period from October 1, 1941. For the past 5 years,
the program has involved the annual placement of approximately 50 graduate
students preparing for public service careers, in agencies of the Federal Govern-
ment for a year of practical apprenticeship. The institute alio serves as a clear-
inghouse of information and as a liaison agency in matters relating to tbife re-
cruitment and training program. Sixty percent of its "internes" are now in the
Federal service ; several are in State and local or other government services* and!
a number are continuing graduate study.
"The institute hopes to continue its program directed toward developing a
more effective means of recruitment of persons for Government service, espe-
cially for its influence in improving the relations between the Federal authorities
and the educational Institutions of the country."
(Source: The Rockefeller Foundation, 1941 annual report.)
Pages 230-231:
INSTITUTIONAL GBANTS
"Council on Foreign Relations
"Each study group consists of specialists in designated areas in the various
problems to be dealt with. The program permits the continuous examination of
events related to problems of special interests of this country, and the assembly
and interpretation of research material. Each group works under the leadership
of a rapporteur. A steering committee composed of the rapporteurs and the
leading officers of the council is responsible for the general planning, the coordina-
tion of the activities of the groups, and the interchange of material and points of
view.
"More than 250 memoranda on special subjects had been prepared before the
end of 1941. These had been furnished to the Government services charged
with handling the various questions discussed. Many representatives of these
services had also participated in the discussion of the study groups."
"Foreign Policy Association
"The former project is concerned primarily with the organization of educational
work in relation to world problems, collaboration with colleges, schools, forums,
women's clubs, youth groups, labor programs, agricultural clubs, etc. Its purpose
is the preparation and distribution of educational material in the field of inter-
national affairs and the encouragement of discussion Of such material. A special
series of 'Headline Books,' published since 1935, is one aspect of the publication
program. At least 15 titles have been added to the list over the past 3 years.
Study materials which supplement these books are used by various .groups
throughout the country. Several of the 'Headline Books' have been translated
into Spanish and distrbuted in South America.
"It is hoped to establish effective bases of cooperation with leading national
organizations serving the cause of public education in the United States, and
with Government agencies actively concerned with increasing general knowledge
and understanding of problems of American foreign policy,
"In view of the current world situation, the Foreign Policy Association will
concentrate its research during the coming year in three main fields : (1) Devel-
opments in the occupied countries of Europe; (2) political and economic trends
in Latin America; and (3) problems of postwar reconstruction.
49720 — 54— pt. 1 60
932 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
"In addition to its research activities, the association furnishes speakers to
educational public policy organizations, arranges luncheon discussions, and
conducts a series of broadcasts now distributed through 70 stations. Its Wash-
ington bureau collects firsthand information on current issues of American foreign
policy. The association also maintain a Latin American Information Service,
which published until the end of 1941 its biweekly Pan American News, furnish-
ing background material on political and economic trends in Latin American
countries."
Pages 233-234 :
INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
"Yale University
"The institute, founded in 1935, had the following objectives : To promote basic
research in international relations with particular attention to studies designed
to clarify American foreign policy ; to develop a broad and well-rounded program
of education' and training in international relations on both the undergraduate
and graduate level ; to evolve procedures of coordination and integration among
the various social sciences in the analysis of international problems ; and to aid
in the postdoctoral training of younger scholars in the general field of inter-
national relations.
"The research program of the institute included many projects centering around
problems of American foreign policy, but designed also to interpret the role of
power in international affairs, and the relation of national policies to military
policies and principles of grand strategy.
"Four major studies have been published and several others are nearing com-
pletion. Certain of the projects are being carried on in conjunction with Govern-
ment departments. Among the specific subjects proposed for study are: Prob-
lems of national defense; United States and the future order of Europe; hemi-
spheric unity ; the geographic basis of foreign policy ; and inter- American trade
relations.
"The program of education has been closely coordinated with the research
program. The projected program for the next few years will not represent any
substantial change in policy. A combined social science approach will stress
analytical rather than historical methods."
{Source: The Rockefeller Foundation, annual report for 1942.)
Pages 179-180 :
THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
"Social Science Research Council
"Washington personnel office. Even before the United States entered the war,
a vital need was felt in Washington for an agency to promote more effective
utilization of social scientists. In the stress of the prewar emergency the Na-
tional Government had recruited many thousands of persons trained in the social
sciences ; later, of course, the demand greatly increased.
"It was foreseen that unless the recruitment policies were integrated and wisely
administered severe shortages would result and skilled talent would be squan-
dered.
"After a careful study of the problem the Social Science Research Council set up
an office in Washington to work in cooperation with Government agencies on
three tasks: (1) Consulting with Government agencies on policies and methods
of recruitment; (2) advising with individuals who wished to contribute their
talents where they could be utilized most effectively; and (3) consulting with
university officals regarding the temporary release of members of their faculties.
"The Council already had joined with other national scientific councils in
promoting the roster of scientific and specialized personnel, but responsible offi-
cials felt that this was not enough. Now, the office which has been set up in
Washington provides a place to which persons may turn for extragovernmental
advice concerning social science problems. Similar services had earlier been
provided for engineers and specialists in the various field of medical and natural
sciences."
* * * * * * *
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 933
Pages 181-182 r, ;.
"Public Administration Committee
"The agencies through which society will seek to meet its diverse problems are
multiform, and total effort, whether for defense or for the postwar world, will
receive its primary direction through the agency of Government. For the past 7
years the foundation has supported the activities of the public administration
committee, whose original objectives were to capture and record and lay the basis
for the appraisal of measures initiated in the United States for grappling with the
consequences of the worldwide social and technological changes that were taking
place. The end objective was, if possible, to add to the store of principles of
administration so that administrators who must make decisions might profit by
recent and current experience.
"The committee formulated a series of major studies of two general types:
(1) Administrative problems of new and emerging governmental activities;
and (2) appraisal and review of significant developments in administration of
the last 3 decades.
"More recently the committee has focused its resources and attention mainly
on planning and stimulating rather than on executing research. A broadening of
the program to include the field of government, with public administration
as one sector is now contemplated. Such a program would deal less with the
mechanics of administration than with the development of sound bases of policy
determination and more effective relationships in the expanding governmental
structure."
(Source; The Rockefeller Foundation, 1943 annual report, pp. 178-179:)
INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
"Council on Foreign Relations
"The war and peace studies project of the council was organized shortly
after the outbreak of hostilities in 1939 for the purpose of furnishing such
scholarly contributions to the work of the Government as an unofficial agency
can make in wartime. Studies have centered around five main fields : strategy
and armaments, economics and finance, political questions, territorial ques-
tions, and the peace aims of European nations. Since the inception of the
project 541 memoranda have been sent to Washington dealing with subjects
selected by both the council and the Government. The research is carried
on by the study group method and the membership of these groups includes
persons especially qualified by training and experience, both in Government
service and out, as well as members of the council's research staff. The founda-
tion has appropriated $60,800 for the continuation of these studies in 1944. The
interest which has been shown in these studies has led the council to arrange
during the coming year for a wider distribution of various memoranda based
on/some of them, both inside the Government and to selected individuals in
private organizations."
* * * * . * * *
Pages 186-187 : "The grants in international relations were for the support
of agencies devoted to studies, to teaching, to service to Government and to pub-
lic and expert education. Collectively these grants assume that it is not possible .
to guarantee peace but that the way to work toward it is to strengthen 'the
infinity of threads that bind peace together.' To that end the foundation made
grants for the support of studies and related activities of the following institu-
tions : Foreign Policy Association, Royal Institute of International Affairs
(London), Swedish Institute of International Affairs (Stockholm), and the
economic, financial, and transit department of the League of Nations. The im-
portance to peace of our relations with, and an understanding of, Russia was
reflected in two grants to Columbia University for the Russian institute of its
School of International Affairs. The sum of $60,000 was appropriated to the
Council on Foreign Relations for the continuation of its war and peace studies.
A special grant of $152,000 was made to the Royal Institute of International
Affairs for a history of the war and the peace settlement. The Institute for
Advanced Study at Princeton received $40,000 for a study of the problems of in-
ternational civil aviation. Fifteen thousand dollars was granted to the Massa-
chusetts Institute of Technology to aid in the development of a course in inter-
national relations for engineers."
934 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
(Source: The Rockefeller Foundation, 1945 annual report, pp. 18S-189:*) :
INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
"Columbia University School of International Affairs, Russian institute
"Increased efficiency and rapidity of transportation and communication have
ended for this country the possibility of isolation, either as a physical fact or as a
national policy. Those responsible for the management of the interests of the
United States, whether in governmental of nongovernmental capacities, will of
necessity be increasingly concerned with the institutions, mores and policies
of other nations and peoples. There must therefore be developed with the
United States a body of men and women with a broad understanding of inter-
national affairs who have in addition training as functional or regional special-
ists. Only a body of men and women so trained will provide a reservoir from
which experts capable of handling the increasingly complex and intricate prob-
lems of international affairs can be drawn.
"For some time Columbia University has been exploring the desirability of
establishing at the university a school of international affairs. The ceeom-
mendation that such a school be created was made in 1945 and included the
proposal for establishment of six institutes designed to develop special knowl-
edge and understanding of certain of the so-called power and problem areas of
the world. It is planned to assemble in these institutes groups of outstanding
scholars who have specialized in specific geographical areas. The university
suggests that a British Commonwealth institute, a French institute, a German
institute, a Russian institute, an East Asian institute, and an institute of Latin
American affairs be created. The Rockefeller Foundation has made a 8-year
grant of $250,000 to Columbia University toward the development of a Russian
institute."
(Source: The Rockefeller Foundation, 1945 annual report, p. 199:)
UNITED NATIONS INFORMATION OFFICE, NEW YOBK
"One of the elements vital to the future success of world cooperation is the
immediate accessibility of the huge documentation of the United Nations ^infer-
ence in San Francisco, which, by an almost unprecedented action of the confer-
ence, was made available for prompt public examination and study. With respect
to many crucial issues the really significant material is not the formal language
of the articles of the Charter, but the interpretation contained in the reports
and discussions of the various committees. The conference, however, had no
means Of publishing this material. The secretariat which staffed the conference
ceased to exist at the closing of the conference. The new secretariat is dealing
with the future rather than with the past. The United Nations Information
Office, therefore, with the consent of the authorities of the conference, is publish-
ing the official document of the conference in cooperation with the Library of
Congress."
(Source: The Rockefeller Foundation, 1946 annual report:)
Pages 8-9: "The challenge of the future is to make this world one world — a
world truly free to engage in common and constructive intellectual efforts that
will serve the welfare of mankind everywhere."
* * * * * * . •
Pages 32-33: "International relations:
"The grants in this field went to agencies which conduct research and education
designed to strengthen the foundations for a more enlightened public opinion and
more consistent public policies. * * *"
" * * * This parallels the grant of $152,000 made in 1945 to the Royal Institute
to enable Arnold Toynbee to write a history of international relations from 1939
to 1949. An appropriation of $300,000 was made to the food research institute
of Stanford University for the preparation, in collaboration with experts from
many countries, of a history and appraisal of the world's experience in handling
food and agriculture during World War II. Another grant was for the purpose
of assisting the United Nations information office to reproduce the documentation
of the first General Assembly and Preparatory Commission of the United Nations,
The Brookings Institution was given a fund which will enable Dr. Leo Pasvolsky,
who was special assistant to the Secretary of State for International Organiza-
tion and Security Affairs, to analyze the background of the development of the
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 935
United Nations organization and to initiate studies and educational conferences
on the problems that are emerging in the functioning of our new international
maehiaary. * * *"
■'■■*■:.. * * * * * *
Page 40: "In this connection, mention might be made of the appropriations,
vote&f in 1946, through the foundation's division of the social sciences, of
$233,006; to the Institute of Pacific Relations, $60,000 of which went to the
American Council and $173,000 to the Pacific Council. Much of the work of
this organization is related to the training of personnel, the stimulation of lan-
guage study and the conduct of research on problems of the Far East. It is part
of the pattern by which, from many different directions and points of view,
efforts are being made to bring the West and the East into closer understanding."
Pages 182-183:
INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
"The Brookinffs Institution
"The developing foreign policies of the United States as one of the major
powers sharing world leadership are to be appraised under the new international-
relations program of the Brookings Institution. Each of the studies is an integral
part of a research plan geared to those international-relations problems with
which the United States either is, or will be, concerned. This problem approach is
intended to aid in formulating enlightened public opinion in training specialists
in international affairs, and in aiding governmental agencies dealing with foreign
relations; . An annual seminar will endeavor to train specialists and aid teachers
of international relations. A 1-year grant of $75,000 was made by the foundation
in support of this program.
"Two annual surveys will be published. One of these will examine American
foreign policies, but with particular attention to the problems directly ahead
and to the factors likely to determine their solution. The second survey will
consider the foreign policies of other nations, especially the major powers, and
how these are being harmonized through the United Nations and its related
agencies.
"Five major studies are in progress : The United Nations Charter and its effect
on 'the powers, duties, and functions of the U. N, ; the foreign policy objectives of
the five major powers; the general effectiveness of international organizations
and conferences as methods of diplomacy ; present-day factors making for eco-
nomic war or for economic peace in international relations; and changes in
international security concepts resulting from technological and strategic
developments.
"Dr. Leo Pasvolsky, who has been in Government service since 1934, has now
returned to the Brookings Institution as director of these studies."
Pages 190-191 :
"Institute of Padfie Relations
"The Institute of Pacific Relations, an unofficial international organization
with a; number of constituent national bodies or councils, aims to increase knowl-
edge- erf economic, social, cultural, and political problems of the Pacific area.
Training personnel, stimulating language teaching as well as curriculum attention
to the Far East in general, and publishing research studies, are the institute's
chief means of spreading knowledge. The distribution of educational materials
to secondary sehools and to the Armed Forces increased significantly during the
past several years."
Pages 192-193 :
United Wations Information Office, New York
"The importance of preventing possible serious misinterpretations of actions
of international bodies due to unavailability of actual documents on transactions
was recognized when the foundation early in 1946 appropriated $16,177 to the
United: Nations Information Office, New York, toward the cost of reproducing
the documentation of the Preparatory Commission in London and of the sessions
of the First General Assembly of the United Nations Organization. Preparatory
Commission documents were microfilmed in London and the film flown daily from
the Interim Organization to the United Nations office in New York and repro-
duced here by photo-offset within 24 hours of their arrival. Fifty or sixty copies
were sent to the Department of State and to key libraries throughout the country.
936 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
One thousand other copies were distributed to interested libraries, insttitfutions,
and societies, and an additional number provided for editorial writers, news
commentators, and others. This appropriation was an emergency measure to
permit the reproduction of these documents and their distribution as promptly
as possible."
(Source: The Rockefeller Foundation, 1947 annual report, pp. 39-41, 43-44:)
APPROACHES TO PEACE
"Work which looks toward more adequate analysis and understanding of the
issues in international relations continued to hold an important place in the
grants made by the Rockefeller Foundation in 1947 in the field of the social
sciences."
* * * * * * *
"Meanwhile we cannot neglect the direct approach to the overwhelming crisis
of our generation, and for its part the foundation has contributed substantial
sums over the last decade to organizations and projects that are concerned with
the issues of international relations. This policy was, of course, continued in
1947. For example, the sum of $225,000 was given to Brookings Institution in
Support of its broad program of research and education in the field of foreign
policy. This program, under the leadership of Dr. Leo Pasvolsky, involves,
among other objectives, five basic studies :
"(1) Origin and Interpretation of the United Nations Charter.
"(2) Foreign Policy Objectives of the Major Powers.
" (3) Influences Making for Economic War or Economic Peace in International
Relations,
"(4) New Concepts of International Security.
"(5) International Organizations and Conferences as New Methods of
Diplomacy. -'.-'■.,..
"In addition, Brookings Institution, as part of its program in the training of
specialists, has planned an annual 2-week seminar for about 100 teachers of inter-
national relations.
* . . * * ■*.'... * ■ .. ...*'..., * .
"Still another appropriation — in the amount of $75,000— was given for the
creation of senior fellowships at the Russian institute of the School of inter*
national Affairs at Columbia University. The Russian institute, toward whose
creation in 1945 the foundation contributed $250,000, is without doubt the leading;
jgraduate school in the United States in the field of Russian studies. In addition
to the Russian language, its basic curriculum provides : (1) A broad background
and training in 5 disciplines (history, economy, law and government, international
relations, and the social and ideological aspects of literature) as applied to
Russia; (2) an intensive research training in one of these 5 disciplines elected
by the student; and (3) fundamental graduate training in the broader aspects
of this elected discipline.
"The senior fellowships will make it possible to bring to the institute for ad-
vanced training some of those persons who are now conducting instruction in
Russian subjects in other universities, thus enabling them to broaden their
equipment and develop their effectiveness in Russian research.
"Other grants by the foundation in 1947 in this general field of international
relations include the following:
"(1) The Royal Institute of International Affairs ($50,625)— a supplement
to an earlier grant toward Prof. Arnold J. Toynbee's study of the history of the
war and of the peace settlement.
"(2) Commission of the Churches on International Affairs ($15,000)— for
preparations for conferences on the role of churches in international relations.
"(3) Johns Hopkins University ($37,400) — f or a study of the trends and f orees
which affect the United States in its international relations.
"(4) Netherlands Institute of International Affairs ($25,000)— for a broadly
based European conference on the economic and cultural aspects of the German
problem.
"(5) Council on Foreign Relations ($60,000) — for general support.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 93?
THE HUMANITIES IN SPACE
• • * * * .-,-■* *
"The range and variety of grants of this type made during 1947 may be
briefly indicated. The American Council of Learned Societies received $12,000
for the work of its committee on Near Eastern studies, $25,000 for the trans-
lation into English of important Russian works, and $100,000 to augment the
supply of materials needed for teaching and research on Slavic studies; the
University of Pennsylvania, $60,000 for the development of studies of modern
India ; the University of Washington, $150,000 for studies of the Far East; Tale
University, $25,000 toward the support of a group of advanced students of the
Far East; the University of California, $30,000 to develop/ intensive instruction
in Slavic and Far Eastern languages, and $100,000 for the development of junior
personnel in Slavic studies; Columbia University, $25,000, likewise for Slavic
studies ; Indiana University, $27,500 for the development of studies of Eastern
Europe, principally Finland and Hungary."
Pages 189-190:
THE FUNCTIONING OF AMERICAN POLITICAL DEMOCRACY
"Pacific Coast Board of Inter-Governmental Relations
"The foundation gave its support in 1947 to a pioneering educational experi-
ment in integrovernmental relationships at the working level. On the Pacific
coast the Governors of Washington, Oregon, and California, the chairman of the
3 State Leagues of Cities and State Associations of County Commissioners, and
the coast regional chiefs of 11 Federal agencies, have created a Board of Inter-
governmental Relations. The board aims to improve and coordinate government
through meetings for the discussion of common problems, and acts as a nonprofit
association solely to inform its individual members; and through them the public,
of general and current problems. It takes no action, directly or indirectly, which
might be construed as carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting to influ-
ence legislation.
"Thus far every meeting has had virtually full attendance, from the three
Governors down. Typical subjects discussed to date include Federal-State-local
tax and fiscal relationships ; division of welfare costs ; forest development, con-
servation, and protection ; educational programs for veterans and nonveterans ;
problems of minorities in metropolitan centers; employment and unemployment;
public-works planning and timing; adequate housing programs; industrial re-
conversion ; availability of materials ; and surplus property disposal."
* * * ■•■■-■ *■ *. * ■ ■
Pages 190-191:
"National Institute of Public Affairs
"The National Institute of Public Affairs recruits from the immediate gradu-
ates of the colleges and universities in the country talent for administrative and
management posts in the Government of the United States and other jurisdic-
tions. Sponsored by a board of public-minded citizens and acting as a liaison unit
between the colleges and universities and the Federal departments, it has com-
pleted the 12th year of its unique public service training program, under which 30
to 50 college graduates each year have been selected and given rotating assign-
ments on a nonsalaried basis within Federal agencies. The institute provides in-
tensive orientation, supervision, and a carefully planned program of reading,
studies, and conferences with public officials.
"The foundation has supported this program since 1935. Maintenance for
about half the interns is financed by funds or followships raised by various col-
leges or their alumni. Encouraging is the competition and career interest which
the program stimulates on college campuses throughout the country; also the
rapidity with which graduates of the institute have risen to positions of responsi-
bility in public life:
"A natural complementary development, guided by the institute in its first
stages is a parallel inservice training program, for selected personnel of some
15 Federal departments or agencies, which is now in its seventh 6-month session
under a coordinator furnished by the Civil Service Commission. The departments
of State, War, Navy, Commerce, and Agriculture, are supplementing this with
coordinated programs of their own."
938 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
INTERNATIONAL KELATTQNS
Page 204-205 : "There is an urgent and ever-increasing need in this country
for basic information on the economic and political structure of the world and
on the treads and forces which prevail and collide in various parts of the world
and; which affect the United States in its international relations. It is not
enough - ' to point out these trends and forces ; it is essential to measure and
weigh them,
"At Johns Hopkins University, Dr. W. S. Woytinsky has undertaken a piece
of work which should help to answer this demand by giving an inclusive sta-
tistical picture of the different patterns of life of all nations of the globe and
of the conditions in which they are facing the future. It will provide at least
a partial background for discussion of such problems as the future of various
races and continents ; the fate of colonial empires ; relations between industrial
and agricultural nations; growth or decline of foreign trade; competition of
raw materials, sources of energy, and means of transportation within the world
economy ; and conditions of world prosperity and peace. The work goes beyond
the simple source book of statistics of international interest, in that these sta-
tistics are selected and organized with reference to specific problems of inter-
national importance. The resulting volume, America in the Changing World,
should be valuable in promoting a better understanding of statistics, not as a
mathematical discipline but as quantitative thinking on human affairs. The
Rockefeller Foundation is supporting this project with a 3-year appropriation
of $37,400."
* * * * » * *
"Council 0$ Foreign Relations
Page 205:
.'*.■•.* * * * * *
"The role of conflicting ideologies in foreign affairs is under discussion in
a study group which the council has recently initiated on public opinion and
foreign policy. The central problem of the group concerns the proper func-
tion of propaganda in the conduct of foreign affairs. Progress has been
made on another study, the problem of Germany, which is financed by a spe-
cial grant from the Rockefeller Foundation. The Netherlands Institute of
International Affairs invited the Council on Foreign Relations to participate
in this, study, which is being undertaken on an international basis,"
( Source : The Rockefeller Foundation, 1948 annual report : )
FOUNDATION POLICIES
Pages 8-9 :
,<*'.• * * * * *
"In general the policy of the foundation and, with occasional exceptions,
its practice have conformed to the following principles: (1) The support of
the foundation should be directed to purposes for which it is otherwise diffi-
cult to seeur.fr funds ; (2) the support should be of an initial or catalytic char-
acter, with the idea that what has been demonstrated to be useful should then
be carried on by other means; (3) current and palliative types of philanthropy
should accordingly be left to others, not because they are unimportant, but be-
cause the needs they encompass are more generally recognized. Furthermore,
the resources of this foundation, and indeed of all similar foundations com-
bined, are insignificant in relation to s.uch needs."
;'■.•:-.■■-.■* * ■ * * * ■ •
Page 243 :
"Columbia University Far Eastern Studies
"Without question east Asia will remain for a long time to come one of the
great problem areas of the world. The United States has need of specialists
who possess at once high technical competence in the social sciences and a
knowledge of the languages and cultures of the area. Looking toward the
pstablisfament of a research institute in the east Asian field, the school of
international affairs at Columbia University has started a program of Far
Eastern studies through the various social-science departments. Owing to
recent expansion in the fields of Chinese and Japanees languages, literature, and
history, Columbia has a firm foundation for these studies. The aim at present
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 939
is to promote a similar expansion in the social sciences, in order to provide
advanced training in economics, political science, and social analysis as related
to China and Japan. * * *"
* * » * * * *
Pages 247-248 :
"UnitmtfUfations Eoonomie Commission for Europe— Training Scholarships
"The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe has received a grant
of $12,000 from the Rockefeller Foundation to provide social-science scholarships
for selected European students.
* * * * * * *
"An operational body which deals with virtually all aspects of European
recovery and development, the Commission has attracted to its staff an interna-
tional group of competent economists. These men can offer promising graduate
students an introduction to the international approach to economic problems
while they are acquiring first-hand knowledge of applied economics. The Re-
search and Planning Division, headed by Mr. Nicholas Kalder, formerly of the
London School of Economics, carries on work which is closely linked with the
technical economic problems encountered in the operational activities of the
Commission. Dr. Gunnar Myrdal, of Sweden, Executive Secretary of the Com-
mission, has established a special committee to administer the program."
(Source: The Rockefeller Foundation, 1949 annual report:)
pbisibent's eeview
* * * ♦ ' * * *
Page 5-7 : "The deeply disturbed political situation now prevailing in a large
part of the world has had the effect of considerably curtailing the worldwide and
international scope of foundation programs. Profound political changes have
prevented the foundation from operating in several countries in which it was
formerly active. These countries include Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and
China. During the past year the far-eastern office of the international health
division of the Rockefeller Foundation was moved from Shanghai to Macao and
then to Bangalore, India. All personnel were withdrawn from China, and a
malaria project under way in the island of Formosa was transferred to Govern-
ment auspices.
"Monetarily speaking, this is an age of huge financial operations. In the United
States large funds, chiefly governmental, are available even in the relatively
restricted field of research and fellowships. This has brought about a sharp
awareness of the discrepancy between the resources of any privately endowed
philanthropic organization, such as the Rockefeller Foundation, and the magni-
tude of funds needed today for large-scale research or educational enterprises.
"Until recently the Rockefeller Foundation was a principal source of funds for
foreign student fellowships at the advanced level. Today, as shown by the
United Nations educational, scientific, and cultural organization handbook of
available fellowships, Study Abroad, appointments made annually by the founda-
tion constitute hardly 2 percent of the 15,070 comparable awards now offered,
62.5 percent of them by Government agencies. It has been calculated that in
1913, when there were about 900 institutions of higher education in the United
States,, the appropriations of the General Education Board and of the Carnegie
Corp., the 2 principal foundations at that time, represented more than 15 percent
of the current income of all higher educational institutions. In other words,
these philanthropic resources were fairly large in relation to the activities with
which they were concerned, and they were not unsubstantial even with reference
to public primary and secondary education.
"As things stand now, the income of the Rockefeller Foundation, the General
Education Board, and the Carnegie Corp. covers less than 1 percent of the
budgetary needs of the 1,800 institutions now ministering to higher education.
Indeed, the annual expenditures of all foundations, even though roughly $100
million, are insignificant in relation to public and private funds now needed and
now available for education, scientific research, and scholarly activities.
"In the light of these changed conditions I propose to devote part of this review
to a brief discussion of Rockefeller Foundation techniques in giving and in
cooperating with other 'agencies and other countries. It is hoped that some
light may be shed on the comparatively modest, yet significant, role that can
940 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
still be played under present world conditions by a privately endowed 'philan-
thropic organization."
* * * * * ♦''■■»' ■
Pages 253-254 :
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
"Council on Foreign Relations:
"The Rockefeller Foundation in 1949 appropriated $50,000 to the Council on
Foreign Eelations, New York, for an organized study of problems of aid to Europe
in its broadest aspects. The European recovery program of the United States
has a significance for our future prosperity and security so great as to challenge
the best efforts of private citizens as well as those in public office. The Economic
Cooperation Administration (ECA) believed that it would be of great value to the
Government and to the public at large to have an appraisal of the European
situation by a group of competent private persons free from the pressure of day-
to-day decisions and unhampered by governmental procedures or the considera-
tions of practical polities.
"Upon the invitation of the ECA, the council organized a group of leaders in
the fields of economics, politics, and military strategy under the chairmanship of
Gen. Dwigbt D. Eisenhower. At its monthly meetings this group has carefully
examined the aims of American foreign policy with respect to Western Europe
and has assessed the means — economic, political, and military — for achieving
those aims. Special attention has been given to the continuing interests of this
country, as opposed to urgent expediencies of today and tomorrow, and to the
relation between current measures of policy and the attainment of long-term
goals. Close liaison has been maintained with ECA and with other Federal agen-
cies and departments, but the group has functioned independently of the Govern-
ment.
"Conclusions will be presented in the form of memoranda to responsible Gov-
ernment officials. Nonrestrieted information is to be released to the general pub-
lic by means of articles or pamphlets in order to help the public understand and
judge the measures which it will be asked to endorse and carry out. In addition,
it is hoped to issue a major publication or series of publications on the operations,
effects, shortcomings, and interrelations of United States aid to Europe under
ECA and under the provisions of military lend-lease.
"To assist the group the council has provided a full-time research staff of
experts in the various fields of study, headed by Prof. Howard Ellis of the Uni-
versity of California. Under the guidance of the study commission the research
staff gathers facts and data for the discussion meetings and prepares memoranda
on assigned topics. The council also furnishes library and clerical assistance.
The study group is serving on a voluntary basis. The Rockefeller Foundation's
grant is to cover salaries and expenses of the research staff."
"Institute of Pacific Relations
* * * * • * •
Page 256-257 : "The eleventh conference will convene in 1950 in India and will
discuss recent political and economic trends in the Far East and their conse-
quences for the Western World. Preparation for the conference is a part of the
research program of the Pacific council, which is responsible for writing up the
data papers which give the members of the conference the background informa-
tion they need for the discussions. Some of these papers, such as those on the
Chinese Communist movement, nationalism and communism in Burma, postwar
development of Indian capitalist enterprise, the development of political parties
in Japan and the international effects of the withdrawal of western power from
the Far East, are of wide interest. In order to enable the institute to strengthen
its conference and educational activities at a critical time in Far Eastern rela-
tions, the foundation In 1949 made a supplementary grant of $25,000, available
until the end of March 1950. Of this, approximately $14,000 is to augment the
research function of the Pacific council and $11,000 toward the expenses of 1950
conference."
( Source : The Rockefeller Foundation, 1950 annual report : )
"Brookings Institution
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 941
Page 208-209: "The 10 yearly issues contain research on the immediate issues
to be faced by foreign policymakers. Additional publications put out under the
new program include a series of individual analyses on long-range problems.
Reeent studies in this group have been on the International Trade Organization
as an instrument of American economic foreign policy, the United States and
peace settlements, and a history of the United Nations Charter. In order that
the values of this problem approach may be extended to Government leaders,
educators, and businessmen, the Brookings Institution now holds an annual
2-week seminar on Problems of United States Foreign Policy. Seminars have
already been held at Dartmouth College, Stanford University, Lake Forest Col-
lege, and the University of Denver, with over a hundred persons attending
«ach one."
Pages 209-210 :
"Foreign. Policy Association
"The Foreign Policy Association was created in 1918 for the purpose of carry-
ing on 'research and education activities to aid in the understanding and con-
structive development of American foreign policy.' As the role of the United
States has expanded in the international sphere, the association has undertaken
to explain this role and its implications to an ever-increasing number of Amer-
icans. Thirty-two branch organizations have been organized in large cities
throughout the country. Through the activities of these branches there have
been organized local and national conferences, and a widespread educational
program with frequent use made of radio and television. The three publications
of the Foreign Policy Association, available to the general public, schools, organ-
izations, and Government agencies, are a weekly foreign policy bulletin, which
covers current issues, the foreign policy reports, published twice monthly, which
discuss at some length pressing international issues and the popular Headline
Books, with details on problems of importance to Americans and to the world."
(Source: The Rockefeller Foundation, 1951 annual report:)
Pages 68, 69, 70:
THE INTERNATIONAL SCENE
"With the enigma of Russian intentions still the top problem in world politics,
the Russian institute of Columbia University's School of International Affairs
continues to be a key center for research and training in this field. Its 2-year
course, requiring familiarity with the Russian language and providing intensive
postgraduate instruction in the history, economics, law, politics, and culture
of Russia, has in 5 years supplied the United States Army, the Department of
State, and other Government services with more than 100 trained men. Staff
members are frequently called on to lecture at the National War College, the
Air War College, and outside universities. Earlier grants for the institute,
which was established in 1946, totaled $362,000; and in 1950 the foundation
appropriated an additional $420,000 toward support over a 5-year period.
"A postwar development of the Brookings Institution is its international
studies group, organized in 1946 for research, education, and publication on
questions of American foreign policy. Directed by Dr. Leo Pasvolsky and
using a technique which is calls 'the problem method,' the group has held 10
seminars in various parts of the United States for university teachers, advanced
students, Government administrators, and journalists. To date some 800 uni-
versity professors have shared in foreign policy analysis through participation
in these seminars. Research activities are reflected in a number of books,
notably in the annual Major Problems of United States Foreign Policy, which
has been adopted as a textbook at West Point, Annapolis, and various universities
and colleges. A projected study which is now in the planning stage will analyze
the basic framework of international relations, including the fundamental con-
cepts and objectives of the major nations, patterns of economic behavior, polit-
ical attitudes in international relations, the channels and instrumentalities of
national action, and in general the whole pattern of internal and external factors
which condition the international scene. Since the international studies group
began 6 years ago, the foundation, has appropriated $480,000 toward its program,
including $180,000 in 1950."
942 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Pages 355-356 :
"United Nations Economic Commission for Europe
Long-ruri: tendencies in the European economy:
"In connection with its overall program on postwar recovery, the United
Nations Economic Commission for Europe (ECE) in 1949 asked Prof. Ingvar
Svennilson, the Swedish economist, to undertake a study of longrtin trails in the
European economy. Professor Svennilson and a staff of assistants at Geneva
are now nearing the end of this work. It is essentially a survey of trends in the
European economy for the years 1913-50, with emphasis on population, indus-
trialization, manpower, and production, the influence of foreign trade on produc-
tion and the important factors contributing to economic growth in Europe.
"The Rockefeller Foundation appropriated $50,000 to the Economic Commis-
sion for Europe when Professor Svennilson began this work in 1949; in 1951 the
foundation made a 1-year grant of $23,725 for expenses in connection with the
completion of the survey. The United Nations intends to publish the findings."
* * * * * * *
Page 359 :
"PuMie Administration Clearing House
Consultant for Japan,
"Throughout the period of allied occupation of Japan there has been an effort
to shift the emphasis of the Japanese governmental organization from a highly
centralized bureaucratic control system to a more widely diffused pattern, with
large areas of self-determination in local matters delegated to prefectures, cities,
towns, and villages.
"One group in Japan which is sponsoring the spread of this movement Is the
recently organized Japan Public Administration Clearing House. All three levels
of local government are represented in this group, which is made up of delegates
from the Tokyo Bureau of Municipal Research and the national associations of
prefectural governors, prefectural assembly chairmen, municipal mayors, city
assembly chairmen, town and village mayors, and town and village assembly
chairmen.
"Assistance was offered to the new organization by the Public Administration
Clearing House of Chicago. With a grant of $10,740 from the Rockefeller
Foundation, the Chicago Public Administration Clearing House arranged to send
a. consultant to Japan and to make its official resources available to the group
in Japan."
(Source: The Story of the Rockefeller Foundation, by Raymond B. Fosdick:)
Pages 283-284 :
"As we have already seen in earlier chapters, the example of Rose and Pearee
in developing their programs on a worldwide basis was eagerly followed by the
other divisions of the foundation as they began their activities after the reorgan-
ization of 1928. The details of many of these activities have already been con-
sidered; in all cases they were motivated by the single phrase in the Charter:
'the well-being of mankind throughout the world' ; and they were predicated on
the conception that civilization and the intellectual life of men represent a co-
operative achievement, and that the experience of the race can be pooled for the
common good. It is an ironic circumstance that this objective should have had
to run the gauntlet of two world wars with their hideous aftermaths, when behind
closed frontiers, rigidly sealed off from contact with the ideas and opinions of
other nations, vast populations have suffered from mental undernourishment and
starvation. Intellectual malnutrition can be as stunting to human life and
character as the absence of calories and vitamins. The influences that in normal
times flow freely across boundary lines, the uninhibited stream of ideas coming
from all corners of the world, are, in this modern society of ours, a corrective
and stabilizing factor in the lives of men, bringing strength and fertility to soils
that would otherwise become sterile and dry. 'Speech is civilization itself,' says
Thomas Mann. 'The word, even the most contradictory word, preserve eon-
tact — it is silence that isolates.' "
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 943
Page 297:
"A foundation with wide and intimate contacts can perform a useful function
in serving as an unofficial clearinghouse for ideas and plans in many fields.
Certainly this has been true of the Rockefeller Foundation. Its officers are in
continual touch with promising developments and personnel around the world.
The most effective projects it has supported have been developed in the field.
These projects have come from close acquaintance with scientists and lab-
oratories, from days and weeks spent on university campuses, from hard journeys
on horseback and riverboat to discover the breeding places of disease or the
prospects for a new type of corn. The officers thus develop a point of view that
is both cumulative and comparative.
"Consequently, the foundation has become a center to which research students
and universities turn for information; and much of the time of the officers is
spent, not on questions of financial support, but in discussing with eager inquirers
the developments in their fields in other institutions and in other countries. As
the late President Keppel of the Carnegie Corp. said : 'Much of what one uni-
versity learns about another is learned in foundation offices.' "
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
HEARINGS
BEFORE THE
SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS AND
COMPAKABLE OBGANIZATIONS
HOUSE OF KEPKESENTATIVES
EIGHTY-THIRD CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON
H. Res. 217
WASHINGTON, D. 0.
PART II, Pages 945-1241
Printed for the use of the Special Committee To Investigate Tax-Exempt
Foundations and Comparable Organizations
UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
49720 WASHINGTON : 1954
SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
B. CARROLL REECE, Tennessee, Chairman
JESSE P. WOLCOTT, Michigan WAYNE L. HAYS, Ohio
ANGIER L. GOODWIN, Massachusetts GRACIE PFOST, Idaho
Rene A. Woemskb, General Counsel
Kathrtn Casey, Legal Analyst
Norman Dodd, Research Director
Arnold Koch, Associate Counsel
John Marshall, Jr., Chief Clerk
Thomas McNiece, Assistant Research Director
H
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
House of Representatives,
Washington, D. C, June 21, 195^
Hon. B. Carroll Reece,
House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.
Dear Carroll : I cannot be at the meeting on foundations tomorrow
and in the meantime want you to know I think there should be an
immediate cancellation of all public hearings.
Sincerely,
Angier L. Goodwin,
Member of Congress.
Statements of the Rector of the Catholic University of America,
and the Heritage Foundation, Inc., in Reply to Congressman
Hays' Remarks Concerning the Catholic University and Sister
Mary Margaret Patricia McCarran
The Catholic University of America,
Office of the Rector,
Washington, D. C, September ®, 195^,.
Hon. Carroll Reece, Member of Congress,
Chairman, Special Committee To Investigate Tax-Exempt
Foundations, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.
Dear Congressman Reece : It has come to my notice that at a hear-
ing of your committee in early June the assertion was made that a,
doctoral degree was granted by the Catholic University of America
as a result of pressure.
On behalf of the university, I wish to deny this allegation as com-
pletely false. Throughout the 65 years of our existence, our aca-
demic standards have been recognized as high and as honestly en-
forced. Neither in the instance referred to nor in any other instance
has pressure or influence brought about the conferring of a degree
by the Catholic University of America.
According to our regulations, a student is admitted to graduate
work only after rigid and impartial scrutiny of his prerequisite
undergraduate training. The courses for the major and the minors
in the master of arts and doctor of philosophy programs entail con-
stant checks and examinations and are designed to prepare the student
for independent thinking and research. For the doctor of philoso-
phy, he must also prove his ability to read French and German.
The doctor of philosophy requirements include the publication of a,
dissertation based upon the student's independent research. A small
board of the faculty reads and judges the dissertation. While ap-
proval would not be given to views contrary to morals or Catholic
faith, and while an effort is made on the part of the official reader to-
945
946 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
protect the student from errors of fact and judgment, still, in these
matters academic freedom is accorded a doctoral candidate and re-
sponsibility rests with him. Approval by the faculty of a dissertation
means formal recognition that the student has demonstrated sufficient
competency in research to justify consideration for the doctoral
degree.
These regulations are carefully and honestly followed by our faculty
without exception.
If the unwarranted assertion referred to above is included in the
record of your hearings, may I ask that this letter be given equal
prominence in your record.
With kind regards, I remain,
Sincerely yours,
Bryan J. McEntegart,
Rector of the University,
Titular Bishop of Aradi.
The Heritage Foundation, Inc.,
Chicago, III., August 4, 195 If.
Hon. Carroll Reece,
Chairman, Special Committee To Investigate Tax-Exempt
Foundations, Washington, D. C.
Dear Congressman Reece : During the course of the public hear-
ings on the investigation into the tax-exempt foundations, generally
referred to as the Reece committee, the insinuation was made that
the graduate school at the Catholic University could be pressured
or influenced into granting a degree when it was not earned or
deserved.
A reference to the transcript of public hearings of your committee
will make the point very clear. The remarks made by Congressman
Hays with reference to Sister Margaret Patricia McCarran's work —
Fabianism in the Political Life of Britain, are so derogatory and so
full of insinuations that this attack upon the integrity of the uni-
versity and upon the character of a nun should not be allowed to
stand unanswered in a congressional record.
As the publisher of the second edition of Sister Patricia's book, the
first edition having been published by the Catholic University of
America Press, I hereby challenge every statement and every insinua-
tion about this book and about the nun that the Congressman from
Ohio made in this connection.
As a doctor's dissertation Fabianism in the Political Life of Britain
is pretty much a public document and it can and it will withstand
any criticism that might be forthcoming. The Heritage Foundation
as publisher and Catholic University of America, I am sure, would
agree that criticism of a volume or of a study and certainly of a
doctor's dissertation would be in keeping with the true spirit of aca-
demic freedom. However, we would not agree with the methods used
by Congressman Hays of Ohio. A person is still free in this country
to agree or disagree with a book, an article or a doctor's dissertation.
However, the obvious smear technique used by the Congressman from
Ohio to discredit the reputable work of a reputable teacher in an out-
standing university must not go unchallenged.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 947
There are a number of instances in which the Congressman from
Ohio was wrong.
First : He insinuated that Sister Margaret Patricia McCarran took
more than the necessary time to obtain her degree from the university.
The most casual amount of inquiry at the university would reveal the
fact that Sister Margaret Patricia completed her work for her doctor
of philosophy in 4 years. This happens to be an unusually short
period of time.
Nuns do their full teaching job during the year in their own com-
munities and their own schools. Sister Margaret Patricia is a full-
time teacher in the College of the Holy Names in Oakland, Calif.
Nuns, therefore, have to complete their work in summer school, night
school, and then by special leave of absence from their communities
in order to fulfill all of the requirements for an advanced degree.
Therefore, some nuns and other religious working for advanced
degrees take 6, 7, or more years before they meet all of the residence
requirements for a doctorate. On this score, then, the Congressman
from Ohio was completely in error.
Second : The insinuation was made that the Catholic University of
America might have been pressured or influenced in some way into
granting the degree to Sister Margaret Patricia. It would be well to
point out to the Congressman from Ohio that the highest academic
standards in the United States of America are maintained at Catholic
University. Besides its recognition as an outstanding American
university it has also been designated a pontifical university.
There has never been a pressured or undeserved degree granted by
the university in the past, and I am sure there will be none granted
in the future. Even a casual reference to the high academic standards
of Catholic University of America would have informed the Congress-
man from Ohio that his information on this score was also completely
in error.
Third : The remarks in the record of the Congressman from Ohio
constitute a stigma on the integrity of the faculty of Catholic Univer-
sity ; on the honesty and character of its students who, for the most
part, are devoted, self-sacrificing nuns, priests, and brothers of every
religious order in the Catholic Church. The attack upon the char-
acter of Sister Margaret Patricia as a nun, devoted to a life of teach-
ing, with a vow of poverty and complete worldly abandonment, is one
of the most irresponsible, thoughtless, and uncharitable acts that has
ever come to my attention.
I do not believe that in the records of the House of Representatives
there could be found a more striking example of an irresponsible state-
ment by a Member of that body.
Sister Margaret Patricia, Catholic University of America and
Fabianism in the Political Life of Britain need no defense from me.
However, as the publisher of the second edition of this volume I
request that this reply to the unfounded and untrue charges and insin-
uations made by Congressman Hays be recorded and inserted in the
official record immediately following the unjustified attack as it
appears in the printed record.
Sincerely,
The Heritage Foundation, Inc.,
Arthur L. Conrad, President.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
TUESDAY, AUGUST 10, 1954
House or Representatives,
Special Committee to
Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations,
Washington, D. C.
Pursuant to its resolution of July 2, the committee received the fol-
lowing statements, which were ordered incorporated in the record of
proceedings :
State of New York,
Comity of New York, ss :
Charles Dollard, being duly sworn, deposes and says as follows :
1. I am president of Carnegie Corporation of New York.
2. Attached hereto are two documents marked respectively "Ex-
hibit A" and "Exhibit B," the former entitled "Introductory State-
ment to Special Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations
by Charles Dollard, President, Carnegie Corporation of New York,"
and the latter entitled "Answers to Specific Charges, a Memorandum
Submitted for the Record by Charles Dollard, President, Carnegie
Corporation of New York, to Special Committee to Investigate Tax-
Exempt Foundations."
These documents were prepared for submission to the Select Com-
mittee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations in connection with
the testimony which I intended to give before that committee during
the week of June 21, 1954, at the invitation of counsel for the com-
mittee.
3. Having been informed that no representative of Carnegie Corpo-
ration of New York will be heard by the committee, I submit these
statements for the record and swear that they are true and correct to
the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.
4. Also attached hereto is a photostatic copy of a letter dated June 9,
1954, addressed to me by Mr. Vannevar Bush, president of Carnegie
Institution of Washington. This is the letter referred to on page 26
of exhibit A.
Charles Dollard.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 7th day of July, 1954.
Gordon S. Walker,
Notary Public, State of New YorTc.
Commission expires March 30, 1956.
949
950 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
STATEMENT BY CHARLES DOLLARD, PRESIDENT, CARNEGIE
CORPORATION OF NEW YORK
FOUNDATIONS IN AMERICAN LIFE
Philanthropy is an American habit, and the modern foundation is
an American invention. Other countries have philanthropic founda-
tions of various kinds, but it is in America that they have reached their
most impressive development. Abraham Flexner, one of the most dis-
tinguished figures in the history of organized philanthropy, once
wrote:
* * * There is not a nation in Europe that does not envy ns the puhlic spirit
which our wealthy men have shown in dedicating a large part of their wealth to
public services, in the form of foundations. * * * 1
The emergence of great foundations in America was no accident.
Americans like to make money, and they enjoy spending the money
they have made for the benefit of their fellows. It is quite true that
in recent years the development of foundations has been facilitated by
tax provisions ; but it is a grave injustice to American philanthropists
to say that they are moved chiefly by consideration of tax avoidance.
Both the Kockefeller and Carnegie Foundations were set up at a time
when there were no Federal income or estate taxes. Even today no one
can doubt that the great bulk of American giving is in response to
charitable impulses .
The function of the philanthropic foundations is to improve the
tenor of human life in the area or areas in which they operate. They
seek to make human beings healthier, happier, wiser, more conscious of
the rich possibilities of human existence and more capable of realizing
them. A foundation will, of course, fail of its purpose if it attempts
to do everything at once — to be all things to all men. It must con-
centrate its grants in a limited number of fields, using its best judg-
ment as to what expenditures will at any given time be of most value
in forwarding its central purpose.
Free and untrammeled inquiry by freemen is of the very essence
of a free society, its growth and development. Government has its
necessary function in support of free schools and colleges and uni-
versities; but the success of government, whether Federal, State, or
municipal, in the field of education, broadly defined, will be in pro-
portion to the degree in which it does not dominate. The privately
endowed institutions of learning — schools, universities, colleges, and.
foundations — help to set standards for education as a whole and en-
gage in research, inventions, and discoveries in fields that may not yet
interest government.
Private enterprise in education contributes to the diversity which
is the life of our American system. Many different people and organi-
zations are encouraged to work independently in recognizing and
tackling new problems and in developing new ideas and processes.
Their efforts will not be uniformly successful. But the net effect of
their efforts will be good because of the very freedom that permits
the best to demonstrate its superiority over the second best. Selection
by competition is the cornerstone of American free enterprise.
i Extract from letter dated December 15, 1952, from Abraham Flexner to Harold M.
Keele, counsel for the Cos committee, reprinted on p. 763 of the hearings before the Cox
committee.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 951
A wise nation will never surrender to government the exclusive
right to be concerned about the health, the education, and the pros-
perity of the people. The very essence of the American system is that
government shall do everything possible to encourage private enter-
prise in all phases of our national life — economic, social, and cultural.
Our Nation owes much of its vitality and momentum to the inbred
reluctance of Americans to lean on their Government. Anything
which might reduce this reluctance is in our opinion to be feared and
avoided. Those who wish to have research, study, inquiry, and teach-
ing put in the hands of government exclusively, or indirectly subject
to government control, should look to Russia where this process has
been perfected.
CARNEGIE CORPORATION OF NEW YORK
Now let me speak briefly about the Carnegie Corporation of New
York, and the other funds established by Andrew Carnegie.
Carnegie Corporation of New York is an educational foundation,
chartered by the State of New York in 1911.
During his lifetime, Andrew Carnegie made personal gifts for edu-
cational and cultural activities totaling approximately $107 million.
In addition he provided endowment for six American philanthropic
funds. The first five trusts which he established were chartered for
work in specific fields :
Carnegie Institute of Pittsburgh, 1896
Carnegie Institution of Washington, 1902
Carnegie Hero Fund Commission, 1904
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 1905
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1910
Each of these trusts has its own board, its own staff, and its own capital
funds. The total endowment of these first 5 trusts was $53,100,000.
Then in 1911 he established Carnegie Corporation of New York with
the broad purpose of carrying on philanthropic activities which would
contribute to the advancement and diffusion of knowledge and under-
standing." Carnegie Corporation of New York received from An-
drew Carnegie by gift and will an endowment of $135 million. The
assets of the corporation as of September 30, 1953, were $178,861,599,
the difference between the original endowment of $135 million and
the present book value of the corporation's holdings representing pri-
marily gains on the sales and redemption of securities. Securities are
carried at cost ; the present market value is higher.
In his letters of gift to the corporation, Mr. Carnegie stipulated that
only the income from the endowment should be available for expendi-
ture by the trustees ; and that the original trustees should elect their
own successors. A complete list of current trustees of the Carnegie
Corporation is appended to this statement.
It has been suggested that foundation trustees are figureheads and
have no real knowledge of what the paid officers of the foundations
are doing. This has no basis in fact with respect to the operations of
Carnegie Corporation. The trustees of the corporation are active and
responsible in both the making of corporation policy and the actual
expenditure of corporation income. There is constant communica-
tion between officers and trustees. Attendance at board and commit-
tee meetings is uniformly high.
952 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Carnegie Corporation has always made a full public accounting in
its annual reports and in other publications; and we have long advo-
cated complete public reports by all foundations, showing detailed
facts as to' the amount and sources of income and the amounts and
objects of expenditures. Such exposure of foundation activities to
public and governmental scrutiny is in our opinion the most effective
and desirable means of insuring that foundation officers and trustees
live up to their fiduciary obligations.
As soon as practicable after the close of the fiscal year and after
an audit of the accounts by independent auditors, the officers of Car-
negie Corporation present to the trustees a report of the year's oper-
ations that covers both its financial and its philanthropic acts. This
report is printed and distributed to all those who have any interest in
the corporation's work. In addition, the corporation now issues a
quarterly report describing projects underway and announcing new
grants. The mailing list for both reports is approximately 9,000
institutions and individuals.
It was Mr. Carnegie's wish that the income from the major part of
the corporation's endowment should be used for the advancement and
diffusion of knowledge and understanding among the people of the
United States ; included in the total endowment, however, is a special
fund of $12 million the income from which may be used for similar
purposes in the British dominions and colonies.
In the 42' years of its existence, the board of trustees of the corpora-
tion has voted grants totaling approximately $253,220,000, all repre-
senting income from the endowment. About 5 percent of the income
has been spent for administration. The remainder has gone entirely
to institutions, agencies, and individuals concerned with the increase
or diffusion of knowledge.
Colleges, universities, and schools in the United States have received
in direct grants about $68,300,000 or 27 percent. Professional and
scholarly agencies have been granted approximately $69,300,000, an-
other 27 percent. A very substantial part of this latter amount found
its way indirectly to colleges and universities. Some $14 million was
expended in the first 6 years of the corporation's life for construction
of free public libraries and purchase of church organs in continuation
of programs begun by Mr. Carnegie before the founding of the
corporation.
The remainder of the total of $253,200,000, or approximately
$100,800,000, has been granted to four of the other trusts previously
mentioned, established by Mr. Carnegie, to help them carry out their
chartered purposes. Here, again, a very substantial part of this money
eventually found its way to colleges and universities.
More than half of this $100,800,000 has gone to the Carnegie Foun-
dation for the Advancement of Teaching (established by Mr. Carnegie
primarily to provide retiring pensions for college teachers) , and to the
Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association (established by the foun-
dation and the corporation in 1918 to expand the pension idea on a
sound actuarial basis) .
From the beginning the Carnegie Corporation has operated as a
grant-making organization rather than as an operating agency. The
entire staff, professional and clerical, now numbers 33 and has never
exceeded this figure. The trustees have always sought to achieve Mr.
Carnegie's purposes through other agencies — especially colleges and
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 953
universities. The corporation has made grants to 734 colleges, uni-
versities, and schools in all 48 States, the District of Columbia, Alaska,
Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands. It has also made grants
to many private research and educational agencies. The names of
these colleges, universities, schools and private agencies will be found
in the reports issued each year by the officers.
The trustees and officers of Carnegie Corporation are proud of the
record of accomplishment of the corporation over the years since its
founding. No doubt they have made mistakes and will make others
in the future. No. doubt their predecessors also made mistakes. Only
death frees man from the possibility of error. But the record stands
for all to see and it cannot be altered by those who seek to rewrite
history and distort reality.
The question has been raised in these hearings as to whether founda-
tions have supported pro- American projects and, through a shocking
combination of innuendo and implication, the impression has been left
that perhaps they have failed in this respect.
As far as the Carnegie Corporation is concerned, there can be only
one answer to such a question. The corporation regards its entire
program as pro-American. That is why the corporation is in business.
It is the whole purpose of the corporation trustees and officers to work
in behalf of their country, to strengthen it, and to insure its future.
America is proud of its educational system. Literally millions of
Americans have profited from this system. To strengthen education in
America, to encourage the healthy growth of colleges and universities,
and to promote that experimentation and innovation which is char-
acteristically American are in the profoundest sense pro- American
objectives. It is to just these objectives that the corporation is dedi-
cated.
J. L. Morrill, president of the University of Minnesota, puts the
matter this way :
If the best defense against democracy's enemies is to make America a better
place in which to live and to place human welfare first, American foundations
have rendered service far beyond the actual sums they have contributed to
higher educational institutions. Thus, indirectly, the foundations can be credited
with a significant role in the never-ending battle against democracy's enemies.
And at this point I should like to add one fact of vital importance: In all our
dealings with foundations and with their representatives, we have never found
evidence of any motivation other than a sincere and patriotic desire to further
scholarship in the best American tradition.
The corporation admits readily that it must choose between ap-
plicants for its funds. It also admits that those who do not receive
them must feel that those who do are favorites. The corporation cer-
tainly favors those who come to it with the best and most imaginative
ideas. It favors those who have demonstrated a capacity for pro-
ductive scholarship. It favors those who are recognized by their peers
as being first rate. It favors institutions honestly dedicated to the
best in education and research.
It does not follow that those who do not receive corporation funds do
not meet the tests indicated above. The corporation's funds are lim-
ited and it can support only a fraction of the worthy individuals and
institutions who apply. But a foundation which in the first 40 years
of its history has made grants to more than TOO colleges and univer-
sities can hardly be accused of "favoritism" in any invidious sense of
that word.
954 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Gilbert White, president of Haverford College, has offered some
relevant comments on the smaller college :
It has been my own observation here of Haverford and at other small colleges
with which I am familiar, that many of the larger foundations have been more
than open to opportunities to support the smaller institutions. Relatively speak-
ing, I think that on the whole the small colleges have received better treat-
ment, taking into account the number of requests made, than have many of the
larger institutions.
Now let me speak in more detail about Carnegie pensions and annui-
ties for teachers. During the last 60 years, Andrew Carnegie and the
Carnegie Corporation and the Carnegie Foundation for the Advance-
ment of Teaching have together given over $80 million for such pen-
sions or annuities for teachers in 375 colleges and universities in 42
States and in Canada.
Andrew Carnegie, speaking of the Carnegie Foundation for the Ad-
vancement of Teaching, said :
This fund is very near and dear to me— knowing as I do, many who are soon
to become beneficiaries, and convinced as I am of their worth and the value of
the service already rendered by them. Of all professions, that of teaching
is probably the most unfairly, yes, most meanly paid, though it should rank
with the highest. Educated men, devoting their lives to teaching the young,
receive mere pittances. When I first took my seat as a trustee of Cornell Uni-
versity, I was shocked to find how small were the salaries of the professors, as a
rule ranking below the salaries of some of our clerks. To save for old age with
these men is impossible. Hence the universities without pension funds are com-
pelled to retain men who are no longer able, should no longer be required, to
perform their duties. Of the usefulness of the fund no doubt can be entertained.
The Carnegie pension program played a very significant role in
developing private pension systems generally, and was the dramatic
first step m the more or less universal establishment of pensions for
teachers. A substantial par.t of the corporation's current income still
goes and for many years will go to pay those free pensions.
The great increase in the teaching population after the First World
War, combined with a steady increase in professors' salaries, made it
impossible for the foundation, even with the assistance of the corpora-
tion, to provide free pensions for all college and university teachers.
Accordingly, the corporation helped to establish the Teachers Insur-
ance and Annuity Association in 1918, through which colleges and
professors might cooperate in building a system of annuities based
upon regular joint payments by the professor and his college.
Through this company 75,000 teachers (men and women) have accu-
mulated assets of $335 million toward their future retirement.
Men who genuinely wish American higher education to retain its
vigor cannot help but applaud the philanthropic impulse which led
Mr. Carnegie to diminish the extreme financial hazards of a teaching-
career. To the extent that these hazards drive good men and women
out of the teaching profession, American education suffers. The eco-
nomic circumstances of our teachers still are not enviable, but the
hazards of the profession have in the past 50 years been notably
diminished by the Carnegie pension program.
Millions of Americans have at one time or another made use of
a Carnegie library. Andrew Carnegie and the Carnegie Corporation
have devoted more than $56 million to establishing free public li-
braries. More than 2,500 library buildings were built by Carnegie
money.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 955
By 1917 it was clear that the idea of the free public library had been
fully accepted. The trustees then turned their attention from erecting
buildings to improving the service which libraries can offer. More
than $15 million was granted during the next 30 years for improve-
ment of college libraries, for refinement of library techniques and
services, for support and endowment of the American Library Asso-
ciation, and for endowment or support, of library training schools in
universities such as Chicago, Columbia, Denver, Emory, North Caro-
lina, and Western Reserve.
American libraries today are recognized throughout the world as
outstanding. Americans take their free public libraries for granted
and rarely recall today that these institutions stem from one of the
most imaginative philanthropic conceptions in the history of human
giving.
Other and more recent contributions of Carnegie Corporation to the
field of education cannot yet be seen in full historic perspective but they
merit comment. The corporation has played a significant role in rais-
ing the level of higher education in the South. It has done its part to
preserve and reinvigorate the best elements in our tradition of under-
graduate liberal arts education. It has had, along with other founda-
tions, a rather marked effect in strengthening certain fields of post-
graduate and professional education. It has supported plans designed
to attract better qualified individuals into academic life.
Although chief emphasis is upon higher education, the corporation
has made two substantial grants in the field of precollege education —
to the National Citizens' Commission for the Public Schools, and to
Teachers College, Columbia University, for a program in citizenship
education. Prior to the war, the corporation also made substantial
grants in the field of adult education.
But perhaps the most important thing that can be said about Car-
negie Corporation in the field of education is that it has served over the
years as a source of encouragement and support to gifted leaders, vig-
orous pioneers, and promising young people in American higher edu-
cation. The effects of this cannot be measured, but it is not unreason-
able to suggest that it has been a significant ingredient in our national
life. America has grown great through the encouragement of talent
and through the rewarding of creative leadership. In the field of edu-
cation, Carnegie Corporation has contributed importantly to both
processes since 1911.
These examples may serve to illustrate some of the activities of the
Carnegie Corporation over the years. One could name many others.
The high standards of our medical schools can be traced in the first
instance to the effects of Abraham Flexner's report on Medical Educa-
tion in the United States and Canada, financed by the Carnegie Foun-
dation for the Advancement of Teaching and published by it in 1910.
Thousands of scholarships and fellowships have been made available
by foundations. Thousands of smaller but vitally important private
organizations concerned with such diverse matters as the improvement
of the civil service, adult education, music and the fine arts, religion
and philosophy, have received substantial support. This listing could
be enlarged to include all that is best in our society and way of life.
In the course of these hearings, it has been said or implied that the
foundations have departed from the high purposes assigned them by
956 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
their founders ; that the donors and creators of the great foundations
would be horrified if they knew that their funds were being used for
activities in controversial fields such as the social sciences.
Those who think so will find no comfort or substantiation in the first
letter of gift, dated November 10, 1911, which Mr. Carnegie addressed
to the trustees of his newly founded corporation. The third para-
graph of this letter is worth quoting in full :
* * * Conditions upon the earth inevitably change ; hence no wise man will
bind trustees forever to certain paths, causes, or institutions. I disclaim any
intention of doing so. On the contrary, I give my trustees full authority to
■change policy or causes hitherto aided, from time to time, when this, in their
opinion, has become necessary or desirable. They shall best conform to my
wishes by using their own judgment. * * *
Mr. Carnegie's own language makes it crystal clear that he had
no thought of specifying the fields in which increase of knowledge
Would most profit his fellow men in years to come. As a student of
history whose life spanned a period of great social, economic, and
technological change, he knew that even the wisest man could not
predict what knowledge will be most valued, what problems most
important, what fields of research most fruitful, 1, 10, or 50 years
hence.
Educational and philanthropic foundations and comparable organi-
zations have served as a relatively modest (in size) but very impor-
tant complement to public funds in the financing of education, par-
ticularly higher education. The total dollar contribution of educa-
tional and philanthropic foundations and comparable organizations
to private higher education in this country is small compared with
the public funds which have been poured into the field. Yet the pri-
vate contribution is substantial, and without it the pattern of higher
education in this country would have lost an element which has given
richness and diversity to the whole system.
Those who believe that the United States must preserve a healthy
balance between governmental and private control of our national
life will be quick to see the usefulness of this contribution of private
philanthropy. There are more than 1,200 privately supported col-
leges and universities in this country. These institutions have been
vigorous and effective forces in preserving the highest standards
and best traditions of our educational heritage. They would be very
much less vigorous were it not for the wholehearted support of educa-
tional and philanthropic foundations.
FOUNDATION RELATIONS WITH RECIPIENTS OF GRANTS
The freedom of the scholar and teacher differs in no way from
the freedom of every American. Freedom of inquiry is nothing
other than the freedom of thought that every American enjoys as
a birthright. The cabdriver is free to question the wisdom oi city
hall, and the farmer is free to reach his own conclusions on the
Indochina war. These are cherished American rights.
The right of the scholar to study any subject that interests him
and to arrive at any conclusions that seem sound to him is inseparable
from those larger rights. In the Soviet Union scholars do not have
these rights. They are told what conclusions they must come to.
By the same token, in the Soviet Union the man in the street does
not have the right to think freely. Freedom of thought is indivisible.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 957
What are the obligations and limitations of a private foundation
in the light of these principles? The Carnegie Corporation deals
principally with men who are scholars or teachers or both. It must
expend its money pursuant to the high purposes of its charter (the
advancement and diffusion of knowledge), but it must do so with-
out seeking to control the individual scholar or teacher. It must
proceed with a scrupulous regard for the American tradition of
free inquiry. The Carnegie Corporation, like other leading founda-
tions, takes great pride in the tradition of restrain and mutual respect
which characterizes its dealings with those who receive its grants.
The obligations and limitations of a foundation with respect to
recipients of its grants may be clearly outlined. If a research grant
is involved, the foundation must satisfy itself that the individual
or organization under consideration will conform to the highest
standards of scholarship and objectivity in arriving at conclusions.
In making such judgments it is inevitable, that any foundation will
occasionally be fooled ; but the record of a properly run foundation
should show an overwhelming proportion of recipients who do in
fact meet these standards.
If a teaching program is involved, the foundation must satisfy itself
that the objectives of the program are within the scope of its charter
and that the individual or organization involved will conduct the edu-
cational program according to the highest traditions of fairness, hon-
esty, and academic excellence. Again, any foundation will inevitably
commit some errors in making such judgments, but a properly run
foundation should be able to point to an overwhelming proportion
of recipients who meet these standards.
Having made the grant, the foundation should in no circumstances
tell the recipient what conclusions to reach in his research, how or
what to teach his students, or what to say in the book that he is writing.
Any such practice would be intolerable to scholars and teachers, and
at odds with the American tradition of free inquiry.
If a scholar or author working under a foundation grant has con-
victed himself of falsification or other forms of grave scholarly mis-
practice, then of course the foundation should take whatever steps are
possible to prevent further misuse of its funds by that individual.
But beyond such instances of clear scholarly delinquency, the founda-
tion should not interfere with the recipients of its grants. It should
not reserve the right to edit the book which is published with founda-
tion support. It should not tell the teacher how to teach. It should
not exercise thought control over the recipients of its grants.
It is extremely important for the American tradition of free inquiry
that this principle of noninterference be maintained. At the same
time it must be recognized that such noninterference involves conse-
quences for the foundation. It means that the foundation cannot
endorse all of the things done and said under its grants. It means
that things occasionally will be done and said under foundation
grants which are repugnant to the foundation itself. But, always and
everywhere, this is the price one pays for freedom. Freedom is, in
one sense, the right to be wrong. If you leave a scholar (or a cab-
driver) free to find the right answer, you have also left him free to find
the wrong answer. The history of our Nation provides abundant evi-
dence that freemen will find right answers more often than wrong
958 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
answers, and the history of tyranny shows that men who are not free
find very few answers of any kind. Nobody yet his discovered a better
way of insuring the victory of truth over error than free speech.
just as the foundations must be extremely scrupulous, so also must
be the Government in not telling the scholar what to think. All of our
private colleges and universities, our religious institutions, our teach-
ing hospitals, our private preparatory schools, as well as our private
foundations, enjoy tax exemption. We must be exceedingly careful
not to formulate the doctrine that this tax exemption permits either
the executive or the legislative branch of the Government to control
the thinking Of these institutions. Although medical schools and
teaching hospitals are tax exempt, surely no one would think it his
right to tell the cancer specialist how he should go about curing cancer.
Although religious schools are tax exempt, surely no one would con-
sider that he had the right to judge the validity of the religious doc-
trines taught. Although universities are tax exempt, surely no one
would argue that Federal control of the faculty and student thinking
would be a healthy step forward. In short, the doctrine that tax
exemption justifies a political judgment as to the soundness of ideas
can be a very dangerous two-edged weapon. Indeed it can be the most
devastating weapon ever invented for invading the private life of this
Nation.
Since the first list of subversive organizations was published by the
Attorney General, the Carnegie Corporation has never made any
grants, gifts, loans, contributions, or expenditures either directly or
indirectly to any organization so listed, or to any individual or organ-
ization that was known or believed to advocate the overthrow of the
constitutional Government of the United States by force or violence
or other unlawful means.
It has always been the policy of the Carnegie Corporation to
examine carefully the individuals and organizations who apply for
our grants. This examination includes consideration of scholarly
objectivity, public reputation, and standing as well as the loyalty and
honesty of those who will direct the project. In recent years and par-
ticularly since the last war the problem of subversive activity has nat-
urally received increased attention.
There are many ways and means by which we examine the indi-
viduals and organizations who apply for our funds. In assessing
their reputation in their scholarly and professional fields we seek the
judgment of their peers. We read their books and articles within
the limits of time available. We are familiar with the reputation of
the institutions with which the scholars are associated. Since most
applications come to us from institutions rather than from individuals,
the reputation of the institution is a significant factor in our
judgments.
Before entering a new field of interest we make it our business to
know most of the capable people who are working in the field. We
see personally the applicants for funds and we visit the institutions
with which they are connected.
Such investigation of applicants has been a continuous process since
the founding of the corporation. These efforts are not sporadic but
are a part of established policy.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 95U
IS THERE AN "INTERLOCK?"
The committee staff has asserted that the foundations form a tightly
knit group — an "interlock" — and as a group play a key role in a tightly
knit system that also includes operating agencies such as the Social
Science Research Council, schools and colleges, and the executive arm
of the Federal Government. One of the committee staff's own wit-
nesses, Dr. Thomas Briggs, had to admit that he did not know what
the staff was talking about in making this assertion, and we share
that handicap.
The foundations, the educational system, and the governmental
agencies do not form a tightly knit group. Any responsible educa-
tional leader will confirm that fact. Just as each foundation pursues
its independent course in traditional American fashion, so the colleges
of the country pursue their independent courses. The public schools
are under State and local control and only individuals abysmally lack-
ing in firsthand experience of these institutions could picture them as
part of a nationally integrated whole. Indeed the suggestion that the
foundations have produced a national system of education is the sort
of fantasy which could only be indulged in by individuals wholly un-
acquainted with the highroad and byroads of American education.
As for the collaboration between foundations, it is interesting to note
that the staff of the Cox committee considered that the foundations
cooperated all too rarely. The question was even raised at that time as
to whether the foundations should not find some means of more effec-
tive collaboration.
Mention has been made of the fact that the foundations give their
money through so-called operating agencies, such as the Social Science
Research Council and the American Council of Learned Societies.
Why shouldn't they % But some have exaggerated the extent of this
practice. The bulk of the money granted by the corporation for edu-
cation and research has gone directly to the colleges and universities.
Furthermore, almost all the funds granted to operating agencies
eventually find their way back to the colleges and universities.
It is the essence of responsible philanthropy to seek guidance from
those who are in a position to offer wise judgments. For this reason a
foundation operating in the field of scholarship or teaching will habit-
ually consult scholars and teachers. It will do this on a very broad
scale. In addition to the many, many interviews which foundation
officers have with scholars and teachers, the foundations find it profit-
able to keep in close touch with the organizations which scholars have
formed to advance their common scholarly interests.
The so-called operating agencies are for the most part just such
scholarly and teaching organizations run by scholars and teachers to
serve their own needs and turned to by the foundations as sources of
the best professional guidance. An organization such as the Social
Science Research Council is the crossroads and the forum for some of
the ablest scholars in the country. The council has a great many com-
mittees, each of which numbers among its members leading scholars
from universities covering the length and breadth of America. The
Social Science Research Council is one of the many scholarly organiza-
tions through which leading American academic figures achieve their
common objectives. No foundation which hoped to maintain contact
with American scholarship would want to ignore these organizations.
49720 — 54 — pt. 2 2
960 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The corporation's policy of not handling fellowship programs itself
but of financing them through scholarly agencies is an old one, and we
believe a wholly sound one. The disbursement of fellowship funds
should only be made on the judgment of competent scholars in the
field or fields in which the awards are applicable. The scholarly
councils and learned societies represent the simplest and most efficient
means of insuring that fellowship awards will be made only by men
who are most competent to make them.
THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
The corporation has given a good deal of money particularly in
recent years, for research and teaching in the social sciences. An
attempt has been made in the course of these hearings to attach a
sinister significance to the social sciences. This is a grave injustice
to the 40,000 or more Americans who earn their living by teaching or
doing research in these fields.
"Social sciences" is a term which has come into common usage as a
label for a certain sector of the world of knowledge. It is usually
applied to history, political science, economics, sociology, anthro-
pology, social psychology, and geography. It is sometimes taken to
include law.
Much that goes under the label "social science" is not science in the
strictest sense of that word. Indeed, much that goes on in these fields
is a purely humanistic type of scholarship. There is some research
in the social sciences which is more quantitative and precise.
Whether the term "science" is justified for this latter research depends
entirely upon how one wishes to define science.
What are these supposedly dangerous social sciences concerned
with? What kinds of questions do they interest themselves in?
Briefly stated, they are interested in all of the problems that men
have always been interested in with respect to their own lives, the
society they live in, their past, their means of livelihood, and the
troubles that afflict them.
It has been said that the social sciences are new fields. This is not
true. History has been the concern of distinguished scholars as far
back as Herodotus, who considerably antedates the modern
foundations.
What do social scientists do ? The historian seeks to discover what
the past can tell us about the human enterprise and about our own
American background. The political scientist seeks to examine the
problems involved in the governing of men. The psychologist may
concern himself with why some children find it difficult to read or to
learn. The sociologist may concern himself with why we have
juvenile delinquency. The economist is interested in how our
economy works, and why — on occasion — it doesn't work. The student
of international relations is interested in the causes of war.
Are these silly questions? They are not. They are problems
which concern all Americans, now more than ever before.
There have always been individuals who were opposed to the free
examination of such questions. There always have been individuals
who believed that man and society are much too dangerous as subjects
for study. There always have been those who favor thought control.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 961
But the American tradition of free inquiry is uncompromising.
Americans are freemen, and they will continue to ask these questions
about their own lives. Having asked them, they will feel themselves
free to seek answers. They will not allow themselves to be fettered
by fearful and small-minded men.
On this subject Laird Bell, former chairman of the board of
trustees of the University of Chicago, has said :
To forbid or hamper foundations studying and reporting matters in the fields
of economics, education, international relations, government, and public admin-
istration, is to deny or restrict the public access to the facts upon which judg-
ment in a democracy should be based. Unless we want public decisions in
these fields made in ignorance, agencies should have the same freedom as
individuals to ascertain facts and express opinions. The agencies have better
resources for this purpose than individuals, and the very multiplicity of such
-agencies is a better defense against erroneous opinions than suppression or
intimidation of the agencies.
Take education, for example. No one knows to what conclusions research
in economics and sociology may lead. Any deviation from accepted orthodox:
views is bound to be objectionable to someone, and there is always, but par-
ticularly right now, the probability that someone will consider that a view
■differing from the conventional is subversive. The same is true in the whole
field of international relations, education, and Government administration.
The term "subversive" means different things to different people. I submit
that there is a serious danger that the study of controversial questions, a study
that in our complex civilization is increasingly important, may be discouraged by
fear that some authorized or voluntary agency may choose to apply this dread
word to activities which are entirely legitimate and in the public interest.
There has been an attempt made in the course of these hearings to
attach a sinister significance to the word "empiricism." The attempt
is wholly unjustified. To approach a problem empirically means to
seek to discover what the facts are. This is a distinctively American
tradition.
The city which makes a traffic count at an intersection to determine
whether a stoplight is needed is conducting an empirical investigation.
The soap manufacturer who sends out research teams to discover how
customers react to his product is conducting empirical research. The
housewife who goes to the basement to discover how many mason jars
she has before preparing a batch of preserves is conducting an empiri-
cal study. Literally millions and millions of dollars are invested by
industry every year in empirical research. It is simply research which
seeks to determine the facts obj ectively.
No foundation that I know of has ever said that empirical research
can take the place of religion, morality, or any of the ethical principles
that guide our lives. Research that seeks to get at the facts is a useful
means of learning something. Americans like to get at the facts. They
like to learn. They believe that knowledge will help them to build
better lives for themselves, better communities for their children, and a
better Nation. They do not have any illusions that facts alone will
suffice, but they do not have any doubts that facts will help.
Much has been made in these hearings of the allegation that the
social sciences are not "scientific" in the same sense as are the natural
sciences. The latter have been referred to by the committee staff as
"exact" sciences. These allegations have been highly misleading.
Since no natural scientists have been called to testify on this point, I
think it relevant to quote part of a letter I received recently from Dr.
962 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Vannevar Bush, president of the Carnegie Institution of Washington
(photostatic copy of the entire letter is appended to this statement) :
I find it very interesting to try to state the essential differences between the
natural sciences and the social sciences, for there seems to be a good deal of con-
fusion on the matter. The real difference lies in the face that the social sciences
bring in the human element, and this renders their problems inherently difficult.
But often the distinction is made on the basis that the social sciences are obser-
vational in nature, whereas the natural sciences are experimental. In other
words it is asserted that in the social sciences one cannot exercise control and
hence cannot separate variables, whereas these are essential features of the
natural sciences. This, it seems to me, is entirely an incorrect approach. In
astronomy and also in geology we have observational sciences completely within
the framework of the natural sciences. One does not manipulate the stars, neither
does he separate out one factor in their complex performance ; he merely takes
what he gets, measures it as well as he can, and proceeds to construct his theories.
Exactly the same thing is true if one is observing for example, the impact of
migration upon a primitive people.
It is also sometimes stated that one can measure precisely in the natural
sciences and cannot do so in the social sciences. This is again an incorrect
criterion. Some of the data of the social sciences is precise, for example much
of the material in the census. On the other hand there still remains a vast area
of the natural sciences where measurement is crude and sometimes almost
absent.
It has been said that "social science research in this country is
financed virtually entirely by the foundations and the United States
Government. There is very little privately financed social science re-
search." This is a misstatement. Many millions of dollars are spent
each year by manufacturers, by merchandising concerns, by banks, by
public utilities, and others in social science research. Market research
is moderately big business. Banks spend many millions yearly in
economic research. Insurance companies spend millions yearly in
actuarial research and other kinds of statistical studies. Many great
industries conduct extensive studies of employee attitudes, of indus-
trial relations, of personnel problems, of customer relations, and so
forth.
In no other country in the world have the social sciences developed
as rapidly as they have in the United States. Americans are curious
about their own society. The typical American reaction to curiosity
is to seek the facts. These are the ingredients that make social science.
As long as Americans retain their curiosity and their respect for facts,
the social sciences will flourish in this country. Any attempt to stifle
this curiosity or fetter the search for the facts is bound to do great
harm, and, in the end, to be defeated.
Because of the similarity in words, uninformed individuals occa-
sionally confuse the social sciences and socialism. The two are not
related, even distantly. There are social scientists who hold every
variety of political view. They do not differ in this respect from other
groups. Presumably some are Socialists. No doubt there are those
who favor other minority political and economic beliefs. But the
overwhelming majority of them are middle-of-the-road Americans,
with a middle-of-the-road view of politics and economics.
It is in the field of economics that the question of socialism is most
frequently raised. The activities of the Carnegie Corporation in the
field of economics have been relatively limited. Such grants as it has
made in this field have gone chiefly to the Brookings Institution of
Washington and the National Bureau of Economic Eesearch in New
York City.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 963
A former vice president of the Brookings Institution, Dr. Edwin
Nourse, was Chairman of the President's Council of Economic Ad-
visers in the last administration. The Research Director of the Na-
tional Bureau of Economic Research,- Dr. Arthur F. Burns, is Chair-
man of the same group in the present administration. The public
reports of both Brookings and the national bureau have been gener-
ally accepted by economists in universities, in industry, and in the
Government as wholly objective and untainted by any special plead-
ing, socialistic or otherwise.
As a matter of objective fact, socialism has lost ground steadily in
the United States during the first half of this century. Socialists,
like all extremists, are essentially doctrinaire. The record might have
been a vastly different one if Carnegie Corporation and other founda-
tions had not helped American economists to make the objective studies
that have exposed all doctrinaire positions in their true light, and thus
reduced their allure for the public generally.
Another field of foundation activity that has been criticized is the
field of international affairs. The implication has been left that it is
somehow reprehensible for a foundation to foster an active interest
in international affairs. The position of the Carnegie Corporation
with respect to this matter is easily stated.
Americans have experienced 2 devastating world wars in 40 years.
Their sons have been killed in Europe, in Africa, in Asia, and in the
Pacific. They have suffered through the Korean war and face the
threat of war in Indochina. Atomic war, with the total destruction
of civilization, looms as an imminent possibility.
In the circumstances, all sensible Americans are interested in inter-
national affairs. All sensible Americans hope that wars can be avoided.
All sensible Americans hope that law and order among nations will
someday replace anarchy among nations. All sensible Americans hope
that understanding among nations will someday replace hatred and
bitterness among nations.
Andrew Carnegie believed fervently that the curse of war could be
lifted from mankind. Some will argue that this belief was unrealistic ;
none can argue that it was un-American. Andrew Carnegie believed
devoutly that all Americans should work for increased understanding
among nations. It was not a dishonorable belief.
The Carnegie Corporation has an unqualified loyalty to the princi-
ples that have made our Nation great. The corporation is concerned
that those principles — and the nation which embodies them— shall
survive in a dangerous world. Such a concern leads inevitably to an
interest in international affairs.
Therefore, the Carnegie Corporation has given money to enable
Americans to gain a more adequate knowledge of the world at large.
It has given money to enable Americans to study the problems of war
and peace. It has given money to develop experts on international
affairs.
The corporation does these things because it considers them essen-
tial to insure America's future as a nation, ihe gravest threats to
America's future are on the international scene. One cannot be sin-
cerely concerned about America's future and unconcerned about the
international scene.
A question has been raised as to propaganda and the influencing of
public attitudes. The question must be divided. Carnegie Corpora-
964 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
tion does not engage in propaganda. But it is not only the right but"
the duty of educational and philanthropic foundations to assist proj*
ects which through the discovery of new facts or through the full pres-
entation of old facts may lead people to better knowledge and under-
standing. Research, whether in the natural sciences, the social sciences,,
medicine, or public education, may well provide new information or
new insights that will in some measure affect public attitudes.
In this sense of influencing opinion through knowledge and under-
standing, the work of an educational foundation unquestionably
affects public attitudes. The effort to learn would be futile, indeed,
if there were no effort to teach.
The Carnegie Corporation is only one of a great and varied group of
public and private organizations concerned with teaching and re^-
search in this country — a group that includes schools, colleges, uni-
versities, scholarly societies, research laboratories, religious training
institutions, foundations, and medical centers.. These organizations,
individually and collectively, have contributed enormously to the
American tradition of inventiveness, innovation, freedom to learn,
and freedom to teach. Each of them, from the largest foundation
to the smallest college in the land bears a grave responsibility to keep
this tradition alive. It is that tradition that has been called into
question in the present hearings.
I am a graduate of the University of Wisconsin, and I should like
to close this statement with an extract from the official record of the
board of regents of that university. This extract is taken from the
report of a special committee of the regents called into being by
another and earlier threat to the freedom of inquiry. I quote :
We cannot for a moment believe that knowledge has reached its final goal, or-
that the present condition of society is perfect. We must therefore welcome
from our teachers such discussions as shall suggest the means and prepare the-
way by which knowledge may be extended, present evils * * * removed and
others prevented.
We feel that we would be unworthy of the position we hold if we did not
believe in progress in all departments of knowledge. In all lines of academic
investigation it is of the utmost importance that the investigators should be-
absolutely free to follow the indications of truth wherever they may lead.
The concluding sentence of this report is engraved on a bronze-
plaque which is set into the portico of Bascom Hall, the main class-
room building of the university. Often as I went to and from my
classes 30 years ago, I stopped to read it because it seemed to me to
embody the essence of the spirit of free inquiry. This is the sentence :-
Whatever may be the limitations which trammel inquiry elsewhere we believe
the great State University of Wisconsin should ever encourage that continual
and fearless sifting and winnowing by which alone the truth can be found.
These words were not written by scholars. They were written by
brave and honest citizens— businessmen, lawyers, farmers — drawn
from the length and breadth of Wisconsin. They were written in
September 1894. Now, 60 years later, I can find no other words which
so well summarize my own convictions and the convictions of my col-
leagues in the staff and board of Carnegie Corporation of New York.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 965
Trustees or Carnegie Corporation of New York
E. C. Leffingwell, chairman of the board ; vice chairman, J. P. Morgan & Co., Inc.
"YV. Randolph Burgess, Deputy to the Secretary of the Treasury
Vannevar Bush, president, Carnegie Institution of Washington
Charles Dollard, president, Carnegie Corporation of New York
John W. Gardner, vice president, Carnegie Corporation of New York
Morris Hadley, lawyer, Milbank, Tweed, Hope & Hadley
Devereux C. Josephs, chairman of the board, New York Life Insurance Co.
Nicholas Kelley, lawyer, Kelley, Drye, Newhall & Maginnes
Margaret Carnegie Miller
Frederick Oshorn, executive president, the Population Council, Inc.
Arthur W. Page, business consultant
Gwilym A. Price, president, Westinghouse Electric Corp.
Blihu Root, Jr., lawyer, Root, Ballantine, Bushby & Palmer
Charles M. Spofford, lawyer, Davis, Polk, Wardwell, Sunderland & Kiendl
Charles A. Thomas, president, Monsanto Chemical Co.
Carnegie Institution of Washington,
Washington 5, D. <7., June 9, 1954-
Dr. Charles Dollard,
Carnegie Corporation of New York,
New York 36, N. Y.
Dear Chuck : I find it very interesting to try to state the essential
differences between the natural sciences and the social sciences, for
there seems to be a good deal of confusion on the matter. The real
difference lies in the fact that the social sciences bring in the human
element, and this renders their problems inherently difficult.
But often the distinction is made on the basis that the social sciences
are observational in nature, whereas the natural sciences are experi-
mental. In other words it is asserted that in the social sciences one
cannot exercise control and hence cannot separate variables, whereas
these are essential features of the natural sciences. This, it seems to
me, is entirely an incorrect approach. In astronomy and also in
geology we have observational sciences completely within the frame-
work of the natural sciences. One does not manipulate the stars,
neither does he separate out one factor in their complex performance,,
he merely takes what he gets, measures it as well as he can, and pro-
ceeds to construct his theories. Exactly the same thing is true if one
is observing, for example, the impact of migration upon a primitive
people.
It is also sometimes stated that one can measure precisely in the
natural sciences and cannot do so in the social sciences. This is again
an incorrect criterion. Some of the data of the social sciences is
precise, for example, much of the material in the census. On the
other hand, there still remains a vast area of the natural sciences
where measurement is crude and sometimes almost absent. Take the
field of genetics, for example. When one is attempting to sort out
the order of the genes of the chromosome of the fruitfly he measures
the numbers of progeny and, in fact, assembles the sort of vital sta-
tistics for his organism which are quite parallel in nature to the type
966 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
oi vital statistics utilized in population studies, and these are often
subject to the same vagaries and influences and have to be used with
care. The present geneticists are much concerned with the bio-
chemistry of their subject and in particular with the influence of the
cytoplasm upon the functioning of genes. There is involved an ex-
ceedingly complex chemical interrelationship, which is hardly subject
to chemical analysis in the ordinary terms. One cannot control in
the usual sense by introducing chemicals at will, for he is dealing with
a live organism and the introduction of a single chemical affects the
functioning in diverse and little understood ways. He accumulates
a hint here, and a suggestion there, and attempts to make a consistent
and useful pattern out of the vast maze of intricate and sometimes
conflicting testimony. The parallelism with what he does with some
of the investigatory work of the social scientist is almost complete.
There is often the assertion that the social sciences would prosper if
they would carry over the methods of the natural sciences. This is
unusually asserted by people who see the extraordinary results being
attained in the natural sciences and who jump to a conclusion. But
there is no such thing as a method of the natural sciences, there is a
maze of methods, and the selection of these involves one of the greatest
skills of genius. Certainly there are tools and instruments which are
applicable in both fields, and which should be made use of wherever
they can prove advantageous. But to try to carry over bodily methods
of approach from any branch of science to any other leads always
into difficulties, as would be expected, for the method must be based
on the problem in hand and not on a priori considerations.
The real difference between the two great branches lies in the fact
that the social sciences deal with the performance of human beings.
It is far more difficult to measure these and to reduce all arguments
to be in terms of numbers than it is to do the same thing for a molecule.
We might note in passing that even the physicists, when dealing with
the interactions inside the nucleus, have proceeded to abandon all of
the usual mathematical formulations and are proceeding in terms of
arguments which at times border on the mystical. But one cannot
specify a human being in the same way that he can specify a chemical
compound. Again be it noted that the chemists, dealing with proteins,
are in much the same situation for they can neither specify the atomic
arrangements involved, nor can they predict what characteristics one
of their chemical modifications may produce.
The difference is hence a matter of degree as far as the use of meas-
urement is concerned. Also one should note that there has been enor-
mous progress in the last decade or two in reducing to measurement
many matters in the field of the social sciences which were formerly
thought to be beyond reach from this standpoint. But one cannot
disregard the fact that there has been great science at times with very
little in the way of measurement and mathematical formulation in-
volved. The trend in both the natural and social sciences is toward
the use of more measurement and more precision in the handling of
them. This does not mean that a subject in order to be called a science
needs to lean on the deflection of a needle or the dip of a balance.
The natural sciences are far more advanced down the road of use
of measurement and the use of precise analysis. There is one effect
which is important in weighing the validity of efforts. As rapidly
.as a science becomes precise and subject to mathematical treatment,
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 967
there is less of argument upon the basis of balance of evidence, and
opinions become to a great extent subject to tests in a form that are
universally accepted. For this reason the career of an individual in the
natural sciences who abandons logic, and who tries to support wild
guesses, is usually brief and conclusive. The social scientists do not
have the same degree of means for insisting upon rigor where it ap-
plies, and soundness and logical reasoning in the handling of evidence.
They are making great progress along these lines, but there is here still
a real difference in the way in which the scientists proceed as profes-
sional groups in the two fields.
I do not know whether there are any thoughts in here that will aid
your own thinking on the matter, but I hope the time is not far off
when we can again explore the subject together.
Cordially yours,
V. Bush.
Answers to Specific Charges
A memorandum submitted for the record by Charles Dollard,
president, Carnegie Corporation of New York
I have sought in oral testimony before this committee to make
clear how completely unfounded are the broad charges which have
been leveled against the Carnegie Corporation. It remains to answer
in detail certain specific charges which have been brought against
various projects with which the corporation has been associated.
The evidence which has been placed before the committee to date
on these matters has been characterized by errors of fact and errors
of interpretation. I am genuinely reluctant to engage in public dis-
putation on these matters. But the record must be set straight, and
I am sure that the committee will welcome such corrections as I am in
a position to offer.
I shall discuss five separate matters, in the order in which they
appear in the record :
I. An American Dilemma : The Negro Problem and Modern Democracy by
Gunnar Myrdal et al.
II. Education for International Understanding in American Schools. Prepared
and published by the National Education Association.
III. The Proper Study of Mankind by Stuart Chase.
IV. The American Soldier by Samuel Stouffer, et al.
V. Report of the Commission on Social Studies. American Historical Asso-
ciation.
I. AN AMERICAN DILEMMA BY GTJNNAR MYRDAL ET AL
An American Dilemma has been referred to in the course of the
hearings by two witnesses, Messrs. Dodd and Colegrove. Originally
published in 2 volumes (1,500 pages) in 1944, it was the end product
of a 6-year study of the Negro problem, which study was financed
by the Carnegie Corporation at a cost of about $300,000.
In the early days of these hearings, one of the witnesses character-
ized this 1,500-page work by reading a series of short excerpts taken
from the introductory chapter of the work. Without raising the ques-
tion as to the appropriateness of characterizing a scholarly work by
968 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
lifting a few sentences out of context, and reading these sentences
seriatim as if they followed one on another, one feels a duty to set the
record straight.
Here is the first quotation which the witness offered :
Indeed, the new Republic began its career with a reaction. Charles Beard,
in An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States, and a
group of modern historians, throwing aside the much cherished national my-
thology which had blurred the difference in spirit between the Declaration of
Independence and the Constitution, have shown that the latter was conceived
in considerable suspicion against democracy and fear of the people. It was
dominated by property consciousness and designed as a defense against the demo-
cratic spirit let loose during the Revolution.
Here are the two sentences which follow immediately on the para-
graph quoted above and which the witness did not quote :
But, admitting all this, the Constitution which actually emerged out of the
compromises in the drafting convention provided for the most democratic state
structure in eatistence anywhere in the world at that time. And many of the
safeguards so skillfully thought out by the conservatives to protect "the rich,
the wellborn, and the capable" against majority rule melted when the new
order began to function. (Italics ours) — Chapter I, page, 7.
Other quotations read into this record earlier all leave the impres-
sion that Myrdal was consistently and bitterly critical of everything
American. It is worth noting that the witness who read these quota-
tions into the record overlooked passages which give a much truer
indication of Dr. Myrdal's attitude toward this country. Consider,
for example, the following passage (p. 4, ch. I) :
These ideals of the essential dignity of the individual human being, of the
fundamental equality of all men, and of certain inalienable rights to freedom,
justice, and a fair opportunity represent to the American people the essential
meaning of the Nation's early struggle for independence. In the clarity and
intellectual boldness of the enlightenment period these tenets were written into
the Declaration of Independence, the preamble of the Constitution, the Bill of
Rights, and into the constitutions of the several States. The ideals of the Amer-
can creed have thus become the highest law of the land. The Supreme Court
pays its reverence to these general principles when it declares what is constitu-
tional and what is not. They have been elaborated upon by all national leaders,
thinkers, and statesmen. America has had, throughout its history, a continuous
discussion of the principles and implications of democracy, a discussion which,
in every epoch, measured by any standard, remained high, not only quantitatively
but also qualitatively. The flow of learned treatises and popular tracts on the
subject has not ebbed, nor is it likely to do so. In all wars, including the present
one, the American creed has been the ideological foundation of national morale.
Another quotation which serves to illustrate Myrdal's profound
respect for America and Americans will be found in the author's
preface on page xlii. It reads as follows:
At this point it must be observed that America, relative to all the other
branches of western civilization, is moralistic and moral conscious. The ordi-
nary American is the opposite of a cynic. He is on the average more of a believer
and a defender of the faith in humanity than the rest of the occidentals. It is a
relatively important matter to him to be true to his own ideals and to carry them
out in actual life. We recognize the American, wherever we meet him, as a
practical idealist. Compared with members of other nations of western civiliza-
tion, the ordinary American is a rationalistic being, and there are close relations
between his moralism and his rationalism. * * * This moralism and rationalism
are to many of us — among them the author of this book — the glory of the Nation,
its youthful strength, perhaps the salvation of mankind.
The truth of the matter is that any conscientious person who reads
Myrdal's entire report cannot possibly fail to sense his deep affection
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 969
for this country in which he received part of his education and which
he has visited almost annually for the last 20 years.
Neither of the two previous witnesses who referred to Myrdal's
work made any attempt to tell the committee what the Myrdal book
was about, or to evaluate it as a scholarly work. Hence, it may be
worth noting in passing that few studies of American social problems
in this century have been as widely applauded or warmly reviewed.
An American Dilemma stands and will stand as one of the great social
documents of the century, and Dr. Myrdal will continue to be admired
here and abroad as an objective and completely honest scholar.
One of the earlier witnesses dismissed Dr. Myrdal as a "foreigner"
and a "Socialist." That Dr. Myrdal is a foreigner cannot be denied
since he was born in Sweden and is still a Swedish citizen. It is
worth asking, however, whether the witness would similarly dismiss
Lord Bryce and De Tocqueville, two other foreign-born scholars, who
helped America to see its problems in new perspective and to under-
stand and appreciate its own greatness.
It is less accurate to refer to Dr. Myrdal as a "Socialist," without
defining that opprobrious word. True indeed, he was and is a mem-
ber of the Social Democratic Labor Party in Sweden which has been
the dominant party in that country for many years. But it is com-
mon knowledge that the program inaugurated in Sweden by the
Social Democrats is vastly different from what we in this country
normally think of as socialism. While Sweden has gone beyond most
states in the provision of social services to its people, facilities for
production and distribution of goods are still almost entirely in pri-
vate hands, Sweden's economy remains a private-enterprise economy.
The question remains : Why did Carnegie Corporation seek a for-
eign scholar to undertake this particular study and why did it finally
select a Swedish scholar? The answer is contained in the following
extract from the foreword to An American Dilemma which was
written and signed by Frederick P. Keppel, then president of the
corporation :
In 1931, the late Newton D. Baker joined the corporation board. He was the
son of a Confederate officer, attended the Episcopal Academy in Virginia and
the Law School of Washington and Lee University, and spent the greater part
of his early years in the border States of West Virginia and Maryland. His
services first as city solicitor and later as mayor of Cleveland gave him direct
experience with the growing Negro populations in northern cities, and as Secre-
tary of War he had faced the special problems which the presence of the Negro
element in our population inevitably creates in time of national crisis.
Mr. Baker knew so much more than the rest of us on the board about these
questions, and his mind had been so deeply concerned with them, that we readily
agreed when, he told us that more knowledge and better organized and inter-
related knowledge were essential before the corporation could intelligently dis-
tribute its own funds. We agreed with him further in believing that the gathering
and digestion of the material might well have a usefulness far beyond our own
needs.
The direction of such a comprehensive study of the Negro in America, as the
board thereupon authorized, was a serious question. There was no lack of com-
petent scholars in the United States who were deeply interested in the problem
and had already devoted themselves to its study, but the whole question had
been for nearly a hundred years so charged with emotion that it appeared wise
to seek as the responsible head of the undertaking someone who could approach
his task with a fresh mind, uninfluenced by traditional attitudes or by earlier
conclusions, and it was therefore decided to import a general director — some-
what as the late Charles P. Howland was called across the Atlantic to supervise
the repatriation of the Greeks in Asia Minor after the close of the First World
970 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
War. And since the emotional factor affects the Negroes no less than the-
whites, the search was limited to countries of high intellectual and scholarly
standards but with no background or traditions of imperialism which might
lessen the confidence of the Negroes in the United Sttes as to the complete im-
partiality of the study and the validity of its findings. Under these limitations,
the obvious places to look were Switzerland and the Scandinavian countries,
and the search ended in the selection of Dr. Gunnar Myrdal, a scholar who
despite his youth had already achieved an international reputation as a social
economist, a professor in the University of Stockholm, economic adviser to the
Swedish Government, and a member of the Swedish Senate. Dr. Myrdal had a
decade earlier spent a year in the United States as a fellow of the Spelman
Fund, and when the invitation was extended to him by the corporation in 1937,
was about to make a second visit at the invitation of Harvard University to
deliver the Godkin Lectures * * * (pp. VI, VII) .
II. EDUCATION FOR INTERNATIONAL UNDERSTANDING IN AMERICAN
SCHOOLS — A BOOK PREPARED AND ISSUED BY THE NATIONAL EDUCATION
ASSOCIATION
At an earlier stage in these hearings, one of the witnesses read into
the record a number of quotations from the book Education for Inter-
national Understanding in American Schools issued by the National
Education Association. Careful scrutiny of the book itself will reveal
that the quotations selected do not provide a fair picture of the views
of the authors. No passages w T ere quoted to illustrate the construc-
tive and realistic attitude of the authors toward nationalism. For
example :
"International understanding" is a broad term and necessarily encompasses
many things. It does not connote the absence of national loyalty nor an unre-
alistic approach to the world. Bather, it includes the process of making students
informed and loyal citizens of their own country — aware of the nature of the
world in which they live, the relationship of their nation to the world as a whole,
the forces that motivate national action, the life and institutions of other nations,
and a host of other things in order that they may bring their intelligence and
judgment to bear upon the problems of living in an interdependent world (p. 9).
Americans generally agree that our country must be prepared for any emer-
gency, but the problem is to determine what is adequate preparedness. The prob-
lem is not simple, for our security rests upon the strengthening of the ideals of
the American way of life as well as upon economic and military factors (p. 19).
The Brookings Institution, in a recent study, has outlined the problem thus :
"There are certain elements of national military power, however, that are
required for the security of the United States, whether or not a system of world-
wide collective security under the United Nations is effective. The essentially
national elements relate to : the maintenance of an adequate military estab-
lishment ; continuous research and development ; the maintenance of a coordi-
nated system of intelligence ; plans for the organization of the Government for
possible war, for the mobilization of industry and manpower, and for civilian
defense, civilian economy, and national discipline. The full effectiveness of all
these elements requires a unity of purpose and a high degree of moral strength
among the American people" (p. 19) .
As one scholar puts it :
"Patriotism, loyalty to one's nation, has in some places been criticized as an
'absurd prejudice' or as 'a vulgar vice,' or as 'a virtue— among barbarians.'
Such criticism of patriotism are about as valid as would be the charge that one
is less loyal and effective as a citizen because he is loyal to his family, his com-
munity, and the multiplicity of social groups of which one may be a member.
Nevertheless, such criticisms are sound if patriotism means that love of one's
fellow men stops at national frontiers, if it means that it must be based on malice
to all and charity toward none outside one's national group" (I. L. Kandel)
(p. 46).
"Nationalism has been, and is, one of the most powerful forces in the develop-
ment of the kind of world in which we must live. The idea of 'one nation
indivisible,' which we repeat in our pledge of allegiance to the flag, is also held,
in one form or another, by most of the people in the world. We look to our
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 971
Nation for protection; we give it our loyalty and faithful service." (Quoted
from manual prepared by Cleveland public schools.) (P. 178.)
No passages were quoted which revealed the active concern of the
authors for moral and spiritual values. For example :
There is another threat that is as great as that to be feared from new engines
of destruction — the loss of the moral and spiritual values that a resort to force
seeks to defend (p. 16).
The peaceful resolution of differences, however, is only possible within the
limits of what nations and individuals consider to be the essential values govern-
ing their conduct, values, and principles that are not susceptible to change and
which must be defended in the face of attempts to subvert them (p. 22).
Education as a force for world peace derives its validity from the fact that
it is the process by which individuals and groups are made aware of the values
and standards that men create to govern their conduct. The process of becom-
ing aware of those standards and values involves the acquisition of knowledge
and the development of a capacity to judge critically the mass of human experi-
ence in terms of these standards. It involves further the process of applying
the standards and values to specific situations (p. 35).
No passages were quoted which reveal the alertness of the authors
:to the dangers of communism. For example :
The Soviet system, which we call "communism" is not the only form in which
authoritarianism exists today, for there are absolute monarchies and dictator-
ships throughout the world. It has been entirely possible for democratic states
to exist harmoniously in a world with nondemocratic states. However, if the
ideology of any state requires attack upon the very existence of another state,
such aggressiveness is a serious menace to the peace. It was this ideological
aggressiveness — embodied in the mazism and fascism — coupled with the unscrup-
ulous use of state power, that helped bring on World War II. This same
situation — revolutionary ideology implemented the vast national strength — is
evident in certain aspects of the foreign policy of the Soviet Union today.
The combination of an aggressive ideology with a powerful national state is
. made all the more dangerous because it is difficult or impossible to appeal directly
to the people of that state. The denial of the concept of individual liberty, the
strict censorship of access to information not approved by the state, and limita-
tions of freedom of thought and expression make it extremely difficult for the
people in any authoritarian state to express effectively that desire for peace
which is undoubtedly the common possession of all peoples everywhere (p. 24) .
In some intances, sentences were taken out of context in such a way
as to affect the meaning of the total passage. For example, on page
45 there appears the passage quoted below. The two sentences
italicized (italic not in original) were quoted to the committee. The
remainder of the passage was not quoted to the committee.
T. V. Smith has said that "nationalism represents perhaps man's most massive
; achievement up to date." This is true because the evolution of the nation-state
system represents an advance of men in the organization of a political unit larger
.than the tribe, the city-state, or the province. It made possible the maintenance
of law and order over a larger area than was formerly possible.
Unfortunately man did not attain peace through the nation-state system on a
worldwide basis. Militant leaders realizing the unifying spirit that could be
aroused in their followers by an appeal to their new national loyalties utilized
it for purely national ends. A spirit of narrow nationalism was stirred up in
the people by impressing them with an idea of their own superiority. The
self-interest of the race or nation was magnified.
People were taught to look down upon other nationalities as inferior. War
was regarded as an accepted means of extending the prestige of the nation. This
■ development was an important factor in bringing about both the First and Second
World Wars, So long as these narrow nationalistic ideas continue to be held by
many -people in all nations today, there is a threat to peace (p. 45).
Note that the two italicized sentences taken alone give the impres-
sion of rather unqualified criticism of nationalism. Placed in con-
.text, it becomes apparent that the authors are critical of only those
972 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
"narrow nationalistic ideas" which — in the hands of aggressor na-
tions — brought on both the First and Second World Wars.
III. THE PROPER STUDY OF MANKIND, BY STUART CHASE
A witness has raised some questions about this book and its author.
Stuart Chase is an extremely able writer who had in the past demon-
strated a great capacity for translating technical material into terms
which the ordinary layman could understand. The last assignment
which Mr. Chase undertook prior to writing the Proper Study of Man-
kind was an assessment of the labor policies of the Standard Oil Co. of
New Jersey. This study was commissioned by the Standard Oil Co.
and the results were printed in its monthly magazine (the Lamp) and
offprinted for wide public distribution. A careful study of Mr. Chase's
record would have also disclosed the fact that he has performed similar
assignments for a variety of other well-known industrial concerns.
Mr. Chase was called a "cultural determinist." The influence of
social factors in determining behavior was observed by the ancient
Greeks, and the modern case for culture as an influence on human
behavior was first made more than 50 years ago by William Graham
Sumner, one of the greatest of American sociologists and economists
in a book entitled "Folkways." Chase's estimate of the importance
of the so-called culture concept would be concurred in by a majority
of the anthropologists in America. This does not deny (nor does
Chase) the importance of biological and other factors in human
behavior.
It was said "that there is not a balanced presentation of ideas" in
Chase's book. The opinion of 10 qualified social scientists who read
the book in manuscript was unanimously to the contrary, as was the
opinion of almost every social scientist who reviewed the book in a
professional journal.
It was stated that Chase's treatment of the field of economics is a
"balanced presentation" because Chase knew this field but that his
treatment of anthropology, sociology, psychology, etc., is unbalanced
because Dollard and Young did not tell him what to say about these
fields. Of course Dollard and Young did not censor Chase. What
they did do was (a) help give Chase access to the most competent
social scientists in the country, and (&) require him to submit his
completed manuscript for criticism by competent social scientists
representing all of the fields which the book covers.
That Mr. Chase made good use of the very trenchant criticisms
which he thus received, prior to the publication of the book, is evi-
denced by the fact that competent authorities who reviewed the Proper
Study of Mankind found no lack of balance in Mr. Chase's treatment
of the various social sciences.
IV. THE AMERICAN SOLDIER, BY SAMUEL STOUFFER ET AL.
A witness made a general attack on the 4-volume work entitled
"The American Soldier." His specific criticisms focused on chapter 1,
of volume I, which is an attempt by the authors to explain how the
studies on which the volumes were based came to be made, and chapter
2, volume II. The studies made by the Information and Education
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 973
Division 1 of the Army which resulted in the adoption of the so-called
point system for demobilization were singled out for particular
attention.
Since the testimony on this matter is confused almost beyond belief,
the following categorical statements are in order.
The studies which led to the establishment of the point system were
made at the request of a Special Planning Division created in the War
Department by General Marshall in 1943 or early 1944. This staff
was assigned the responsibility for making forward plans for all
phases of demobilization and related matters.
The chief contribution of the Information and Education Division
was to define the factors which soldiers thought should be taken into
account in a demobilization plan and to list the order in which the
troops thought these factors should be weighed. The actual weights
were assigned by the Special Planning Division, upon the recommen-
dation of a committee of officers representing Army Service Forces, the
Air Force and Ground Forces. 3
It was clearly specified in the overall demobilization plan that mili-
tary necessity should outweigh other considerations and that theater
commanders were authorized to retain "essential personnel" no mat-
ter what their point scores might be. If field commanders did not in
fact take full advantage of this authority, it was not because of pres-
sure from social scientists but rather resulted from congressional pres-
sures and the very vocal outcries of wives and mothers for the release
of their husbands and sons. Clear evidence supporting this will be
found in the January 16, 1946, issue of the New York Times." It was
on this date that General Eisenhower, then commanding general of
the European theater, and Admiral Nimitz appeared before an ex-
traordinary joint session of the two Houses of Congress to answer de-
mands that soldiers be returned from Europe more rapidly.
It was implied that the activities of the Kesearch Branch of the In-
formation and Education Division were in direct defiance of the Sec-
retary of War and as proof a directive issued by the Army in May
1941 was quoted.
The fact is that this regulation was issued primarily to protect the
Army against the incursions of outside "pollers" who wished to use
soldiers as a captive audience. The Secretary of War quite rightly
outlawed such activities as soon as they were brought to his attention.
A subsequent regulation issued by the Army specifically authorized
the Information and Education Division * to conduct studies of sol-
diers' opinions and attitudes and certified such studies as useful and
necessary for the proper conduct of certain established Army activi-
ties. This regulation reads as follows :
d. Sample surveys. — Planning surveys and experimental studies of specific
morale problems provide an accurate method of determining soldiers' mental
attitudes and the extent to which the factors considered in these regulations in-
*At various times during World War II, this Division was officially designated as the
Special Services Division and the Morale Branch. Its mission remained constant despite
these semantic changes.
. a All these events antedate the creation of the Department of Defense.
3 A single paragraph from the Times, January 9, illustrates the point : "Letters from
GI's bearing 'No boats, no votes' stamps and from organized 'Bring Daddy Home Clubs'
piled up to legislators' letterboxes in what was termed the greatest volume of mail in con-
gressional history. Some Congressmen talked of introducing legislation to force the Army
to release men with 18 months' service, dependents, or a desire to go to school."
* See footnote p. 12, supra.
•974 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
fluence the morale of the individual. Such surveys and studies should be based
on the questioning of scientifically selected cross sections of troops under condi-
tions which protect the anonymity of the individual. This research provides a
necessary scientific check on personal impressions, and aids in the interpretation
of statistical data from official records. The making of such sample surveys and
experimental studies is the responsibility of the Director, Special Services Divi-
sion, 4 Services of Supply.
This regulation was published in the War Department, ME 1-10,
March 5, 1943 (par. 43 D, p. 17) .
It was implied that data resulting from opinion surveys or "polls"
is "unscientific." As a matter of fact, survey techniques are widely
used by many of the leading industrial firms in the country. For the
past 5 years, the economic forecasts of the Federal Reserve Board have
been based to a very large extent on careful estimates of the intentions
of consumers with respect to future purchases and future savings.
These data are supplied by the Survey Research Center of the Univer-
sity of Michigan, one of the leading centers for the scientific study of
attitudes and opinions, under contract with the Federal Reserve
Board.
Social scientists made important contributions in World War I long
before any of the foundations were active in these fields. Much of
our present knowledge in the field of psychometrics is an end product
of the pioneering work done by Guthrie, Miles, Bingham, et al., who
were called on by the Adjutant General of the Army in 1917 to set
up a system of classification for the Army. Similarly, the statistical
procedures which now enable the General Staff of the Army to keep
track of its day-to-day business were initiated by two economists, the
late Leonard Ayers of Cleveland and W. Randolph Burgess, present
Deputy to the Secretary of the Treasury.
If the Army has indeed been "invaded" by social scientists, the
record should show that the invasion began when the authors of The
American Soldier were still in knee pants.
V. REPORT OF THE COMMISSION ON SOCIAL STUDIES, AMERICAN HISTORICAL
ASSOCIATION
In 1934 the Commission on Social Studies, an ad hoc group set up
by the American Historical Association, published the final volume
in a series of reports on the social studies field. This final volume,
entitled "Conclusions and Recommendations," has been discussed and
quoted at some length in these hearings. It may be useful therefore
to state what the book is about and describe the circumstances sur-
rounding the Carnegie Corporation grant which made the book—and
indeed the whole series of studies — possible.
The book does not advocate socialism. The authors did repeatedly
record the observation that the United States appeared to be moving
from an era of extreme individualism to an era characterized by far
greater emphasis upon economic and social planning. This was an
accurate observation.
The worst that can be said is that the authors not only reported
this trend but appeared to accept it cheerfully. What they were
accepting was sot socialism. It was the New Deal.
The book was written in the depths of the greatest depression this
country has ever known. The mood of the book was the national
mood at that time. Those were the days of breadlines, soup kitchens,
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 975'
and coal doles ; of men selling apples on street corners or peddling
cheap kitchenware from door to door; of 15,000 bonus marchers
encamped on Anacostia Flats; of nearly 13 million unemployed.
Shall we now deny that there was at that time a widespread disillu-
sionment concerning our economic system, or that men were ener-
getically seeking new solutions to a desperate situation? Or if we
admit those facts, shall we seek now at the height of our prosperity
to reproach all those who shared the doubts and hopes of that time ?
Since the word "collectivism" is used frequently throughout the
book, it is useful to note that Charles Beard, in a letter to Frederick
Keppel, then president of Carnegie Corporation, said that he had
chosen the word because it "avoids the connotations of socialism and
communism." Whether his choice was a wise one may be debated,
but his intention is clear.
So much for what the book says. The relationship of Carnegie
Corporation to the project remains to be clarified.
The Carnegie Corporation was first approached by Dana Carleton
Munro, a medieval historian and well-known authority on the Cru-
sades. The approach was made in behalf of the American Historical
Association, one of the older scholarly societies in America, and with-
out question one of the most honorable. The group of historians who
had developed the project within the American Historical Association
numbered among its members some of the most distinguished univer-
sity professors of the time — Charles Beard, of Columbia; Isaiah
Bowman, of Johns Hopkins ; Guy Stanton Ford, of Minnesota ;
Charles Merriam, of Chicago; and Carleton J. H. Hayes, also of
Columbia. All were men of great integrity and of high reputation
as scholars.
In the early years of the study there appeared no foreshadowing of
the political and economic views which characterize the final volume.
But had the corporation seen the draft of the manuscript, it would
not have sought to alter these views. The corporation made its grant
to the American Historical Association. The association selected the
members of the commission. The members of the commission were
responsible for the book. The fact that the corporation has the power
to grant or withhold funds does not give it the power to censor or
rewrite the works produced under its grants. This means, obviously,
that works will be supported by corporation grants containing views
that differ from those held by trustees and officers of the corporation.
This is as it must and should be. The alternative is thought control.
What actually happened was in the healthiest tradition of American
life. Of the 16 members of the commission, 4 declined to sign the
document. This disagreement was not in any way concealed. On the
contrary, it is mentioned in an introductory note at the beginning of
the volume. Furthermore, each of the men who declined to sign was
invited to submit a dissenting opinion to be printed over his signature
along with the report. None took advantage of this opportunity.
One individual who did sign — Isaiah Bowman — prepared a vigorous
statement dissenting from many of the "conclusions." This, too, was
given full publicity. In fact, it appears as appendix C in the Con-
clusions and Recommendations.
49720— 54— pt. 2 3
976 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Keppel, president of the corporation, expressed his private res-
ervations concerning the final volume. In a letter to one of the
authors of the book, Mr. Keppel says :
Frankly, I think that the report in its final form is a fairly vulnerable docu-
ment, but I am not sure that in the long run that it is not going to be a good
thing. * * * The fact that the report was not signed unanimously does not
trouble me very much, nor the fact that I would have dealt with some of the
material quite differently if I had been writing it myself.
LEAGUE FOE INDUSTRIAL DEMOCRACY— ANSWER OF DR. HARRY
W. LAIDLER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE LID, TO STATEMENT
OF KEN EARL
Sworn statement by Dr. Harry W. Laidler, executive director, League
for Industrial Democracy, regarding the educational activities of
the LID, submitted in writing to the Special Committee To Investi-
gate Tax-Exempt Foundations. The statement is a reply to the
criticisms of the league made by Ken Earl, attorney of the law firm
of Lewis, Strong & Earl, Moses Lake, Wash., at the hearing of the
special committee in Washington, D. C, Tuesday and Wednesday,
June 15 and 16. These criticisms were contained in Mr. Earl's
mimeograph report and in his answers to the committee's questions
To Members of the Special Committee To Investigate Tax-Exempt
Foundations of the United States House of Representatives :
My name is Dr. Harry W. Laidler, executive director of the League
for Industrial Democracy. I have served as executive director of the
league since its inception in 1921, and, prior to that, as secretary of
the league's predecessor, from 1910 to 1921. Outside of my LID
activities, I have been a member of the New York City Council; a
lecturer in economics at Brooklyn College, the College of the City of
New York, and New York University ; have written a number of books
including college textbooks on economic movements and problems;
am a member of the New York bar, and have been active in economic
research organizations.
The League for Industrial Democracy is a nonprofit, educational
organization of 49 years' standing, incorporated as a membership
corporation under the laws of New York State. It is not a founda-
tion, as defined by the Webster's New International Dictionary, which
describes a foundation as "a corporation provided with funds for
contributing to the endowment of institutions ; that which is founded
or established by endowment." The league was not founded by an
endowment. It has at the present time no endowment. It does not
endow other institutions, and it receives but an infinitesimal part of
its moderate income of less than $50,000 a year from foundations.
Its members and board of directors were thus, in the nature of the
case, somewhat surprised to learn that the league, after 49 years of
fruitful educational activity, had been suddenly made the subject of
a 39-page attack by Mr. Ken Earl, a Moses Lake, Wash., attorney,
hitherto unknown to them, and had been selected for that unusual
attention from thousands of foundations, as technically and popularly
defined, and from tens of thousands of other tax-exempt associations.
The league, indeed, is one of the few tax-exempt educational so-
cieties in America dedicated to a better understanding of the labor
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 977
movement and to education for increasing democracy in our economic,
political, and cultural life.
It has sought to stimulate college men and women in the public
generally to understand the social problems of their times and to seek
constructive, democratic remedies to social abuses. It has done valu-
able educational work through its researches, publications, confer-
ences, lectures, college and city discussion groups, and information
services. And it has sought to honor through its annual awards men
and women who have served the cause of democracy — among them
Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt; Dr. Ralph J. Bunche, winner of the Nobel
peace prize ; Oscar L. Chapman, former Secretary of the Interior ;
John Dewey, philosopher and echicator ; Paul H. Douglas, Senator
from Illinois; Thomas C. Douglas, premier of Saskatchewan, Canada;
David Dubinsky, president of the ILGWU; the late William Green,
late president of the A. F. of L. ; John Haynes Holmes, pastor emeri-
tus, Community Church ; Sidney Hook, professor of philosophy, NYU ;
Hubert H. Humphrey, United States Senator from Minnesota ; the
late Philip Murray, late president of the CIO ; Herbert H. Lehman,
United States Senator from New York ; Trygve Lie, former Secretary
General of the United Nations ; George Meany, president of the A. F.
of L. ; Wayne L. Morse, United States Senator from Oregon; Leland
Olds, former Chairman of the Federal Power Commission ; Walter P.
Reuther, president of the CIO and of the United Auto Workers; Paul
R. Porter, former United States Deputy for Economic Affairs in Eu-
rope ; Clarence Senior, Latin American authority ; and Dr. Selman A.
Waksman, codiscoverer of streptomycin and winner of the Nobel prize
in medicine,
John Dewey, foremost American philosopher and educator, was
the league's honorary president for 11 years until his death in 1952.
Nathaniel M. Minkoff, secretary of the New York joint board,
Dressmakers' Unions, ILGWU, is its president. Its vice presidents
include Dr. John C. Bennett, professor of theology and ethics, Union
Theological Seminary ; Dr. John Haynes Holmes, of the Community
Church, New York; President A. J. Hayes, president of the Inter-
national Association of Machinists; Dr. Bryn J. Hovde, former presi-
dent of the New School for Social Research; Dr. William H. Kil-
patrick, professor emeritus of education, Teachers College, Columbia ;
Dr. Alexander Meiklejohn, former president of Amherst College;
Vida D. Scudder, for years professor of English literature, Wellesley
College; and M. J. Coldwell, Member of Parliament of Canada. Its
board chairman is Mark Starr, prominent labor educator and author;
its treasurer, Joseph Schlossberg, member of the Board of Higher
Education, New York, and secretary-treasurer emeritus of the Amal-
gamated Clothing Workers of America ; and its secretary and execu-
tive director, Dr. Harry W. Laidler.
Its board of directors, consisting of 75 members, include many
educators, businessmen, labor and civic leaders, and members of the
legal and other professions.
All believers m the strengthening of the democratic way of life are
eligible to league membership. Prior to the spring of 1943, the stated
object of the league was "education for a new social order based on
production for use and not for profit." In that year, the member-
ship voted to change the stated object to "education for increasing
democracy in our economic, political, and cultural life." In making
978 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
this change, the members of the league wished to broaden its basis,
and to make it doubly clear that the league's primary goal was educa-
tion for a strengthened democracy in all phases of our life, rather
than education for a particular type of social order.
Surely the league's object, educational activities, or officers and
■associates in no way, in our opinion, justify the type of attack to
which the league was subjected, without notice, before the special
investigating committee.
THE LI1>'S TAX-EXEMPT STATUS
Mr. Earl seeks in his report to show that the League for Industrial
Democracy should not continue to be tax-exempt.
The LID received tax exemption in the twenties. In the early
thirties, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue questioned this exemp-
tion as the league, a pioneering educational society, was, in the nature
of the case, constantly dealing with social problems of a controversial
nature.
The question of the educational character of the league was then
argued before the United States Circuit Court of Appeals, in the case
of Weyl versus the Commissioner of Internal Revenue. After exam-
ining the league's educational activities, the court handed down a
decision on April 13, 1931, in favor of the LID in what has since been
regarded as a decision of historic importance. In this case, the court
declared :
(1) The sole question presented is whether the League for Industrial Democ-
racy is an educational corporation within the meaning of the statute. The facts
are not in dispute. The league makes researches, gives lectures, holds debates
and discussions, promotes, by writing pamphlets, books, and helping to distribute
them, giving information concerning economic and social problems. It is well
organized, has substantial sponsors, and claims to have a definite social doctrine.
It claims the best education is self-education, and considers that the best work
it can do among the colleges is by voluntary groups which organize themselves
in various colleges and seek the benefit of the publication of its information.
The fact that its aim may or may not resemble that of a political party does not
of itself remove it from the category of an association engaged in educational
work.
(2) Congress did not include a definition of the term "education" as used in
the act. In the absence of specific definition, the words are to be given their
usual and accepted meaning. Matter of Will of Fox (52 N. Y. 530, 11 Am. Rept.
751). "Education" has been defined by the encyclopedia and dictionaries as
"imparting or acquisition of knowledge, mental and moral training ; cultivation
of the mind, feelings, and manners." The definition given by the Funk & Wagnall
New Standard Dictionary, volume 1, may be referred to : "Education, as under-
stood today, connotes all those processes cultivated by a given society as means
for the realization in the individual of the ideals of the community as a whole.
It has for its aim the development of the powers of man (1) by exercising each
along its particular line, (2) by properly coordinating and subordinating them,
(3) by taking advantage of the law of habit, and (4) by appealing to human
interest and enthusiasm. It includes not only the narrow conception of instruc-
tion, to which it was formerly limited, but embraces all forms of human experi-
ence, owing to the recognition of the fact that every stimulus with its correspond-
ing reaction has a definite effect on character. It may be either mainly esthetic,
ethical, intellectual, physical, or technical, but to be most satisfactory it must
Involve and develop all sides of human capacity."
The literature which the league distributes covers different authors and is of
interest and information to students of political subjects and political economy.
All is the subject of education.
The organization has no legislative program hovering over its activities. It
is clear that, as Congress did not intend to use the word "education" in the
statute in any exceptional sense, but giving it its plain, ordinary meaning, it is
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 979
applicable to this appellant's contributions, and the deduction should have been
allowed.
On the basis of the league's educational activities, the Bureau of
Internal Revenue, following the passage of the Revenue Act of 1938,
also declared that the educational activities of the League — its re-
searches, pamphlets, promotion of debates, and discussions relating
to economic and social problems, etc. — entitled the League "to exemp-
tion under the provisions of section 101 (6) of the Revenue Act of
1938 and the corresponding provisions of prior revenue acts."
ACTIVITIES, 195 3-5 4
During the last year the LID has conducted a number of valuable
educational activities :
Forty-ninth annual conference. — One of these activities was the
holding of its 49th annual conference. At this conference, held on
April 9-10, 1954, at the Hotel Commodore, New York, we sought to
analyze various currents in our economic system, and seek to discover
what had been the restrictions imposed on free enterprise, and how
we would at present best characterize our present economy.
The first round table of the conference was held on Friday evening,
April 9, 1954. At this session we asked a variety of opinions on the
impact on free enterprise of monopoly, partial monopoly, trade agree-
ments, and Government subsidies and regulations initiated by business
groups. The round table panel represented a variety of interests and
points of view. On the panel were Theodore K. Quinn, former vice
President of the General Electric Co. and author of Giant Business ;
)r. Solomon Barkin, economist, author, research director, Textile
Workers Union of America ; Lee F. Johnson, executive vice president
of the National Housing Conference; Aaron Levenstein, author and
member of the staff of the Research Institute of America ; and Mark
Starr, author and labor educator.
Following a number of brilliant and searching papers on the
problem of subsidies, trade agreements and regulation, and their effect
on free competitive practices, there as a vigorous discussion within
the panel and between the panel and the audience.
The second session on Saturday morning, April 10, dealt with the
effect on free enterprise and a laissez faire economy of labor, con-
sumer, and political action, President A. J. Hayes of the Interna-
tional Association of Machinists, gave a paper on what, in his opinion,
had been some of the achievements of the trade union movement, and
its impact on our economic system. Wallace J. Campbell, Wash-
ington director, Cooperative League, United States of America,
described the development of the cooperative and other consumer
movements. James Farmer, student field secretary, LID, gave a
factual statement on some phases of social-security legislation, while
George Soule, professor of economics, Bennington College, and for-
mer president of the National Bureau of Economic Research, gave
an analysis of the types of industry that were and that were not
subject to public regulation.
The final round table of the conference discussed the important
problem, How To F'revent a Depression.
Here, as elsewhere, the league sought to obtain the benefit of various
viewpoints on whether the present recession was likely to lead to a
QgO TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
depression, and what measures should be recommended to labor, busi-
ness and governmental groups to avoid mass unemployment. The
panel was opened by Dr. Geoffrey H. Moore, associate director of the
National Bureau of Economic Kesearch, who presented an analysis of
hopeful and less hopeful trends in the present business cycle. Dr.
Moore had for many years worked with Dr. Arthur F. Burns, now
Chairman of the President's Council of Economic Advisers in the
field of business cycles and is one of the Nation's foremost authorities
on business trends. His address was printed almost verbatim in the
financial section of the New York Times.
He was followed by Wesley F. Rennie, executive director of the
Committee on Economic Development, a committee of prominent
businessmen who had recently formulated an antidepression program
for business and Government. Congressman Jacob K. Javits, Repub-
lican Congressman from New York, presented his program for maxi-
mum employment. Dr. Boris Shishkin, director of research, AFL,
analyzed the census figures on unemployment, and Dr. Theresa Wolf-
son, professor of economics, Brooklyn College, dealt with the need of
long-range planning as a means of stabilizing employment at a high
level. Max Delson, New York City attorney, presided. An enlight-
ening interchange among speakers and audience followed.
Between the round-table discussions the league held its annual
luncheon, at which President George Meany, of the AFL, and Senator
Wayne Morse received citations for their contributions to democracy,
and John Dewey awards to former LID student leaders were presented
to Dr. Wolfson and, posthumously, to Dr. Felix S. Cohen, lawyer,
writer, teacher, champion of the rights of the American Indian.
President Meany delivered a valuable address on the Challenge of
International Communism, while Senator Morse urged that the coun-
try's legislators be kept better informed on the international situation.
The conference throughout was one of a highly educational
character.
' Pamphlets. — The LID has long been famous for its popular yet
scholarly pamphlets on social and economic problems which are used
extensively by labor education, labor, and civic groups.
The league has high standards for its educational pamphlets. It
has an excellent pamphlet committee of which Mrs. Katrina McCor-
mick Barnes (daughter of the late Senator Medill McCormick and
the late Ruth Hanna McCormick) , is secretary.
The committee carefully considers each manuscript, edits it for
accuracy and language, and plans the pamphlet series. # On the other
hand, while endeavoring to choose authorities on particular subjects
to prepare the pamphlets, the opinions expressed by the authors are
their own and do not necessarily reflect the official point of view either
of the pamphlet committee or of the league. In this respect, it is
similar to the average book-publishing house.
During the last 2 years, the league has published a number of infor-
mative, educational pamphlets :
The Right To Make Mistakes, by George S. Counts, professor of
education, Teachers College, Columbia — an examination of the errors
in judgment of public figures in the last decade or so on domestic and
international policy, and a plea for tolerance toward honest error and
for freedom of inquiry and thought as an essential to the democratic
way of life.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 981
National Health Insurance and Alternative Plans for Financing
Health, by Seymour E. Harris, professor of economics, Harvard Uni-
versity, a scholarly analysis of the economic and social problems
involved in health insurance, national, and voluntary, by an economist
who has given much thought to the problem of social security. The
titles of the chapters indicate the types of problems dealt with:
Chapter I — The Issues; Chapter II— The Cost of National Health
Insurance ; Chapter Ill—Can We Afford National Health Insurance? ;
Chapter IV — Insurance and Availability of Medical Resources ; Chap-
ter V— The Supply of Physicians; Chapter VI — The Problem of
Financing the Medical Schools; Chapter VII — Voluntary Insurance;
Chapter VIII — Voluntary Insurance Versus Federal Insurance;
Chapter IX — Unresolved Issues; Conclusion; Postscript; Report on
President's Commission.
The pamphlet has a foreword by Alfred Baker Lewis, president of
the Union Casualty Co., and is carefully documented. The pamphlet
has been praised for its scholarship and keen insights.
Taft-Hartley Act in Action, by Jack Barbash. In this pamphlet,
Mr. Barbash, formerly research director of the United States Senate
Subcommittee on Labor and Labor Management, and author of Labor
Unions in Action, has described the evolution of collective-bargaining
legislation and the chief provisions of the Taft-Hartley Act, compared
the two acts, presented criticisms of Taft-Hartley and presented a
"design for Taft-Hartley changes." The pamphlet contains an ex-
tensive list of references, and a selected bibliography. It has been
described "as the best short treatise* on Taft-Hartley thus far written."
Forward March of American Labor, by Theresa Wolfson, professor
of economics, Brooklyn College, and Joseph Glazer, educational direc-
tor, the United Rubber, Cork, Linoleum, and Plastic Workers of
America. Illustrated. This is an educational pamphlet giving a
brief, concise, accurate history of the American labor movement espe-
cially prepared as an educational pamphlet for newcomers in the labor
movement. It is now in its fourth printing, and is being revised and
brought up to date. It has been checked and rechecked for accuracy
and is extensively used by labor and educational groups.
Democratic Socialism — A New Appraisal, by Norman Thomas. A
restatement by the well-known authority on American socialism of
what democratic socialism is, and how its goals have been changed as
a result of the economic, political, and social developments and social
experiences of the past few decades. It was regarded as so valuable
a contribution that, besides the press publicity, it was discussed on
The Author Meets the Critic television show — the first pamphlet to be
so treated.
World Labor Today, by Robert J. Alexander, professor of eco-
nomics, Rutgers College. This is a careful, factual study by a student
of the world labor movement of the development of the postwar labor
movement throughout the world — in Western and Eastern Europe, the
Middle and Far East and the Americas, with an estimate of trade-
union membership, selected references and bibliographical notes.
Student activities. — The LID has continued during the year its edu-
cational activities on college campuses. The league since its founda-
tion has sought to stimulate young men and women in the colleges to
obtain an understanding of the great social issues of their day, and to
do their part, after their college days were over and while in college
982 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
to help in the solution of these problems. It has never sought to
commit the students to any political or economic doctrine, but has
. urged them to seek their own solutions. As a believer in democracy,
it makes ineligible to membership advocates of dictatorship. Its
SLID constitution reads :
By virtue of the democratic aims of the league, advocates of dictatorship and
totalitarianism, and of any political system that fails to provide for freedom of
speech, of religion, of assembly, and of political, economic, and cultural organiza-
tion ; or of any system that would deny civil rights to any person because of race,
color, creed, or national origin, are not eligible for membership. Nor are those
eligible whose political policies are wholly or largely determined by the policies
laid down by the leaders of a foreign government.
The league has a proud record of achievement in helping to start
young men and women on careers of public service, as the catalog of
its former student leaders will indicate.
Of the league's educational work in the college field in the past,
Prof. George S. Counts has the following to say :
Since its founding in 1905, the League for Industrial Democracy, in my
opinion, has done more than any other organization in arousing the social
conscience and advancing the political understanding of students in our colleges
and universities. From the beginning it has opposed all forms of bigotry,
obscurantism, and totalitarianism and remained true to the inscription on its
masthead, "education for increasing democracy in our economic, political, and
cultural life." It is dedicated without reservation to that sublime faith in the
human mind which is the foundation of foundations of free society in all ages.
Prof. Sidney Hook, chairman of the department of philosophy,
New York University, has written .recently :
The SLID has been one of the most fruitful forms of extracurricular educa-
tional activity on the campus. It has supplemented, and sometimes supplied
where it was missing, the intellectual stimulus and motivation to explore the
problems of social philosophy and organization in the liberal arts college.
During the past year, James Farmer, the Student League's field
secretary, visited many college campuses, lectured on labor and social
problems before assemblies, college classes, and student groups, and
organized college discussion groups. Mr. Farmer, as is indicated by
the letters which the league receives, is noted for his knowledge of
social and labor problems, his clarity of expression, and his educa-
tional approach.
The following was received from a member of the faculty at
Central Michigan College :
I should like to express my appreciation and that of my students, for the
excellent talks presented for us by Mr. James Farmer, of your organization.
Mr. Farmer exhibited a degree of command of his subject and of control of
his audience that is rarely combined in one individual. He appeared to be
"up" on the best relevant sociological knowledge, and was able to present it in
a thoroughly stimulating manner.
A professor of sociology of an Indiana college writes :
James Farmer has just left for Chicago. He did a superb job on this campus
in the course of 2 days. His chapel address was enthusiastically received by
students and faculty alike and his talks in our classes were equally effective.
Only a talented, dedicated person could speak so many times in so short a
period and scarcely repeat himself.
Please know how grateful I am to you and the LID for making it possible
for Mr. Farmer to visit our campus. His message is urgently needed.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 983
From an associate professor of Christian ethics, University of
Southern California.
I am glad to supply my reactions to the address by James Farmer to our
students. Mr. Farmer did' an excellent job of summarizing some of our basic
contemporary problems and of stimulating thought aimed at a constructive
conclusion. His ability at analysis and careful clear presentation is marked.
I hope that you will continue to use him in situations which utilize his out-
standing talents.
A partial list of lectures given by Mr. Farmer this last year appears
on accompanying sheets.
The SLID, in its various college chapters, emphasizes democratic,
undogmatic discussion, and does much to stimulate debates and
symposia where different points of view are represented. Thus the
Yale John Dewey Society, a branch of the SLID, this spring held a
debate on compulsory health insurance. Dr. D. Olan Meeker, chair-
man of the committee on national legislation of the Connecticut State
Medical Society, opposed a system of national health insurance, while
Dr. Theodore Sanders, of New York, a member of the executive board
of the Committee for the Nation's Health, favored it.
The chapter also arranged a debate between Mark Starr, labor
educator, and John Welch, assistant treasure of a local textile com-
pany and consultant on labor relations on "Are trade unions too
powerful?"
Its last meeting this spring was a panel discussion on Indochina,
with a number of different points of view represented by Prof. Walter
Sharp, director of graduate studies in international relations, Yale ;
N. Due Thanh, president of the American Vietnamese Foundation;
Jean Levy, a French Fulbright student ; Stephen Keid, director of
southeast Asian studies, and Milton Sacks, assistant in research in
southeast Asian students. Another meeting was addressed by Norman
Thomas.
Following each lecture, debate, and panel discussion, students and
faculty are invited to participate. E. Wright Bakke, professor of
economics ; Brand Blandshard, professor of philosophy, and Prof.
Carlton R. Rollins are faculty advisers.
The strictly educational character of the student LID is also indi-
cated in the roundtable discussion in this May 7 and 8 SLID con-
ference on The Patterns of Social Reform in North America, at the
center of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. At
this conference ,the students selected as topics for discussion, Social
Reform and the Conflict of Rural and Urban Values, The Role of the
Trade Unions in Social Reform, and Social Reform and the Commu-
nication of Ideas. Among the participants in these roundtables were
C. Wright Mills, associate professor of sociology, Columbia Uni-
versity ; Daniel Bell, labor editor of Fortune ; Felix Gross, associate
professor of sociology, Brooklyn College, and professor of public
affairs, NYU; Mark Starr, educational director, ILGWU, and co-
author of Labor in America; S. Martin Lipsit, associate professor,
Columbia ; Thomas Brooks, assistant trade union editor ; Colin Cam-
eron, Canadian member of Parliament, and several students. The
discussions were informal, and no resolutions were passed.
984 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
During the winter and spring of 1953-54 in New York, the student
members of the LID organized a number of meetings dealing with
democratic, developments in specific countries in Europe, Latin Amer-
ica, Africa, and Asia, addressed by Dr. Robert J. Alexander, of
Rutgers; Joseph Monserrat, director. New York office, Puerto Rico
Department of Labor; S. Atmono, of the Indonesian consulate; and
others, including some graduate students.
This summer the student LID is organizing a tour to Saskatchewan,
Canada, to study the farmers' cooperative movement and the activi-
ties of the CCF government ; is sending student helpers to the CIO
Institute at Port Huron, Mich., and scholarship students to the Sum-
mer Institute for Social Progress at Bard College, and is organizing
an educational conference near Peekskill, N. Y.
City chapters. — The LID also organizes and conducts city branches,
of which the New York chapter is the largest.
The meetings and affairs of the chapter during the last year were in
brief, as follows :
February 8, 1953: Award to Charles Abrams, housing expert..
Speakers : Supreme Court Justice Bernard Botein ; Helen Hall, di-
rector, Henry Street Settlement ; Stanley M. Isaacs, member New
York City Council; Alvin S. Johnson, president emeritus of the New
School; Lee Johnson, executive vice president, National Housing
Conference Theodore McGee, chairman of the Columbus, Ga., Housing
Authority; William C. Vladeck, president, Citizens Housing ana
Planning Council ; Walter White, secretary, National Association for
the Advancement of Colored People; Benjamin Naumoff and Dr.
Harry W. Laidler, chairmen.
The March 1953 programs dealt with Crime, Health, and Welfare
in New York City. Among participants were Dr. George Baehr,
president of the Health Insurance Plan of Greater New York ; Henry
L. McCarthy, commissioner of welfare, New York ; Helen Harris,
executive director, United Neighborhood Houses; Dorothy Dunbar
Bromley, radio commenator; Dr. Ernst Papanek, director of
Wiltwyck School; and Benjamin Naumoff, president of the chapter.
June 20, 1953: The Crisis in the U. N. Speaker: Clark M. Eichel-
berger, national director, American Association for the U. N. (at
garden party) .
October 14, 1953: The Struggle for Democracy versus Totalitar-
ianism in Europe and Latin America. Participants : Amicus Most,
formerly chief of the Industry Department, ECA in Germany ; M. J.
Coldwell, Member of Parliament of Canada; Jacques de Kadt,
Netherlands, Member of Parliament ; Serafino Romualdi, AFL repre-
sentative in Latin America ; Norman Thomas, chairman.
November 14, 1953 : Tour of chapter members to U. N.
November 15, 1953: Recent Developments in Britain. Speaker:
Austen Albu, Member of Parliament, president Fabian Society, and
former deputy director, British Institute of Management.
December 11, 1953: Annual awards of chapter. Presentation of
citations to George S. Counts, professor of education, Teachers
College, Columbia ; and Dr. Abraham Lef kowitz, principal, Samuel
Tilden High School "for their outstanding contributions to education
and civic progress." Drs. Counts and Lefkowitz delivered addresses,
respectively, on The Right To Be In Error and on The Menace to
Freedom. The award to Dr. Lefkowitz was given by Dr. William
TAX-EXEMPT EGGHDATIONg 98§
Jansen, superintendent of schools, New York, and to Dr., Counts by
Dr. George E. Axtelle, professor of education, NYU. Other par-
ticipants were Dr. John L. Childs, professor of philosophy of educa-
tion, Columbia; Dr. William H. Kilpatrick, foremost America^
educator; Mark Stair, labor educator, and Rebecca C. Simonsonj
teacher and vice president, American Federation of Teachers.
January 30, 1954: Tour to International Center of Carnegie
Foundation and to Gold Coast Exhibition.
February 11, 1954 : Cross Currents in Israel, Egypt, and the Far
East. Participants : Prof. George E. Axtelle, recently returned from
Egypt; and Louis Yagoda, former chief of CARE Mission in Israel.
May 12, 1954 : Reception to Margaret Cole, author, member London
County Council, honorary secretary, Fabian Society.
June 5, 1954 : A tour to Miltwyck School and to Hyde Park.
June 19, 1954 : Dictatorship versus Democracy in Latin America.
Participants: His Excellency the Rev. Benjamin Nunez, Ambassador
of Costa Rica to the II. N.; Dr. Balmore Rodriguez, former president
of the Zenezuelan Senate ; Frances R. Grant, secretary-general, United.
States Committee of the Inter- American Association for Democracy
and Freedom.
The chapter also held monthly radio programs over WEVD on
economic, social, and civic questions.
The league stimulated much research during the year in connection
with its meetings, radio broadcasts, and pamphlets and served as an
informal information center on economic problems.
I have carefully read the report of Mr. Ken Earl on the League for
Industrial Democracy, and the discussion before your committee on
that report.
May I try to appraise both the report and Mr. Earl's observations
before the committee. In the first place, there is an assumption
throughout Mr. Earl's discussion that if an organization deals with
economic, social, or political problems the solution of which necessi-
tates legislative action, such discussion is political rather than
educational.
On page 1748 of the report of the committee's discussion, Mr. Earl,
for instance, mentions the fact that Dr. I. S. Falk, Director of Re-
search and Statistics of the Social Security Board, gave a talk at our
1943 conference on the system of social insurance in this country and
asked that it be strengthened. The address did not advocate the
passage of any specific piece of legislation.
Mr. Earl remarks that he is not arguing whether the system of
social insurance should, or should not be strengthened, but that social
insurance was a political subject, and thus, by implication, should not
be discussed by an educational body.
The Moses Lake attorney infers the same thing about the items
mentioned in the league's executive director's report in early 1953,
in which, without mentioning any bill before Congress, or without
engaging in any type of lobbying, the executive director enumerated
some things that he believed should be considered in the field of conser-
vation, social security, labor legislation, economic stability, housing,
education, civil liberties, racial relations, corruption, foreign policy,
trad* unionism, and cooperation.
If, of course, the discussion of economic and social problems ceases
to be educational because these problems have, in part, to find their
986 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
solution in some type of legislative action, all courses in political
science, economics, and sociology given in college would necessarily
be regarded as political, not educational, for today, with legislative
and governmental bodies passing legislation on all matters that con-
cern the life of the community, there is no question that does not have
a political angle. If a college course or an educational organization
deals with corporations, the professor must discuss antitrust and regu-
latory legislation. A discussion of trade unions and labor problems
necessarily involves a discussion of collective-bargaining legislation.
A course or conference on the problem of economic stability, must,
unless the discussion deals with pure theory, bring in the question of
public works, social-insurance legislation, governmental financial con-
trols, taxation, minimum wages, tariffs, international cooperation,
political alinements, and a host of other problems that have political
overtones and are subjects of legislation. A course on or discussion
of comparative economic systems must, to be complete, involve the
question as to how one economic order, through democratic legislative
process, might evolve to another economic order. The discussion does
not cease to be educational in the sense of the provisions of the internal
revenue law, if it is directed to the enunciation of principles and pro-
cedures which may sooner or later be incorporated into the law of the
land. Otherwise all courses in college dealing with the social sciences
would have to be regarded as political, not educational, in their nature,
and th^ college would, by that token, cease to be educational, at least
insofar as the teaching of the social sciences was concerned. The same
thing could be said about very many tax-exempt organizations inter-
ested in one or more social abuses which require legislation to correct.
Of course the educational character of the colleges and of the
courses they give in the social sciences has long since been established,
and such discussions cannot be regarded as educational if they are held
in our colleges, and political if they are held at meetings or in publi-
cations outside of academic halls. The books and pamphlets published
by the league that are used in college courses cannot be regarded as
educational in the classrooms and political in LID groups.
Mr. Earl's charge against the league that it is primarily political,
not educational in its nature is vitiated not only by his too restricted
definition of education, but by a number of other false assumptions
and techniques, the use of which in a college essay would, I fear, have
been severely criticized in any class.
I. False assumption No. 1: The first false assumption is that the
activities and point of view of an educational organization in 1954
can be judged by its alleged activities 22 years before. Instead of
analyzing the league's activities during the past season, Mr. Earl, near
the beginning of his 39-page report, devotes 9 pages to expressions of
opinion of a student magazine issued in 1932, the assumption being
that these opinions represent those of the LID in the year 1954.
The extremely small degree of merit in this assumption is indicated
by the following facts :
(1) First, that the publication referred to, Revolt, was not edited
or published by the league proper, but by the Intercollegiate Council
which had its own executive committee, and the league assumed little
or no responsibility for its editorial policy ;
(2) Second, that the Intercollegiate Council, while providing a
free forum for the discussion of social problems by students and
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 987
others, did not hold itself responsible for all of the conflicting
opinions expressed in its magazine ;
(3) Third, that the stated object of the league was a different one
in 1954 than in 1932, the league members having changed that object
in 1943 from "education for a new social order based on production
for use and not for profit" to "education for increasing democracy in
our economic, political, and cultural life" ; and
(4) Finally, that the economic and psychological situation in 1932
differed widely from the situation today, as was so vividly brought
out by Congressman Hays and others at the hearings of June 15 and
16. In 1932, the country was in the midst of the greatest depression
in its history ; hundreds of thousands of white-collar workers, includ-
ing many college graduates, were unemployed; many banks were
closing up ; the Government seemed to be doing little to grapple effec-
tively with the unemployment problem, and many economists and
others were predicting that the economic order was on the verge of
collapse.
Moreover, the rising tide of fascism and nazism in Germany due,
in part, to the great insecurity of white-collar and industrial workers
after World War I, inclined many young people to think that, unless
something was done in America to give employment to millions of
jobless, f ascistic demagogs might arise in this country.
The social reforms of the thirties and the preparations for war and
World War II in the late thirties and early forties eliminated mass
unemployment, and many of the fears of college students and others
entertained in 1932 were found to be groundless. The young writers
revised their economic and social outlook, and several of them became
distinguished and most valuable public servants. It might be inter-
esting in this connection that one of the writers for the September
1932 issue of Revolt, which Mr. Earl failed to mention, was J. B.
Matthews, who soon after took a turn to the left, followed by one to
the right.
II. A second assumption of Mr. Earl which has little or no validity
is that the expressions of opinion on an international problem by 1 of
the 75 members of the board made a decade ago— even an opinion at
wide variance with that which the member holds today — necessarily
reflects the opinion today of the LID. Mr. Earl has devoted 2,y 2
mimeograph pages (pp. 20-22) to Alfred Baker Lewis' Liberalism
and Sovietism. The pamphlet was not published by the LID, but
by another anti- Communist organization. It gives a graphic account
of the rising imperialism of Russia, as shown in its policy in Iran, the
Balkans, Manchuria, and so forth, declares that "totalitarian dictator-
ships such as Russia are aggressive, that appeasement will not work,
and that liberals should not form a united front with Communists.
Toward the very end, however, Mr. Lewis expresses the hope that
Russia's imperialism may conceivably be less aggressive in the
future.
Mr. Lewis was too optimistic concerning the possibility in the com-
mensurate future of Russia's dropping an aggressive policy. He was
not so optimistic as General Eisenhower appeared to be on June 15,
1945, when he declared in Paris at a press conference, "There is
nothing in my experience with the Russians that leads me to feel that
we can't cooperate with them perfectly," and when, in November 1945,
he sent a letter of good will to the National Council of American-
§88 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Soviet Friendship wishing it "the utmost success in the worthy work
it has undertaken," but more optimistic than events have shown was
Justified and his position is of course a different one today. How-
ever, whatever position he took in 1946 was quite irrelevant to Mr.
Earl's thesis, since the pamphlet was not an LID publication and the
league was not bound by it. No one in his right mind could claim
that an organization in which General Eisenhower functioned in 1945
was today bound by the opinions which he expressed 9 years ago on
our future relations with Soviet Eussia, opinions which he now finds
to have been unjustified by recent events.
III. Another assumption of Mr. Earl that has little validity is that
•scattered excerpts from pamphlets published by the LID and of
speeches delivered at league conferences necessarily portray the true
character of the entire pamphlet or speech.
Many readers of these excerpts, I fear, would obtain an entirely
false impression of the educational character of much of the league's
literature.
The paragraphs devoted to the pamphlet, Toward a Farmer-Labor
Party, published in 1938, but now practically out of print, gave little
indication of the educational character of this pamphlet — its factual
information on the history of minority parties; the reasons for their
successes and failures; the problems confronting them; the concrete
developments in farmer-labor political action in the late thirties in
numerous States in the Union and the forces for and against their
development, followed by a carefully selected bibliography. Nor do
the excerpts on Russia — Democracy or Dictatorship? give any concept
of the carefully checked facts presented in this pamphlet by Dr. Joel
Seidman, now of the economics department of the University of Chi-
cago, and Norman Thomas, on the Soviet dictatorship, facts gathered
from many sources with infinite patience and industry at a time when
such facts were difficult to gather. The pamphlet presents one of the
most unanswerable indictments of Soviet dictatorship appearing in
pamphlet form up to that time, but the excerpts printed give little
indication of the true character of this pamphlet. The same is true
of the paragraphs presented in the report culled from the pamphlet,
Toward Nationalization in Industry. The reader of the report is
given little idea of the factual material presented from authoritative
sources on the industries discussed, and the arguments that are
marshaled.
It might be added that all of the above pamphlets just referred are
practically out of print. The league would like to revise them thor-
oughly in the light of recent developments, but unfortunately has not
had the finances to prepare and publish such revisions.
Mr. Earl tries another technique when referring to the league's
most popular pamphlet among trade unionists, The Forward March of
American Labor. He does not criticize any of the facts given in this
brief and popular history of the trade-union movement of the United
States written by Dr. Theresa Wolf son, professor of economics, Brook-
lyn College, and by Joseph Glazer, educational director of a labor
union — a pamphlet found most educational particularly by newcomers
in the labor movement and by introductory students of labor.
Here Mr. Earl seeks to discredit the pamphlet by declaring that it
possesses a "remarkable series of cartoons which, in the year 1953,
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS; 989
strike an impartial reader as a crude effort to discredit today's business
with faults long *since corrected."
: , After reading this criticism, I reviewed the cartoons and found that
each one referred to a certain period in the development of labor; were
true of conditions in that period and made it evident to the ordinary
reader to what decade it referred. Thus the first cartoon, dealing
with child labor, and portraying a child worker and an employer,
reads, "Two-fifths of all the people employed in Massachusetts in 1832
were under 16." The second said, "Workers demanding tax- supported
schools were stoned in Boston in 1830." The third presented a picture
of Abraham Lincoln, father of the Republican Party, and a quotation
from him, "If any man tells you he loves America, yet hates labor, he
is a liar. If any man tells you he trusts America, yet fears labor, he
is a fool." ■ , . , ,
In practically every cartoon,, the dates are given. Only two car-
toons referring to conditions in the 20th century present pictures of
employers. One deals with the use of detective agencies, with a cap-
tion, "The General Motors Corp. and its divisions spent $994,855 for
detective agency services from January 1934 to July 1936." The text
makes it clearly evident that practices of that type have largely dis-
appeared as a result, by the way, of the constant fight against it by
hosts of Americans, including members of the LID working in trade
unions and through educational and political channels. Another
deals with the rise in corporate profits from 1936 to 1944. The car-
toons, drawn by Bernard Seaman of the Hat Worker, are throughout,
I believe, fair to the spirit and condition of the times.
IV. A fourth assumption of Mr. Earl seems to be that one way of
discrediting a conference of the league is to make a broad generaliza-
tion as to the alleged political composition of its participants. Thus,
in characterizing the league's conference at the Hotel McAlpin in 1943,
he declares :
The conference * * * brought together a number of labor leaders, Socialist
professors, and foreign politicians. They met to emphasize the need for postwar
planning if the free world was to be spared mass unemployment and depression.
The presence of so many Socialise leaders from abroad emphasized the reality of
the world movement against capitalist society, a movement in which allies join
hands across national frontiers to combat their own countrymen.
After reading these sentences, I glanced again over the participants
of the conference, which was devoted to a discussion of The Third
Freedom: Freedom from Want. I find that the Right Honorable
Arthur Greenwood, who, when member of the British war cabinet,
had initiated the preparation of the Beveridge report on social in-
surance, had broadcast from Great Britain a short message in which
he had declared that —
Freedom of the spirit is mankind's greatest need and dearest hope. We must
preserve that spirit. We must also free mankind from want. Broken, beaten,
impoverished, and underfed bodies, wracked by physical suffering and tortured
minds, are not worthy temples of the human spirit.
We also had a short address by the Honorable Margaret Bondfield,
the first woman Minister of Labor in Britain, on The Beveridge Plan
and International Trade. Miss Bondfield, who happened to be in this
country at the time, was the only foreign Socialist leader present at
and participating in this conference, and was invited because of her
990 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
intimate knowledge of the British social insurance system. A Pro-
fessor Underhill, professor of history at the University of Toronto,
was, it is true, a member of the Canadian Cooperative Commonwealth
Federation, but was hardly one of its political leaders. Of the 27
participants in the conference discussions, not more than 1 chanced
to be a member of the Socialist Party of the United States as far as
I am aware. Practically all were Government experts on social in-
surance, college professors, labor, social welfare, and church leaders.
All except 1 of the 27 participants dealt with the immediate questions
involved in bringing about greater social security. One of the twenty-
seven presented the claims of democratic socialism to a round-table
audience. Not one urged the passage of a particular bill before Con-
gress. The discussion was in general of a high order.
It would have been difficult for Mr. Earl to have found the contin-
gent of Socialist leaders from abroad. On the other hand, Mr. Earl
would have found as speakers a number of distinguished students of
the problem of economic security, including, outside of Miss Bondfield,
Dr. Carter Goodrich, professor of economics, Columbia University,
and the chairman of the governing body, International Labor Office ;
Dr. Eveline M. Burns, then Director of Research, Security, Work, and
Relief Policies, National Resources Planning Board, and author of an
authoritative volume, Toward Social Security; Dr. L. S. Falk, Di-
rector, Bureau of Research and Statistics, Social Security Board;
Henriette C. Epstein, vice president of the American Association of
Social Security ; Dr. Arne Skaug, Director of the Norwegian Govern-
ment Disability Service, and then teaching at the University of Wis-
consin ; Donald H. Davenport, Chief of the Employment and Occupa-
tional Outlook Bureau of the United States Department of Labor
Statistics; Alfred Baker Lewis, now president of the Union Casualty
Co. ; Donald S. Howard, assistant director of the charity organization
department of the Russell Sage Foundation, and author of The
W. P. A. and Federal Relief Policy ; Dr. Herman A. Gray, then chair-
man of the New York State Unemployment Insurance Advisory Com-
mittee; E. J. Coil, director of the National Planning Association;
Charles Abrams, housing expert ; Ellis Cowling, educational director
of the Consumers Cooperative Services ; Charles C. Berkley, execu-
tive director of the New York Committee on Discrimination in Em-
ployment ; F. Ernest Johnson, executive secretary, department of re
search and education, Federal Council of Churches ; Rabbi Ephraim
Frisch, former chairman, commission of justice and peace, Central
Conference of American Rabbis ; Leroy E. Bowman, now professor of
sociology, Brooklyn College ; Robert J. Watt, international represent-
ative, AFL; R. -J. Thomas, then president of the UAW-CIO;
Nathanial M. Minkoff, secretary-treasurer, New York Joint Board
ILGWU; Prof. John L. Childs, profession of philosophy of educa-
tion, Teachers College; Mark Starr, labor educator; Jack Barbash,
then of the staff of the United States Office of Education, and others.
Mr. Earl, in the final pages of his report seems to object to the LID
because, according to him, it is continuing "to fill the air with propa-
ganda concerning socialism" and "stumping for certain legislative
programs." Though the LID believes that an educational program
which gives the truth about socialism is in every sense legitimate, the
picture of conferences of the LID painted by Mr. Earl is, it seems to
me, a far cry from the type of conferences which the LID is holding.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 991
This holds true of the picture given by the attorney from Moses
Lake, Wash., of the Conference on World Cooperation and Social
Progress in 1951. There were many educational papers on the over-
shadowing problem of international cooperation presented at that con-
ference : one by H. L. Keenlyside, Director General on the Technical
Assistance Administration of the U. NVs technical assistance pro-
gram ; Dr. Selman A. Waksman, Nobel prize winner in medicine, co-
discoverer of streptomycin and incidentally one of the former student
leaders of the LID while a student at Rutgers, on the World Health
Organization ; by William Green, president of the AFL, on what labor
had done for international cooperation; by M. J. Coldwell, member
of the Canadian Parliament, on the Colombo plan; by Paul R. Porter,
Assistant Director of the EC A on international action against in-
flation and scarcity of raw material, and by Dr. Boris Shishkin, chief
economist of the AFL, on the Marshal plan, delivered after Dr. Shish-
kin has spent 2 years in France in connection with the plan.
V. A fifth assumption of Mr. Earl seems to be (pp. 13-14 of his re-
port) that, when the league grants a citation to a Democratic Socialist,
this presentation carries with it proof of the league's commitment to a
particular political doctrine advocated by the award winner. Mr.
Earl quotes the league's citation to Premier T. C. Douglas of Sas-
katchewan with a view, I assume, of proving this point.
However, in the course of the last few years, the league has pre-
sented awards to men and women long associated with the Demo-
cratic, Republican, Liberal, and Socialist Parties, and to those inde-
pendent of any party; to stated believers in free enterprise, and to-
advocates of democratic social planning. The league has not asked
what politics the receiver of the award had, but what he had accom-
plished in advancing the democratic ideal. No one maintains that the
presentation of honorary degrees by colleges and universities carries,
with it a commitment by the university to the point of view of the re-
cipient. The same should be true of an award presented by educa-
tional societies of the type of the league.
VI. A sixth assumption of Mr. Earl seems to be that, somehow or
other, the discussion of socialism and fundamental social change is not
appropriate to an educational, tax-exempt society, a point of view
again which the United States Circuit Court of Appeals and the
Bureau of Internal Revenue have failed to share with him.
That assumption has likewise long been repudiated by economists;
and social scientists and by the great educational institutions of the
country. For whether we like it or not, various types of Socialist
thought and movements — Utopian, Fabian, Marxian, revisionism,,
et cetera — have had a great influence on the intellectual, the economic,
and political life of the world. They have profoundly affected eco-
nomic thought, historical interpretation, industrial motivations, im-
mediate and far-flung social changes, and political institutions
throughout the world. The Socialist movement is a significant one in
most countries in Western and Central Europe with which the United
States cooperates in opposition to Communist aggression and in de-
fense of democracy. It is difficult, indeed, for a person in public life*
today to do his full part in dealing constructively with domestic and
international problems without an understanding of socialism as a,
theory and as a movement, and of the differences between democratic
49720 — 54— pt. 2 4
992 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
socialism, capitalism, communism, fascism, and other systems of
thought and action.
That organization is doing a service to the community which seeks,
among other things, to promote such an understanding.
; .Courses on various aspects of Socialist thought and action have been
given for a half -century in scores of colleges throughout the country,
and have universally been regarded as having a legitimate place in
college curricula.
VII. Throughout Mr. Earl's report there likewise seems to be a
feeling that it is somewhat un-American and uneducational to discuss
the problems of public versus private ownership of enterprises and
services. However, ever since the beginning of this country, the city,
State, and Federal Governments have assumed greater collective re-
sponsibility in the fields of education, health, social security, conser-
vation, et cetera, as a means of meeting certain popular needs, and
there is an increasing need for analyzing present-day ventures in
public control and ownership, of studying what types of controls to
avoid in the future, and what types to encourage. Freedom of inquiry
and expression on these controversial problems is of vital importance
to our evolving democracy.
VIII. Finally, Mr. Earl seems to assume that it is uneducational to
help to form and develop free forums for the free discussion of con-
troversial problems in our colleges and universities, and that, if such
forums are formed, the organization sponsoring them must necessarily
assume responsibility for the opinions expressed in the student
discussions.
However, the great need of our time is the stimulation of hard think-
ing and courageous expression of opinion on our burning social prob-
lems. America has become great because of the fact that, by and
large, the expression of conflicting points of view on both technical
and social problems has been encouraged, not discouraged, and today
the problem of keeping our social engineering space with our techno-
logical development makes such freedom ever more important.
Yet, many educators have expressed in recent days a great fear that
freedom was now being unduly restricted in many institutions of learn-
ing. Dr. Martin Essex, chairman of the committee on tenure and
academic freedom of the National Educational Association, recently
declared, after an extensive survey, that many faculty members are
afraid to express themselves freely on the controversial issues of the
daj, that freedom to learn is today at a low ebb, and that "we are mov-
ing dangerously toward a sterile education." In this situation, the
educational activities of the league are more necessary from the stand-
point of our evolving democracy than ever before. It is likewise more
necessary than ever to realize that no organization developing forums
can be responsible for all of the opinions freely expressed therein. If
this responsibility were assumed, freedom of speech in such forum
would be dead.
DETAILED CRITIQUE OF MR. EARL's REPORT
Commenting more specifically on some of the observations of Mr.
Earl in his report and discussion at the hearings, may I make the fol-
lowing observations :
TAX-EXEMPT FOlJNDATIONS 993
1. ISS: A study organization— As Mr. Earl states, and as the LID
proudly proclaims in its literature, the League _f or Industrial De-
mocracy is the successor to the Intercollegiate Socialist Society, popu-
larly known as the ISS. Mr. Earl rightly declares that this
organization, formed as a result of a call by a distinguished group of
writers and publicists, including Jack London, Upton Sinclair, J. Gr.
Phelps Stokes, Clarence S. Darrow, and Thomas Wentworth Higgin-
son, "the grand old man of Harvard," had as its object "to promote
an intelligent understanding of socialism among college men and
women." It should be added that the society was purely a discussion
and study organization connected with no political party. It always
made it perfectly clear that membership in it in no way committed
the members to a belief in socialism. Such membership indicated
merely that the member was interested in learning more about social-
ism and other movements for social change, or in promoting an un-
derstanding of socialism among others. The society throughout its
existence contained within its ranks non-Socialists and anti- Socialists
as well as Socialists.
That this pioneering educational society was a vital force for good
in stimulating hard and constructive thinking on the social problems
of the day is attested by the number of the former student leaders
who later distinguished themselves for their service to the community
in the fields of business, labor, education, and government. On the
completion of the society's 20 years of activity — 16 under the name
of the ISS, and 4 as the League for Industrial Democracy— Prof.
A. N. Holcombe, professor of government, Harvard University, and
later president of the American Political Science Association, wrote :
During the 16 years that I have been teaching economics and political science
at Harvard, no organization has done so much as yours to stimulate a sym-
pathetic interest in contemporary economics and political problems on the part
of students and to direct their private studies into fruitful channels.
Dr. Harry J. Carman, professor of history and later dean of Colum-
bia University and member of the New York City Board of Higher
Education, declared in a letter to the executive director:
I have followed your work for a number of years ; first as the Intercollegiate
Socialist Society, and later as the League for Industrial Democracy, and I know
that you have accomplished splendid results in an educational way. Despite
our boasted progress, we are still ignorant, narrowminded, and, above all, in-
tolerant. Anything which will tend to break down these barriers to real prog-
ress, cooperation, and human happiness, is decided worth while, and that, as
I see it, is the kind of endeavor in which the League for Industrial Democracy
is engaged. My heartiest congratulations and hope for your continued success.
Similar statements were made by Profs. Edwin R. A. Seligman, of
Columbia, and John B. Commons, University of Wisconsin, past
presidents of the American Economics Association, and a host of lead-
ing educators.
The fact that the LID began, therefore, as the ISS should m no
way carry with it the inference that the league's background was
political. It was an educational society, and entirely independent of
any political party, or of commitment to any specific social doctrine.
Articles m 1982 college paper. — Following his reference to the or-
ganization in 1905 of the ISS, Mr. Earl, on pages 3 to 11 of his re-
port, proceeds to the year 1932, and discusses the articles in a small
magazine, Revolt, which appeared for two issues in September and
994 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
December 1982 and was edited and published by the intercollegiate-
council of the league, not the general society. The LID as such as-
sumed no responsibility for its editorial policy, and neither the league-
nor the intercollegiate council were responsible for the opinions con-
tained in the articles appearing in its pages. The council felt that
it was performing a useful function in providing a free forum for
the expression of opinion of college students and others on the im-
portant social problems of the day.
The articles were written at a time when the stated object of the-
league differed from the present object and, as has been before stated,,
in the midst of a severe economic depression. They have no relevancy
to today's educational activities of the league. Nor has the program
of action mentioned by Mr. Earl, formulated by a number of studentss
at two informal student conferences of the general society, any
relevancy.
League organization and other educational activities. — Pages 11-13 x -
of Mr. Earl's report deals with the 1950 conference of the league ork
Freedom and the Welfare State.
Mr. Earl quotes here a statement by the executive director of th&
league, and comments on that portion of the report that states that the
league is organizing branches, conducting conferences, and scheduling-
lectures in the colleges, activities which the United States Court of
Appeals in the Weyl v. Commission of Internal Revenue decision
regarded as legitimate functions of an educational tax-exempt society.
Mr. Earl, however, seems to look upon these activities as outside the
scope of those of tax-exempt associations. We join with the United
States Circuit Court of Appeals and of educators generally in dis-
agreeing with Mr. Earl.
How else, it might be asked, in response to Mr. Earl's position, can
an educational society carry its information and ideas to the public-
than through the written and spoken word? And what is there non-
educational in the formation of study groups and the enlargement
of its individual membership through which such information and
ideas may be given circulation? Colleges do not cease to be educa-
tional because they organize classes and student clubs. The very proc-
ess of forming and running a democratic organization on or off the-
campus for the discussion of important public issues is, moreover, an.
educational process and the league has helped through its college and
city chapters to educate large numbers of young men and women in.
active, constructive, democratic citizenship and leadership.
If all nonprofit organizations were to be denied tax-exemption for-
organizing branches, publishing literature and arranging lecture-
trips, few tax-exempt organizations would continue in existence.
The 1950 Conference on Freedom and Welfare State thoroughly
educational. — Following Mr. Earl's comment on the remarks of the=
executive director at the 1950 Conference on Freedom and the Wel-
fare State Mr. Earl quotes from some of the addresses of the speakers..
In doing this, he applies a technique similar to that used in describ-
ing the 1943 Conference on the Third Freedom — Freedom from Want,
mentioned in previous pages under assumption No. IV. He mentions
but a few of the articles and addresses presented at the conferences
and selects out of their context a few paragraphs from a few addresses;
which, in his opinion, express an extreme point of view, thus tending-
1 Ibid., pp. 756 et seq.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 995
to leave in the minds of the investigating committee an unbalanced
and distorted picture of the conference.
As participants in this 1950 conference to discuss Freedom and the
Welfare State, the league presented to the luncheon and round table
audiences Senator Herbert L. Lehman, to whom an annual award was
presented ; Oscar R. Ewing, Administrator, Social Security Agency ;
<xeorge Meany, then secretary of the A. F. of L. ; Walter P. Reuther,
president, UAW-CIO ; Dr. Eveline M. Burns of the New York School
•of Social Work; Cbrley Smith, economic and social counselor, United
Kingdom delegation to the U. N. ; Margaret Herbison, Member of
Parliament and Under Secretary of State for Scotland; Charles
Abrams, housing expert; Prof. Sterling Spero, professor of public
administration of the graduate division for training in public service,
NYU; Norman Thomas, chairman, Post War World Council; John
Hoche, assistant professor of government, Haverford College; Bryn
*T. Hovde, then president of the New York School for Social Research ;
Israel Feinberg, vice president of the International Ladies' Garment
Workers, and Toni Sender, labor representative to the U. N. Economic
and Social Council.
The formal speakers and informal participants from the floor were,
for the most part, men and women who from their positions in educa-
tion, labor, government, and the professions had an intimate knowl-
edge of the issues discussed.
From the conference discussion, Mr. Earl selected a few paragraphs
•contained in the addresses of Messrs. Ewing, Reuther, Feinberg, and
Thomas, and made the comment that "Both Mr. Ewing and Mr. Reu-
ther seemed to feel that the real threat to America was from 'reaction-
aries.' " President Reuther did see as dangers to our economy "the
blind forces of reaction," and maintained that, if reaction led to a
-depression, the Cominf orm would be provided with a powerful weapon
with which to fight western democracy. The quoted paragraphs with
"which most Americans, I believe, would wholly or in large part agree,
were but a part of addresses which emphasized the positive values of
-constructive welfare legislation, and urged a program in behalf of
greater security and abundance. Mr. Ewing reaffirmed in his talk his
TDelief "with all my heart that our American system is the best that
man has so far devised." But he declared that it was not perfect and
"that it could be made better. He recalled that —
a hundred years ago those who opposed the establishment of free public schools
■called them "socialism" and many people shouted "socialism" when Congress
set up the Interstate Commerce Commission and the Federal Reserve system,
and passed the Securities Exchange Act and Social Security Act. He concluded
that we must build strongly for the future in the fields of housing, labor legisla-
tion, conservation, utilization of our great sources of energy, etc.
Why Mr. Earl should think that such remarks were out of place in a
iree educational forum given over to the discussion of an important
social problem, whether or not he agreed wholly with them, many of
us fail to see.
Mr. Earl quoted the late Vice President Feinberg as urging that con-
sumer purchase power be increased and that labor should have a
greater voice in the formulation of economic decisions. He quoted
Mr. Thomas as advocating more democracy in trade union administra-
tion, and the strengthening of civil liberties ; as blaming the setbacks
in civil liberties on "the whole Communist technique of conspiratorial
996 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
deceit," on reactionaries, and on those politicians who seek to find an
issue in a "socialism versus liberty."
Mr. Earl might not agree with these statements, but he cannot say,
merely because of his disagreement, that they have no place in an edu-
cational conference.
Program for democracy — No advocacy of specific bills, — On pages
14 and 15 of Mr. Earl's report is a summary of a "program for de-
mocracy in action in 1953" presented for the consideration of the public
by the league's executive director. The program included, among other
things, suggestions for labor unity ; the purging of corrupt elements
from business, labor, and government; a strengthened cooperative
movement, a more consistent foreign policy, and programs for con-
servation, collective bargaining, social security, housing, civil liberties,
and so forth.
It was not an official program of the board or the league's member-
ship ; was concerned with many developments which required economic
rather than political action ; urged no specific bills before Congress and
provided for no machinery for legislative action. It was similar to
those proposed by individuals in many tax-exempt educational so-
cieties in the field of conservation, cooperation, and labor relations,
and so forth, and presented a summary of issues which are discussed
daily in classes of every American university and regarded as an es-
sential part of their educational curriculum.
Conference on Needed: A moral awakening in Amsrlca; the Earl
picture an unbalanced one. — Pages 16 and 17, 1 in discussing the league's
conference in 1952 on Needed : A Moral Awakening in America, repeats
Mr. Earl's same technique of naming only a few speakers, picking a
few paragraphs out of their context, and presented a one-sided picture
of the conference discussion.
It is true, as Mr. Earl states in describing this conference, that both
Walter P. Reuther and James B. Carey, in discussing the activities
of Philip Murray — receiver of a leagu award — vigorously criticized
at this conference certain practices in the steel industry, where a strike
was then being waged; that Dr. Abraham Lefkowitz, an educator,
urged that students be inspired with the ideal of cooperation and
social service — points of view which are legitimate in any educational
program. It is also true that at the conference — a thing which Mr.
Earl failed to mention — Wesley F. Rennie, executive director of the
Committee for Economic Development, supported the thesis that
American industrial and business leaders had become increasingly
aware since the thirties of their social responsibility; that Charles
Zimmerman, vice president of the ILGWU, urged labor to get rid of
corruption within the house of labor, while Louis E. Yavner, com-
missioner of investigations in New York City under the LaGuardia
administration ; Rev. John Haynes Holmes of the Community Church,
New York ; Sidney Hook, professor of philosophy, NYU ; Dr. George
S. Counts, professor of education, Teachers College; Congressman
Jacob K. Javits; former Congresswoman Helen Gahagan Douglas;
public utility expert Lei and Olds ; James Rorty, author of Tomorrow's
Food; Mark Starr, labor educator, spoke in behalf of higher ethical-
standards in our political, educational, and international institutions.
No one, we believe, could attend the various sessions of the conference
without realizing its unique educational values and the wide range of
opinions expressed therein. And no one could read Mr. Earl's ref-
1 Ibid., pp. 766, 767.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 997
erences to the conference without realizing how inadequate a concept
any reader of these references would obtain of the league's 1952
gathering.
LID pamphlet on public ownership— An educational treatise.— -In
previous pages we have dealt with Mr. Earl's presentation (on pp. 16
to 20) x of the executive director's pamphlet on Toward Nationalization
of Industry, a pamphlet originally written in response to a request
from high school debating coaches who had scheduled a discussion of
public versus private ownership of basic industries among high schools
throughout the country. Surely, if it is educational for the Founda-
tion for Economic Education, a tax-exempt organization, to set forth
the arguments for private enterprise in forest and public utilities,
et cetera, it is educational for the league to set forth the facts which
may support control by the community of specific enterprises. The
Eresentation of the contents of this pamphlet, as I have before stated,
y Mr. Earl, gives to the committee no conception of the factual
nature of its contents ; its careful references to over 40 authoritative
sources, its selective bibliography, et cetera. Its educational char-
acter has time and time again been attested by professors of economics
who have used it for collateral reading in their economics classes.
Mr. Lewis' pamphlet on Liberalism and Sovietism 2 — Not a league
pamphlet. — In previous pages of this statement, we have dealt with
Mr. Earl's characterization of Mr. Lewis' Liberalism and Sovietism,
not a league pamphlet. Of the purpose of this pamphlet, Mr. Lewis
recently (July 6, 1954) declared :
This pamphlet was written some time ago, while the Progressive Party was
shaping up. The pamphlet's main idea was to prevent liberals from going into
the various Communist infiltrated organizations, whose stated purpose was
liberal.
Since this period preceded the conviction of Alger Hiss, and the revelations
concerning the Rosenbergs, a good many liberal-minded persons tended to fall
for the Communist line that it was all right to cooperate with organizations
with a sound stated purpose, even if such organizations had Communists in im-
portant places in them.
It was this feeling among too many liberals that I wanted to combat, and on
the whole I think I have done so fairly well, if the pamphlet is read in
its entirety.
Other league pamphlets — elsewhere discussed. — I have also dealt
with Mr. Earl's discussion on pages 23-27 3 on Democracy vs. Dictator-
ship, The New Freedom : Freedom from Want, Toward a Farmer-
Labor Party, Forward March of American Labor, and World Coop-
eration and Social Progress.
After commenting on the league's activities of former years, some
as far back as the early thirties, it is regrettable that Mr. Earl did not
give a fair-minded description of the educational activities of the last
year or so, activities far more relevant to the problem which he poses
than are those of past years. To these activities, Mr. Earl has seen
fit to devote but 10 lines.
The summary of the league's 1953-54 activities is, therefore
enclosed.
Gaps in report. — Finally, Mr. Earl's report is as conspicuous for
what it leaves out as for what it includes.
The Washington State attorney, for instance, has nothing to say
concerning the research activities of the league during the years,
which have been the basis for much of its book and pamphlet, its lec-
tures, and other educational activities.
'Ibid., pp. 767, 768. 3 Ibid., p. 771. 3 Ibid., p. 773.
998 TAX-EXEMPT 10XJNDATI0NS
One of the volumes made possible through the efforts of the league
■was Social Economic Movements, a college textbook on comparative
economic systems, which was used in past years as a text in some 40
institutions, which was republished in Great Britain, and which was
regarded by Wesley C. Mitchell, late president of the American Eco-
nomics Association and director of research of the National Bureau
of Economic Research, as —
the most comprehensive survey of plans for bettering social organization that I
have ever seen. The book is one that the world much needs and I hope many
people will read.
The book, writes Prof. Louis M. Hacker, dean of the School for Gen-
eral Studies — ■
Is amazingly complete ; both trustworthy and a very useful handbook.
Similarly the books made possible by the league on Power Control,
A Program for Modern America, Concentration of Control in Ameri-
can Industry, and its many symposia, have received high praise for
their scholarship and accuracy.
A careful analysis of the league's conferences, its popular and scien-
tific pamphlets, and so forth, instead of the hop, skip, and jump
method or research observed in Mr. Earl's report would give a more
accurate idea of the league's educational accomplishments.
I, Harry W. Laidler, being first duly sworn, on oath declare that I
have prepared the foregoing statement ; that it is true and correct with
respect to those matters stated upon personal knowledge and with
respect to those matters not stated upon personal knowledge, it is true
to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Harry W. Laidler, Executive Director.
Sworn to before me this 14th day of July 1954.
Muriel J. Comberbatch,
Notary Public State of New York,
Term expires March 30, 1954.
STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY THE AMERICAN COUNCIL OF
LEARNED SOCIETIES
This statement is submitted by the American Council of Learned
Societies in accordance with the procedure established by the com-
mittee and communicated to the council by telephone to its counsel on
July 8, 1954.
In the preliminary reports prepared by the staff of the committee
and in the testimony taken in open hearing by the committee, interest
and concern were expressed in the activities of the council. Without
directly and specifically charging any improper activity, the reports
and testimony strongly implied that this organization, together with
others, has engaged in some kind of conspiracy with the foundations,
and that it has acted as a "clearinghouse" for the development and
propagation of ideas that are in some indefinite way not consistent,
with our form of government.
The fantasy of these suggestions has been fully demonstrated in the
testimony given on behalf of the Social Science Research Council and
the American Council on Education. Presumably, the decision to
dispense with further open hearings records the committee's judgment
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 999
that the charges and innuendoes contained in the staff reports and in
the early testimony were so completely without foundation as not to
warrant serious consideration. The American Council of Learned
Societies agrees with this conclusion. Nevertheless, serious charges
have been made and publicized. In order to keep the record straight,
the council believes it desirable to avail itself of the committee's offer
to present a factual picture of the council's organization and activities.
At the very outset it should be stated that to the knowledge of the
council no individual member of the council, its board of directors, or
staff is now or ever has been a Communist. No society constituent of
the council is or has been listed by the Attorney General or in any
other way designated as a subversive organization.
On the contrary, it is our belief that one of the most effective ways
to combat subversive ideas and activities is by the spread and promo-
tion of the humanistic studies with which the council is concerned.
ORIGIN AND ORGANIZATION OF THE AMERICAN COUNCIL OF
LEARNED SOCIETIES
The American Council of Learned Societies was founded shortly
after World War I to represent academic societies concerned in the
fields of humanities in joint dealings with comparable groups in other
countries. The council remains today a federative body of humanistic
learned societies, for the purpose of dealing with the interests of those
organizations which extend beyond the scope of any of the particular
constituent societies.
To explain more precisely the council's area of concern, it is de-
sirable to attempt a definition of "the humanities" as a field of study.
Many such efforts have been made, without any wholly satisfactory
result. It is possible to get some view of what is meant by listing the
constituent societies of the council :
American Philosophical Society
American Academy of Arts and Sciences
American Antiquarian Society
American Oriental Society
American Numismatic Society
American Philological Association
Archaeological Institute of America
Society of Biblical Literature and Exegesis
Modern Language Association of America
American Historical Association
American Economic Association
American Folklore Society
American Philosophical Association
American Anthropological Association
American Political Science Association
Bibliographical Society of America
Association of American Geographers
American Sociological Society
College Art Association of America
History of Science Society
Linguistic Society of America
Mediaeval Academy of America
Far Eastern Association
American Society for Aesthetics
American Musicological Society
The humanities are concerned, then, with the things that, are speci-
fically human about man—his language, his history, his attempts to
reach beyond knowledge of his tangible world through philosophy
1000 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
and religion, and his realization of beauty through literature, music,
and the arts.
The council maintains an office at 1219 16th Street NW., Washing-
ton D. C, with a full-time staff of about a dozen people. The names
and addresses of the staff as well as of the present officers and directors
-of the council are attached. In the past, administrative expenses,
including office rent and staff salaries, have run to about $100,000
annually.
ACTIVITIES OF THE COUNCIL
Within the humanistic field, the council's activities are directed
broadly at the training and development of American scholars, the
provision of new implements of study and research in these disciplines,
and the addition to our humanistic knowledge. Any selection of the
activities of the council for description here can only be illustrative
of the range of its concern.
One further introductory remark is appropriate. In general, the
■council's activities touch directly only a relatively small group of
scholars in institutions of higher learning, libraries, museums, and
the like throughout the country. But, although these programs do
not achieve great public notice, the council has always worked com-
pletely in the open, and has been subject to the fullest scrutiny by
anyone interested. Its activities are reported in Bulletins recording
its annual meetings and the work of the year there discussed. In recent
years it has published a quarterly Newsletter, and of course, much of
the research which the council fosters eventually finds its way into
print.
So far as known to the council, none of these activities — all of them
widely publicized — has ever called forth any question or complaint
as to the propriety or integrity of the council's operations.
Wartime language program. — Before turning to the council's pres-
ent-day activities, it may be instructive to review the one program in
its history which had a direct impact on large numbers of American
men and women. That was the council's work in the development of
language training during World War II. It is very proud of its
achievement in preparing the common defense, and this effort also
illustrates the unexpected values which are sometimes derived from
«areful research in remote and what some may consider "impractical"
fields of study.
Languages and linguistics, of course,, are the basis of all the work
in the humanistic disciplines. They have been of concern to the coun-
cil from its beginning. In 1927, accordingly, the council began the
collection and study of the American Indian languages, then rapidly
disappearing, as an undertaking in the interest of pure linguistic
science. The funds were supplied by the Carnegie Corporation.
It soon turned out that these languages could not be fitted satisfac-
torily into the descriptive patterns derived from Greek and Latin
which had been worked out for the study of European languages. The
small group of American linguists engaged in this study began to
develop a completely new and American approach to the study and
description of linguistic phenomena, which, a decade later, became
the new science of American descriptive and structural linguistics.
So rapid were the strides in this field, and so fruitful the develop-
ment, that it can only be compared to the process that took place in
the same period in the much more publicized field of nuclear physics.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1001
A year or more before the American entry into World War II
members of the council and its staff began to realize that, in the event
of war, there would be an urgent national need for training in Asiatic
languages. Yet teachers, textbooks, dictionaries, teaching materials
to fall that need were not available. The council began to examine
the possibility of applying the new techniques developed in the study
of American Indian languages to the study and teaching of other
languages not in the European tradition, and specifically the lan-
guages of Asia which were destined to become crucially important.
._ With funds from the Rockefeller Founation, the council started its
intensive language program. Before Pearl Harbor, this program had
•developed a general approach to the problem of teaching Americans
to speak these exotic languages, and had made substantial progress
in the preparation of teaching aids and tools in specific languages such
as Chinese, Japanese, Persian, Siamese, Malay, and Turkish. The
work had progressed to the point that, at the outbreak of the war, the
council was prepared to move into a full-scale teaching operation.
This was done rapidly, beginning with Siamese at the University of
Michigan, and by the summer of 1942, 56 courses were being taught
in 26 institutions, in 22 languages, most of which had never before
been formally taught in the United States.
When, early in 1942, the Armed Forces turned their attention to the
language training problem, the pioneering developmental work done
under the auspices of the council was ready to hand. A fruitful col-
laboration was established, with council staff members advising and
consulting with the various branches of the Armed Forces which
needed people with special language proficiencies. The council staff
was expanded ; in the work of preparing dictionaries, texts, and teach-
ing manuals in a multitude of languages there were at times as many
as 100 people on its payroll. The money was supplied by the Armed
Forces.
The council participated with the Army in the Army Specialized
Training Program (ASTP) language and area courses; with the Civil
Affairs Training Schools (CATS) of the Adjutant General's Office;
and with the Language Branch of G-2 in organizing the operation of
classroom instruction and the production of teaching tools.
At the end of the war, the whole enterprise was dropped by the
Army as a part of our sudden demobilization. The council continued
to publish textbooks and dictionaries through Henry Holt & Co., and
to produce new ones slowly as the funds could be found. Among the
casualties of this sudden termination was an almost completed Korean-
English dictionary, which would have been immensely useful a few
years later, but which, at the time, was still reposing on file cards,
unpublished.
American studies. — Most of the council's current activities are not
so spectacular as the wartime language program just discussed. But
this does not measure their usefulness.
The improvement of college and university study of the American
tradition and experience has always bulked large in council concerns.
A fair share of our effort and of the funds which we have had avail-
able to aid research and publication have been directed in this field.
Perhaps the largest undertaking in this area is the Dictionary of
American Biography, of which the first 20 volumes appeared from
1928 to 1936 and the first suplementary volume in 1944. Funds for
1002 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
this enterprise came from the New York Times, assisted by the large
foundations.
The project envisages a single ready reference for the facts about the
lives of distinguished Americans. Unfortunately, the dislocations of
the war threw the work somewhat off schedule. We have just suc-
ceeded in raising funds for the compilation of the second supplemen-
tary volume, and are now entering upon its production. We hope to
have the whole operation back on schedule before long.
Of equal scientific importance, but without such wide appeal, is the
Linguistic Atlas of the United States and Canada. Here the attempt
is? to analyze and record the variations and nuances in spoken English
from section to section of the continent. The first six immense volumes,
covering New England, appeared between 1939 and 1944. Continua-
tion of this work proceeds very slowly as the funds for it can be se-
cured. Unfortunately, this may be too slowly, since regional varia-
tions in American speech are beginning to become obscured or to die
Gut.
Extending 'humanistic scholarship beyond the West European tra-
dition. — The modern study of humanities began with the Renaissance
and its liberating rediscovery of the great civilizations of classical
antiquity. It was for the study of these classical civilizations of
Greece and Rome that the early humanistic tools and training were
designed. The results of this orientation for the subsequent develop-
ment of the West are so great as to defy description. Nevertheless
it had an unfortunate effect, from the point of view of the study of
humanities, in that traditionally these studies have concentrated on
the classical and Mediterranean civilizations, and the West European
and American traditions derivative from them, to the almost complete
neglect of the rest of human experience.
Starting from a conference held on December 1, 1928, to discuss
means for the development of Chinese studies in the United States*
the council has taken leadership in correcting this deficiency by cre-
ating in American universities and colleges a better basis for studying
the civilizations of Asia, Latin America, and Eastern Europe, particu-
larly Russia. It has used every means available to it, including the
provision of fellowships and study aids, to develop Americans trained
in these fields, and to produce the implements — guides, translations,,
textbooks, bibliographies, catalogs — without which this kind of study
cannot be carried on. It is not too much to say that there has been no
significant improvement in the study of these areas in any American
university or college, so far as the humanistic fields are concerned, in
which the council has not been in some way involved.
In this broad field of endeavor, a number of lines of activity emerge
clearly. One of the most important of these is the program of trans-
lating significant works of humanistic study from their original lan-
guages into English. In the past, these translation programs have
included works in Chinese, Japanese, Russian, Arabic, Turkish, Per-
sian, and Hebrew languages.
The council's most recent effort in this field is a near eastern trans-
lation program. The five modern Arabic works which have so far
been published under this program include analyses of the great con-
troversies that pervade contemporary Muslim religion. Five more-
volumes are just going to press and about twenty others are in various;
stages of editorial progress.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1003
Currently also it is bringing to a close a Russian translation series,
which has concentrated on contemporary works. Among the 30 to 40
published volumes of this series are Vishinsky's Law of the Soviet
State, Berg's Economic Geography of the U. S. S. R., Glebov's History
of Russian Music, and others. It has also reprinted about 30 books
in the original Russian, which were otherwise unavailable in this
country. Among these was the 1941 5-year plan, of which only
one copy had previously existed in the United States. These works
have been invaluable, not only to American scholars, but to our foreign
policy officials and intelligence agencies such as the CIA, and they are,
often, the only authentic source materials that are available to scholars
and others interested in these fields.
Another comparable translating venture is the Current Digest of
the Soviet Press. This is a weekly publication containing sixty to
seventy thousand words of translation of current Russian press and
periodical literature. It was begun by the council, and is now car-
ried on by it jointly with the Social Science Research Council from
headquarters in New York. It has been justly called the biggest hole
there is in the Iron Curtain.
Language and linguistics — In recent years a grant of funds from
the Ford Foundation has made it possible to take up again some of
the work in language teaching materials and methods which was left
unfinished at the end of the war. The council now has work going
in about 20 languages, including the revised Korean- English diction-
ary. Its ambition is to have a good American textbook on modern
linguistic principles, a satisfactory students' dictionary, some graded
readings, and a set of phonograph records to be used in teaching for
every significant Asian language, that is, every language spoken by
more than 10 million people.
Meanwhile, the work has been expanded to include the problem in
reverse: i. e., methods of teaching English to speakers of other lan-
guages. This too has required the creation of new techniques and
new materials, the most important of which is a series of textbooks
for teaching English to Koreans, Indonesians, Turks, Persians, Thais,
Serbo-Croatians, Burmese, Vietnamese, Greeks, Chinese, and to speak-
ers of Spanish.
The problem of highly trained and specialized personnel. — In the
future, no less than in the past, the people of the United States will
not be able to depend upon numbers to maintain its leadership and
security. We are a small numerical minority of the world's popula-
tion. Our continued progress, our security, even our survival will
depend, as it has in the past, on our ability to utilize our resources of
trained intelligence. An increasing recognition has been given to this
problem in the laboratory and engineering sciences. But the need
is no less pressing in the fields of humanistic study. The council has
directed, and intends in the future to direct its attention to this weak
spot in the Nation's armor.
Naturally, officers and staff members of the council have a very
wide acquaintance among scholars and teachers professionally con-
cerned with the humanities. Concerning some of the people the
council has detailed information derived from its special activities.
For instance, its work in the development of Asian and Russian studies
has given it, for many years, comprehensive knowledge of the aca-
demic personnel working in those fields. And the many applications
1004 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
for its various fellowships, study-aids, and grants-in-aid of research,
comprise a file of the academic and professional careers of many
scholars in all humanistic fields.
Up to 1949 the collection and dissemination of this information was
haphazard and incidental. In that year, however, money was secured
from the Rockefeller Foundation to make more formal investigations,
into the supply, potential, and distribution of trained personnel in the
humanities. Hardly had these studies started when the Office of Naval
Research and the Department of Defense became interested in the-
same problems, and asked the council to make a more elaborate investi-
gation of them. With the cooperation of as many of the constituent
societies as possible, the council gathered detailed professional infor-
mation from some 27,000 scholars and students in the humanities and.
social sciences, probably about half of those professionally engaged in
these fields. From these materials, when they had been coded and in-
dexed, the Bureau of Labor Statistics abstracted the statistical infor-
mation required by the Office of Naval Research. The Office was
supplied with a microfilm of the schedules for its records, and the-,
schedules themselves became what is now called the National Regis-
tration in the Humanities and Social Sciences, an imperfect instru-
ment, but still the best accumulation of such personnel information
available.
This kind of personnel work is done in close cooperation with thfr
National Science Foundation, which maintains a similar register in
the natural and physical sciences. In conjunction with the foundation,
the council compiled and published a book, Classifications for Surveys-
of Highly Trained Personnel, which is now the standard guide on the:
subject.
It is hoped that work in this field can be improved to the point whem
the registration can be a source not only of information about the pro-
fessional competences of individuals, but a basis for analysis of Ameri-
can potential in trained specialists in the humanistic fields, so that-
'gaps in our specialized armament can be discovered and filled and we-
can be prepared for any emergency which the future might bring.
Anyone who participated in the frenzied search for specially trained,
personnel in the early days of World War II realizes the magnitude 01"
this task. We should never have to face its like again.
THE CHARGES MADE BEFORE THE COMMITTEE
Against the background of the factual description of the council and
its activities presented above, it is useful to examine more directly some
of the charges made against the council before this committee, either
in staff reports or in testimony. Other witnesses have sufficiently indi-
cated the difficulty of trying to pinpoint the charges and identify them
with any precision. Nevertheless, it is easy to see what the grava.
men is.
It is suggested that the council, together with other research
councils, has dominated American scholarship. It is implied that this
power has been exercised to foist upon America policies and ideas-
alien to its heritage, and indeed subversive of its institutions. The
mechanisms by which this end was achieved are said to be that the
council has acted as a clearinghouse for channeling moneys from the
foundations to students and causes congenial to these subversive ends,.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1005
and as a recruiting agency to place similarly oriented individuals in
positions of importance in government.
As for the allegation of dominance there must be more than a little-
irony in it for anyone who has visited the offices of the council or read
its financial reports and the reports of its annual proceedings. To
make such a charge demonstrates an almost unbelievable ignorance of
the mode of organization of American scholarship.
The American tradition, as has been pointed out in other statements,
to the committee, places the responsibility for scholarship, science, and
higher learning in private, not governmental, hands. The result has-
been a national structure for the cultivation of this field of human ac-
tivity of which Americans have every right to be proud, and which
attests the fundamental soundness of that tradition.
It is a truism that Americans are the world's greatest joiners. Be-
hind this truism, however, is the fact that our fantastic genius for spon-
taneous self-organization is one of the elements that has made this;
country what it is, and in particular has preserved vast areas of ac-
tivity from governmental control.
This free-enterprise, self -organizing capacity is found in Americans
business, philanthropy, politics, and social activity. It is found also-
in the fields of science, scholarship, and higher learning. We have-
almost 2,000 separate institutions of higher learning, each going its
own way, without centralized planning or control. In many countries,
abroad, they would be marching in step under the direction of a gov-
ernmental ministry of education.
Much the same is true of the organization of science, scholarship,,
and higher learning outside the universities. Abroad this is usually-
taken care of by a national academy of arts and sciences, such as was.
founded in France by Louis XIV and in Russia by Peter the Great
and the Empress Catherine. Such academies are governmentally con-
trolled and supported. Their members are selected, of course, for
scholarly and scientific eminence, but too frequently with at least one
eye on their conformity with the government.
In the United States we do it differently. Our instinct for private-
organization has led to the formation of private associations — profes-
sional, scientific, or learned societies — to pursue a shared interest in
some scientific or scholarly activity. There are literally thousands of
these scieties, of all sizes, interests, and degrees of formality. Most of
them have only local importance. Perhaps a couple of hundred have-
national membership and significance. Practically all of them are
freely open to any person who shares their respective interests and is;
able to pay the usually modest dues.
In general, each of these private scientific or learned societies de-
votes itself to a specific branch of study : History, chemistry, archae-
ology, geology, etc. But sometimes, interests call for activity across;
these artificial lines which separate the branches of learning. Among-
the most important of these is the promotion of research and scholar-
ship in the whole field of which the particular branch is a part. For
these limited purposes, the most important of these scientific and
learned societies have joined together in four national groups called
councils : The National Research Council, based on constituent societies:
in the natural, mathematical, and biological sciences; the Social
Science Research Council, based on societies concerned with economics,,
political science, sociology and the like; the American Council on.
1006 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Education, based on societies as well as institutions of higher learning
concerned with the techniques of college education; and the American
Council of Learned Societies, based, as has been shown, on societies
concerned with the humanistic studies.
These councils differ somewhat in size, structure, wealth, and
methods of opration, but they are all distinctly private organizations,
based on private associations and dependent upon private sources of
funds for their support.
While the four councils are quite separate in every respect, they did,
in 1944, create a mechanism for functioning together whenever that
seems desirable. Two delegates from each of the councils meet ap-
proximately once a year in an informal group (it does not even have
its own stationery, much less a staff) known as the Conference Board
of Associated Research Councils. This board is quite without power
and is simply a consultative body, which on rare occasions is used to
carry forward enterprises in which all the councils have an interest.
For about a generation these organizations have devoted themselves
to the creation of an American scholarship worthy of the richest and
most powerful nation in history ; and not without success. Nothing
like this simple, democratic structure of scholarship and higher educa-
tion exists in any other country. The caricature of it presented in the
preliminary staff studies of this committee is so greatly at variance
with the fact that they might have been written by some ill-informed
foreigner.
So much for the charge of dominance. There remains the charge
that the council acted as a clearinghouse for channeling foundation
funds in the subversive directions identified by the committee staff.
This requires a few words about the finances of the council and its
relation to the foundations.
For a few years in the early thirties the Rockefeller Foundation did
make available modest free funds which the council could spend for
research in any way it chose. That practice was preceded and has been
supplanted by a system in which the foundation money coming to the
council is specifically earmarked for projects presented to and passed
on in advance by the particular foundation making the grant.
In the 35 years of its existence, the American Council of Learned
Societies has received and expended about $9 million. A little more
than half of this has come from the great foundations. A detailed
analysis of the source of all its financial support since 1937 was pre-
sented in response to the questionnaire distributed by the Cox com-
mittee and is available to this committee.
The money coming from the foundations falls generally into two
categories. The first covers general administrative expenses and has
run, as indicated above, to about $100,000 annually in recent years.
Both the Carnegie Corporation and the Rockefeller Foundation have
made substantial contributions for these purposes. More and more in
recent years, however, the tendency has been to try to meet these costs
from administrative charges against funds for specific projects. At
the present time the council is receiving no contribution for central
administration from either of these foundations, except as a percentage
charge against funds for specific programs.
The second category of contributions from the foundations com-
prises grants for the support of specific projects for which the council
is responsible. Such projects originate with the council staff, com-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1007
mittees, or members. They must, of course be approved by the board
of directors. Thence they are submitted to the foundations for sup-
port. Usually, if the program receives such support, it is adminis-
tered by a special committee appointed by the board of directors for
the purpose.
Such projects or programs may be works of research conducted by
the council itself, such as the Dictionary of American Biography. In
that case, the special committee picks the editor, who in turn selects
the contributors, and the work proceeds under the supervision of the
editor and the committee.
In other cases, the project may be a special fellowship or study aid
program. The council has no such funds at present. In the past, it
has conducted some 25 separately organized and financed programs of
aid to individuals for study, research, or publication in the humani-
ties. From 1926 to 1954 it has made slightly more than 2,000 awards
to about the same number of people. The stipends have ranged be-
tween $100 and $6,000 and have averaged about $1,000. Such fellow-
ship and study-aid programs are short-term operations, extending not
more than 3 years. They are likewise administered by specially ap-
pointed committees who review the scholarly and technical qualifica-
tions of the applicants and make the awards. The names of all in-
dividuals who have received such awards and the subject-matter of
the research are regularly published, were presented to the Cox com-
mittee, and are available to this committee.
All of the council's projects, of whatever nature, are presented to
the foundations on their merits and in competition with projects spon-
sored by colleges and universities, other research institutions, indi-
viduals, and even its own constituent societies. Not only are the funds
received from the foundations extremely limited both in amount and
in the freedom with which they may be disposed of, but the council
as a matter of policy does not interpose itself between any foundation
and any other agency or individual in search of funds. Foundation
policies and decisions in such matters are made by the foundations
themselves.
Finally, there is the question of recruiting Government personnel.
As has been indicated above, the council's contacts with scholars in
the humanistic fields and its more recent work on the national regis-
tration in the humanities and social sciences have made it a valuable
source of information about the professional and technical compe-
tence of individuals in those fields of endeavor. Institutions and
.•agencies in need of such specialized personnel sometimes request in-
formation of this character from the council, and within the limits
imposed by available staff time, the council responds. Such requests
are infrequent, and come predominantly from universities and colleges,
.museums, libraries, and the like, and only very occasionally from the
Government. Since the registration has been in usable shape, that
is roughly the last year and a quarter, the council has responded to
,-about 15 such requests, only one of which came from a Government
^agency.
The information supplied in response to such requests is in no sense
■a recommendation. To the best of the council's knowledge, it is not
treated as such by the requesting agency or institution. Indeed, where
the reference is to the registration, as it has invariably been since that
49720— 54— jrt. 2 5
1008 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
has been completed, the only information given is that supplied by the
individual himself.
The council has assumed that it is not in the American tradition,
in a register designed for employment purposes, to inquire about the
individual's race, religion, or politics. Any information it might have
on these points might be accidental or untrustworthy. It goes with-
out saying, moreover, that the council has no facilities for investigation
and clearance of individuals on security matters. It is not a proper
body for such work in any case. Where requests for information come
from a Government agency, therefore, the council takes no respon-
sibility for such questions and properly assumes that any individual
who is hired will have to meet the applicable security standards im-
posed by the Government.
CONCLUSION
The body of this statement has been directed, as was no more than
proper, to the assumptions and presuppositions which were implicit
in the reports of the committee staff and some of the friendly testi-
mony which the committee heard. But the council cannot let this
opportunity pass without saying vigorously and directly that it does
not share a number of those assumptions and preconceptions.
It believes that, far from being committed to any particular body
of doctrine, America is a land of boundless experiment, of constant
and relentless search for better ways of doing things, for richer
experience, to make human life fuller and more attractive. Nothing
could be less American than an assumption that Americans had
reached the ultimate boundary of thought— political, economic, social,
or cultural as well as physical — in 1903 or 1953, or are destined to
reach it in 2003.
A corollary of this interpretation of our tradition is the belief in
the maintenance of a completely free market in ideas, no matter how
unpalatable they may be to our preconceived notions. The moment
we have to protect any mature American from any idea whatsoever,
that moment we must stop boasting about American democracy.
The American Council of Learned Societies is concerned with
thought, with ideas, with mankind's concept of itself and its place in
nature. It believes that the best interests of America require uncom-
promising exploration of any thinking that mankind has ever done
or is doing. There is no subversion comparable with an interference
in the traffic in ideas.
Ideas are explosive materials. They must not be handled carelessly
nor ignorantly. All the activities of the American Council of Learned
Societies have been directed at creating and fostering in America the
mechanisms through which ideas can be handled understandingly and
without fear.
To this end it has done whatever it could to develop Americans
trained to participate fully in the pursuit and communication of all
humanistic knowledge and to provide the tools of study, teaching,
and research with which such trained Americans have to work.
The council is proud of its record in these activities. It holds, more-
over, that in the harsh decades ahead, many of our most pressing
problems will lie in the very fields of the humanities with which the
council is concerned. In its opinion no work is more important to
the future security and welfare of the Nation.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1009
verification'
State of Massachusetts,
Cov/nty of Essex, ss :
I, Mortimer Graves, swear and affirm that I am executive director of
the American Council of Learned Societies ; that I have read and am
familiar with the contents of the foregoing statement; and that to
the best of my knowledge and belief every statement of fact con-
tained therein is true.
Mortimer Graves,
Executive Director, American Coim,cil of Learned Societies^
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 19th day of July 1954.
My commission expires November 30, 1956.
[seal] Kathleen T. Flynn,
Notary Public.
Annex to Statement Submitted by the American Council of Leaened
Societies of the Select Committee of the House of Representatives To
Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations
administration
Officers
C. W. de Kiewiet, University of Rochester, chairman.
Theodore C. Blegen, University of Minnesota, vice chairman.
William R. Parker, New York University, secretary.
Sidney Painter, Johns Hopkins University, treasurer.
Board of directors
Walter R. Agard, University of Wisconsin.
Curt F. Buhler, Pierpont Morgan Library.
Irwin Edman, Columbia University.
Rensselaer Lee, Columbia University.
Roger P. MeCutcheon, Tulane University.
Henri Peyre, Yale University.
Robert Redfleld, University of Chicago.
B, J. Whiting, Harvard University.
STAFF OF THE EXECUTIVE OFFICES, WASHINGTON, D. 0.
Mortimer Graves, executive director. Shirley D. Hudson, public affairs officer.
D. H. Daugherty, assistant to the di- Alice M. Harger, bursar,
rector. Catherine E. Berry.
J. F. Wellemeyer, adviser on personnel Elizabeth H. Cizek.
studies. M. Frances Cochran.
William A. Parker, secretary for fel- Hilda H. Melby.
lowships. Anna Stern,
STATEMENT OF ARTHUR S. ADAMS, PRESIDENT, AMERICAN
COUNCIL ON EDUCATION
I am Arthur S. Adams, president of the American Council on Edu-
cation. My request to appear before you was made by the authority
and direction of the executive committee of the council, and I shall
present a statement which that committee has unanimously approved.
We are deeply concerned that the special committee may obtain a true
picture of the role that philanthropic foundations have played in
connection with education. We believe deeply and firmly in the
importance of education to American principles and institutions.
There often comes to my mind the historical fact that when the settlers
of our country first came to its shores, they addressed themselves to
1010 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
building a school building almost before they had provided shelter
for themselves. The whole story of American greatness, to my mind,
has been written in terms of educational opportunity.
Especially in times such as these, there is need for a clear and accu-
rate public understanding of what our schools and colleges are trying
to do. I believe that this committee has the opportunity to perform
a great service by assisting the people to gain such a picture. Hence,
although it was the understanding of many of us that the central focus
of the investigation was to be the activities of foundations, it is grati-
fying that the focus has been broadened to include not only the rela-
tionships of foundations to education but also the relationships of
education to the public welfare. This affords a magnificent oppor-
tunity for the committee to present a clear-eyed judicial appraisal
of the importance of education to our society.
Now, let me comment briefly on some of the reasons why philan-
thropic foundations have flourished and multiplied in American
society as nowhere else in the world. It is not because we have a
monopoly of wealth ; great f ortunesjiave been amassed in other coun-
tries. I suggest it is because a climate has been established here, an
atmosphere of freedom which encourages private initiative not merely
for selfish purposes but for the public welfare. Both Federal and
State Governments, from the beginning of our history, have main-
tained the position that it is in the public interest for individuals and
groups of individuals to contribute voluntarily to worthy causes.
Advocates of centralized national planning and action have always
contended that many of these causes could be served more efficiently
by Government. In criticism of private initiative, they have pointed
out that at times it has resulted in duplication of effort, lack of co-
ordination, sometimes even naive support of dubious causes. One can
accept these criticisms in large part and still assert with deep convic-
tion that despite failures and mistakes, private funds, dispensed by
independent agencies, have by and large made an impressive and
creditable record. Both the mistakes and the achievements are symbols
of free enterprise as we in America know it.
Now suppose that the climate in America should change, and it
should become established policy that Government should regulate the
purposes of private foundations, their methods of operation, and the
appointment of their trustees and other personnel. What incentive
would remain for anyone to give to them ? It would be much easier
simply to let the Government collect the money in taxes and take the
total responsibility for the public welfare.
I take it that none of us desire such developments. I urge this com-
mittee to protect the climate of freedom in which we now live. True
freedom means the right to make mistakes as well as to achieve suc-
cesses. Federal control of foundations operating within the broad
limits of public welfare would not last long. Foundations would
simply disappear. Free enterprise of any sort vanishes under Govern-
ment dictation.
Against this background, let us consider briefly the frame of refer-
ence supplied to this committee by its director of research to assist it
in the current investigation. I would respectfully suggest that the
committee scrutinize the document with great care before determining
what guiding principles should be adopted. Several of the basic as
sumptions are open to serious question. I am confident that the com-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1011
mittee desires to approach the study without prejudice in the interest
of truth. The search for truth will obviously be severely hampered if
the committee at the very beginning accepts a series of dubious con-
cepts as the basis for its study.
I suggest, for example, that the committee give special consideration
to the application of the term "un-American." The report of the
research director asserts that a political change so drastic as to con-
stitute a "revolution" took place in this country between 1933 and
1936, "without violence and with the full consent of the overwhelming
majority of the electorate." He might have added that it was ap-
proved by the Congress as sound public policy and by the Supreme
Court as constitutional. Later in the report there seems to be a definite
implication that some, at least, of the changes made at that time were
un-American.
It is a strange doctrine indeed that the overwhelming majority of
the American people, acting through their own political and social
agencies, can adopt un-American policies. Certainly the American
people can make mistakes; they can also rectify mistakes. One may
consider the 18th amendment to have been right or wrong, and its
repeal to be either right or wrong; but surely both the adoption and
the repeal of prohibition were American actions. To take any other
position is to assume that the power resides somewhere, in some group,
to pass judgment on the decisions of the American people made in
accordance with the Constitution, and to declare some of these decisions
un-American. I am confident that this committee desires neither to
arrogate that power to itself nor to confer it upon its research staff.
This matter is closely related to the definition of "the public in-
terest." The research director has recommended that this phrase bo
defined in terms of "the principles and form of the Federal Govern-
ment, as expressed in our Constitution and in our other basic founding
documents." What this passage seems to imply, in context, is that a
foundation or other agency operates in the public interest only when
it promotes acceptance of a particular theory concerning government,
called in legal circles, I believe, a strict interpretation of Federal
powers.
If this committee desires to discover to what extent foundations and
other organizations have spent money and energy_ in promoting a
special theory in constitutional law, it has every right to do so. I
respectfully suggest, however, that if the committee discovers, as it
well may, that little time and. money have been so spent, it should
report the fact in those terms. To report such a conclusion to the
American people as a finding that foundations and educational
agencies have failed to operate in the public interest would be a seman-
tic distortion of the first order. The American people have more than
an impression — they have a conviction — that efforts to control disease,
to alleviate poverty, to advance science and technology, to expand
libraries and museums, and to do many other things havinsr nothing
to do with the promotion of a special brand of political philosophy
contribute to their welfare. Such activities are therefore, in any rea-
sonable definition of the term, "in the public interest." All of these
areas happen to be among those in which foundations have been es-
pecially active.
I would suggest further that as part of the process of establishing
a reasonable framework for its investigation, this committee consider
1012 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
the historic purpose of tax exemption. It would appear that this privi-
lege was originally related to the principle, stated frequently by the
Founding Fathers, that the power to tax is the power to destroy. Tax
exemption was presumably granted to local and State governments
to reinforce their freedom from Federal control. Tax exemption was
presumably granted to churches to reinforce the provision of the first
amendment guaranteeing freedom of religion. Tax exemption was
presumably granted to educational institutions and agencies to rein-
force the constitutional provision against Federal control of education.
Similarly, tax exemption was presumably granted to other agencies,
such as hospitals, charitable and welfare organizations, and philan-
thropic foundations, on the theory that private initiative should be
encouraged in certain broad areas of concern for the public welfare.
A contrary principle, frequently advanced in recent years and seem-
ingly implicit in the report of this committee's research director, is
that tax exemption not only confers the right but carries along with it
the obligation of Federal supervision and, if need be, control. This
doctrine is itself one of the most revolutionary concepts in the history
of American Government. It could lead to Federal control, either by
direct regulation or by threat of removal of the tax-exempt status, not
merely of foundations but of health services, education, religion, and
the operations of State and local government. It would seem to be
highly important that this committee take a stand on this issue and an-
nounce in clear terms the extent to which it believes Federal control of
tax-exempt institutions and agencies is justifiable. I should think the
committee might question, for example, the assumption implicit in the
report of its research director that the Government should determine
the scope and direction of research and instruction in the social sciences.
We come now to the reason why the American Council on Education
has become involved in this investigation. The argument of the re-
search director seems to be this :
1. That beginning in 1933, a political "revolution" took place in the
United States, supported by an overwhelming majority of the elec-
torate, which in some of its manifestations seems to the research staff
to be un-American.
2. That the approval of this so-called "revolution" by the electorate
resulted from their indoctrination by the Nation's educational institu-
tions.
3. That the indoctrination was engineered by a closely knit group of
national organizations, including the American Council on Education.
The flimsiness of this line of reasoning can be demonstrated in many
ways. One is to consider the time factor.
Of the population over 25 years of age in 1932, comprising roughly
8'8 percent of our potential electorate, more than 60 percent had re-
ceived no formal education beyond the eighth grade. This fact seems
to warrant the inference that more than half the voters completed
their formal education before 1920. Yet the research director, in his
own report, notes that the American Council of Learned Societies was
founded in 1919, the National Research Council in 1916, the Social
Science Research Council in 1923, the American Council on Education
in 1918, and the John Dewey Society in 1936. The assumption that
these organizations engineered a program of mass indoctrination
through the schools that brought about the "revolution" of 1933 would
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1013
seem to be an undeserved tribute to their power, since in 1920 the oldest
had been established only 4 years and the 2 youngest had not yet been
conceived.
Let us approach this matter in another way. The director of re-
search says his procedure has been to reason from total effect to pri-
mary and secondary causes. It would appear that in this instance he
may have omitted the primary causes and have gone far beyond the
secondary. Would he seriously contend that the farmers who roamed
the roads of Iowa with pitchforks and shotguns in the early 1930's, or
the industrial workers who stood in mile-long bread lines, or the
veterans who sold apples on street corners, or the bankrupt business-
man who jumped from 10-story windows did so because of something
in their educational curriculum ? Whatever one's political persuasion
may be, one must concede that surely, the economic forces which
brought the industrial machine grinding to a halt constituted more
important causes for social change than any possible influence of the
little red schoolhouse.
What, then, is the role of education in social change? It would
appear that in a democratic society such as ours, where, as in all
societies, constant changes are required to maintain equilibrium be-
tween the rights of the individual and the protective functions of
government, education serves two essential purposes: first it
strengthens the conviction that necessary adjustments can be made
by peaceful means, and, second, by spreading knowledge, it assists the
people and their leaders to discover what the appropriate adjustments
are. To say that education provides the motivation for change because
it performs these functions is like saying that fire engines cause fires
because they are usually present at the scene and seem to have a
significant role in the proceedings.
It seems apparent, from some of the testimony previously presented
before this committee, that the director of research and his staff have
done a considerable amount of research in the library. In that process,
they have uncovered, in books and periodicals, numerous statements by
educators advocating specific programs. Individual educators, like
members of other professions, are human and are prone to argue that
their ideas are worthy of immediate universal adoption. It would be
an unwarranted inference to assume, however, that such statements
invariably, or even usually, reflect prevailing beliefs or practices. The
gap between theory and practice is as great in education as in other
areas of human activity, such as ethics, and as great as the gap between
individual opinions and the consensus in other professions, such as
politics.
Furthermore professors, as the great historian Carl Becker once re-
marked, are by temperament people who think otherwise. If all their
ideas were simultaneously adopted, the result would be utter chaos.
Hence, by carefully selecting his excerpts, one can secure evidence from
educational publications for almost anything he may set out to prove.
The only way to find out what educational institutions are actually
doing is to examine them at firsthand, without preconceived ideas.
That is a vast undertaking, which the research staff of this committee
has apparently not undertaken and has certainly had inadequate time
to complete.
1014 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
I suggest to the committee, therefore, that it be wary of conclusions
based on the wishful thinking of individual educators as expressed
in books and periodicals. To consider such material as presenting an
accurate picture of educational practice is like judging the accomplish-
ments of a session of Congress by a selected group of bills introduced
rather than by the sum total of legislation actually passed.
With regard to the American Council on Education itself, I have
brought with me a supply of pamphlets that describe its objectives and
operations and list its membership. You will note that members of
the council are institutions and organizations, not persons. You will
note further that the largest group of members is composed of colleges
and universities. That fact explains why the major interest of the
council has traditionally been and is now in higher education, al-
though it has a general concern with the whole range of education.
The council is thoroughly democratic in organization. Its govern-
ing body is the membership, represented by duly appointed delegates
at the annual meeting. The interim policymaking body is the execu-
tive committee, elected by vote of the members. Membership dues
comprise the major source of income for central operations.
The council has no power to regulate its members in any respect,
nor has it ever attempted to exercise such power. Although the basic
reason for this policy is that it represents a sound concept of service
to education and to the public, a second reason is wholly practical.
Since all authorities on higher education agree that its dominant char-
acteristic is diversity, any effort toward regimentation from a central
headquarters would mean disaster for the organization through the
immediate loss of numerous members. The truth of this statement
is clear from a mere listing of the affiliations of member institutions.
One hundred and twenty-eight are affiliated with the Catholic Church,
61 with the Methodist Church, 24 with the Lutheran Church, 29 with
the Baptist Church, 35 with the Presbyterian Church, and 60 with a
dozen other denominations. Twenty-nine are supported by munici-
palities, 261 by 48 States, and 28 by other public and private agencies.
A final 200 are privately supported, without special affiliation, and are
administered by their individual boards of trustees. The constituent
organization members of the council have a similar diversity of sup-
port and orientation. The most challenging problem of the council,
under these circumstances, is to discover issues on which there is such
agreement among council members as to warrant joint consideration.
Let me say emphatically that the college curriculum is not one of the
matters on which agreement has ever been reached among institutions
of higher learning. The standard educational curriculum apparently
discerned by this committee's director of research is sheer fantasy.
The idea that such diverse institutions as the University of Notre
Dame, Southern Methodist University, Yale, and the University of
California have adopted or would ever adopt the same curriculum is
simply inconceivable. This diversity, reflected in the freedom of
choice which every institution exercises with respect to its curriculum,
is, in fact, the distinctive genius of higher education in America.
Yet American institutions of higher learning, and in fact educa-
tional institutions at all levels, do have some ideas in common, and
feel that those ideas should be vigorously expressed. That is why
they have created and now support national organizations such as
the American Council on Education. In serving the cause of educa-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1015
tion, these organizations do believe, with great sincerity, that they
render a national service. Unless the members likewise believed it,
there would be no such organizations.
One of the central ideas that the American Council on Education
is authorized and directed by its members to express is that the in-
dependence of colleges and universities should be maintained at all
costs and against all agencies, including the Federal Government, that
might attempt to dominate them. The basic reason is that they are
opposed in principle and in practice to indoctrination. Although
they approach their goals in many and varied ways, they share the
purpose of preparing students to think for themselves and to continue
the habit of study to the end that they may be well-informed and
effective citizens. The distinctive product of higher education in
the United States is not a person taught to embrace certain prejudices
but a person trained to make intelligent decisions on issues as they
arise. And this, in the expressed opinion of great American leaders,
from Thomas Jefferson to Dwight D. Eisenhower, is a basic pro-
American service.
The plain fact is that the schools and colleges of this country do not
have the power to achieve mass political indoctrination even if they
had the desire to do so. Political indoctrination of the great mass of
American citizens is impossible for any institution or group of institu-
tions so long as freedom of speech and press continue to exist. In-
doctrination requires a negative as well as a positive force to be effec-
tive, as both Hitler and Stalin well know. Not only must a single
doctrine be presented with persistence, but access to all other doctrines
must be denied. The only agency in this country capable of mass
political indoctrination is the Federal Government, and even the Gov-
ernment could not be successful by controlling the schools alone; it
would also have to control the pulpit, the press, radio, television, and
all other media of mass communication. Mass indoctrination is
therefore a theoretical as well as a practical impossibility in America
today. It simply does not exist. It cannot exist so long as any
minority is free to raise its voice.
Let me summarize. The standard educational curriculum postu-
lated by the committee's director of research is nonexistent. If the
executive committee or staff of the American Council on Education
had any desire to promote such a curriculum— which they do not — •
they could not do so, because the council's membership would literaly
dissolve if they did. If the council cannot promote such a curriculum
itself, it certainly could not effectively participate in an alleged con-
spiracy among national educational organizations to reach the same
objective. The alleged conspiracy, also, is a figment of imagination.
I am at a loss to understand what factual basis there could conceiv-
ably be for the allegations apparently made by the director of research
against the Ameriacn Council on Education. I shall be glad to answer
questions, to the best of my ability and knowledge, about any of the
council's operations. As I indicated at the outset, we welcome the
opportunity to assist the committee in constructing a true picture of
the part which educational institutions, educational organizations, and
foundations interested in education have played in the development
of American civilization.
The first draft of the above statement was prepared for presenta-
tion to the committee at the direction of the executive committee of
1016 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
the American Council on Education, on the assumption that it would
represent testimony offered voluntarily on the council's initiative.
Subsequently I received a subpena to appear, and therefore felt it
necessary to revise the first paragraph in order to remove any impli-
cation of presumptuousness on the part of myself or the executive
committee.
I swear that the revised draft above, different in only this respect
from the first draft, of which some copies are still in circulation, is
accurate and true to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Arthur S. Adams,
President, American Council on Education.
Washington 6, D. C.
Subscribed and sworn to before me a notary public in the District
of Columbia on this 21st day of July, 1954, by Arthus S. Adams who
is personally known to me.
[seal] Eleanor Quill, Notary Public.
My commission expires January 14, 1957.
STATEMENT OF H. ROWAN GAITHER, JR., PRESIDENT AND
TRUSTEE, THE FORD FOUNDATION
Before the Special Committee to Investigate Tax Exempt Founda-
tions, House or Representatives, United States Congress
Kingdom op Denmark, Citt of Copenhagen,
Embassy of the United States of America, ss:
H. Rowan Gaither, Jr., being duly sworn, deposes and says as
follows:
1. I am president of the Ford Foundation.
2. Attached hereto are three documents :
Statement of H. Rowan Gaither, Jr., president and trustee of the
Ford Foundation, to the Special Committee to Investigate Tax Ex-
empt Foundations, House of Representatives, 83d Congress ;
Reply by the Ford Foundation to allegations directed specificajy
against it contained in the record of the committee's public hearings
to date (supplement A to statement of H. Rowan Gaither, Jr.) ;
History of the establishment of the Fund for the Republic (supple-
ment of H. Rowan Gaither, Jr. ) .
These documents were prepared for submission to the Special Com-
mittee to Investigate Tax Exempt Foundations in connection with the
testimony which I intended to give before that committee at the invi-
tation of its counsel.
3. Having been informed that no representative of the Ford Foun-
dation will be heard by the committee, I submit these statements for
the record and swear that they are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge, information, and belief.
H. Rowan Gaither, Jr.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 21st day of July 1954.
Theodore Sellin,
Vice Consul of the United States of America.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1017
The Fokd Foundation
This sworn statement is submitted on behalf of the Ford Founda-
tion in compliance with a request dated July 2, 1954, from the counsel
for the special committee of the House of Representatives, 83d Con-
gress, to investigate tax-exempt foundations.
The authorized purposes or the committee, as stated in House Reso-
lution 217, are —
to determine if any foundations and organizations are using their resources
for purposes other than the purposes for which they were established, and espe-
cially to determine which such foundations and organizations are using their
resources for un-American and subversive activities; for political purposes;
propaganda, or attempts to influence legislation.
With reference to those authorized purposes, I wish to state :
The Ford Foundation devotes its resources entirely to the purposes
for which it was established. As set forth in its charter, these are to
"engage in charitable, scientific, and educational activities, all for the
public welfare."
The Ford Foundation has not used any of its resources for un-
American or subversive activities.
The Ford Foundation has not used any of its resources for political
purposes, propaganda, or attempts to influence legislation.
The trustees and staff of the foundation are loyal, responsible
Americans. Our operating procedures insure responsible and careful
decisions in hiring staff, planning our program, and making grants.
The Ford Foundation's entire program is aimed at advancing the best
interests of the American people.
To aid the committee in completing its investigation and to answer
the general allegations in the record of these hearings, this statement
is primarily a description of the personnel, policies and programs of
the Ford Foundation. In separate supplements hereto, detailed
answers are made to specific allegations against the Ford Foundation
and certain individuals and organizations associated with it. Before
turning to those subjects, however, I must comment on certain pro-
cedures of this committee and on some of the testimony presented to it.
The Ford Foundation, along with others, has been maligned in
public by the witnesses called by this committee in the opening weeks
of the hearings. This testimony has ranged from sweeping innuen-
does to detailed allegations of wrongdoing. We have grave doubts
as to the validity of any of the material charges against American
philanthropy and education, and insofar as they refer to the Ford
Foundation, we state they are erroneous and baseless. We had hoped,
of course, to have the opportunity of replying to the charges in public
so that the real record of the Ford Foundation would be known to
all those who may have been misled by those charges. We therefore
regard the decision of the committee to discontinue public hearings
and to limit the foundations' defense to written statements or closed
sessions as a puzzling and unexpected act of injustice. However, we
are ready to cooperate with the committee on the terms which it has
set, because it is imperative, in our view, that the committee now re-
ceive all the information it requires in order promptly to complete its
investigation in every respect.
To leave this investigation in any sense incomplete would be a re-
flection on the Congress and a disservice to the public. Moreover, it
1018 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
would leave the door ajar to repeated investigations with all of their
immense cost in terms of time, money, and effort to the Congress and
to the foundations, and their unavoidable effect on the morale, initia-
tive, and freedom of scientific, educational, and charitable organiza-
tions. Postponing or delaying completion of this investigation for
any extensive period would produce these same undesirable effects.
The second preliminary topic I would like to discuss relates to
certain testimony presented in these hearings by staff members and
by witnesses procured by the staff. These individuals have put before
this committee a theory about foundations which is erroneous and
which could cause grave damage.
From the record of the public hearings, this theory appears to be
about as follows:
Most trustees of most foundations have had so little time to spare
from other activities that the foundations have been taken over by
staff members, who are running them for their own purposes.
These schemers really make the decisions as to how foundation
money is spent; they have a master plan for society; and they are
intent upon reshaping the country to fit that plan.
To this end they have engineered a giant conspiracy, subverting our
people, our institutions, and our Government to produce the major
political, social, and economic changes of the past 50 years.
Their partners in this conspiracy include the faculties and adminis-
trators of American colleges and universities, the members of the
learned and educational organizations of the country, and public
servants in State and Federal Government.
This theory is the sheerest nonsense. I believe this statement will
show that it is false insofar as it is applied to the Ford Foundation.
While I do not speak for the thousands of other American founda-
tions, my experience in this field leads me to believe that the theory
is no more applicable to them.
Contrary to the premise of the theory, the trustees and officers of
the Ford Foundation are neither dupes nor plotters, nor are they dele-
lict in their duty. They are respected men of wide experience and
alive to their responsibilities.
In attempting to portray the historic changes of the twentieth cen-
tury as the result of a conspiracy, the theory ignores such factors as
two world wars; an economic depression of global proportions; the
emergence of the United States and Russia as world leaders of con-
flicting ideologies ; the rise of nationalism and new nations in the less
developed parts of the world ; and vast scientific and technical change.
A main element of the theory is that the conspiracy has long been
spreading through all levels of American education. If so, one can
only wonder how such a situation has escaped detection by thousands
of local school boards, parent-teacher associations and school teachers.
"We think the theory is an affront to the commonsense of the American
people, who have presumably been the objects of the conspiracy and
whose major decisions it is said to have dictated. Contrary to the no-
tion that our educational system has been subverted, we share with
most Americans the view that our public and private schools have
served us well and deserve considerable credit for the advances we as
a Nation have achieved.
Although the overwhelming majority of the press has derided the
conspiracy theory presented in these proceedings, important segments
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1019
of the public may have gained the impression that it has been proved
to the satisfaction of this committee. The other trustees and I are
concerned with this possibility. Accordingly, we hope this commit-
tee will take positive steps to dispel any such impression, because it
carries damaging implications not only for all private philanthropy,
but for all science and education.
PRIVATE PHILANTHROPY IN A FREE SOCIETY
One of the most productive characteristics of American life has
been the practice of voluntary giving for the public good. Since the
very beginning of our history, the American people have recognized
a duty to give to their churches and schools and to charitable causes,
and they have looked upon the right to join together in private action
for the public welfare as an important element in the idea of a free
society.
In the past, private philanthropic efforts were devoted largely to
providing education, supporting religion, and alleviating human suf-
fering. As the Nation expanded, the role of philanthropy grew with
it. Today private giving is related to every important charitable,
scientific, educational, cultural, religious, economic and social need;
and this breadth of voluntary effort is one of the sources of strength
of our society.
This is not to say, of course, that private giving offers the only
approach to our problems. Compared to the giant resources of Gov-
ernment, those of private philanthropy are meager. But in a free
society some things, of course, are inappropriate to Government and
must be handled by private means. The function of private giving,
through foundations and otherwise, is something special. And the
principle of private giving, I think, is vital.
The American people, it is estimated, give $5,600 million a year to
private efforts for those causes they wish to support. Of this amount,
however, less than 3 percent comes from foundations. We are thus
dealing here with only a fraction, a small fraction, of private giving.
At the same time, it is, I believe, an important fraction because there
are things that a philanthropic foundation can do more efficiently
than any other institution. The hopes of our people to solve some of
their sorest problems often depend upon the existence of foundations,
even though they represent only 3 percent of our national philan-
thropic effort.
Take for example the vital work of searching out and eliminating
some of the causes of human suffering, whether due to physical or to
social factors. Foundations are particularly able to organize and
conduct these searches for several reasons :
One is that such searches often risk unpopularity and misunder-
standing, and it has often been difficult to obtain initial or continuous
public financial support for them. Frequently only a foundation can
take on this kind of responsibility.
Second, such searches can require coordinated attacks on problems
with multiple causes — juvenile delinquency, for example. Founda-
tions can bring together into common endeavor the needed variety of
persons with special skills and professional training.
Third, such searches can be long and drawn out. Sometimes they
fail completely. Because foundations can assume financial risks in
1020 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
the initial phases of exploratory research that the general public or
the Government cannot or should not take, they have often paved the
way for more general public support of such endeavors.
The fight against cancer is an example of such pioneering. The
foundations were among the first to support organized research into
this disease. Government participation came later. And finally the
fight was so dramatized that millions of individuals began to make
donations for an all-out attack.
Incidentally, the fight against cancer illustrates the three basic types
of work supported by the large foundations, which are the acquisition,
dissemination, and application of knowledge.
Scientists and scholars engaged in the search for new knowledge —
if their findings upset the status quo— must sometimes fight for their
discoveries tooth and nail. And foundations in supporting their
researches must be prepared to join in the fight to defend the principal
of freedom of inquiry.
Man's right to acquire knowledge and to use it freely is one of our
noblest traditions. It was expressed in our earliest state papers, both
in colonial days and in the early years of the Eepublic. The suppres-
sion of ideas, and not the free exploration of them, was the great
fear of our Foundation Fathers — as it must be ours. It was the author
of our Declaration of Independence and the Virginia bill of rights
who said :
Here we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor to tolerate
any error so long as reason is left free to combat it.
This committee is conducting its inquiry^ at a time when reason is
being challenged on many fronts. The basic propositions of our own
national life have never existed in many areas of the world. Even
where they have at one time existed they have now all too often
been driven out. Freedom of inquiry, with all other liberties, is sup-
pressed in a growing number of police states. Education in such
countries has become a tool of autocratic control ; its content dictated
by the state and its use prescribed by the state.
We have also seen, in a few harried years, man's technical advances
in some areas of knowledge so outstrip his progress in others that he
stands in greater danger of their misuse. Scientific advances have in-
evitably been followed by new social, economic, and political problems.
Men trained by knowledge and experience to deal with such problems
have got to be brought together in patient, wise, and cooperative
efforts.
The great responsibilities of our generation are to preserve our
fundamental beliefs, to encourage progress and to solve in a peaceful
way the social, economic, and political problems which confront us.
Foundations are equipped to assist in these great undertakings.
However, the potential usefulness of foundations at this critical
time in history would be destroyed if the Nation were to forsake its
heritage of freedom and accept the conspiracy theory advanced in
the record of these hearings. This committee has received statements
from earnest and informed men disproving this theory with clear and
open expositions of the achievements and actual methods of their
organizations. On behalf of the trustees of the Ford Foundation, I
join in rejecting this frightened and mistaken theory; we reject also
the related allegations directed specifically against the Ford Founda-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1021
tion. In this connection, I am submitting, as supplement A to this
statement, a detailed denial of such allegations.
POLICIES AND OPERATIONS OF THE FORD FOUNDATION
The role of foundations has been so distorted in these proceedings,
and their importance so obscured, that it may assist the committee to
know how one foundation, the Ford Foundation, took its place in
American philanthropy and how it actually conducts its affairs.
The remainder of this statement describes what the Ford Foundation
is, how it operates and what it does.
The Ford Foundation is a Michigan nonprofit corporation incor-
porated in 1936. The trustees of the Ford Foundation, in addition to
myself, are —
Henry Ford II, chairman ; president, Ford Motor Co. ;
Frank W. Abrams, associated with Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey for 42 years
and chairman of its board at the time of his retirement last year ;
James F. Brownlee, partner of the New York investment firm of J. H. Whitney
&Co.;
John Cowles, publisher, Minneapolis Star and Tribune and chairman of the board,
Des Moines Register and Tribune ;
Donald K. David, dean, Harvard Graduate School of Business Administration ;
Mark Ethridge, publisher, Louisville Courier-Journal and Louisville Times ;
Benson Ford, vice president, Ford Motor Co. ;
Laurence M. Gould, president, Carleton College, Northfield, Minn. ;
John J. McCloy, chairman, the Chase National Bank of the city of New York and
former United States High Commissioner for Germany ;
Charles E. Wilson, president of the General Electric Co. until 1950 and now
chairman, executive committee, W. R. Grace & Co. ; and
Charles E. Wyzanski, Jr., judge of the United States District Court in Boston
and president, board of overseers, Harvard University.
From 1936 to 1948 the income of the Ford Foundation was relatively
small and its grants were made largely to local Michigan charities in
which the Ford family had a particular interest. In the fall of 1948,
the trustees anticipated greatly expanded resources due to the settle-
ment of the estates of Mr. Henry Ford and Mr. Edsel Ford. They felt
that to allocate this money wisely, they would have to begin by iden-
tifying those urgent human problems to the solution of which a foun-
dation might make effective contribution.
To aid them in this task the trustees decided to appoint a study com-
mittee which would draw upon the advice of the best minds of the
country. The committee's task was to define and examine the most
pressing needs and to recommend a policy and program to the trustees.
I was asked by the trustees to organize and direct that committee.
The study committee agreed at the outset that its purpose was not
to compile a comprehensive catalog of projects which the foundation
might undertake, but to identify the "areas where problems were
most serious and where the foundation might make the most sig-
nificant contribution to human welfare.
This committee was hard at work for many months. We believe
the conclusions and recommendations of the committee were influenced
by the best judgment of our times. Hundreds of leading Americans
were consulted in lengthy personal interviews. Advisers represented
every major segment of American life, and every field of knowledge.
The committee secured the opinions and points of view of officials in
State and Federal Government, representatives of the United Nations
and its affiiliated agencies, business and professional leaders, and the
1022 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
heads of many private organizations. Administrators and teachers;
of leading universities and colleges contributed generously of their
time and thought. The views of military leaders and of labor were
sought and obtained. Conferences were held with the heads of many
small enterprises as well as those of large corporations.
Experts were asked for recommendations not only on problems
within their special fields, but on more general problems as well.
Incidentally, experts from the physical and medical sciences who
were consulted by the committee agreed that the most urgent needs
for foundation action were in the area of the social sciences, even
though attention to their own special fields might thereby be post-
poned.
I would like to add that this practice of consulting the best avail-
able outside experts has since been steadfastly followed by the founda-
tion in its operations. Each year we obtain the opinions of hundreds
of consultants and advisers on the various parts of our programs.
The results of the study, including the proposed areas in which the
Ford Foundation would spend its funds, were adopted by the trustees
and were published and widely distributed in September, 1950. The
five major areas of foundation attention announced at that time still
form the basis of its program today. These can be briefly described :
The foundation supports efforts to promote international understand-
ing and peace because without peace civilization may well be doomed.
It aids the strengthening of democratic institutions and processes be-
cause they are fundamental to human welfare. It helps programs to
make our free ecenomy stronger and more stable because economic
health is necessary to man's attainment of his other goals. It believes
that education is vital to a free people, and supports its advancement
on all levels. Finally, it holds that a better understanding of man
will aid his progress, and therefore supports projects to increase such
knowledge.
The trustees I listed are responsible for determining policy to guide
the foundation in contributing to these objectives and for appro ving-
and authorizing the specific actions undertaken in pursuit of them-
They fully recognize this responsibility and spend a great deal of time
carrying it out. All foundation expenditures are made pursuant to a
specific grant, appropriation or authorization by the trustees. The*
trustees establish and review the procedures for following up the-
results of grants. They select the foundation's principal policy-
making personnel and review operating procedures, including those
for the selection and supervision of other personnel.
Formal meetings of the trustees are held at least quarterly, and each
lasts at least 2 days. Prior to each meeting, the trustees receive a com-
prehensive docket setting iorih. the background of each proposal sched-
uled for consideration at that meeting, including such details as the
history, organization, and operations of the proposed grantee, the
qualifications of the personnel involved, and the comments of advisers
used in the development of the project. Between formal meetings, th&
other officers and I frequently consult with individual trustees to re-
view new proposals or consider operating matters. Ad hoc committees
of the trustees are established to deal with special program or ad-
ministrative matters from time to time. Such a committee may con-
tinue work on a major grant from its preliminary stage, before it is
ever incorporated in a docket, until the grant has been completed and.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1023
the followup action is taken. In addition, most of the trustees are
members of either the executive or finance committees, which meet
often with the chairman, Mr. Ford, and with me.
The trustees of the Ford Foundation take their responsibilities most
seriously. They feel deeply that the purpose of their effort is the ad-
vancement of the public welfare and that the resources of the founda-
tion are devoted to the public interest.
At the same time, they are responsible for the management of an
organization which is private, independent, nonpolitical and non-
governmental. The philosophy which pervades their actions rests
squarely on the American concept of private initiative and free enter-
prise. They are guided always by the responsibility to act in the public
interest, but as private individuals operating a private organization
they must accept the full responsibility for their decisions. To this
end they have formulated a number of general policies. I would like
to mention four in particular :
First, the foundation's funds can be given only for scientific, educa-
tional and charitable purposes. These are its charter purposes and
are the permissible areas of operation for tax-exempt organizations.
All of its private domestic grantee organizations are themselves exempt
from Federal income taxes under section 101 (6) of the Internal Reve-
nue Code. As representatives of the Internal Revenue Service testi-
fied to this committee, no un-American, subversive, or political organi-
zation can receive or retain this exemption privilege. Foundation
operating policy and procedures assure that its funds will not go for
un-American or subversive activities, or for propaganda or for
attempts to influence legislation. After I have described the program
of the foundation, I believe it will be clear that the activities supported
by the foundation adhere strictly to basic American traditions and
principles. It should also be clear that these activities are not prop-
agandists or partisan even though they involve subjects which are
from time to time in the area of public debate and controversy. Prop-
aganda and partisanship are excluded from research and educational
activities by the high standards of objectivity and scholarship which
the foundation insists upon in its grantees.
Second, the foundation has to have a program so that it can select
from thousands of applications those relatively few it can support
with its limited resources. The Ford Foundation endeavors to make
grants only for those projects which clearly embrace one or more of
the program objectives I have outlined. Projects must be sponsored
and conducted by reliable organizations and competent persons. By
its program the Ford Foundation concentrates dollars and efforts
upon what are felt to be important needs instead of scattering its
funds inadequately and wastefully over a large number of projects.
Third, the foundation tries to administer its gifts in ways which
give general strength to its grantees— schools, colleges, and other pri-
vate organizations — in addition to helping accomplish the particular
purposes of its grants.
Fourth, the foundation seeks new opportunities for service arising
from changing needs and conditions. It continuously reexamines its
program and plans. Its arrangements with its grantees are such that
the foundation retains the freedom to change its own program or to.
shift emphasis within its program.
49720 — 54 — pt. 2 6
1024 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
I believe that the foundation's adherence to these general policies,
as shown by the detailed record of its operations, answers the allega-
tions of the staff and its witnesses. It also answers the major ques-
tions with which this committee is concerned.
HOW A GRANT IS MADE
The board of trustees makes the grants of the Ford Foundation.
The only exception is a very limited number of small grants which I
am authorized by the trustees to make when emergency needs arise
between meetings of the board. I make no recommendation to the
board on grants without first getting the advice of the officers of the
foundation, which is based on extensive staff studies and reports. _
The vice presidents and secretary constitute a program committee
which meets several times a week and reports to me its findings on
every grant proposal. This involves not only an appraisal of the
proposed project but a careful inquiry into the qualifications of the
agency conducting it.
If a project is approved by me for recommendation to the board,
it is then fully analyzed in materials supplied to the trustees for their
study well in advance of their meetings. Rejections of important
proposals are also reviewed by the board of trustees. ^
In voting to support an activity, the trustees specify such terms
and conditions as they think necessary for its efficient execution.
Let me give you an example of the processing of a grant:
At their last meeting the trustees voted to make a grant of $500,000
to the trustees of the University of Pennsylvania for a study of con-
sumer expenditures, income, and savings in the United States. This
action was the culmination of months of study, investigation, and
consultation by the foundation's staff; of a careful appraisal of the
results of this work by several trustees individually before their meet-
ing ; and of discussion and inquiry at the meeting itself.
The proposal had originated 6 months earlier. At a cost of more
than $1 million, the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics had
gathered data on consumer behavior in interviews with 12,500 fam-
ilies in 91 cities. The original purpose was to revise and improve
the Consumers' Price Index. This initial purpose was fulfilled, but
Government funds were not available to finance additional analysis
of the data which would be of great usefulness to economists, sociol-
ogists, and marketing and advertising experts. A general public bene-
fit would also accrue, since economists are generally agreed that a
greater knowledge of consumer behavior would be useful in under-
standing and minimizing fluctuations in the economy as a whole.
The desirability of tabulating and further analyzing the data was
initially brought to the attention of the Ford Foundation by the Bu-
reau of Labor Statistics in December 1953. In January 1954, mem-
bers of the foundation staff discussed the project in greater detail
with Mrs. Aryness J. Wickens, Deputy Commissioner of Labor Sta-
tistics, and Mr. Robert Behlow, the Bureau's Coordinator of special
projects. It was decided that Mrs. Wickens would hold a, series of
conversations with various universities to explore the possibility of a
cooperative project. As a result, the Wharton School of Finance and
Commerce of the University of Pennsylvania was selected to partici-
pate in the project.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1025
In April 1954, the Wharton School, with the assistance of the Bu-
reau, submitted to the foundation a detailed proposal on the project's
scope, general purposes, and uses. They submitted descriptions of the
source of books of basic data to be prepared by the Bureau and of
research studies to be undertaken by the Bureau, the Wharton School,
and faculty personnel of the University of Michigan, Yale University,
and the Carnegie Institute of Technology. They also gave details
of a proposed budget for the project, in addition to many other exhibits
and schedules.
The foundation then sent copies of the proposal to seven independ-
ent, outside experts for their appraisal.
Dr. Neil H. Jacoby, member of the President's Council of Economic Advisers ;
Dean E. T. Grether, School of Business Administration, University of California
(Berkeley) ;
Professor Bertrand Fox, director of research, Graduate School of Business
Administration, Harvard University ;
Professor Theodore Schultz, department of economics, University of Chicago;
Professor George Katona, program director, survey research center, University
of Michigan ;
Dr. Ralp*h A. Young, director of research, Board of Governors, Federal Reserve
System; and
Professor Franco Modigliani, School of Industrial Administration, Carnegie In-
stitute of Technology.
The consensus of this group was very favorable and resulted in con-
structive suggestions for the conduct of the project.
The validity of the sample used by the Bureau in assembling the
original data was the subject of consultation with three experts on
sample design:
J. Stevens Stock, Alfred Politz Research, Inc.;
Vergil D. Reed, vice president, J. Walter Thompson Co. ; and
W. Edwards Deming, Bureau of the Budget and New York
University.
These men all endorsed the sample used.
Conferences were then held with those who would be responsible
for conducting the project:
Dean C. Canby, Balderston, the Wharton School ;
Dr. Dorothy Brady, Chief, Division of Prices and Cost of
Living, Bureau of Labor Statistics;
Dr. Irwin Friend, professor of finance, University of Penn-
sylvania; and
Dr. Raymond T. Bowman, professor of economics, University
of Pennsylvania.
The proposed budget was carefully examined, and it was found pos-
sible to provide for nearly all the main points of the project even
though the requested funds were reduced from $688,150 to $500,000.
During April the vice president responsible for economic develop-
ment and administration programs and the staff member who had
assisted him in investigating and preparing the proposal presented
it to the foundation's program committee, where it was the subject
of a series of meetings. The committee approved it and transmitted it
to me. I reviewed it, approved it, and asked the secretary to summa-
rize the proposal, with my recommendation, for inclusion in the docket
being prepared for the trustees' May meeting. After this and prior
to tlie meeting, the proposal was the subject of several discussions be-
1026 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
tween individual trustees and various officers of the foundation. At
the meeting, the proposal was repeated by oral summary ; and, after
discussion, the trustees voted a grant for the project.
RELATIONSHIPS WITH GRANTEES
The Ford Foundation is almost entirely a grant-making institution.
While it occasionally administers activities directly, by far the major
part of its program consists of the gift of money to others. From
the outset the trustees adopted the policy of avoiding direct operations
wherever practicable. Among other results, this policy makes a large
operating staff unnecessary. It guarantees a wide and continuing
representation of many different viewpoints. It enables the founda-
tion to take advantage of the specializations offered by various existing
institutions. It retains flexibility for the foundation. Finally, it
enables the foundation to strengthen the grantees themselves and to
support that multiplicity of educational and scientific organizations
which is in itself necessary in a free society.
Direct grants. — A considerable part of the foundation's program
is in the form of direct grants to colleges, universities, or other oper-
ating institutions. Such grants are made after careful consideration
of the merits of proposals and also of the qualifications of the indi-
vidual or organization that would carry it out.
Once a grant is made to support a project, full responsibility is
placed upon the grantee for its effective execution subject to the terms
and conditions of the grant. Within those limits, the foundation
makes no attempt to direct the detailed administration of the project,
influence its course, or control its results. Of course, it follows up
to determine that the funds are properly expended for the purposes
of the grant and to learn what has been accomplished. But discharg-
ing this responsibility is to be carefully distinguished in every way
from the domination or direction of grantees.
'•'■Intermediaries.' 1 '' — A formulation sometimes finds it useful to work
through an independent outside agency in administering a program.
There is nothing sinister or mysterious about the use of such agencies —
which are sometimes called "intermediaries" — nor do they constitute
bottlenecks or centers of control. They often take care of the admin-
istration of projects involving several operating agencies, such as a
program of coordinated study by several universities. Their service
to foundations provides a practical business solution to a variety of op-
erating problems.
The Social Science Research Council, for example, performs the
valuable function of bringing together individuals of common schol-
arly or technical interest and serves as a clearing house of information.
Many scholarly organizations serve as foundation intermediaries and
fill a real need for interuniversity and intergroup organization. Such
agencies are indispensable if rapid development of education and re-
search is to continue. „ ,
When the services of an intermediary are needed, the Ford * ora-
tion prefers to support a competent agency that is already established
in the field and let it deal directly with other groups and individuals
in the selection and support of individual projects. Sometimes, how-
ever, qualified intermediary organizations to carry out a particular
kind of program do not exist, and in such cases the foundation coop-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1027
grates in establishing a new organization to fill the need. Six such
independent grant-making organizations have been established: The
Fund for the Advancement of Education ; the Fund for Adult Edu-
cation ; East European Fund, Inc. ; the Fund for the Republic, Inc. ;
Resources for the Future, Inc.; and Intercultural Publications, Inc.
Each of these organizations has its own independent board of direc-
tors, and its own staff. I make reference to these particular inter-
mediaries at this point because it allows me to clear up a confusion
reflected in the views of some witnesses in these proceedings. It is
often assumed that the staff members of these organizations are em-
ployees of the Ford Foundation, which they are not; or that their
detailed administration is my responsibility or that of the foundation's
trustees, which it is not. The trustees are fully acquainted with their
proposed programs, but these intermediary organizations are respon-
sible for the selection of projects to carry out those programs. They
are not subsidiaries or divisions of the Ford Foundation. Their crea-
tion enabled the foundation to focus the special skills and competence
of their respective organizations on detailed and technical activities
in specific areas. It gave broad representation to new viewpoints. It
tended to decentralize rather than to centralize administration of proj-
ects. And it enabled the foundation to remain a small and flexible
organization. The performance of these organizations has confirmed
the soundness of the trustees' judgment in establishing them.
EXAMPLES OF FORD FOUNDATION PROJECTS
I turn now to examples of projects the Ford Foundation has sup-
ported since 1950 when it began full-scale operations.
During the period January 1951 to December 31, 1953, we committed
a total or approximately $119 million. Of this sum, about $87,500,000
went to United States institutions operating within the United States,
and another $19 million went to the United States institutions operat ■
ing abroad. The amount that went directly to foreign institutions was
$12,500,000.
Every cent of this money has been spent for one ultimate purpose—
a stronger American society and a stronger free world. Within this
broad purpose the grants made have been directed towards 1 or more
of the 5 program objectives announced by the trustees in 1950. The
full list of foundation grants has, of course, been made available to this
committee and to the general public.
Support of education
The Ford Foundation has spent the largest share of its funds since
1950 in the field of education. Indeed, the support of education in
the broader sense encompasses most of our activities. The foundation's
assistance for research and training in foreign policy and world affairs,
for the study of human behavior, for work on problems in economic
development and administration, for broader understanding and better
functioning of free institutions, has all, in a sense, been aid to educa-
tion — education directed to the development of the free and self-reliant
mind and the growth of the human spirit.
In its approach to problems of education, the foundation does not
attempt to promote any particular point of view. It is governed by
the belief that in democratic countries there should be no single school
1028 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
of thought concerning education and no central point of control, either
in the hands of government or in the hands of some private group. We
believe that our public-school systems must remain under decentralized
control and that our private schools, colleges, and universities must
retain their independence. To whatever extent our schools are drawn
under central control, our democracy is to that extent weakened.
We believe also that our dual system of private and tax-supported
institutions of higher education must be preserved. Despite the excel-
lence of our State colleges and universities and the extensive diversity
of their control, we regard the continuance of private colleges and
universities as a most important national obligation.
Within this century the demands made upon these various institu-
tions have been immense. The number of our young people attending
college has increased almost tenfold ; there are today some 2 1 y 4 million
students in college. The growth of the demands on both elementary
and secondary schools has been no less spectacular.
An enormous burden has correspondingly been thrown upon the
teaching profession, and upon the administrative structure and facil-
ities of our schools and universities. Intensifying this strain have been
such other factors as the growing complexity of industrial life, with
its requirements for training in vocational skills, and the dislocations
resulting from the draft.
The trustees' appraisal of the opportunities for foundation action
in advancing education brought them to the conclusion that two in-
dependent nonprofit organizations should be established to deal with
some of the complex problems in education today. These were cre-
ated in March 1951 and are headed by distinguished boards of direc-
tors. One is the Fund for the Advancement of Education, the pur-
pose of which is to encourage and improve formal or institutional
education, and which is under the chairmanship of Owen J. Roberts,
former Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.
The other, the Fund for Adult Education, has been established to
support education for those whose formal schooling is finished, and
is under the chairmanship of Clarence Francis, until recently chair-
man of the board of General Foods Corp.
The Fund for the Advancement of Education concentrates upon
five major educational objectives. These are —
Clarifying the function of the various parts of the educational
system so they can work together more effectively ;
Improving the preparation of teachers at all levels of the educa-
tion system;
Improving curricula ;
Developing increased financial support for educational insti-
tutions ; and
Equalizing educational opportunity.
As of the end of 1953, the foundation had made grants aggregat-
ing $30,850,580 to this fund. The fund, in turn, had disbursed
$22,242,568 for the benefit of hundreds of colleges, school systems, and
teachers throughout all of the 48 States.
As of December 31, 1953, grants of $22,400,000 had been made to
the Fund for Adult Education. After an initial period of surveys and
experimentation, the fund's program was devoted largely to adult
study and discussion activities involving the collaboration of a great
many voluntary groups and associations.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1029
Of the foregoing sum, $9 million was granted to help extend and
develop educational television. The fund offered to match money
raised locally for building and operating educational television sta-
tions in about thirty cities and university centers. Stations already
are on the air with iund assistance in Madison, Wis. ; San Francisco,
Calif.; East Lansing, Mich.; and Pittsburgh, Pa., and others soon
will be operating. With help from the fund, a center to produce and
exchange program materials for these stations has been established
at Ann Arbor, Mich.
The foundation has felt from the beginning that it should try to
help develop the educational possibilities of standard television.
Through its TV-radio workshop, the foundation supports the pro-
duction of OMNIBUS, a 90-minute television program designed to
demonstrate that commercial television may serve as a cultural and
educational medium and still attract a large audience.
Peace and international understanding
Throughout most of their history, the religious spirit and humani-
tarian motives of the American people have led them to give help to
people abroad. In more recent years, the recognition has grown that
such help is also in our enlightened self-interest, since our own free-
doms and even our survival can now depend on happenings thou-
sands of miles from our shores. Because of this recognition the
American people are carrying unprecedented burdens in an effort to
establish a just peace throughout the world. In this effort the Ford
Foundation feels it can as a private agency play a small but signifi-
cant role.
In its international activities, the Ford Foundation supports three
kinds of projects: foreign economic development, research and train-
ing in overseas problems, and educational activity on international
affairs.
Economic development, — These projects are concentrated in South
and Southeast Asia and the Middle East. The emerging powers in
these areas are important to the United States and to the free world.
Their choice between the democratic forms of government they prefer
and the totalitarian forms which threaten them, depends largely upon
their ability to make political and economic progress. The trustees
have responded to requests of governments and private institutions
in these areas for assistance in the production of food, in improving
the techniques of village industry and in basic education. In India,
for example, aid has been given to the Allahabad Agricultural In-
stitute, which is supported by 5 American and 2 British religious or-
ganizations, to train a group of leaders who can teach better agri-
cultural techniques in the villages. In Pakistan, the foundation has
helped to establish a polytechnic institute and industrial training cen-
ter, to ease the acute shortage of mechanically skilled workers in that
country. In the Middle East, aid has been given the American Uni-
versity in Beirut for creation and support of an experimental farm
and applied agricultural research program.
Overseas training and research. — The trustees recognized that the
United States, in exercising its responsibilities of world leadership,
has been handicapped by inadequate knowledge of other parts of the
world and by a dearth of trained people. They decided, therefore,
to support research and training projects on foreign areas in Ameri-
can universities for at least 5 years. The University of Michigan,
1030 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
for example, received a grant last year under which a number of
graduate students was taken to the Near and Middle East for field
training under faculty supervision. Another example was the grant
to the Hoover Institute and Library at Stanford University to im-
prove its collection of materials on Asia and the Near and Middle
East.
Educational activities on international problems. — If our capacity
to work toward peace is to be increased, there must be a broad base of
public understanding of international problems both in the United
States and abroad. The trustees, therefore, have authorized the sup-
port of a variety of educational activities involving the dissemination
of information and knowledge through voluntary organizations, pub-
lications, and other media. A grant to the Council on Foreign Rela-
tions, for example, enabled it to organize a study group on United
States-Soviet Union relations composed of business and industrial
leaders, scientists and scholars, to analyze the issues in conflict between
the free nations and the Soviet Union. The foundation also has fa-
cilitated the travel and interchange of scholars and others, such as
4-H Club leaders, to increase their general understanding of inter-
national affiairs.
In response to a special opportunity to strengthen an outpost of
freedom surrounded by Soviet-controlled territory, the foundation
has made grants to build a library and lecture hall at the Free Uni-
versity of Berlin, which was established following the war by students
and teachers who fled the Communist-dominated university in the
Soviet sector of the city.
Sometimes our efforts in distant parts of the world are misconstrued.
For example, a well-known newscaster said a few months ago :
The Ford Foundation has allocated 250,000 American dollars to the American
Council of Learned Societies for the study of Telegu. It has handed over a
quarter of a million dollars for the study of Telegu, which is a neglected
oriental language spoken mainly in Hyderabad India * * * If the disturbed
dead could turn in their graves, Old Henry would be whirling tonight.
Actually, only a few thousand dollars of the total grant went for
work on Telegu. But more important than that are the following
facts : Telegu is today the language of more than 30 millions of Indians.
Most of them live in Andhra on the eastern coast of India. It is true
that the language has been neglected — by us, but not by the Russians.
Telegu-language publications from Moscow are distributed every day.
There is a Russian-Telegu dictionary. There is no comparable English
dictionary. The Ford Foundation believes it is money well spent to
help bridge the language gap between the United States and those
millions of Indians.
Neither the laws of this country nor the articles of incorporation
of the foundation prohibit or limit philanthropic activity abroad, and
such activity is in keeping with some of the finest traditions of Ameri-
can life. It is also in line with the policies of the American Govern-
ment, which is carrying on large-scale assistance programs in foreign
areas.
In working abroad, the activities of a foundation must be consistent
with the established goals of our Government ; and our operating pro-
cedures and policies assure such consistency. But a foundation cannot
become a mere tool of Government policy, or it will certainly end by
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1031
compromising both the Government and itself and diminishing the
effectiveness of its own activity.
Operating in countries on the border of the Communist world, as we
do, has its risks. These are sectors where Communist and democratic
ideas are in conflict every day. The foundation has not, of course,
worked in Communist countries, and we would withdraw our support
from a country the minute a Communist takeover appeared inevitable.
But we are willing to enter the fight to help people protect their free-
dom — even though at times the tide seems to be running against them,
even though their country may not do everything exactly to our liking.
The alternative is to leave the battlefield to communism.
The strengthening of democratic institutions
The Ford Foundation hopes to strengthen democratic institutions
and processes because they are fundamental to the advancement of
human welfare. In considering how to work toward this vitally
important objective, the trustees and their advisers have had to assess
the stresses and strains put upon Amercan democracy by the upheavals
of the first half of this century and especially by the internal and
external threats of communism. In this connection the trustees
decided after many months of careful staff work and consultation to
establish the Fund for the Republic, Inc. This new, independent,
nonpartisan organization, devoted to the problem of achieving security
with freedom and justice, has received $15 million from the founda-
tion. I am submitting a separate report on the details of this fund's
establishment as supplement B to this statement.
The trustees in analyzing our democratic strengths and weaknesses
were led to a consideration of interracial relations. To increase the
Negro's opportunity for education, the foundation made a grant of
$1 million to the United Negro College Fund, Inc.
We have been concerned with the need for improving the adminis-
tration of criminal justice. To this end a grant of $50,000 was made
to the American Bar Foundation, created by the American Bar Asso-
ciation.
Three groups seeking to improve the efficiency of Government at all
levels have been supported : The National Civil Service League, the
National Municipal League, and the Public Administration Clearing
House.
Underlying their consideration of this part of the program was an
awareness on the part of the trustees of the need for a widespread
understanding of American ideals and traditions. They therefore
have supported a number of important activities directed toward this
end, in addition to the Fund for the Republic. The Advertising Coun-
cil, Inc., received $50,000, matched by funds from other sources, for a
restatement of our national beliefs and ideals. Through the fund for
Adult Education, $500,000 went to the American Library Association
to provide opportunities and materials for study and discussion of the
basic national documents, ideas and experiences that constitute the
American heritage. Almost 300 groups in 28 States are already par-
ticipating in this program. Again through this fund, over a million
dollars of foundation money went into the development of recorded
educational radio programs. The first of these— a series of 13—
dramatized the life and work of Thomas Jefferson and was broadcast
over 168 stations throughout the Nation. The National Broadcasting
1032 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Co. in cooperation with the National Association of Educational
Broadcasters adapted a part of the series for television, and the scripts
were also published in book form.
The behavioral sciences
All the areas of the foundation's program concern the behavior of
human beings. Clearly, the success of efforts to eliminate war, to
strengthen free societies and to lift civilization to higher levels depends
upon man's better understanding of himself. We recognize that our
present knowledge of human behavior is inadequate, and that there
are too few people capable of adding to this knowledge or even able to
apply effectively what is now known.
The foundation's interest in this field is in no sense diminished by
the difficulties which men face in the advance toward knowledge of
human behavior, and by the fact that quick results are not to be ex-
pected. Here again is an area of effort that appears peculiarly appro-
priate to a foundation. Societies make progress when they can invest
substantial resources in the acquisition of knowledge and in the train-
ing of scientists and scholars, and when they have faith that the invest-
ment will ultimately yield worthwhile returns. The foundation shares
the faith of this country in scientific knowledge and education. In
promoting the study of man it has confidence that the institutions and
scholars it supports will in the long run contribute to the solution of
many of man's problems.
The foundation's program to increase understanding of human be-
havior includes grants to universities and other educational organiza-
tions (1) to improve the competence of behavioral scientists and
scholars; (2) to improve the sciences and disciplines which are con-
cerned with behavior; (3) to improve the methods employed by the
universities and scholars in scientific research and training; and (4)
to strengthen the basic resources of universities and colleges that are
engaged in training and research in human behavior.
Economic development
Another major objective of the Ford Foundation is to help keep our
economy viable and stable because economic health is necessary to
man's attainment of his other goals. In developing this program and
in screening the many worthwhile applications submitted to the foun-
dation, the trustees and officers have sought the advice of numerous
American businessmen and economists. The grant to the Wharton
School described earlier is an example of one of the ways in which
the foundation is attempting to enhance our economic strength by
assisting research and training in our educational institutions.
Another type of activity was the establishment of Resources for
the Future, Inc., an independent agency concerned with the whole
problem of wise use of our national resources. This agency sponsored
the Mid-Century Conference, which was held in Washington last
year, to discuss various aspects of the conservation, development, and
use of our resources. More than 1,500 persons, including the President
of the United States, took part. Here many different views, includ-
ing those of industry, agriculture, labor, consumers, and Government,
converged and often conflicted. The nonpartisan sponsorship of the
conference and the objective methods by which it was conducted show
how a foundation can properly support activities on subjects that
are often controversial.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1033
Manpower is a critical national resource, and as such is another
subject of interest to the foundation. In the present period of pre-
paredness we must obviously make the maximum use of our man-
power. The foundation has provided substantial support to Columbia
University for the National Manpower Council, established in 1951.
Other projects looking toward economic development and political
stability, particularly in the newer nations of the free world, have
received substantial support by grants to the Massachusetts Institute
of Technology.
The foregoing outline of some of the activities of the Ford Founda-
tion suggests the scope and character of our program as of today,
after 3y 2 years of expanded operations. We expect this program con-
tinually to evolve as conditions change. As old problems come nearer
to solution and new problems arise, the foundation must be able to
respond and move in new directions. We will make mistakes, and
may incur criticism. But our usefulness is really at an end if ever we
become more interested in playing it safe than in serving humanity.
CONCLUSION
The Ford Foundation is a young foundation. It took its place
among the large philanthropic organizations with its expanded pro-
gram only in 1950. But even though it is still in the formative period
of finding the most effective ways to serve the public welfare, it has
had the opportunity and privilege to meet thousands of people, in-
cluding representatives of hundreds of private organizations that are
dedicated to the common good. It has therefore had an unusual oppor-
tunity to observe American private philanthropy in action, and to
become acquainted with the people who run the organizations that
constitute important parts of philanthropy. It has also had the
opportunity to study the benefactions which flow in increasing volume
from philanthropy to education, science, and charity.
The trustees and officers of the Ford Foundation, therefore, have
no hesitancy in defending the institutions and individuals that make
up American private philanthropy. We attach great importance to
the successful defense of private philanthropy in America because
it is an important exercise of the rights of private association and
private action, and we have seen the collapse of free forms of society
where such rights are curtailed. We think the public interest has not
been served through the attacks which within the last 2 years have
twice been leveled on so vital a part of our free and democratic system.
To date the record of this committee, because of its almost complete
preoccupation with alleged shortcomings of foundations, has virtually
ignored the great contributions of foundations to the public welfare.
To leave the record in this imbalance would be inconsistent with this
committee's declared purpose of conducting a fair inquiry.
The Ford Foundation respectfully submits that this committee has
an unusual opportunity to render a great service at the time it makes
its report to the Congress :
First, it can dispel public misunderstanding by denouncing all
irresponsible testimony given in its public hearings insinuating
that foundations have been party to a subversive conspiracy ;
Second, it can restate and reaffirm the vital role of private phi-
lanthropy in America and in the free world ;
1034 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Third, it can encourage the maintenance and growth of con-
ditions under which philanthropy can flourish as an integral and
indispensable part of the total American democratic system ; and
Fourth, it can testify to all the adherence of the vast part of
American philanthropy to the law, to public policy, and to our
national objectives.
We hope that the committee will choose this constructive course.
Supplement A
Reply by the Fokd Foundation to Allegations Directed Specifi-
cally Against It Contained in the Record of the Committee's-
Public Hearings to Date
During the course of this investigation, several statements have
been made attacking purposes, personnel and programs of the Ford
Foundation. These statements or allegations appear in the speech
of Mr. Reece before the House of Representatives on July 27, 1953,
when he presented House Resolution 217, which speech has now been
repeated in the record of this committee ; in reports subsequently pre-
pared by the committee staff ; and in the testimony of certain witnesses.
Except for a few miscellaneous criticisms, these allegations follow
two general themes : that certain present or former employees of the
foundation are of "dubious" loyalty, and that certain grants have been
made to individuals or organizations of questionable loyalty or for
questionable purposes.
We believe the record of this committee's hearings does not sub-
stantiate these allegations. An examination of the press releases of
the committee and the transcript of the hearings strongly suggests
that many of the allegations — having been made perhaps carelessly or
for partisan purposes — have now been forgotten, if not actually dis-
avowed, by their authors.
We recognize therefore that it is not necessary to deal with all these
allegations as if they were well-documented and seriously intended.
Indeed it is impossible to deal with all the innuendoes and implica-
tions, for often the statements are vague and ambiguous ; and it seems
unnecessary to bother with those clearly irrelevant to the scope of the
inquiry, as for example the farfetched charge that the Ford, Rocke-
feller, and Carnegie Foundations have violated the antitrust laws.
Nevertheless, we believe that the dignity and prestige of the Con-
gress give even trivial and baseless comments a certain standing once
they become part of the official record. It is our hope, by presenta-
tion of the following information, to set the record right and, insofar
as we are able, to prevent further undeserved injury to the individuals
and institutions concerned.
i. charges regarding the loyalty of certain present or former
employees
We state for the record as follows :
1. Since the beginning of full-scale operations in 1950, the Ford
Foundation has hired several hundred full-time, part-time and tem-
porary employees, consultants and advisers. To the best of our knowl-
edge and information, the record does not contain a single instance
of anyone having been hired in any capacity by the Ford Foundation
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1035
who had ever been a member of the Communist Party or of any other
subversive organization.
2. In the hiring of personnel, the foundation follows the practices
of any well-managed private organization. A careful investigation is
made of the competence, character and integrity of all potential em-
ployees before they are hired. Regular supervision is of course exer-
cised over employees after they are hired, and in no instance to date
has any incident arisen or any information been discovered leading
us to doubt the loyalty of any employee.
3. Based on the foregoing, we believe the officers and staff of the
Ford Foundation are, without exception, men and women of com-
petence, integrity and loyalty.
The foundation has carefully reviewed the allegations which have
been placed in the record of this investigation against various of its
employees. In general the allegations involve no more than legitimate
differences of opinion between the person criticized and the critic.
But by the clever use of innuendo, the suggestion is conveyed that there
is something "dubious" if not actually subversive about the person
with whom the critic disagrees.
Without exception, we reject the insinuations made in the record
of the hearings of this committee to date that certain Ford Foundation
employees are disloyal or subversive. Based on our investigations we
believe these insinuations are erroneous and without substance. We
are forced to the conclusion that the purpose in giving circulation to
the allegations and to the material offered in their support was to cast
doubt upon the loyalty of men against whom no real evidence was
available, and thereby to reflect doubt upon the purposes and character
of the Ford Foundation.
In reaffirming the foundation's confidence in the loyalty and com-
petence of the men involved, it is not intended to say that all they
have ever said or done, or all they may say or do in the future, neces-
sarily represents foundation policy. They are men of standing and
ability. Like all citizens, they have their views on public issues, and
as free citizens they have the right to express them. If the committee
wishes to question any of these persons further, we are certain they
would be happy to provide whatever information is requested, and the
committee should feel free to call upon them directly.
Case No. 1 : Mr. Bernard Berelson
Allegation; — On pages 90-91 of the transcript 1 of these hearings, 2
the following statement appears:
Bernard Berelson is the director of the Ford Foundation's behavioral sciences
division, which has just been allotted $3,500,000 for the creation of a center for
advanced study in behavioral sciences which will consider social relations in
human behavior. Berelson, while on the faculty of the University of Chicago,
served on a committee to welcome the Red Dean of Canterbury, the Very Rev-
ered Hewlett Johnson, world renowned apologist for communism who sports
a Soviet decoration for his work in behalf of his Kremlin masters. The welcom-
ing committee for the Red Dean of Canterbury was organized under the aus-
pices of the National Council of American- Soviet Friendship, an agency which
has been cited as subversive and Communist by the Attorney General of the
United States.
.* References to the transcript of hearings throughout are to stenographic transcript pre-
pared by Alderson Reporting Co., Washington, D. C.
a Ibid., p. 36.
1036 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Berelson joined the staff of the foundation in July 1951. At
the present time he is the director of the behavioral sciences program
of the foundation.
Mr. Berelson is a social scientist of national reputation, who in the
course of his career has been research director of the bureau of applied
social research at Columbia University and dean of the Graduate
Library School at the University of Chicago. He is a past president
of the American Association for Public Opinion Research. He is the
author of several books and numerous articles of acknowledged scien-
tific merit.
In connection with the reference made to him in the record of these
hearings Mr. Berelson states that:
(a) He is not nor has he ever been a member of or in any way affil-
iated with the National Council of American-Soviet Friendship.
(6) He is not and has never been a member of any organization
cited by the Attorney General as subversive.
(c) He has never served on any welcoming committee for the Dean
of Canterbury sponsored by the National Council of American-Soviet
Friendship or by any other organization.
In connection with the incident mentioned, he states :
I recall signing a petition at the University of Chicago sometime between
1949 and 1951, asking the State Department to reconsider its adverse ruling
on the Dean of Canterbury's application for a visa to enter this country, and
to grant the dean such a visa.
I was not endorsing the dean's views, hut merely expressing my belief that
the United States in cases such as this should not place itself before the world
in the ridiculous posture of appearing fearful of ideas with which we as a
Nation do not agree.
This is the closest I ever came to "serving" on any committee concerning the
dean and I have never seen or heard the dean.
Case No. 2: Dr. Philip E. Mosely
Allegation. — On page 91 of the transcript of these hearings, 1 the
following reference appears :
The East European fund was established by the Ford Foundation, is financed
by it and deals with issues relating to the Soviet Union and its European satel-
lites, and particularly with the settlement and adjustment of Soviet refugees
who have come to the United States. The president of this fund is Dr. Philip
PJ. Mosely, who is also director of the Russian Institute at Columbia University.
Some years ago Professor Mosely made the following evaluation of the Soviet
Union in a pamphlet he wrote for the Foreign Policy Association, also supported
by foundations : "Over the long run, great numbers of people will judge both
the Soviet and American systems, not by how much individual freedom they
preserve but by how much they contribute, in freedom or without it, to develop
a better livelihood and a greater feeling of social fulfillment."
Garet Garett, editor of American Affairs, said that this is straight Commu-
nist Party ideology: "It means only that pure Communist ideology may be
thus imparted by Columbia University's Russian Institute through the Foreign
Policy Association."
Dr. Mosely, who is an eminent scholar and authority on the policies
of the Soviet Union, has been president of the East European fund
since January 1952. The fund is an independent corporation estab-
lished and financed by the Ford Foundation. One of its purposes is
to help refugees from the Soviet Union to make reasonable economic,
social and cultural adjustments to American life.
Dr. Mosely's special knowledge has been drawn upon repeatedly
by our Government. For example, in 1951-52 he appeared at the
request of the Attorney General of the United States as a principal
expert witness in an action brought before the Subversive Activities
ilbid., p. 36.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1037
Control Board to compel the Communist Party of the United States
to register as a Communist-action organization under the Subversive
Activities Control Act. The report of the Subversive Activities Con-
trol Board in this case, Senate Document ISTo. 41, 83d Congress, 1st ses-
sion, dated April 20, 1953, reads in part as follows :
Report of the Board
Dr. Philip B. Mosely, professor of international relations at Columbia Uni-
versity and director of the university's Russian Institute, was petitioner's prin-
cipal witness for the purpose of establishing that respondent's (Communist Party
of the United States— CPUSA) views and policies do not deviate from those
of the Soviet Union. Dr. Mosely has had a distinguished and active career in
the field of international relations, and for more than 20 years has devoted
his research primarily to Russian political and diplomatic history. While so
doing, he has had occasion to analyze carefully the publications and other
documents issued by respondent and the Soviet Union. He is eminently quali-
fied to testify as an expert on evidence relative to the "nondeviation" criterion
of the act.
Dr. Mosely's testimony traced the continuing stream of international ques-
tions upon which both the Soviet Union and the CPUS A have announced a posi-
tion. He enumerated some 45 international questions of major import, extend-
ing over the past 30 years, with respect to which there was, as revealed by
his testimony, no substantial difference between the position announced on
each by the Soviet Union or its official and controlled organs and that announced
by the CPUSA or its official and controlled organs.
In connection with his appearance in this case, a list of some 88
major publications by Dr. Mosely on subjects relating to Soviet policy
was submitted to establish his qualifications as an expert.
With reference to the allegations made against him in the record
of this investigation, the original source of the single criticized sen-
tence, quoted out of context and twisted out of its original meaning,
is Dr. Mosely's Face to Face with Russia, No. 70 of the headline series
of the Foreign Policy Association, Inc., published on August 20, 1948.
The sentence quoted cannot be understood except in the context of
the four preceding sentences and the single sentence following it in the
original pamphlet :
As we have seen, most of the problems we face in dealing with the Soviet
Union are not direct Soviet-American problems, but are rather problems in
third areas. The problem of Iran is not solely whether Soviet influence will
dominate there, or whether British-plus-American influence will balance Soviet
pressure. It is whether Iran can develop its resources and reshape its social
and political structure to survive in the modern world. The same problems,
written even larger, confront India, China, Indonesia, and the Arab East.
Over the long run great numbers of people will judge both the Soviet and
American systems, not by how much individual freedom they preserve, but
by how much they contribute, in freedom or without it, to develop a better
livelihood and a greater feeling of social fulfillment. The shape and purpose
we give to our dealings with peoples in the non-Soviet world will determine
whether American leadership continues to be acceptable to them (pp. 51-52).
The point of view expressed in these two paragraphs is that which
underlies the point 4 program to assist the economic and social devel-
opment of the underdeveloped countries and thereby to influence their
political orientation in a way favorable to the free world and there-
fore to the interests of the United States.
In addition to the direct allegation against Dr. Mosely quoted
above, reference was made (p. 92, Reece hearings transcript) 1 to the
fact that Dr. Mosely heads the Russian Institute at Columbia Uni-
versity, of which Philip C. Jessup and Ernest J. Simmons were iden-
tified as board members. If the implication is that Dr. Mosely is
ilbid., p. 36.
1038 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
somehow suspect because of his association either with the institute
or these two men, or both, we believe it is pertinent to note that the
institute is being used as a center to train United States Army, Air
Force, and Navy officers as well as State Department personnel. It
seems to us unlikely that such functions would be entrusted to the
institute if the Government had any question relating to its security.
Case No. 3: Mr. Bernard L. Gladieux
A number of allegations have been made concerning Mr. Gladieux
in the record of these hearings (pp. 92-96, Reece hearings transcript) }
These are enumerated and specifically refuted in a statement which
Mr. Gladieux has prepared and signed under oath. He has asked
that the committee accept this statement, which is being submitted
herewith, as part of its record. Mr. Gladieux has also stated that if
the committee wishes to ask him to appear and testify, he will be glad
to comply.
Mr. Gladieux has been a member of the staff of the Ford Founda-
tion continuously from November 1950, until the present. He was
originally employed on the basis of an outstanding record of service
as a Government official and on the highest recommendation of respon-
sible people. The foundation believes that Mr. Gladieux's statement
speaks for itself. We have had close contact with him during his 3^
years of service with us, and there is nothing in his record of service
to make us doubt his character, his integrity, or his complete loyalty.
Based on the foregoing, we believe that the accusations which have
been made against him in the record of the hearings before this
committee are false.
Case No. If,: Mr. Robert Maynard Hutchins 2
Concerning the allegations made in these hearings about Mr.
Hutchins, there is little to add to what is already a matter of public
record. He has been a leading figure in American education and pub-
lic life for nearly 30 years. His views on such matters as civil liberties,
academic freedom, and the right of universities to carry on their work
without political interference are well known.
The foundation feels it is unnecessary to repeat what Mr. Hutchins
has already stated, before the Cox committee and on other public
occasions, with respect to such criticisms of his views and actions as
are in the record of this investigation.
Mr. Hutchins served the foundation as an associate director from
late 1950 until May 1954. No action or statement of his during that
time would lead us to have the slightest doubt of his deep and complete
devotion to the ideals and interests of our country.
II. CHARGES MADE REGARDING DUBIOUS GRANTS
We state for the record as follows :
1. As a matter of policy and patriotism as well ,as for reasons of
scientific integrity, the foundation would not make a grant to a sub-
versive individual nor to a subversive organization.
2. The record of the foundation shows that of the hundreds of
grants it has made, it has never given money to any organization on
the Attorney General's list of subversive organizations and that it has
never made a grant to any individual known by it to be subversive.
1 Ibid., pp. 36, 37, 38.
J Ibid., p. 38.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1039
3. The foundation's policies, program, and operations are controlled
by its trustees, who are men of the highest patriotism, with broad
managerial experience and national reputation. Foundation grants
are carefully investigated before they are made, and are subsequently
reviewed and evaluated.
4. Our practice of regular public reporting exposes foundation
grants and policies to constant public scrutiny.
5. The entire program of the Ford Foundation is devoted to the
welfare of the American people. In this positive and constructive
sense, it is totally pro- American and actively antisubversive.
Case No, 1: Alleged subversive and un-American propaganda
activities
In the record of these hearings (pp. 70-71, Reece hearings tran-
script) 1 it is stated thai^-
Important and extensive evidence concerning subversive and un-American
propaganda activities of the Ford Foundation which was available to the (Cox)
committee of the 82d Congress was not utilized. Thus the Ford Foundation — ■
which is the wealthiest and the most influential of all foundations — was not
actually investigated. In fact, the hearings on the Ford Foundation constituted
merely a forum for the trustees and officers of this foundation to make speeches
instead of answering specific questions regarding the many dubious grants
made by them.
The above statement must also be read in light of another made at
the same type (pp. 64-65, Reece hearings transcript), 2 in which the
procedures of the Cox committee are referred to as follows :
The usual jurat was omitted. As a result of this, neither the Congress nor
the people know whether these officers and trustees were telling the truth * * *
In view of these circumstances, much of the testimony has no more validity than
common gossip, and no proper investigation has taken place.
The witnesses for the Ford Foundation before the Cox committee
were Messrs. Henry Ford, II, Paul G. Hoffman, Robert M. Hutchins,
and H. Rowan Gaither. These are not men whose veracity changes
with place and circumstance. The suggestion that becausethey were
then not under oath their statements had "no more validity than
common gossip" is contemptible.
In the Cox investigation, the foundation was not asked to testify
or submit information under oath. Had it been asked to do so, it
would have readily complied. In that investigation, as in the present
one, the foundation has cooperated to the fullest with staff and com-
mittee members. It has answered all questions and has provided
without exception whatever information has been requested.
With reference to the statement that the Cox committee had "im-
portant and extensive evidence concerning subversive and un-Ameri-
can propaganda activities of the Ford Foundation," we remind this
committee of the following :
1. In answering the Cox committee questionnaire, the Ford Founda-
tion stated that it had not made grants to any organization listed as
subversive by the Attorney General or, insofar as it could discover, to
any individual who had ever been cited or criticized by the House Un-
American Activities Committee or the Senate Subcommittee on In-
ternal Security ( answers D-10 and D-14 to Cox questionnaire ) .
ilbid., p. 30.
a Ibid., p. 28. ;5™' ."""
49720— 54— pt. 2 7
1040 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
2. In its final report, the Cox committee came to the following con-
elusion:
* * * It seems paradoxical that in a previous congressional investigation in 1915
the fear most frequently expressed was that the foundations would prove the
instruments of vested wealth, privilege, and reaction, while today the fear most
frequently expressed is that they have become the enemy of the capitalistic sys-
tem. In our opinion, neither of these fears is justified. (H. Rep. 2514, 82d
Congress, 2d sess., p. 10.)
It is impossible to believe that the Cox committee would have come
to such a conclusion had there been any important and extensive evi-
dence of the kind alleged.
Case No. 2: The Ftmd for the Republic
A number of statements have been made in these hearings (pp. 57,
58-59, 74, 103-105, 110, Reece hearings transcript) 1 to the effect that
the creation of the Fund for the Eepublic by the Ford Foundation was
an affront to the Congress; that its purpose is to investigate the Con-
gress and interfere with the investigation of subversive activities in
this country. Such criticisms are baseless.
Full public information has been made available from the start de-
scribing the actual purposes of this important undertaking. Supple-
ment B attached summarizes the materials previously made available
to this committee regarding the origins and purposes of the Fund for
the Republic.
The counsel to this committee has indicated that the Fund for the
Republic would be asked to make a further statement in its own behalf
covering its operations to date. The foundation will provide any
further information which may be reasonably required by the commit-
tee in order to aid it in disproving the charges which have been made
against the fund.
Case No. 3 : The television program Assembly VI and the employment
of Mr. Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.
Mr. Schlesinger was once employed by the TV-Radio Workshop, at.
that time an agency of the Fund for Adult Education, a grantee of the
Ford Foundation. He was hired by them to narrate Assembly VI, a.
television series reporting on the United Nations General Assembly
meetings in Paris, November-December, 1951. It has been suggested
(pp. 107-108, Reece hearings transcript) 2 that Mr. Schlesinger 's em-
ployment as narrator for these television films was improper because
of his viewpoint on certain political questions. It should be noted
that, even in the criticism of his views, no statement is made that Mr.
Schlesinger or his viewpoint is subversive or in any way disloyal.
In any case, Mr. Schlesinger was not employed because of his.
political opinions, nor did his employment by the TV-Radio Work-
shop signify endorsement of his personal views by the Workshop. Mr.
Schlesinger is a well-known author, a Pulitzer prize winner in history,
and is a highly competent radio and television commentator. These
are the reasons why his services were used.
The program which Mr. Schlesinger narrated was broadcast over
the NBC television network and consisted of 12 weekly one-half hour
programs, beginning November 10, 1951. The series received favor-
able public comment from critics and listeners all over the Nation. A
careful review of the scripts of these programs will reveal no evidence
whatever of a lack of objectivity on the part of Mr. Schlesinger. More-
i Ibid., pp. 26, 27, 40, 41, 42.
* Ibid., p. 41.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1041
over, except for the statements in these hearings, the foundation has
never heard criticism from any source alleging bias of any kind in
these programs:
Case No.Jf.: Fellowship grant to Moses Finley {Finkelstein)
On page 110 of the transcript of these hearings, 1 the following alle-
gation is made :
Another example of the kind of grants the Ford Foundation makes was re-
vealed in the testimony of William M. Canning, a former member of the faculty
of the City College and of Xavier University, who said under the oath at the
hearings of the Internal Security Subcommittee that Moses Finkelstein, a City
College teacher and later a professor at Rutgers University under the name of
Finley, was a member of the Communist Party and that recently this man
received a grant from the Ford Foundation.
Mr. Finley was one of 988 winners of faculty fellowships given by
the Fund for the Advancement of Education, a grantee of the Ford
Foundation, to enable younger faculty members in colleges throughout
the country to improve their competence in undergraduate teaching.
The fellowships covered compensation as well as travel and tuition
costs. The total of these awards to date has been $5,950,000, plus travel
and tuition costs. Mr. Finley's fellowship was for the academic year
1951-52, and amounted to $4,000. He received in addition $660 in
travel expenses.
The Fund for the Advancement of Education, at the time of estab-
lishment of the faculty fellowship program in April 1951, appointed a
committee on administration to administer the program. Its chairman
was President Victor L. Butterfield of Wesleyan University. Other
members of this committee were —
Chancellor Harvie Branscomb, Vanderbilt University
President Mary A. Cheek, Rockford College
Dean Fred C. Cole, Schools of Arts and Sciences, Tulane University
Dean Paul A. Dodd, College of Letters and Science, University of California at
Los Angeles
Dean Eldon L. Johnson, School of Liberal Arts, University of Oregon
Chancellor Arthur H. Compton, Washington University (St. Louis, Mo.)
President Arthur G. Coons, Occidental College
President Albert W. Dent, Dillard University
Dean William C. DeVane, Yale College, Yale University
Dean O. Meredith Wilson, University of Utah
Dean Francis Keppel, Graduate School of Education, Harvard University
Dr. Nathan M. Pusey, then president of Lawrence College
President Goodrich C. White, Emory University
Dr. Payson S. Wild, Jr., vice president and dean of faculties, Northwestern
University
All applicants are required to have assurance by the institutions in
which they are employed of their reemployment for the following
academic year, and their applications have to be fully recommended
by their employing institutions.
Newark College of Rutgers University was the sponsoring institu-
tion for Mr. Finley, whose project involved research in the legal history
and economics of the business practices of ancient Greece.
Rutgers University endorsed him "without reservation" on the appli-
cation for the fellowship. In addition, endorsements were received
from several outstanding scholars of law, ancient history and Greek
and Latin, testifying to Mr. Finley's abilities as a teacher and scholar,
* The fellowship to Mr. Finley had been granted prior to the hearings
of the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee in which Mr. Finley was
1 Ibid., p. 42.
1042 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
cited. Obviously, if such charges had been known at the time the
grant was made, they would have been carefully investigated.
It is our understanding that there was no adverse information
known to Rutgers University, the National Selection Committee or
the Fund for the Advancement of Education regarding Mr. Finley
at the time of his selection. The point of view reflected in the alle-
gations which have been made in this instance would hold these non-
governmental organizations culpable for a grant to an individual about
whom no adverse information was known or available to a private
agency at the time of the grant. This view is taken despite the fact
that careful procedures have been established to assure an intelligent
and objective administration of the fund's fellowship program; de-
spite a national selection committee made up of eminent educators
from all over the country ; and despite the fact that the alleged error
in the selections constitutes only a minute fraction of 1 percent of the
total number of fellowship awards.
The foundation feels this is not a reasonable standard by which to
judge Rutgers University, or the Fund for the Advancement of Edu-
cation or the Ford Foundation.
Case No. 5: Alleged "grant to a person who wants to abolish the
United States"
On page 111 of the transcript of these hearings 1 the following state-
ment appears:
Another dubious grant of a different character was made to Mortimer Adler
who received $600,000 from the Ford and Mellon Foundations to set up the Insti-
tute of Philosophical Research. Professor Adler is such an ardent advocate of
world government that according to the Cleveland Plain Dealer, October 29,
1945, he said : "We must do everything we can to abolish the United States."
Mr. Mortimer Adler is president and director of the Institute for
Philosophical Research, which is supported jointly by grants made in
June 1952, from the Fund for the Advancement of Education, a Ford
Foundation grantee, and the Old Dominion Foundation. The grant
to the institute by the Fund for the Advancement of Education was
to provide assistance in clarifying basic philosophical and educational
issues in the modern world.
Mr. Adler has described the facts about the statement attributed
to him as follows:
"In October, 1945, I lectured at a small Catholic girls college in Cleveland,
Ohio, the name of which I have now forgotten. The lecture was on the neces-
sity of world government to procure world peace. In the course of the lecture,
I said that just as our Founding Fathers were willing to abolish the separate
and independent status of New York, Virginia, Massachusetts, etc., in order to
form the more perfect union of the United States of America, so we, in our day,
must be willing to abolish the separate and independent status of the United
States in order to form the more perfect union of a world federal republic, con-
stituted along democratic lines. I went on to say that the citizens of other inde-
pendent states, such as England, France, and Russia, must be equally willing
to abolish the separate and independent status of their states. Since I thought
such willingness was very unlikely, I predicted that we would not see world
government or world peace in our generation.
The next morning the Cleveland Plain Dealer reported the speech under the
headline : "Adler Says : Abolish the United States." Several weeks later the
story from the Cleveland Plain Dealer, with headline, was reprinted in the
-Congressional Record as the result of some Clevelander's sending the clipping
from the Plain Dealer to his Congressman.
* Ibid., p. 42.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1043
Mr. Adler also lias stated that the theme of his Cleveland speech was
in substance identical to that of his book, How To Think About War
and Peace, which was published in 1943 and received generally favor-
able reviews. Mr. Adler's views on world federalism are widely
known, and, whatever one may think about that point of view, we
have never heard of any serious suggestion that it is subversive.
Case No. 6: Alleged "Grant to promote socialism"
The foundation in these hearings (pp. 111-112, Reece hearings
transcript) 1 has been criticized for having made a grant to the Adver-
tising Council, Inc., because that organization published a pamphlet,
The Miracle of America, which allegedly contains Socialist propa-
ganda.
The Ford Foundation in July 1951, made a grant of $50,000 to the
Advertising Council, Inc., of Washington, D. C, to help finance a
series of discussions by a group of prominent men of varied back-
grounds to be known as the American Round Table. The purpose
of these discussions was to develop a clear-cut statement of the beliefs
and ideals of our free American society.
The Advertising Council is a public-service organization main-
tained by American business and the advertising industry to provide
free national advertising in support of major public-service pro-
grams. It is an organization with a magnificent record of service
to the American Government during and since the war.
Some of the wartime campaigns of the council, carried on in co-
operation with the Government, were : Air-gunner recruitment ; Army
nurse recruitment; care of the wounded; Christmas packages for men
overseas ; reduction of industrial accidents ; metal-scrap salvage ; and
victory gardens.
The postwar campaigns have included the following : Armed Forces
blood-donor campaign ; better schools ; civil defense ; ground observer
corps recruitment ; fight tuberculosis ; get out the vote ; help for hos-
pitals ; jobs for veterans ; our American heritage ; religion in Ameri-
can life ("Go to Church" campaign) ; and highway safety.
The members of the council are eminent Americans. The last six
chairmen of its board have been :
Stuart Peabody, assistant vice president, the Borden Co. (present chairman)
Philip L. Graham, publisher, the Washington Post and Times-Herald, Wash-
ington, D. C.
Howard J. Morgens, vice president, the Procter & Gamble Co.
Fairfax M. Cone, president, Foote, Cone & Belding
Samuel C. Gale, vice president and director of advertising and public service,
General Mills, Inc.
Charles G. Mortimer, president, General Foods Corp.
President Eisenhower, in 1953, on the 10th anniversary of the
council, wrote as follows :
The Advertising Council and the business concerns associated with it need
no praise from me. The results of your work are obvious. The various Gov-
ernment departments whose programs you have done so much to forward
have reason to be grateful to you. Tour combined efforts have been worth
many millions of dollars to our Government. And I like to think that the
public spirit which has motivated you will continue to grow under this admin-
istration.
With reference to the charges contained in the record of these hear-
ings regarding the Advertising Council, Mr. T. S. Eepplier, president,
ilbid., p. 42.
1044 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
issued a public statement on July 29, 1953, reprinted in the Congres-
sional Eecord of Friday, July 31, 1953, which stated in part:
Representative Reece mentions the council's public policy committee and
states that several members of this committee have Communist-front affiliations.
So far as we know, all members of this committee are Americans of. unques-
tionable loyalty. The committee was set up as one of the checks and balances
of the Advertising Council. All new programs are passed upon by the council's
board; but as an additional check, they must also secure a favorable vote by
three-fourths of the public policy committee. This committee was deliberately
chosen to represent all phases of American life, including the major religions,
business management, labor, medicine, education, social service, and so forth.
In regard to the council's booklet, The Miracle of America, it is dismaying to
read that the Congressman regards this as a "rewrite of the British Labor-
Socialist Party platform." The booklet has been praised editorially by such
non-Socialist publications as Banking, published by the American Bankers Asso-
ciation, Business Week, the Houston Chronicle, the Chicago Tribune, and others.
It was reprinted in its entirety in Our Sunday Visitor, a Catholic publication.
The Army reprinted 55,000 copies for installations in the United States and
abroad. The United States Chamber of Commerce distributed the booklet to
all member chambers and urged its local use. About 140 leading American
companies have purchased the booklet in bulk for distribution to their employees,
including General Motors, General Electric, General Mills, Republic Steel,
Standard Oil of California, Union Carbide & Carlson, Western Electric,
and many other prominent American corporations who are scarcely prone to
promote socialism.
It would seem that after 11 years of free service to the country in war and
peace, the Advertising Council might be spared these accusations, which could
only arise from inaccurate information.
Case No. 7 : Alleged grant to u pro-Commwiist India)" 1
On pages 112 and 113 of the transcript of these hearings 1 the fol-
lowing statement is made :
The Ford Foundation has singled out India for some of its largest grants and
is spending millions of dollars in that nation. Is there some special significance
to singling out India for large Ford Foundation grants, in view of the fact that
the head of the Indian Government is more sympathetic to the Soviet Union than
toward the United States, and that he wants the United States to recognize Red
China and admit that Communist nation, which is slaughtering Americans in
Korea, to the United Nations? I am greatly concerned with what is being done
with the Ford Foundation millions in India. That nation is a potential ally of
the Soviet Union, and if the Ford Foundation projects in any way are fostering a
pro-Soviet attitude in India, the consequences may be disastrous for the future
of America. The stakes are very high, for if India should definitely become a
Soviet ally, the power of the Kremlin's block would be immeasurably increased.
My fear of what the Ford Foundation might be doing in India is increased by the
fact that in the case of China the activities of the Rockefeller Foundation in that
nation helped, instead of hindered, the advance of communism.
As we interpret this statement, activity by the Ford Foundation
in India is criticized on two grounds : (a) Because the head of the
Indian Government disagrees with certain policies of the American
Government; and (b) because Ford Foundation projects may have
the effect of encouraging a pro-Soviet attitude in India.
With reference to the wisdom of giving American assistance to
India despite the fact that India at times disagrees with some Ameri-
can policies, Mr. John Foster Dulles, the Secretary of State, in testi-
mony before the House Foreign Affairs Committee on April 5, 1954,
said:
* * * Freedom accepts diversity. The Government of India is carrying on a
notable experiment in free government. It provides a striking contrast with
the neighboring experiment being conducted in China by the Communist police-
state system.
* Ibid., p. 42.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1045
We believe that it is important in the United States that India's 5-year eco-
nomic plan should succeed, and that to continue to help in this is legitimately in
the enlightened self-interest of the United States.
The New York Times on Monday, June 14, 1954, reported a speech
of Gov. Thomas E. Dewey of New York, which is pertinent in this
context, in part as follows :
Governor Dewey warned yesterday against listening to the critics of leaders
in other free nations. These critics, he said, tear down the leadership of these
free countries "just because their governments are not like ours."
The Governor emphasized that "we ourselves are far from perfect," and that
"we had better grow up fast enough to extend to others, from France to India
and from Indonesia to Britain, the same tolerance of their difficulties which
we ask them to extend to us."
As to the fear that Ford Foundation projects may have the effect of
encouraging a pro-Soviet attitude in India, perhaps it will be most
helpful to the committee if we describe the nature and objectives of
our activities in that country and the policies and procedures which
have been established to insure that projects are soundly conceived and
properly administered.
One of the five major objectives of the Ford Foundation,
as announced by the trustees in 1950, is to contribute to the mitigation
of international tensions— in short, to peace. The interest of the
foundation in the possibilities for highly useful work in India began
following a visit and firsthand inspection by a number of foundation
officials in the summer of 1951. At the time that newly independent
county was in the fourth year of its drive to raise food production and
develop its resources so as to provide a more nearly adequate existence
for its 375 million people. Indian leaders were keenly aware of the
threat to governmental stability, and perhaps even to national inde-
pendence, which continued economic distress would produce. Founda-
tion assistance to Indian development began in late 1951.
India is a country of some 500,000 villages, in which live nearly 85
percent of the population. Much of the activity of the foundation
therefore has been concentrated on problems of village and agricul-
tural improvement. The most important projects which have been
supported include the following :
1. Development projects, 1 in each of 15 maj or states in India. Each
project includes about 100 villages. Trained Indian extension workers
go into the villages and work with the people to improve agricultural
practices, literacy, and public health. Full financial responsibility for
these projects was assumed by the Indian Government during 1953,
and the Indian Government is now actively engaged in expanding this
program to include the whole of India.
2. Thirty- four centers to train a total of four to five thousand village
extension workers per year. These are the grass roots teachers needed
for the village development program.
3. Three public-health training centers to train 300 public-health
workers annually in the methods of village health work. These trained
workers in turn will teach the men who will go into the villages to help
improve health conditions.
4. Publication of a farm journal for the increasing number of vil-
lage farmers who are able to read.
5. A study of secondary education in India looking toward improve-
ment in teacher training.
1046 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
6. Assistance on the problem of creating new employment oppor-
tunities in agriculture and industry.
7. A number of grants to American colleges and universities for
research on India. Cooperation is being encouraged between Indian
and American scholars and academic institutions. Fellowships and
foreign travel grants have also been made available for Americans to
study in India. Through these arrangements it is hoped that knowl-
edge and research on Indian problems will be advanced in both India
and the United States.
The foundation program in India was most" carefully developed.
After an initial on-the-spot survey, discussions were held with a large
number of American experts in government and in private life. Over
a period of several months, meetings were held to obtain advice and
guidance from the many voluntary American organizations with long
experience in the area. Only then was an appropriation of funds
made.
Once established, the program has been administered with care so
as to insure effective use of the funds provided, and to guarantee it
would in no way prejudice the foreign policies of this country. Views
are regularly exchanged between foundation officials and United
States Government agencies concerned in the giving of technical assist-
ance in India. A resident representative is maintained by the founda-
tion in New Delhi who follows the day-to-day progress of programs,
and consults regularly with officials of the Indian Government and of
the American Embassy.
III. MISCELLANEOUS ALLEGATIONS
In addition to the above allegations regarding the staff and certain
grants of the Ford Foundation, other miscellaneous charges have been
made.
Case No. 1: Report of Norman Dodd, committee research director
In the report presented to this committee by its research director,
Mr. Norman Dodd, in the opening week of hearings, the following
statements appear (pp. 131-132, Reece hearings transcript) : x
Finally, I suggest that the committee give special consideration to the Ford
Foundation. This foundation gives ample evidence of having taken the initia-
tive in selecting purposes of its own. Being of recent origin, it should not be
held responsible for the actions or accomplishments of any of its predecessors.
It is without precedent as to size, and it is the first foundation to dedicate it-
self openly to "problem solving" on a world scale.
In a sense, Ford appears to be capitalizing on developments which took place
long before it was founded, and which have enabled it to take advantage of —
The wholesale dedication of education to a social purpose ;
The need to defend this dedication against criticism ;
The need to indoctrinate adults along these lines ;
The acceptance by the executive branch of the Federal Government of
responsibility for planning on a national and international scale ;
The diminishing importance of the Congress and the States, and the
growing power of the executive branch of the Federal Government; and
The seeming indispensability of control over human behavior.
We have studied these comments. We are frankly at a loss to un-
derstand what they mean and what criticism is intended. It is true
that the foundation, like any private organization, has taken initia-
tive in selecting purposes of its own. Avowedly, the trustees have
dedicated the program of the foundation to the solution of human
problems.
i Ibid, p. 60.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1047
On the other hand, we have never had the slightest interest in dis-
couraging any responsible criticism of the educational system and we
are not involved in any attempt to indoctrinate adults, encourage
national and international planning by the Federal Government, di-
minish the importance, of Congress, or establish control over human
behavior.
Following the introductory comments quoted above, Mr. Dodd con-
tinued with these words (pp. 132-133, Reece hearings transcript) :*
As if they had been influenced directly by these developments, the trustees
established separate funds for use in the fields of education, national plan-
ning, and politics. They set up a division devoted to the behavioral sciences,
which includes a center for advanced glpdy, a program of research and train-
ing abroad, an institutional exchange program, aiid miscellaneous grants in aid.
Supplementing these major interests are such varied activities as: a TV-
radio work shop, external grants, intercultural publications, and an operation
called the East European fund, which is about to be terminated.
When it is considered that the capital resources of this foundation approach,
or may exceed, $500 million, and that its income approximates $30 million each
year, it is obvious that before embarking upon the solution of "problems," some
effort should be made by the trustees to make certain that their solution is in
the public interest.
To correct the more important errors of fact in the first paragraph
above, the Ford Foundation has established several separate funds,
including two in the field of education, but it has not established
funds, nor indeed has it supported any projects, directed toward na-
tional planning or politics.
As to the third paragraph, quoted above, the trustees have decided
to concentrate the work of the foundation on certain problems for the
very reason that their solution is judged to be of the greatest import-
ance to human welfare. If Mr. Dodd's comment is meant to suggest
that the Ford Foundation trustees do not carefully measure founda-
tion activities in terms of their contribution to the public interest, he is
wrong.
The concluding portion of Mr. Dodd's comments on the Ford Foun-
dation (pp. 133-134, Reece hearings transcript) x reads as follows :
It is significant that the policies of this foundation include making funds
available for certain aspects of secret military research and for the education of
the Armed Forces. It becomes even more significant when it is realized that the
responsibility for the selection of the personnel engaged in these projects is known
to rest on the foundation itself — subject as it may be to screening by our military
authorities.
In this connection, it has been interesting to examine what the educational
aspect of these unprecedented foundation activities can be expected to produce.
The first example in a pamphlet in which the Declaration of Independence is dis-
cussed as though its importance lay in the fact that it had raised two, as yet un-
answered, questions :
1. Are men equal? and do we demonstrate this equality?
2. What constitutes "the consent of the governed"? and what does this phrase
imply in practice?
By inference, the first question is subtly answered in the negative. By direct
statement the second is explained as submitting to majority rule — but the restric-
tion of the majority by the Constitution is not mentioned. Only an abridged
version of the declaration is printed. It is interesting that this should omit the
list of grievances which originally made the general concepts of this document
reasonable.
After a review of the list of our grants, we have concluded that
Mr. Dodd's reference to the support of "secret military research" must
be based on a misinterpretation of the grant by the Ford Foundation
to the Rand Corp. The Rand Corp. is a nonprofit research institution
1 Ibid, p.. 50.
1048 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
engaged primarily in research on problems of air warfare and other
defense matters under contract with Government agencies. The presi-
dent of the Ford Foundation was one of the organizers and is now
chairman of the board of directors of the Rand Corp.
To enable Rand to carry on a program of unclassified research in
the public interest, the trustees of the Ford Foundation on July 15,
1952, made a grant of $1 million. The financial arrangements were
made in such a way that the grant also added to the general financial
and organizational strength of Eand. To repeat, the research being
financed under our grant is entirely of an unclassified character.
The Ford Foundation takes no part in the selection of Rand person-
nel. Because of the nature of the primary work of Rand, its employees
engaged in classified work are presumably cleared under the usual
security procedures and regulations of the Government.
Regarding Mr. Dodd's reference to education in the Armed Forces,
the foundation, through the fund for the advancement of education,
has made funds available for a project for this purpose. It may be
helpful to summarize the information on the nature and origin of this
particular project which the fund has furnished us:
In the summer of 1951, at a time when there was some discussion in
the press of education in the Armed Forces, the Secretary of Defense
invited the Fund for the Advancement of Education to provide expert
counsel on the so-called I and E (information and education) program
of the Armed Forces.
Because of the importance of the problem and as a matter of na-
tional service, the fund employed two consultants to prepare a report
and recommendations.
At the same time, an advisory committee was appointed, composed
of—
Harvie Branscomb, chancellor of Vanderbilt University
Leonard Carmichael, president of Tufts College
Henry T. Heald, chancellor of New York University
Lester Markel, Sunday editor of the New York Times
Milton C. Mumford, vice president of Marshall Field & Co.
James J. Reynolds, Jr., vice president of American Locomotive Co.
John Mayer, vice president of Mellon National Bank & Trust Co.
As a result of the consultants' initial reports, the fund was asked
to undertake the preparation of several kits of materials for the infor-
mation and education program, and several additional consultants,
under the direction first of William Litterick, former director of re-
search at Stephens College, and then of Dean John Bartky, of the
Stanford University School of Education, were added to the project
in a Washington office.
These consultants were selected and appointed by the fund ; their
work does not involve the use of any classified material whatsoever.
Mr. Dodd makes reference to a pamphlet on the Declaration of Inde-
pendence which was prepared in connection with this project. He
states that only an abridged version of the declaration is printed and
criticizes the pamphlet in certain other respects.
The pamphlet in question is part of a kit of materials on the Decla-
ration of Independence for use in discussion groups among the troops.
The materials were actually prepared in final form by armed services
personnel from data given them by the fund's project personnel. The
kit contains four items : two large wall posters, one reading "The Decla-
ration of Independence," and the other reading "All Men Are Created
Equal — Consent of the Governed," a pamphlet entitled "You and
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1049
Your USA— The Declaration of Independence," which reprints this
document in its entirety; and a second .pamphlet entitled "You and
Your USA— Group Leader's Guide — The Declaration of Inde-
pendence."
The purpose of these materials is to assist in stimulating a thought-
ful discussion on this historic document by our men in the service.
Their intent is to encourage each man to think through its meaning for
himself. The mistaken suggestion that these prepared materials some-
how give a biased interpretation of the meaning of the Declaration of
Independence is best refuted by an examination of the material itself,
and copies are submitted as exhibit 1 hereto. 1
Case No. 2: Testirrwny of Mr. Aaron M. Sargent
Mr. Sargent in his testimony asserted that there is "not a single
restrictive clause" in the articles of incorporation of the Ford Founda-
tion; that the foundation and the funds it has helped to establish have
"unlimited power to administer and receive funds" for "whatever a
self -perpetuating board says is charitable or welfare" ; and finally, he
asserts that in determining what is charitable or welfare "there is no
control whatsoever" (pp. 849-850, Eeece hearings transcript). 2
As a corporation organized under the provisions of the General
Corporation Act of Michigan, the foundation is subject to the laws
of that State. The foundation's activities are also subject to review
by the Bureau of Internal Revenue because of its exemption from
income taxation under section 101 (6) of the Internal Revenue Code.
The foundation is, moreover, subject to all the normal police and
investigatory processes of such organizations as the Federal Bureau
of Investigation so far as violations of law are concerned. The policy
of the foundation to make full' public reports on all its activities sub-
jects it to general public scrutiny. Its financial statements are audited
by independent public accountants. In view of these various legal
and other safeguards it is hardly accurate to suggest that, in carrying
out their responsibilities, the trustees of the Ford Foundation are
subject to "no control."
If Mr. Sargent intended to propose additional restrictions upon the
functions of foundations and the powers of their trustees, he did not
specify what he had in mind. We cannot believe that even he was
proposing to substitute Government control for the basic concept of
trustee responsibility.
At other points in his testimony, Mr. Sargent made the following
statements :
The Ford Foundation used its financial power to attempt to resist the will of
the people of Los Angeles in connection with a pamphlet known as the B in
UNESCO (p. 850, Reece Hearings transcript) .
Mr. Paul Hoffman, the president of the Ford Foundation, personally appeared
before the Los Angeles Board of Education and sought to prevent the removal
of these pamphlets out of the Los Angeles city schools by the action of a duly
constituted board of the city of Los Angeles, and in so doing he engaged in
lobbying, an activity prohibited to the Ford Foundation. * * * He did it as
president of the Ford Foundation and used the power of the Ford Foundation
as a leverage in the case ( pp. 850-851 ) . 3
He was there using the weight and prestige of the Ford Foundation to try and
influence a city board of education in support of this proposal (p. 864 ). 4
The Ford Foundation has never attempted to "resist the will of the
people of Los Angeles" in connection with a UNESCO pamphlet or
any other matter.
1 Not printed in record, included in committee file.
* Ibid., p. 379. 3 Ibid., p. 379. * Ibid., p. 385.
1050 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Hoffman on August 25, 1952, upon request, appeared as a pri-
vate citizen before a hearing of the Los Angeles School Board to
protest the banning of certain UNESCO publications from the Los
Angeles public schools. Mr. Hoffman made it explicitly clear at the
beginning of his statement that he was appearing purely in a private
capacity and not as an officer of the Ford Foundation.
Mr. Hoffman is the father of seven children and he has been a resi-
dent of and prominent civic leader in the Los Angeles area for many
years. Under the circumstances, it seems not unusual that he should
have been asked to appear to give his personal views on the matter
under discussion and, in view of his great personal interest in the
Los Angeles school system, that he should have accepted the invita-
tion. Surely, his assumption of the duties of the presidency of the
Ford Foundation did not divest him of his rights to express his
personal opinions.
Supplement B
History or the Establishment of the Fund for the Republic
A complete statement of the background and establishment of the
Fund for the Republic, Inc., was furnished to this committee on March
11, 1954, in response to a request from the committee counsel. That
statement included full texts of all those portions of the minutes of
all meetings of the Ford Foundation board of trustees concerning the
fund, together with related material in the dockets for such meetings,
and various press releases. This statement digests those materials
and is submitted to facilitate the incorporation of such material in the
record.
The grant to the Fund for the Republic was designed to implement
a specific part of the Ford Foundation's broad five-point program.
This program had been developed by a study committee which had
been established in 1948. During the many months of its work, the
study committee reviewed existing materials and consulted with hun-
dreds of American leaders in all parts of the country as a basis for
recommending those areas in which the foundation could make the
greatest contribution to the public welfare. The committee's study
was considered by the trustees over a period of time, and in September
of 1950 the trustees published their report outlining the expanded
program for the foundation.
In that report, the foundation recognized the following facts : First,
that one of the major problems of any democratic society is how to
secure greater allegiance to the basic principles of freedom and democ-
racy in an ever-changing world. There is real danger that the gap
between profession and pursuit of the ideals of American freedom
may widen under the tensions and pressures of the international crisis.
Second, that the spread of communism represents one of the most
critical threats to the American public welfare. And third, that some
of the measures taken to deal with the threat of communism in them-
selves pose grave problems concerning traditional American freedoms.
After the adoption of the foundation's expanded program in 1950
there followed a period of intensive planning and reexamination of
these problems and of ways in which the foundation could help solve
them through scientific study and educational activity. The results
of these efforts supported the trustees' earlier decision that it was ap-
propriate and important for the foundation to attempt to deal with
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1051
these problems, and by the time of the trustees' meeting of October
4, 1951, they had decided that a new and separate agency should be
established for this purpose. The importance and complexity of this
area of American concern necessitated, in the opinion of the trustees,
the formation of an independent corporation directed by distinguished
Americans who could specialize in making a concentrated attack upon
threats to democratic processes. In October 1951 the trustees specifical-
ly stated that the purposes of the new agency were to be those set forth
in the President's report to their meeting. This report said in part :
The stated objectives of the fund shall be to help promote within the United
States security based on freedom and justice. In this endeavor the fund would
take into account :
(a) The danger to the national security from the persistent Communist
attempt to penetrate and disrupt free and peaceful societies ;
(6) The danger to the national security arising from fear and mutual
suspicion generated by international tension ;
(c) The danger to the national security arising from fear and mutual
suspicion fomented by shortsilghted or irresponsible attempts to combat
communism through methods which impair the true sources of our strength ;
(d) The need to understand and vindicate the spiritual and practical sig-
nificance of freedom and justice within our society which are enduring
sources of its strength ; and
(e) The need to dedicate ourselves anew to the demonstration within
America of a free, just, and unafraid society at work.
After this meeting, the trustees and the staff continued to consider
more detailed aspects of the organization and program of the agency
which was to be established. Fourteen months after the trustees had
originally decided to create the fund, and 5 years after the trustees had
first announced their interest in dealing with the problems for which
the fund was created, the fund for the Republic, Inc., was finally
incorporated on December 9, 1952. An initial appropriation of $1 mil-
lion was made to enable the fund to begin operations.
The fund began with a board of directors made up of prominent
and public-spirited citizens as follows :
James Brownlee, partner, J. H. Whitney & Co., New York City
Malcolm Bryan, president, Federal Reserve Bank, Atlanta, Ga.
Huntington Cairns, lawyer, Washington, D. C.
Charles W. Cole, president, Amherst College, Amherst, Mass.
Russell L. Dearmont, lawyer, St. Louis, Mo.
Richard Finnegan, consulting editor, Chicago Sun-Times, Chicago, 111.
Erwin N. Griswold, dean, Harvard Law School, Cambridge, Mass.
William H. Joyce, Jr., chairman, Joyce, Inc., Pasadena, Calif.
Meyer Kestnbaum, president, Hart, Schaffner & Marx, Chicago, 111.
M. Albert Linton, president, Provident Mutual Life Insurance Co., Philadelphia,
Pa.
Jubal E. Parten, president, Woodley Petroleum Co., Houston, Tex.
Elmo Roper, marketing consultant, New York City
George N. Shuster, president, Hunter College, New York City
Eleanor Bumstead Stevenson, Oberlin, Ohio
James D. Zellerbach, president, Crown-Zellerbach Corp., San Francisco, Calif.
Each of the directors of the fund had been approved by each of the
trustees of the foundation. I feel sure that the members of this com-
mittee would recognize the board as a distinguished group of loyal
Americans.
Following its organization, the fund first concentrated on detailed
development of its program and method of operation. A planning
committee of the fund's board of directors was established under the
informal chairmanship of Dean Griswold. Mr. Paul Hoffman was
1052 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
elected chairman of the board, and Mr. Bethuel M. Webster was
selected as counsel to the fund. By February 23, 1953, the directors
of the fund had progressed sufficiently in their planning of the fund's
program and operations to be able to present to the foundation a
proposal requesting further foundation support in the amount of
$14 million. Included in that proposal was the following statement :
The directors see a pressing need for a clear statement in contemporary terms
of the legacy of American liberty. They believe that such a statement is one of
the most valuable contributions the fund can make in the near future.
A major factor affecting civil liberties is the existence of communism and
Communist influence in this country. The directors propose to undertake
research into the extent and nature of the internal Communist menace and
its effect on our community and institutions. This research would be carried on
concurrently with the study of the legacy of American liberty mentioned above.
The fund's proposed program was presented to the foundation's
trustees by four of its directors and its counsel. The directors were
Messrs. Hoffman, Griswold, Joyce, and Parten. The fund's repre-
sentatives discussed their plans in detail with the foundation's trustees.
In a later executive session, the trustees again reviewed the entire
matter. They concluded that the foundation should support the fund
by making a grant $14 million. This sum was to support the fund's
operations for a period of 5 to 10 years; that is, the grant was made
to support a program of from $1,500,000 to $3 million a year. The
grant was not payable until the fund had been specifically ruled by the
Treasury Department to be exempt from income taxation under sec-
tion 101 (6) of the Internal Revenue Code. The fund was ruled exempt
on January 20, 1954. After reviewing the matter at their next meet-
ing, the trustees of the Ford Foundation approved the final payment
of the grant, which payment was made on February 16, 1954.
I do not wish to discuss the details of the fund's program to date,
since I understand the committee is going to obtain that information
from the fund's distinguished chairman, Mr. Paul G. Hoffman. How-
ever, I would like to discuss one of its activities, which was used as
a basis for criticizing the foundation for establishing the fund. I refer
to the fund's proposal to study some aspects of legislative investiga-
tions. In our preliminary thinking about the fund, it was apparent
that a study of legislative investigations was an appropriate activity
for the fund. Shortly after its establishment, the fund made a grant
of $50,000 to the American Bar Foundation to support such a study
by a special committee of the American Bar Association. This com-
mittee is headed by Mr. Whitney North Seymour and made up of
eminent members of the bar. Such a study is appropriate, it is needed,
and I hope the trustees of the fund take the necessary action to see the
need is filled. As the Supreme Court of the United States said in U. S.
v. Rumley in 1952, and I quote :
There is wide concern, both in and out of Congress, over some aspects of
the exercise of the congressional power of investigation.
I need hardly labor the point. The President of the United States
has similarly expressed concern over some of these problems and it is
clearly in the national interest and in the best American tradition that
a philanthropic foundation give support to students of the subject.
I would like to point out that the critics of such a study did not even
wait to see whether the study would be fair, would be objective, or
even whether it would be made. Instead, through distortion of the
TAXhEXEMPT foundations 1053
facts, they suggested that the entire $15 million of our grant to the
fund was somehow going to be used to attack Congress as a whole, or
its investigating powers in particular. This was not true; and it
would have been clear that it was not true to; anyone who had sought
to determine the truth before he spoke.
The trustees of the Ford Foundation are proud of their act in
creating the fund for the Republic. The problems which the fund
was created to help solve are increasingly crucial ones. The threat of
communism concerns every American. The need for restating and
defending the basic traditions of American freedom, especially in the
light of tensions, events, and implications in the present world situa-
tion, similarly becomes more pressing.
I am sure that when this committee reviews the facts it will agree
with the trustees of the foundation that the creation of the fund was
appropriate and patriotic, and that the fund's activities constitute a
promising start on a vital and noble task.
STATEMENT OF PAUL G. HOFFMAN, CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD,
THE FUND FOR THE REPUBLIC, INC.
I expected to testify on June 29 at the request of the special commit-
tee. A day or two before the 29th I was told that the hearings had
been terminated or suspended, that my engagement was canceled.
I am sorry I have thus been kept from testifying in person as to
the purposes, program, and activities of the fund for the Republic and
from answering questions.
I submit this statement not because the transscript of hearings con-
tains evidence concerning the fund — for none has been offered so far
— but because Representative Reece's speech of July 27, 1953, now a
part of the record of the investigation, contains references to the fund,
and to me personally, which, in the interest of accuracy and fair-
ness, require comment.
Mr. Reece said :
The Members of this House were amazed when they read just recently that
the Ford Foundation * * ■ * had just appropriated $15 million to be used to
"investigate" the investigating powers of Congress, from the critical point of
view (transcript 57).
No Congressman * * * could fail to be alarmed at the fact that $15 million
* * * was to be expended to attack the Congress for inquiring into the nature
and extent of the Communist conspiracy * * * (transcript 58).
The Communists have their own agency to smear the committees of the
United States Congress and to defend Communists hailed before them. It is
called the Civil Bights Congress and has been listed by the Attorney General
as Communist and subversive. To give it liberal respectability, Mr. Paul Hoff-
man, former president of the Ford Foundation, was made chairman of this
King-sized civil rights congress endowed by the Ford Foundation. The Fund
for the Republic, as this Ford Foundation agency is named, has announced
that it will make grants for an immediate and thorough investigation of Congress
(transcript 58-59).
*' * * the prevkrasly mentioned Ford Foundation grant makes available $15
million for investigating congressional methods of inquiries into communism
and subversion. * * * (transcript 74).
* * * a grant of $15 million, to protect the civil liberties of Communists and
to investigate the Congress of the United States * * * is really peanuts to the
Ford Foundation. * * * Here is the last of the great American industrial for-
tunes * * * being used to undermine and subvert our institutions, $15 million
"being set aside to investigate the Congress of the United States * * * (tran-
script 103 ).*
1 See ibid., pp. 25 et seq.
1054 T&X-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The declaration that the fund for the Republic is a "king-sized civil
rights congress" (and thus subversive) — "given liberal respectability "
by my appointment as chairman — would be actionable as slander but
for the fact that it was uttered by Representative Reece on the floor
of the House. But I pass that, not without feelings of chagrin and
shock that the privilege of the House should be so abused.
The documents and data requested by the special committee have
been supplied; and it is hoped that the committee will refer to this
body of information rather than to the Reece speech for the facts.
The plain truth is that there is no basis whatever for the charge that
the Fund for the Republic was established to attack the Congress.:
The facts pertinent to the charges are as follows :
In December 1952 the fund approved a grant of $50,000 to Ameri-
can Bar Foundation, a tax-exempt organization, to finance seven dif-
ferent studies bearing on individual rights as affected by national
security proposed and to be conducted by a special committee of the-
American Bar Association. A description of the grant is contained
in materials submitted to your counsel and staff. One of the seven
proposed studies was — The extent to which Congress should limit the
scope and regulate procedures of its investigations — a topic con-
cerning which many Members of Congress have manifested interest.
In a speech in the House on August 1, 1953, shortly before his resigna-
tion from Congress to become president of the Fund for the Republic*
former Representative Clifford P. Case, of New Jersey, described his
personal familiarity with the plans of the ABA committee, pointed
out that the ABA committee was approaching its task with full appre-
ciation of the importance of the congressional investigating process*
and made it a matter of record that he himself had introduced the
chairman of the ABA committee to the Speaker and to the minority
leader of the House of Representatives — both of whom expressed inter-
est in, and offered suggestions concerning, the study and plans out-
lined by the ABA committee chairman.
Your counsel and staff have been supplied with the statement of
William J. Jameson, president of the American Bar Association,
printed in the January 1954 issue of the ABA Journal, describing the-,
study which is being made with the fund's grant. In an editorial in
the July 1954 issue the ABA Journal it is said :
The American Bar Association will welcome at its annual meeting in August
the forthcoming report of its special committee on individual rights as affected
by national security headed by the highly respected, highly competent Whitney-
North Seymour, of New York City. Mr. Seymour is already nationally recog-
nized as an outstanding lawyer in the field of civil liberties. His committee will,
no doubt, have proposals relating to procedures for our investigating agencies.
These proposals will be based upon the sober second thought of the capable,,
qualified lawyers whose loyalty to our American institutions is unimpeachable.
Congress and the public are much in need of such sound advice today. Our
people recognize that we need investigating procedures and procedural standards
which will be fair as well as effective. In such fair procedural standards we will
find security both for our lives and our liberties.
Meanwhile, as your committee knows, the Congress itself, aware
of abuses and of the need for satisfactory procedures, is looking for
the answer to a serious problem.
The notion suggested by Mr. Reece that $15 million was to be ex-
pended "to attack the Congress for inquiring into the nature and
extent of the Communist conspiracy" is met by the fact that the Fund
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1055
for the Republic itself has just about completed one phase of an in-
quiry into the nature and extent of the internal Communist menace.
The consultants on this project— an undertaking in which I have been
greatly interested since before the establishment of the fund — are
Prof. Arthur E. Sutherland of the Harvard Law School, Prof.
Clinton Rossiter of Cornell, and Father Joseph M. Snee, S. J., of
Georgetown. Briefly, the study about to be completed consists of
the preparation of a comprehensive bibliography of materials con-
cerning communism in the United States and a definitive digest of
public proceedings in which communism was involved. The bibli-
ography and digest, together with microfilm copies of the principal
records of public proceedings, will be reproduced in such form as to-
be widely available to interested persons throughout the country. The
directors of the fund take some satisfaction in the fact that in one of
the fund's first endeavors it is making available for the first time in
convenient form basic information of incalculable value not only to
the Government and to the Congress but to all persons and agencies
engaged in fighting the Communist menace.
In his speech or July 1953 Representative Reece said "some large
foundations must answer" the following question :
Have they financed studies regarding the excellence of the American Constitu-
tion, the importance of the Declaration of Independence, and the profundity of
the philosophy of the Founding Fathers? And, if not, what is their excuse for
neglecting the study of the basis of the American Republic 't (Transcript 68-9.) *
I am happy to say that it has been the purpose of the Fund for the
Republic since it was established to reexamine, with a view to greater
understanding an d wider application, the sources of strength in our
society as expressed in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitu-
tion, and in our free institutions, and that projects suggested for this-
purpose are being considered and advanced as rapidly as circumstances-
permit.
In conclusion, I want to emphasize that the officers and directors and
staff and resources of the Fund for the Republic are devoted ex-
clusively to the purposes and program of the fund itself. The fund is
a tax-exempt membership corporation engaged in research and educa-
tion. Its financial resources consist of $15 million granted by the Ford
Foundation but administered by the fund's own board of directors..
The Fund for the Republic is completely independent of the Ford
Foundation— except that it is obliged by the terms of its grant to en-
gage in activities consistent with its tax-exempt status.
State of New Yobk,
County of New York, ss:
Paul 6. Hoffman, being duly sworn, says :
I am chairman of the hoard of directors of the Fund for the Eepublic, Inc. I
have read and know the contents of the foregoing statement, and the same is true
to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.
Paul G. Hoffman.
Sworn to before me this 21st day of July, 1954.
Rose Berlin,
Notary Public, State of New Yorlc, No. 31-5288500.
1 Ibid., p. 29.
49.720 — 54 — pt. 2 -8
IQ§Q TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
STATEMENT OP JOSEPH E. JOHNSON, PRESIDENT, CARNEGIE
ENDOWMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL PEACE
INTRODUCTION
The Special Committee To Investigate Tax Exempt Foundations has
now ended public hearings without giving the foundations themselves
an opportunity to testify. This would have been a violation of fair
procedure in any case, but it was rendered extraordinarily so by virtue
of two facts. First, the bulk of the testimony presented in the hear-
ings had, apparently by design, been hostile to the foundations. Sec-
ondly, a month after the hearings closed, the staff was permitted to in-
troduce extensive material attacking certain foundations, including
the Carnegie Endowment, with inadequate opportunity for challenge.
Under the circumstances it. is important to give a short summary of
the history and record of the endowment before commenting on state-
ments made concerning it.
THE RECORD OF THE ENDOWMENT
The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, which is entirely
separate from all the other organizations created by Andrew Carnegie,
was established by him in 1910 with a trust fund of $10 million. He
directed that the principal of the fund should remain intact and that
the income should be administered by his trustees "to hasten the
abolition of international war."
This objective is spelled out in the endowment's charter as follows :
"to promote the advancement and diffusion of knowledge and under-
standing among the people of the United States ; to advance the cause
of peace among nations ; to hasten the renunciation of war as an instru-
ment of national policy; to encourage and promote methods for the
peaceful settlement of international differences and for the increase of
international understanding and concord ; and to aid in the develop-
ment of international law and the acceptance by all nations of the
principles underlying such law." From the beginning these objectives
have been the basis for the work of the organization, for its educational
activities and for the research which it has undertaken and supported.
These facts furnish the explanation for several differences between
the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and other founda-
tions to which this committee has directed its attention. In the first
place, the endowment has a specific set of objectives toward which
all its efforts are directed. Secondly, it has comparatively limited
resources; the endowment's income on its fund has never reached
$600,000 a year and is now slightly over $500,000. In this connection,
it should be noted that a tabulation based on the questionnaires sub-
mitted 2 years ago to the Cox committee placed the endowment below
30 other foundations in terms of net worth.
A third distinction, arising in part from the relatively limited
resources of the organization, is that the endowment is not primarily
a fund-granting foundation. Although in former years a fair pro-
portion of the endowment's funds were expended in grants, it has
always carried on operations of its own. Today the endowment func-
tions almost exclusively by carrying out — through its own staff or
through contracts — specific programs authorized by the endowment's
trustees.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1057
The objectives spelled out in the charter as the focus of the endow-
ment effort in the pursuit of peace were denned by trustees named
Iry Mr. Carnegie and working in consultation with him. He was
inspired to establish this institution by admiration for the policies of
President William Howard Taft, and his principal associates in its
formation — men whose vision and leadership have most influenced
its activities — were Elihu Root and Nicholas Murray Butler, Among
the other distinguished Americans who made up the original board
of trustees and assisted in charting the course for the endowment were
John W. Foster, John Sharp Williams, and Joseph H. Choate. The
liigh caliber of the original board has been maintained throughout
the years. Trustees have included leaders of both major parties in
the United States and eminent citizens from all sections of the country.
One President, Dwight D. Eisenhower, and one Presidential nominee,
John W. Davis, have been trustees. There were also five Secretaries
of State : Messrs. Foster and Root, Robert Bacon, Robert Lansing, and
John Foster Dulles. Trustees who have served as Senators included
Mr. Root, Mr. Williams, Mr. Dulles, George Gray, and Robert A.
Taft. The board has been characterized by the faithful. attendance
of its members at meetings, despite a wide geographical distribution,
and by their profound and active concern with the endowment's work.
The record shows that the trustees of the endowment and its staff
have for 43 years conscientiously pursued the purpose for which Mr.
Carnegie established the organization. In doing so they have had
repeated occasion to applaud the wisdom of Mr. Carnegie who, not
pretending to a clear knowledge of the future, gave the trustees
appropriate discretion in these words :
Lines of future action cannot be wisely laid down. Many may have to be
tried, and having full confidence in my trustees I leave to them the widest
discretion as to the measures and policy they shall from time to time adopt,
only premising that the one end they shall keep unceasingly in view until it is
attained, is the speedy abolition of international war between so-called civilized
nations.
I can speak from personal knowledge only of the years since July
1, 1950, when I became the endowment's president, and all of my
statements as to its activities before that date are based on its records.
Moreover, none of the members of the senior staff concerned with
recommending policy to the trustees and carrying out their decisions
was with the organization before the end of World War II. The
history of the endowment prior to that time, however, is a matter of
record in year books which were widely distributed from the begin-
ning. Despite the international wars which have engulfed the world —
and which have frustrated, in a manner which Mr. Carnegie could
not have foreseen in 1910, the efforts to achieve peace — the endow-
ment's record is one in which the trustees and staff take pride.
A few examples taken frpm this record may serve to illustrate the
methods by which the original instructions of Mr. Carnegie have
been carried out.
People in many foreign nations have learned about the American
principles of liberty through the endowment. The texts of our Con-
stitution and the Declaration of Independence were translated into
several foreign languages and widely distributed, and the teaching
of American history was financed in the universities of England,
France, and other nations.
1058 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The endowment pioneered in the "exchange of persons" and so*
helped to launch the mounting flow of exchange students, teachers,,
technicians, and agriculturalists which today is actively supported by
the United States and other governments and by private organizations..
Nearly 20 years in the writing, James T. ShotwelPs monumental':
Economic and Social History of the World War was completed by the
endowment in 1937 and distributed to governments, libraries, and
universities throughout the world. Over 250 authors, researchers,,
and editors of many nationalities collaborated in the preparation of
this comprehensive analysis in some 150 volumes of the effects of the=
First World War. This study remains a major contribution to the-
world's knowledge of the effects of war, both immediate and long-
term, on governments and on the economic and social life of bellig-
erents and neutrals.
From the beginning the trustees and staff of the endowment have-
devoted a very substantial part of their efforts to increasing public
knowledge about and understanding of international relations. Like
Mr. Carnegie, they have been convinced that in those countries where-
public opinion is the basis of official policy, policy can only be con-
sistently wise when it rests upon informed public opinion. It is this.
conviction which has determined the endowment's educational ac-
tivities.
These activities have been very diverse. Among them has been*
the distribution abroad of important collections of books on Ameri-
can history, government, law, economics, and literature in major-
cities of Europe, Asia, and South America. A similar activity for a.
similar purpose was the fostering of international relations clubs-,
on college and university campuses, chiefly but not exclusively in the-
United States. The point of view which has underlain these edu-
cational activities is well expressed in a statement made about the
international relations clubs in 1941, and in slightly different form
many times before :
The purpose of the endowment in undertaking this work is to instruct and
to enlighten public opinion. It is not to support exclusively any one point of
view as how best to treat the conditions prevailing throughout the world but
to fix the attention of students on those underlying principles of international
conduct, of international law and of international organization which are es-
sential to a peaceful civilization.
Over a 20-year period the endowment spent $184,000 toward cata-
loging and reorganizing the Vatican library's priceless historical col-
lection, thus making it readily available to scholars for the first time.
The active leadership and support of the endowment was the chief
force behind the research, publication, and development that took
place in the field of international law in the first half of this century.
Carnegie fellowships in this field have helped train many persons for-
their present positions of responsibility in American public and aca-
demic life.
Canadian- American relations, an example to the world of peaceful
international cooperation, were the subject of a 25-volume history-
prepared and published by the endowment. This work formed a,
model for subsequent studies of friendly relations among other na-
tions.
Turniag now to the period on which I can report from personal
knowledge, there are four current programs to which the endowment-
today devotes the greatest part of its funds.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1059
First, in the new building at First Avenue and 46th Street in New
York, there is an international center which was designed to provide
-convenient, well-equipped facilities for organizations presenting pro-
grams on world affairs. Since its opening in June 1953, there have
been more than 750 programs in the center attended by more than
30,000 persons. Fulbright scholars have held discussions in the cen-
ter; the Christian Science Monitor Youth Forum meets there; stu-
dents from Africa have arranged an exhibit of native art of the Gold
-Coast; Columbia University has scheduled some of its bicentennial
'events there.
Second, there is a program on universities and world affairs. On
the basis of experience in trial surveys at 8 universities and in
regional conferences attended by representatives of more than 200
colleges and universities, the endowment has encouraged American
institutions of higher learning to conduct self -surveys and appraisals
of their activities bearing on world affairs. One hundred colleges
and universities have survey committees cooperating in the program ;
each committee is appointed by the president of the university and
reports to him. Each university committee reviews its program and
activities in its own way and makes recommendations looking toward
a more effective use of the university's resources. The endowment
makes no recommendations. It acts as a clearing house for the ex-
change of information between cooperating institutions and in compil-
ing results of the survey in a series of eight volumes to be published
next year.
Third, there is a publications program. Primary emphasis is on
International Conciliation, a periodical now published five times a
year. Each issue is devoted to a study of some problem of interna-
tional organization, selected particularly from fields in which infor-
mation is not easily available. A special number each fall presents
background information on issues before the current session of the
United Nations General Assembly.
In two series of books and pamphlets, the endowment has under-
taken studies of various organs and activities of the United Nations.
Subjects have included the International Court of Justice, the Security
-Council, the General Assembly, and disputes brought before the United
Nations. Other publications have dealt with a variety of topics such
as institutes of world affairs and current research in world affairs.
Finally, there is a series of studies now in progress in representative
countries throughout the world concerning their national policies and
attitudes toward international organization, particularly in regard to
the United Nations. Arrangements for the studies vary from one
country to the next. The normal patern is for some leading private
Institution to assume responsibility for the study in its country. The
studies will be published in a series of some 20 volumes.
In undertaking these studies the endowment has assumed that inter-
national organization is here to stay in some form or other and that
it is and will remain an important factor in international life. We
are trying to find out, if we can, why these countries joined the United
Nations, what they expected to get out of joining it, what they have in
fact got out of it, and what they think may be the future. We also
liope that these studies will help in preparing for the proposed confer-
ence to review the United Nations Charter. In addition, we hope to
■encourage research in the field of international organization in general.
1060 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Today the endowment distributes over four thousand copies of its=
annual report to libraries, colleges and universities, newspaper and
radio stations, organizations and individuals concerned with interna-
tional relations, and to all the Members of the Congress of the United
States.
We believe the activities which are summarized above, and described
in greater detail in those reports, are in keeping with the purposes for
which the organization was founded and are in the public interest.
The story is one which the trustees and staff of the endowment are glad-
to submit for the records of this committee.
STATEMENTS CONCERNING THE ENDOWMENT
I turn now to specific statements concerning the endowment, made
either in the hearings of the special committee or in memoranda pre-
pared by the committee's staff which have been brought to our atten-
tion. In considering these statements and the following comments
thereon, it is important to bear constantly in mind the distinction
between facts and inferences which witnesses or staff drew from them.
i. Alleged aid to individuals and organisations with leftist records
or affiliations
The associate staff director of the committee referred in the hearings-
to testimony before the Cox committee which he alleged showed that
the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace gave grants to 15
"individuals and organizations with leftist records or affiliations"
transcript, p. 1022 ). 1 This misleading statement must not stand
unchallenged. It is true that the Carnegie Endowment made at one
time or another grants or payments to 1 organization and 14 indi-
viduals that, in the language of the counsel for the Cox committee, had
been "cited or criticized by the House Un-American Activities Com-
mittee or by the McCarran committee * * *" (Cox committee hear-
ings, p. 583 ) . To have been "cited or criticized," however, is not proof
of "leftist records or affiliations" and there was no reference by any
member of the Cox committee or its counsel, or by me, to "leftist
records or affiliations." Furthermore, the record of the Cox committee
hearings contains no shred of evidence, nor even an allegation, that any
of the work performed with endowment funds had a "leftist" character.
My testimony before the Cox committee showed that grants made 1
by the endowment to the Institute of Pacific Relations, the only orga-
nization involved, ceased in 1939, years before any question was raised
about the activities of that organization (Cox committee hearings,
p. 581). Moreover, the chairman of the present committee indicated
that * * * up until the late forties the IPR had an excellent stand-
ing * * * (transcript, p. 1192). 2
Of the individuals named who had been "cited or criticized," Alger
Hiss constitutes a special case. With regard to him, there is nothing
to be added to the detailed testimony of John W. Davis and Henry
M. Wriston on his connection with the endowment (Cox committee
hearings, pp. 569-572, 183-184). As to the other 13, the officers of
the endowment did not, according to its records, have at the time the
payments were made any knowledge of the citations or criticisms, and
indeed most of the payments took place before any such citations or
* Ibid., p. 472.
'Ibid., p. 541.
TAX-EXEMPT FOtTNDATIOISrS 1061
criticisms had been published. Furthermore, the total received by
these 13 people amounted to $3,701.67, less than one-fiftieth of 1 per-
cent of all endowment expenditures.
%. U A propaganda machine'''
At the hearing on May 11, the committee counsel made the following
statement:
* * * we suggest that a proper subject of inquiry for the committee is whether
or not propaganda is desirable for a foundation which operates as a fiduciary
manager of public funds. The case of the Carnegie endowment we will be glad
to introduce evidence later to show that they were consciously produced, a propa-
ganda machine. We are anxious to get the facts * * * (transcript (ibid., p. 52),
May 11, pp. 137-138 )/
This statement must presumably be read in the light of the definition
of propaganda given the previous day by the research director:
Propaganda-action having as its purpose the spread of a particular doctrine
or a specifically identifiable system of principles, and we noted that in use this
word has come to infer half-truths, incomplete truths, as well as techniques of a
covert nature (transcript, May 10, p. 37) . 2
Using this definition, the answer to the counsel's charge is that the
endowment is not and never has been "a propaganda machine." Nor
has it ever disseminated "half-truths" or "incomplete truths," or used
"techniques of a covert nature."
Certainly it is a fact that the endowment has advocated world peace
and international understanding, but what reasonable person would
disapprove these ends or characterize the activities of the endowment
in pursuit of them as "the spread of a particular doctrine or a specifi-
cally identifiable system of principles" ?
Moreover, if, as seems to be the case, the research director included
the Carnegie endowment as one of the foundations engaged in educa-
tion for international understanding which are "discrediting the tradi-
tions to which (the United States) has been dedicated" (hearings.
May 10, p. 45), 2 he is drawing an inference for which there is not a
shred of evidence. The methods of the endowment have been truly
educational and not propagandistic, and its whole tradition has been
as American as George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Dwight D.
Eisenhower.
To understand the endowment's approach to its task, one must look
to its history, placing its educational activities on behalf of interna-
tional peace and understanding in historical perspective.
Today, to be in favor of peace, is like opposing sin. People differ on
the best way to attain the goal but not on the general aim. This was
not clearly so in 1910. War was respectable in many quarters and
was regarded as an ordinary instrument of national policy.
In working for peace and international understanding in the early
days of the endowment the founders were neither pacifists nor advo-
cates of the doctrine that peace could be attained by mere altruism or
by emotional fervor. They believed, on the contrary, that the road
to real peace was through the development of law, through research,
and through education of the peoples and leaders of the world in terms
of hard realities.
Unfortunately, war came in 1914. That war itself, however, gave
the peoples of the world a drastic and expensive education on the im-
ilbid., p. 52.
2 Ibid., p. 17.
1062 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
portance of peace. As Nicholas Murray Butler told his fellow trustees
in 1920 :
* * * It is no longer necessary to discuss (the desirability of international
peace) with anybody. The elaborate moral arguments and pleas that were heard
for a hundred years before the outbreak of the Great War were made so much
more effectively, so much more convincingly, by the war itself, that they now
sound like pleas in a dead language. We are now confronted with the problem
of how most wisely to insure the maintenance of international peace and how
most effectively to carry forward an ordered civilization.
Butler saw that the war had underlined the importance of interna-
tional relations and shown that what concerned each nation con-
cerned all. As a matter of fact, the peoples of the world would never
again be able to remain apart. Indeed, they would be increasingly
drawn closer together due to an event 7 years before the endowment
was founded, the successful experiment of Orville and Wilbur Wright
at Kitty Hawk.
During the interwar period the endowment's activities both in re-
search and in education were primarily addressed to the problem de-
fined by Dr. Butler : "How most wisely to insure the maintenance of
international peace and how most effectively to carry forward an
ordered civilization." The problem was an immense one, and the out-
break of war in 1939 showed that the solution was not yet at hand.
Since the end of World War II the United States has embarked
on a new phase in foreign policy. One of its major decisions was to
work through an international organization, and subsequently also
through regional organizations, to achieve peace, which is the goal
of the endowment. The policy of participation in international or-
ganizations has had the overwhelming support of the United States
Senate, with votes of 89 to 2 for the United Nations Charter, of 72 to 1
for the Kio Treaty, and of 82 to 13 for the North Atlantic Treaty.
This policy has been of a bipartisan character and clearly reflects a
belief that membership in these international organizations is in the
national interest of the United States.
The endowment has pursued a program of research and education
in relation to these organizations. The effort has been directed to-
ward making them better understood and toward the problem of
improving these still far from perfect instruments.
In charging that the endowment has been "a propaganda machine,"
the staff of this committee must have overlooked the objectives as-
signed as early as 1911 to the Division of Intercourse and Education :
To diffuse information and to educate public opinion regarding the causes,
nature, and effects of war, and means for its prevention and avoidance.
To cultivate friendly feelings between the inhabitants of different coun-
tries, and to increase the knowledge and understanding of each other by the
several nations.
A comparison of the research director's definition of propaganda
with these objectives and with the activities of the endowment must
surely lead fair-minded persons to conclude that the endowment has
steadily pursued those goals by methods which are educational in the
best sense. If in a few instances in the past the endowment strongly
advocated particular means for the advancement toward peace, these
•efforts were, like all other endowment activities, thoroughly American
in character; they were without exception in support of projects en-
dorsed by the incumbent President of the United States. This is
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1063
true, for example, of the World Court, which was endorsed by Presi-
dents Harding, Coolidge, Hoover, and Franklin D. Roosevelt.
In support of the argument that the endowment has engaged in
propaganda, Mr. Dodd referred specifically to the international rela-
tions clubs and the international mind alcoves. The endowment's
support of the international relations clubs was not propagandistic
either in intent or in fact. The statement quoted above (p. 5) to the
effect that the "purpose of the endowment in undertaking this work
is to instruct and enlighten public opinion * * *" is exact, and it
was adhered to. As to the international mind alcoves, these were
started during World War I. The phrase "international mind" had
been coined by Dr. Butler in 1912 in a statement, framed copies of
which were hung over each alcove :
The international mind is nothing other than that habit of thinking of foreign
relations and business, and that habit of dealing with them, which regard the
several nations of the civilized world as friendly and cooperating equals in aiding
the progress of civilization, in developing commerce and industry, and in spread-
ing enlightenment and culture throughout the world.
The endowment sent collections of books to libraries in small com-
munities throughout the United States to interest the general reader
in foreign affiairs and in other lands. No library received the books
except upon request. These collections were given the name Inter-
national Mind Alcoves. It is also to be noted that the State library
commissions or State librarians of 34 States were at their own request
placed upon the list of recipients of alcove collections ; through their
offices the books were sent by mail to inaccessible small communities.
What should be stressed in this regard is that the 'books did not
emphasize any one point of view. They were small collections of books
on one particular subject, which in this case was international relations
rather than, say, engineering or English literature. Not by the widest
stretch of the imagination could such action be called propaganda.
As to the international relations clubs, the first of these were estab-
lished under the leadership of the endowment just prior to World
War I, and the largest number came into being in the period between
the wars. The clubs were formed purely for educational purposes.
They were helped by the endowment through the sending semiannually
of collections of books and pamphlets dealing with important inter-
national questions and by arranging for occasional speakers on request.
It should be noted that most of the clubs were set up at atime when
there was little or no formal teaching of international relations on col-
lege campuses throughout the United States. To encourage interest
in the study of foreign relations in colleges is not propaganda but
education.
3. Committee staff memorandum : "Summary of activities of Carnegie
Corporation of New York, Carnegie Endowment for Interna^
tional Peace, the Rockefeller Foundation)''
Section II of this summary of activities, the only part which relates
to the endowment, is an amazing document which, were it not to be-
come part of the record of a congressional committee would not require
even the following brief comments.
To one familiar with the work of foundations, it appears to be con-
fused, disorganized, inaccurate, and full of inconsistencies. It assumes
a relationship between the Carnegie Endowment and the Rockefeller
Foundation which did not in fact exist. It appears to imply that there-
1064 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
is something discreditable or not in the public interest in research
study and education in international relations and international or-
ganization, entirely disregarding the fact that no organization can
work effectively for international peace (which is the precise pur r
pose for which the endowment was founded) without intensive atten-
tion to the whole field of international relations including present and
potential international organization.
Diligent efforts to disentangle the charges against the Carnegie En-
do wnment suggest that there are four :
(a) That the endowment has consistently worked for world
peace;
(&) That the endowment has been of service to the United
States Government ;
(c) That the endowment has engaged in propaganda ;
(d) That the endowment has supported not only subversive
and leftist organizations and individuals, but certain other or-
ganizations disapproved by the authors of the memorandum.
With respect to (a) and (&) , we feel indebted to the memorandum
for showing that the endowment has consistently sought to carry out
the wishes of Mr. Carnegie, and that it has been of service to the United
States Government in times of both peace and war. If the endowment
is criticized on these counts, I can only assume that the committee staff
is critical of American efforts toward world peace and of patriotic
service to the United States.
Moreover, it simply is not true that the endowment "has not spon-
sored projects advocating other means" for achieving peace than in-
ternational organization (ibid., p. 876), or that it has sought to
"achieve peace through a world-government arrangement" (ibid.,
p. 889).
The propaganda charge has been answered on pages 10-14 of this
statement (ibid., p. 1057). I am more confused than ever, however,
as to what the staff means by propaganda, and am left with the impres-
sion that there is no conceivable foundation activity — at least in the
field of international relations — which staff members would be willing
to call educational.
The final charge relating to alleged support of subversive in-
dividuals or organizations has also been dealt with above (pp. 8-9 of
this statement, ibid., p. 1056-57) .
The memorandum also speaks disparagingly of certain other insti-
tutions which the endowment has at one time or another assisted or
cooperated with. I refer to such organizations as the Council on For-
eign Relations, the Foreign Policy Association, the Commission to
Study the Organization of Peace, and the Institute of International
Education. These can speak for themselves. As president of the
Carnegie Endowment I can say that I believe our cooperation with
them promoted the purposes of the endowment and was in the public
interest.
CONCLUSION
It is clear that I have a very different view from certain members
of the committee's staff as to foundations and their role in American
life. It is evident that these staff members are unhappy about changes
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1065
during recent decades in American attitudes toward foreign relations
and in our country's position in the world. They appear to feel these
changes should not have occurred, that the changes resulted from cer-
tain tendencies in research and education, and that foundations are
primarily responsible. I have the impression that they go so far as
to believe that governmental intervention of some kind in the work of
the foundations would be a corrective.
My own outlook in relation to the particular work in which the
•endowment is active is quite different. I believe the changes which
have occurred in American policy and attitudes in the international
field have resulted from democratic adjustment to the problems created
.by modern social and political upheavals, new inventions, and two
world wars. One of our major problems has been to protect our na-
tional security in a world of new power relationships and at the same
time to seek roads toward a lasting international peace. I rejoice that
this country has been able to grapple with these problems as they
■arose by the orderly procedure of constitutional government. The
education of the public and its leaders is vital to the success of such
a procedure.
As a relative newcomer to foundation work, I express the belief
that foundations by their promotion of research and of education,
both formal and informal, in the field of international relations have
made a valuable contribution in the public interest during these past
40 years not unlike in importance the contributions of foundations in
.other fields.
I have examined the record of the Carnegie Endowment for Inter-
national Peace with some background of training in the appraisal
of historical evidence. To me this record shows that the endowment,
within the limits of human fallibility and of time, resources, and cir-
cumstance, has endeavored to carry out Andrew Carnegie's original
intention. The goal has been to rid the world of war. That inter-
national peace, founded upon freedom and justice, is in the national
interest and is a prime objective of the Government and people of the
United States is beyond and above all dispute.
Joseph E. Johnson.
I, Joseph E. Johnson, being first duly sworn on oath, declare that
I have read the foregoing statement; that it is true and correct with
respect to those matters stated upon personal knowledge, and that
with respect to matters not stated upon knowledge, it is true to the
best of my knowledge and belief.
Joseph E. Johnson.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 3d day of August 1954.
Elizabeth S. Gbover,
Notary Public, State of New York.
Term expires March 30, 1954.
1066 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
STATEMENT OF THE ROCKEFELLER FOUNDATION AND THE:
GENERAL EDUCATION BOARD, BY DEAN RUSK, PRESIDENT
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
New York, N. Y. , August 3, 1954,.
Hon. B. Carroll Reece,
Chairman, Special Committee To Investigate Taae- Exempt-
Foundations,
House of Representatives, "Washington, D.C.
Dear Mr. Chairman : I have the honor to transmit herewith sworn
statements on behalf of the Rockefeller Foundation and the General
Education Board about certain matters raised before the Special Com-
mittee To Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations of the 83d Congress.
We had expected that our organizations would be given the same
opportunity to present our case before the committee that was afforded,
to our critics. When the committee announced on July 2, 1954, that
no further public hearings would be held, we immediately sent a tele-
gram to the committee, reading as follows :
The [Rockefeller Foundation and General Education Board have been informed
that the congressional Special Committee To Investigate Tax-Exempt Founda-
tions decided today to terminate its public hearings. We have not commented,
upon the issues thus far raised because we expected to appear and have an
opportunity to reply in public hearings.
We must assume that the committee's decision means that it will not sub-
mit a report to the Congress containing any material adverse to our two foun-
dations on which we are not fully heard. This is fundamental in view of the-
nature of the charges and innuendoes made against our foundations by com-
mittee staff and other witnesses. These charges and innuendoes are not sup-
ported by the facts.
We shall avail ourselves of the committee's invitation to submit a sworn
written statement on issues raised before it for inclusion in the permanent
record of the Congress and in any official publication of the proceedings of the .
committee. We note that the committee expects our statement to be made
public; we fully agree in view of the wide publicity already given to adverse
testimony. The record of our two foundations over the past half century testi-
fies convincingly to their integrity, patriotism, and devotion to the public-
interest
We received from you on July 3, 1954, the following telegram in
reply.
Re your telegram: The Rockefeller Foundation and all others who were ex-
pected to be called as witness will be given ample opportunity to make state-
ments for the record just as they might have done in open hearings and will also
have opportunity to give full information which may be necessitated by the
presentation to the committee for the record of further data by the committee
staff. All statements by witness or the staff which are presented for the record
will be made available to the press.
The accompanying statements, which are submitted pursuant to our-
telegram quoted above, consist of a foreword by John D. Rockefeller
3d, chairman of the boards of trustees of the 2 organizations, a state-
ment in behalf of the 2 organizations by the undersigned as president
of both, setting forth comments and principles which are applicable
in respect of both organizations, and separate supplemental statements
by each organization, dealing with certain specific grants which were-
referred to in the public hearings or in committee staff reports.
We wrote to you on June 4, 1954, requesting to be advised as to the
particular grants, out of the more than 41,000 made by these 2 f ounda-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1067
tions, which would, in the opinion of the committee, call for discussion
I)y us. In reply, counsel for the commitee informed us by telephone
tnat we ourselves would have to determine this from the testimony
received by the committee and that we would have opportunity to sub-
mit materials, subsequent to testimony, on any matter on which we
would need more time for research in our records. Your telegram of
July 3 also mentioned giving us an "opportunity to give full informa-
tion which may be necessitated by the presentation to the committee
for the record of further data by the committee staff.
We respectfully submit that the committee has presented us with
formidable dilemmas.
The first has to do with the subjects we should cover in our reply.
We find in the present record of the committee no prima facie case of
any instance of wrongdoing on our part. Were we to undertake to
make a full statement on all matters commented upon before the com-
mittee we would have to range over most of our tens of thousands of
grants and deal with a full half century of the social, economic, and
political history of the United States. Yet we have been asked to
reply promptly and briefly. In the attached statement we have tried
to state our position on a series of issues which seem to us to be the
most relevant and important. Even so, we are not able to discuss, in
a brief statement, the large numbers of grants which would substanti-
ate our view. More important, we have no assurance that we have
dealt with all of the issues which might seem important to one or
another member of the committee.
A second concern relates to the future procedures of the committee.
Are we to know what information comes to the attention of the com-
mittee or its staff which might be critical of our two foundations ?
Will we be given full opportunity to know about and to reply to mate-
rial which might influence the committee toward conclusions adverse
to us?
We believe, and the chairman has so stated, that the committee does
not wish to inflict injury upon established institutions such as ours.
We suggest that the committee insure this by affording the foundations
an opportunity to be heard on the draft of any report which the
committee proposes to submit. We see no other way to insure that
we are responsive to the real issues in the minds of the committee which
would have been disclosed had public hearings not been terminated.
We hope that the committee will find the attached statements useful
in its deliberations.
Respectfully yours,
Dean Rusk,
President, the Rockefeller Foundation and General Edu-
cation Board.
FOREWARD BY JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER 3D, CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARDS OF
TRUSTEES, THE ROCKEFELLER FOUNDATION AND GENERAL EDUCATION
BOARD
One of the basic factors that give our American democracy its
strength is the sense of responsibility on the part of the individual for
his fellow cftfeeM and his community. Philanthropy, whether it be
on an individual or foundation basis, is an important expression of
this fundamental. The giving of the individual will always be para-
1068 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
mount, but foundations have come to play an increasingly important
role.
The wise distribution of philanthropic funds is more difficult than
is commonly supposed. Fully appreciating this fact, my grandfather
established the Rockefeller Foundation and General Education Board
in order to provide the continuing wisdom and insights of a group
of distinguished and experienced men. To them was given hroad
discretion.
The charter of the Rockefeller Foundation provides that its funds
shall be spent for "the well-being of mankind." This gives great
latitude as to the fields of program, but no latitude as to the purpose
or objective— man's well-being. Thus, in considering program or
individual projects the primary concern of the trustees is to make
sure that the action taken will effectively advance the interests of
man or, differently expressed, the public interest. An important
guide toward this end has been the founder's statement that, "The
best philanthropy involves a search for cause, an attempt to cure
evils at their source."
While my grandfather never participated in the affairs of the
foundation or the General Education Board once they were formed,,
he followed with great interest for nearly 25 years their programs
and progress. To him, to my father who was chairman of both
boards until 1940, and to the other members of our family, the-
achievements of these two foundations have been a source of genuine
satisfaction. We feel a deep sense of gratitude to their trustees and
officers who have rendered such devoted service over the years.
The trustees of both the Rockefeller Foundation and the General
Education Board have noted the expressed desire of the members of
the special committee to investigate tax-exempt foundations to carry
out their responsibilities in such a way that their report will make
a constructive contribution insofar as the future of foundations is
concerned. The trustees feel confident that the statements which are
submitted herewith will be received and considered in this spirit.
I. Introductory Comments
The Rockefeller Foundation and the General Education Board are-
two foundations established and endowed by John D. Rockefeller in
1913 and 1903, respectively. In accordance with the usual practice,,
this statement is presented by their president as an authoritative
expression of the views of the two corporate bodies. It is verified
by him under oath, as are the separate supplemental statements of the-
two organizations.
The connection of the incumbent president with these two founda-
tions dates from his election as a trustee of the Rockefeller Founda-
tion in April 1950, and as a trustee of the General Education Board
in December 1951. As to events prior to those dates, this statement
and the supplemental statements are necessarily based not upon the
E resident's personal knowledge of the activities of the 2 organizations
ut upon his information and belief, derived from the extensive rec-
ords of the 2 foundations and from discussions with present and
former trustees, officers, and staff. In the case of 2 foundations which
are 41 and 51 years old, a considerable number of important partici-
pants are no. longer alive and others are widely scattered.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1069
Among the criticisms of the Cox committee's investigation of foun-
dations in 1952, advanced as reasons for a second investigation, was
the fact that foundation witnesses were not sworn when testifying
before that committee. It was said on the floor of the House that —
as a result of this, neither the Congress nor the people know whether these
officers and trustees were telling the truth.
We protest this statement and we do not know what the speaker
meant when he added :
For the sake of the foundations, this error should be rectified. 1
We have no objection to testifying under oath. The omission of
an oath was not at the request of the Rockefeller Foundation or the
General Education Board but was the decision of the Cox committee,
with the apparent consent of all committee members then present.
Had the witnesses who testified in behalf of our organizations been
under oath, their testimony before the Cox committee would have
been the same, with the understanding which was clearly implicit
throughout those hearings that as to facts not within their personal
knowledge they were testifying upon information and belief. We
have no double standard for testimony, depending upon whether it
is sworn or unsworn.
We affirm unequivocally the integrity, patriotism, sense of responsi-
bility and devotion to the public interest of all those, whether trustees
or officers, who have over the past half century made the decisions
which carried out the trusts laid upon the Rockefeller Foundation
and the General Education Board. There is no trace of Communist
infiltration into either of these foundations. In the course of the
present investigation, it has been stated or implied by witnesses be-
fore the committee that they are in some way involved in an extra-
ordinary catalog of offenses, ranging from aiding and defending
Communist practices in the schools to violation of the antitrust laws.
Although it is hard to believe that the committee has taken seriously
the great majority of these charges, we shall try to be responsive and
at the same time, to furnish information about the actual roles of our
two foundations over the past decades.
We comment in this and in 2 supplementary statements, 1 for the
Foundation and 1 for the Boardj on what seem to us to be the more
important issues raised before this committee. If we do not respond
to every expressed or implied charge, it should be understood that
we do not concede them. We are confident that the committee will
agree that we would not show a proper respect for the Congress were
we to assume that the committee itself has embraced all of the bizarre
innuendoes presented in the testimony.
The record of this investigation suggests to us that foundations are
not the only institutions under scrutiny here and may, in fact, be
serving as an indirect channel for criticism of important segments of
our national life, such as our educational systems, our scholarly or-
ganizations, and many established polices of the Government itself.
Our 2 foundations can state our own actions and why we have made
the grants we have made, now amounting to more than $800 million.
We can also state the basis of our confidence in the institutions and
organizations to whom we have made these grants. We should re-
gret, however, being placed in the position of speaking for those for
i Congressional Record, July 27, 1953, p. 10190. See also ibid., p. 28 et seq.
1070 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
whom we are not accredited spokesmen. Our school systems, our
colleges and universities, and our research and scholarly organiza-
tions are able to speak for themselves and we would not wish their
position to be prejudiced by any failure of our own to present their
views adequately.
We feel strongly about some of the fundamental issues which have
been raised before this committee ; some are of greater moment to
our free society than is the position of any particular foundation ; if
we speak forcefully, we believe that we owe the committee a duty
to do so.
II. General Considerations
A. PUBLIC RESPONSIBILITY AND FREE ENTERPRISE IN PHILANTHROPY
The Rockefeller Foundation and General Education Board have
always acknowledged that their funds are held as a public trust. Our
trustees recognize a heavy public responsibility, arising from the vol-
untary action of John D. Rockefeller in committing substantial pri-
vate funds to a public purpose, from the policy and laws of the State
of New York and of the United States which permit the two founda-
tions to act corporately for a public purpose, and from the important
privileges granted to educational, religious, and charitable institu-
tions by certain Federal and State tax laws.
Though dedicated to the public interest, the Rockefeller Founda-
tion and the General Education Board retain many of the essential
attributes of private, independent organizations. They are nonpo-
litical and nongovernmental in character. In each case their policies
and decisions are in the hands of a board of trustees of responsible
citizens, who contribute time and a lively interest to their activities
and who select officers and professional staff to carry out their policies.
The foundation and the board hold and invest their own funds and
decide how to spend them for the purposes for which they were cre-
ated. They are prjvate in that they are not governmental ; they are
public in that their funds are held in trust for public rather than
private purposes. As social institutions, they reflect the application
to philanthropy of the principles of private initiative and free enter-
prise, under public policies which have long recognized the benefits
of such activity to a free society.
Most of the discussion of the free-enterprise system in America has
focused upon its accomplishments in lifting the figures of national
production and the general standard of living to levels never before
attained in any other country. With Government controls limited,
the release of the energies behind individual initiative has been given,
we believe deservedly, a large measure of the credit for these extra-
ordinary results. Less attention has been paid to the reliance we
have placed upon the philanthropic impulse of private citizens. This
has been left in large measure free from Government control and has
been given positive encouragement through the tax laws. The result
has been an impressive voluntary outpouring of wealth for charitable,
educational, scientific, and religious purposes, transforming material
wealth into opportunities for pursuing the enduring values of the
mind and spirit.
The voluntary association of private citizens for the carrying out
of public tasks ^deeply rooted in our tradition and, saves us from a
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1071
dismal choice between leaving many tasks undone or handing them
over to an all-pervasive Government. It has been argued that the
favored tax position of schools and colleges, foundations, and a large
number of charitable activities rests upon the propositions that they
do what Government itself would otherwise have to do from public
funds and that independent organizations can do many of these tasks
better than could Government. While there is evidence that such views
have had a strong influence, a more fundamental basis for the public
policy on the matter appears to us to be the importance in a free so-
ciety, of encouraging the widest diversity of individual and group
effort in order that citizens may share directly in the privileges and
responsibilities of free institutions.
President Eliot of Harvard, speaking in 1874, long before our
foundations were established, said :
* * * In England and the United States, the method of doing public work
by means of endowments managed by private corporations, has been domesti-
cated for several centuries ; and these are the only two nations which have suc-
ceeded on a great scale in combining liberty with stability in free institutions.
The connection of these two facts is not accidental. The citizens of a free State
must be accustomed to associated action in a great variety of forms ; they must
have many local centers of common action, and many agencies and administra-
tions for public objects, besides the central agency of Government. * * * To
abandon the method of fostering endowments, in favor of the method of direct
Government action, is to forego one of the great securities of public liberty.'
These are among the basic considerations which have led the Con-
gress, the legislatures of the 48 States, and the courts to shape the
laws and public policy in such a way as to encourage private philan-
thropy. The principles involved were brought to our shores by the
first settlers and have been reflected in official attitudes throughout
our history. The Congress has affirmed its support of this policy by
recent increases in the permissible deductions for charitable contri-
butions made from individual and corporate incomes. One of the two
recommendations of the Cox committee was the following;
2. That the Ways and Means Committee take cognizance of our finding that
the maintenance of private sources of funds is essential to the proper growth of
our free schools, colleges, churches, foundations, and other charitable institu-
tions. We respectfully suggest that the committee reexamine pertinent tax
laws, to the end that they may be so drawn as to encourage the free-enterprise
system with its rewards from which private individuals may make gifts to these
meritorious institutions."
We conclude that the underlying public policy is firmly established
and represents not only a traditional attitude of long standing but the
present policy of Federal and State governments.
We wish to emphasize that the Rockefeller Foundation and General
Education Board have conformed to all applicable laws and author-
itatively expressed public policies, and will continue to do so. This is
our duty as citizens, and was clearly the wish of our founder. We shall
be attentive to the views of responsible critics, but we do not expect
to treat criticism as legislation or to accept the adverse witnesses who
have testified before this committee as exponents of public policy. Our
trustees would violate their trust if they should fail to bring to bear
a Charles W. Eliot. Exemption From Taxation of Church Property and the Property
of Educational, Literary, and Charitable Institutions, American Contributions to Civiliza-
tion and Other Essays and Addresses (New York : The Century Co., 1907), pp. 340-341.
8 U. S. Congress (82d Cong,, 2d sess.), House Select Committee To Investigate Founda-
tions and Other Organizations * * * (final report * * * Washington, D. C. : U. S. Gov-
ernment Printing Office, 1953), p. 13.
49720 — 54 — pt. 2 9
1072 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
upon its performance the full extent of their experience and judgment
and should substitute therefor the least common denominator of
divergent views from every quarter.
Where public interest and private initiative are subtly merged, as
in the case of an endowed foundation, how is the public interest safe-
guarded ? In the case of the Rockefeller Foundation and the General
Education Board, continuous effort is made to do so along several lines.
First, and most important, the trustees and officers in the perform-
ance of their duties are infused with a deep sense of public obligation.
Having been entrusted with decisions to spend funds for the public
good, they bring to their tasks the best of their judgment and skills, a
disinterested rather than a partial view, and as much imagination and
insight as their capacities permit. Their decisions cannot hope to win
universal approval, and occasional mistakes may occur, for these are
inevitable accompaniments of risk bearing. In judging the record of
these trustees and officers, it is not reasonable or proper to use, as a test,
one's agreement with each individual decision. The fair test is the
seriousness and general competence of the attempt, on the part of
trustees and officers, to discharge faithfully their difficult duties.
Second, we appraise our own judgments through the advice and
counsel of many others who can contribute the wisdom of experience
and special knowledge. This is a continuous process, systematically
pursued by the officers, involving consultation with hundreds who give
generously of their time and thought to the problems presented. Some
of it is reflected in a more formal arrangement when competent in-
dividuals are invited to serve the foundation on boards of consultants
on such matters as medicine and public health, agriculture, or legal
and political philosophy.
Third, we respond fully to our obligation to conform to all relevant
laws, to make regular reports to public authorities to whom such
reports are due, and to use our best efforts to furnish information
requested by any official body.
Fourth, the Rockefeller Foundation and the General Education
Board keep the public informed as to their activities through regular
publications which are given wide circulation.
Publications
In their long series of annual reports, the foundation and the board
have sought to tell in plain terms both what they were doing and why.
The policies of the trustees, the thinking which led to the develop-
ment of those policies, and the methods of the officers in applying those
policies, have been regularly disclosed. Grants have been listed, with
a statement of their purpose and amount. These annual reports, sup-
plemented frequently, in the case of the foundation, with brief reports
entitled "The President's Review," have been given the widest dis-
tribution, both in the United States and abroad, to the press and to
leading libraries, as well as to individuals and institutions on ex-
tensive mailing lists. In the last few years the foundation has also
issued quarterly reports at the end of each calendar quarter cover-
ing grants made during that period. Since 1914, the general educa-
tion board's annual reports have been equally complete and detailed.
In addition to these regular reports, special volumes are published
where it is felt that they would meet a scientific, scholarly, or gen-
eral interest. Recent examples are the volumes Yellow Fever, edited
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1073
by Dr. George K. Strode ; The Story of The Rockefeller Foundation,
by Mr. Raymond B. Fosdick; Crete: A Case Study of an Under-
developed Area, by Dr. Leland G. Allbaugh ; and The Sardinian
Project: An Experiment in the Eradication of an Indigenous
Malarious Vector, by Dr. John A. Logan. To these are added a large
number of technical articles arising from the research of the founda-
tion's own staff in such fields as virus diseases and agriculture.
Our heavy correspondence and press clippings every year bear
witness to the attentive reading of these reports and the widespread
interest they have aroused.
In his report to the committee, its director of research charges that
the foundations have not reported the purpose of certain grants "in
language which could be readily understood." 4 In our case, the rec-
ord of careful and full reporting makes it evident that any allegation
of attempted concealment or distortion is without substance.
B. THE TAX EXEMPTION PRIVILEGE
The American Governments, Federal and State, from their earliest
days have used the tax laws as effective and versatile instruments for
the encouragement of voluntary private philanthropy. This en-
couragement has taken a variety of forms: Exemption of philan-
thropic enterprises from income tax, exemption of bequests to philan-
thropic organizations from estate and inheritance taxes, exemption of
inter vivos gifts to such organizations from gift taxes, permission to
deduct contributions to such organizations from income otherwise sub-
ject to tax.
Although tax privileges in one or more of these various forms
doubtless have an important influence on the organization of founda-
tions today, it should be noted that the tax element played no signifi-
cant part in the creation of the Rockf eller Foundation and the General
Education Board by John D. Rockefeller. In 1903, when the General
Education Board was founded, there were neither income nor estate
taxes, and although the 16 amendment, authorizing a Federal income
tax, had become part of the Constitution before the incorporation of
the Rockefeller Foundation in May 1913, the first income tax law
under the new amendement was not enacted until the following Octo-
ber, and the tax which it imposed was at too low a rate to have an
appreciable influence.
The statement has been frequently repeated in the course of this
investigation that a large part (sometimes placed at 90 percent) of
the funds distributed by tax exempt foundations represent money
which, but for the tax-exemption privilege, would belong to the Gov-
ernment. As to our two foundations this assertion is not correct. For
example, the ordinary annual income of the Rockefeller Foundation
in recent years has averaged around $15 million. Dividends received
from corporate stocks held by the foundation account for 91 percent
of this amount. We are advised that if the Federal income-tax exemp-
tion were withdrawn, the tax payable by the foundation on the basis
of the above figures, under the present corporate income-tax structure,
would be about $865,600, or at a rate of between 5 and 6 percent rather
than 90 percent. This is due in part to the 85 percent dividend receipts
credit, in part to the costs of operating the foundation's programs in
4 Stenographic transcript (hereinafter cited as transcript), ibid., p. 49.
1074 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
public health and agriculture, costs which would clearly be deductible
m arriving at taxable income, and in part to the right to deduct, in
any event, in arriving at taxable income, contributions made to other
tax-exempt organizations not in excess of 5 percent of the donor's net
income. These figures do not take into account capital gains (as in
1952) or losses (as in 1951) resulting from the sale of investment
Securities.
Nor can it be supposed with any certainty that a repeal of the exist-
ing income-tax exemption of foundations would result in any signifi-
cant increase of the public revenues. True, a fund which had been dis-
tributing all or the major part of its income in grants might not be
able to deduct more than a limited percentage of this total in com-
puting its income subject to tax, though it might well be held that the
usual limitation is inapplicable to a corporation whose sole authorized
activities consist of charitable operations and grants. In any event,
the removal of the exemption might serve to influence some boards of
trustees, as a matter of provident discharge of their trust, to discon-
tinue grants and substitute direct operations in such fields as scientific
research, health, or public welfare, on such a scale that the clearly
deductible costs of operation would exhaust the income, leaving noth-
ing against which the tax could be assessed. Although the benefits
which could be derived from such direct operations might be of great
significance, there would be a corresponding loss' of flexible and stra-
tegic financial reserves available for the support of research and
scholarship in established institutions of learning — particularly
where uncommitted funds are needed to follow up on promising new
leads in scientific and scholarly investigation. Even though it would
be possible to discourage the grant-making function of foundations by
changes in existing tax laws, these changes would not insure additional
funds for the Public Treasury and might, in fact, work against the
public interest.
It should further be noted that under their present status the funds
of the Rockefeller Foundation and the General Education Board are
a part of the general stream of enterprise which produces taxation for
the support of the Public Treasury. As has been indicated, their
funds are invested largely in corporate stocks and other types of se-
curities. 5 The Rockefeller Foundation pays substantial taxes through
the corporations whose stocks it holds. We are advised that during
1952 the foundation's share of corporate taxes, based upon its own
holdings of corporate stocks, amounted to approximately $12,785,000.
Our two foundations also pay other taxes; for example, the transpor-
tation tax on the travel of staff, the tax included in rent and on sup-
plies, and social-security taxes on payroll to name a few. When the
foundation or board makes a philanthropic gift, such funds or the
income therefrom go quickly into the payment of salaries and travel,
the purchase of equipment and supplies, and a wide range of similar
uses which are tax yielding in character. Apart from money which
goes directly into the Public Treasury as taxes, both the Rockefeller
Foundation and the General Education Board have contributed sub-
stantially (over $75 million) to tax-supported institutions and agen-
ts The recommendation has been advanced before this committee that foundations should
not hold more than 10 percent of the stock of any one corporate enterprise. Our founda-
tions voluntarily adopted this principle some years ago and at present have reduced all of
their holdings below this level with the exception of one company, our stock in which (22
percent of the shares outstanding) resulted from a gift. We are planning to make a similar
reduction in this holding.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1075
cies, such as State universities, public boards of education and boards
of health. These contributions have been much larger than any
income tax we might have paid had we not been tax exempt.
In broader terms, the activities of such agencies as endowed foun-
dations make an important contribution to the economic structure upon
which Government finance must rest. If, for example, the support of
economic research makes it possible for both business leadership and
Government to understand more clearly and more accurately the surg-
ing processes of our productive system and, on the basis of such knowl-
edge, to make decisions which level off the peaks and troughs of the
business cycle and sustain a high and steady national production, the
benefit to the public purse is obvious. It is even more olbvious that the
virtual elimination of yellow fever, the sharp reduction in malaria
and hookworm, have direct economic benefits as well as those which are
measured in terms of the physical welfare of human beings.
The Kockefeller Foundation and General Education Board are large
net contributors to, and not charges upon, our national wealth and
Public Treasury. We believe that we clearly pay our way.
What has been said is not intended to depreciate the value of the
exemption from Federal and State income tax of activities of a charit-
able, educational, or religious nature. The need for more, rather than
less, private enteprise in such fields adds importance to the encourage-
ment which legislatures have given through such exemptions to the
prospective donor. The importance of the exemption should not, how-
ever, be unduly exaggerated in terms of dollars, nor should the fact
of exemption be made an excuse for characterizing foundation funds
as Government funds, or for restricting such funds to fields in which
Government itself operates, or for projecting Government into fields
which are better left to the private citizens of our richly diverse
society.
. C. INTELLECTUAL SURVEILLANCE
Much of the testimony heard by the committee bears directly or in-
directly upon a fundamental and sensitive problem of foundation
activity — that of foundation control over studies aided by foundation
funds.
The implied premise of much of the criticism of foundations to be
found in the testimony is that foundations should be held responsible
for the views expressed by those who receive foundation grants. This,
in turn, rests upon the premise that the power of the purse means con-
trol over the product. The criticism fails because of the errors in its
premises.
The product to be expected from a foundation grant of the type so
frequently criticized in testimony is an intellectual product. The exer-
cise of control would frustrate the principal object of the grant, namely
the unimpaired thinking of the scientist or scholar. If the answer
were to be determined in advance, there would be no need to make the
grant or conduct the study.
It should be noted that one of the committee's witnesses, Dr. Thomas
Henry Briggs, testified :
It should go without saying that a foundation should never "attempt to influence
findings and conclusions of research and investigations either through designation,
of personnel or in any other way." "
* Transcript, p. 271, ibid., p. 102.
1076 TAX-EXEMPT FOTUSTDATIONS
Under our general practice, we consider that our responsibility is
to make a sound judgment at the time a grant is made, a judgment
which encompasses the importance of the purpose for which the grant
is requested and the capacity and character of the individuals and
institutions who are to make use of it. But having made the basic
judgment that the recipient has the capacity and character to carry out
the study, we exercise a minimum of further control. Ordinary pru-
dence and the obligations of our trust require that we insist upon
financial accounting, to assure ourselves that funds are used for the
purposes for which they were appropriated. Where a second grant
to a particular undertaking is up for consideration, some assessment
of the work done under the first grant is necessarily involved. Fre-
quently, those who are working under foundation grants are visited
by one or more officers of the foundation while the grant is still cur-
rent, primarily to keep us informed as to what is going on in the field.
If the foundation should discover that an improper use were being
made of its funds, such as for subversive activities, the foundation
would undoubtedly intervene.
Subject to the foregoing, it has been our consistent policy not to
attempt to censor or modify the findings of scholars and scientists
whose work we are supporting financially. This long-standing policy,
which we believe to be wise, rests both upon principle and upon very
practical considerations.
The following are among the more important of these :
1. For the foundation to exercise intellectual supervision over its
grantees would require the foundation itself to formulate an officially
approved body of doctrine in almost every field of human knowledge.
This is not our role, and is quite beyond our intentions or our capacities.
2. In most cases, the foundation could make itself responsible for
scholarly or scientific conclusions only if it, with its own staff, sub-
stantially repeated the studies in question as a basis for its own find-
ing. This, too, we could not undertake except where our own staff
is engaged in research, as in virus diseases and agriculture.
3. The role of surveillance would add enormously to the staff and
overhead costs of the foundation and consume philanthropic funds
for unnecessary and socially undesirable functions.
4. The foundation is almost never the sole contributor to the
recipient of a grant ; in fact, in the vast majority of cases it is a minor-
ity contributor. We see no basis in principle for the foundation to
assert a right of control taking precedence over national governments,
state legislatures, departments of education, boards of trustees of col-
leges and universities, faculties, other private donors, publishers, etc.
For foundations to attempt to exert such authority would lead to the
confusion of responsibility.
5. No institution, scholar or scientist of character would accept a
grant which is conditioned upon intellectual control. To any scholar
worthy of the name, nothing is more important than his intellectual
freedom.
6. The foundation necessarily makes a grant before the results of the
studies financed by the grant can be known. It is difficult to see how
this order of procedure could be reversed.
The considerations outlined above seem to be conclusive against
the exercise of intellectual control by a private foundation over the
recipients of its grants. We believe that a free society grows in
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1077
strength, and in moral and intellectual capacity on the basis of free
and responsible research and scholarship. We shall continue to sup-
port vigorously this concept which lies at the heart of free institutions
and we will oppose any effort by government to use the tax-exempt
status to accomplish indirectly what could not be done directly under
the Constitution.
D. CONGRESSIONAL JURISDICTION
We respect the heavy responsibility which rests upon the Congress
for carrying out the onerous tasks placed upon it under the Constitu-
tion, but we submit that there are wide areas in the life of our people
which were not intended to be subject to congressional regulation and
control. We have welcomed the statements of the chairman and of
other members of the committee which indicate that this important
principle is receiving the committee's attention.
However, the committee has heard considerable testimony maintain-
ing that f oundatiqns have contributed too much toward an empirical
approach as contrasted with a philosophical approach to certain
studies. We shall speak of this point later ; for the moment, we wish
merely to observe that the relation between empirical studies and fun-
damental or general principle is an intellectual issue which is as old
as man himself, which entered our literature at least as early as Plato
and Aristotle, and which will endure as long as there are men to think.
It is not a question which any foundation, or all the foundations,
can or should referee or decide, and our foundations have never
attempted to do so. Nor is it, we submit, a matter under the jurisdic-
tion of the Congress.
Similarly, the curriculums of our schools are in the hands of tens of
thousands of agencies which are independent in curriculum matters ;
these are the State and local educational authorities, teachers in our
schools and colleges, and the boards of our independent educational
institutions of all levels. The great strength of our educational sys-
tem is its variety of patterns and its decentralization of control. We
believe that it is not for government, nor for foundations, nor for any
other group, to attempt to impose conformity upon this variety. If
anyone has the impression that the foundations have the power to do
so, he is wrong as a matter of fact. If anyone has the impression
that our particular foundations have exerted pressure to produce such
uniformity, he is equally wrong.
E. PERSPECTIVE AND DISTORTION
The Cox committee reported to the Congress that it had been "allot-
ted insufficient time for the magnitude of its task." 7 We respectfully
submit that the present committee faces even greater limitations of
time and staff if, even though giving attention to fewer foundations
than did the Cox committee, it extends its inquiry into a half century
of social, economic, and political change in the United States.
The committee has before it a number of reports prepared by its
own staff which purport to deal with these complex events. They
have been widely regarded as a confused and inadequate review of the
decades they purport to cover and are particularly deficient at the
* Final report, p. 6.
1078 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
very point of greatest interest to this committee, namely, the respon-
sibility of the foundations for the events themselves.
We ourselves do not find them to be a competent review of the trends
they discuss, more particularly as to their sweeping generalizations,
their proposed definitions of key terms, the accuracy and relevance of
their charts and tables, and the imbalance of the selected quotations
which they contain. We assume that we are not called upon to per-
suade staff members that they have been wrong about views which
they have now placed in the public record as sworn testimony and that
the committee will adopt procedures which will not permit staff to par-
ticipate in both an accusatory and an adjudicating role.
Although several sections of this statement have a direct bearing
upon these staff reports, we offer here brief comments on three of them.
Report of the director of research 8
The committee's director of research described the logic used in the
preparation of his initial report as "reasoning from a total effect to its
primary or secondary causes." B If we read his report fairly in the
context of this investigation, his logic produces the following: (1)
A revolution occurred in the United States in the years 1933-36; (2)
this revolution occurred without violence and with the full consent of
an overwhelming majority of the electorate; (3) this could not have
happened had not education in the United States prepared in advance
to endorse it; (4) the foundations contributed funds and ideas to edu-
cation; (5) therefore, the foundations are responsible for the revolu-
tion.
The report in question seems to give little weight to the great de-
pression of the early 1930's, to World War I, and to World War II.
Since the foundations have been charged with some undefined respon-
sibility for an increase in the powers and functions of government,
surely it is relevant that war and depression brought about an in-
creased exercise of power by both the executive and legislative arms
of the National Government under the Constitution. Surely it is
also relevant that, while some measures adopted by Government dur-
ing these decades were abandoned, others have continued, despite
changes in party control, as a part of ongoing public policy. In any
event, a number of allegations heard in the course of these hearings
appear to be directed, not at foundations, but at the executive, legis-
lative, and judicial branches of the Government and at the electorate.
We must strongly protest any attempt to involve our two nonpolitical
organizations in questions which are so basically political, both be-
cause the charges are unsupported and because it would be out of
character for our two philanthropies to attempt to reply to such attacks
in effective political terms.
We must also comment upon the use of the word "revolution" in
the report of the director of research. The word has strong emo-
tional associations. It is frequently used in debate between political
parties and between factions within a political party— and in such
use, it is ordinarily accepted as a forensic figure of speech.
We object, however, to the use of the word "revolution" in an official
proceeding where the implication is a charge of wrongdoing. Such
a figure of speech should not be used as a basis for alleging improper
conduct or for impugning the reputations of respectable and law-
8 Transcript, p. 12 ff., ibid., p. 5.
o Transcript, p. 46, ibid., p. 20.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1079
abiding citizens. It does not help to put the word in quotation marks —
these become lost. It does not help to say, at the beginning of the
report, "In no sense should they [i. e., the statements in the report]
be considered as proof" 10 for such statements are overlooked. It does
not even help that the report came only from a member of the staff,
for it has already been attributed in the press to the committee itself.
As a recent statement of the American tradition on such matters, we
cite the following portion of an address made by President Eisenhower
on May 31, 1954, at the Columbia University bicentennial dinner in
New York:
Whenever, and for whatever alleged reason, people attempt to crush ideas, to
mask their convictions, to view every neighbor as a possible enemy, to seek
some kind of divining rod by which to test for conformity, a free society is in
danger. Wherever man's right to knowledge and the use thereof is restricted,
man's freedom in the same measure disappears.
Here in America we are descended in blood and in spirit from revolutionaries
and rebels — men and women who dared to dissent from accepted doctrine^ Aa
their heirs, may we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion.
Without exhaustive debate — even heated debate — of ideas and programs, free
government would weaken and wither. But if we allow ourselves to be per-
suaded that every individual — or party — that takes issue with our own convic-
tions is necessarily wicked or treasonous — then indeed we are approaching the
end of freedom's road."
Report of the Assistant Director of Research on "Economics cmd the
Public Interest" 12
A further issue of major importance is raised by this report, which
is entitled "Economics and the Public Interest."
In his introduction, the writer of the report says :
This report is made for the purpose of showing the nature and increasing costs
of governmental participation in economic and welfare activities of the Nation.
The body of the report contains a number of tables reflecting the
upward trend of Federal Government expenditures for such purposes
as housing and slum clearance, social security and health, education
(including the GI bill of rights), public works, food programs, etc.
The foundations are brought into the picture by statements in the
preface to the report to the effect that "Most, if not all of these newer
activities of government are recommended in * * * reports by various
educational groups, social science, and others, supported by founda-
tion grants," 1S and that "Much of this planning was done with the
aid of social scientists in government employ * * * [many of whom]
were directly or indirectly connected with educational organizations
who have and still are receiving very substantial aid from the large
foundations." 14
The implication of these statements is that a grant by a foundation
to educational groups or institutions, or for the training of individuals
through fellowships, makes the foundation responsible for the views of
such groups, organizations and individuals on public issues. The re-
port m question seems to assign this responsibility to us even in the
case of employees of Government who are known to work under the
policy direction of the President, Cabinet officers, and the Congress.
10 Transcript, p. 42, Ibid., p. 19.
11 The Department of State Bulletin, vol. XXX, No. 781, Publication 5503 (Washington,
D. C. : U. S. Government Printing" Office, June 14, 1954), p. 902.
12 Transcript, p. 1407, ibid., p. 628.
13 Transcript, p. 1403, ibid., p. 627.
14 Transcript, p. 1405, ibid., p. 627.
1080 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
We do not see how such responsibility could possibly be assigned to
foundations, if for no other reason than that it would be wholly con-
trary to public policy to give foundations the power to exercise it.
Nor do we see why funds from foundation sources should be considered
as so different in this respect from funds from all other sources.
Let us assume, however, for the sake of argument, that if the state-
ments in the report were borne out by the facte, the foundations would
be properly chargeable with a share of the responsibility for the in-
creases in governmental expenditure resulting from "these newer
activities of government." Would this be reprehensible "error,"
amounting to misconduct on the part of the foundations ? If so, how
much graver must be the responsibility of the Members of Congress
who actually determined the policies and voted the funds in support
of measures which, according to the words of the report, "may be said
to be subversive, un-American, and contrary to public interest." l5
And how has the Supreme Court of the United States escaped impeach-
ment for sustaining the constitutionality of such measures ?
We respectfully urge the committee to reread the report and to com-
pare the views of the Federal Constitution expressed by its author
with those of the Supreme Court as set forth by Justice Cardozo (an
appointee of President Hoover) in Helvering v. Davis (301 U. S. 619
(1937)), upholding the constitutionality of the old-age benefit pro-
visions of the Social Security Act :
Congress may spend money in aid of the "general welfare." Constitution, art
I. sec. 8 ; United States v. Butler (297 U. S. 1, 65) ; Steward Machine Co. v. Davis,
supra. There have been great statesmen in our history who have stood for other
views. We will not resurrect the contest. It is now settled by decision. United
States v, Butler, supra. The conception of the spending power advocated by Ham-
ilton and strongly reinforced by Story has prevailed over that of Madison, which
has not been lacking in adherents * * * (p. 640).
* * * Counsel for respondent has recalled to us the virtues of self-reliance and
frugality. There is a possibility, he says, that aid from a paternal government
may sap those sturdy virtues and breed a race of weaklings. If Massachusetts so
believes and snaps her laws in that conviction, must her breed of sons be changed,
he asks, because some other philosophy of government finds favor in the Halls
of Congress? But the answer is not doubtful. One might ask with equal reason
whether the system of protective tariffs is to be set aside at will in one State or
another whenever local policy prefers the rule of laissez faire. The issue is a
closed one. It was fought out long ago. 10 When money is spent to promote the
general welfare, the concept of welfare or the opposite is shaped by Congress,
not the States. So the concept be not arbitrary, the locality must yield * * *
(pp. 644-645 ).
">IV Channing, History of the United States, p. 404 (South Carolina Nullification) ; 8
Adams, History of the United States (New England Nullification and the Hartford Con-
vention).
Our foundations have taken no position either for or against social-
security legislation. We are not quoting the opinion of Justice Car-
dozo as an expression of the views of our foundations on the broad
question of constitutional interpretation which he discusses. Again
our foundations have no corporate opinion on such issues. But we
respectfully submit that on such matters, as on the other controversial
matters covered in the assistant research director's report, where the
legislative, executive, and judicial branches of the Government have
spoken in their support, the measures in question cannot properly be
characterized as "revolutionary," "subversive," or "un-American."
15 Transcript, p. 1412. Ibid., p. 629.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
1081
Report by the legal analyst
The policy issues presented by this report, parts I and II, are dis-
cussed in other sections of this statement. This report contains, how-
ever, statistical information about our grants which, on the basis of
our own records and published reports, is so inaccurate as to be
seriously misleading. The following items illustrate these inaccuracies.
Regarding grants by General Education Board to Dec. 31, 1952
According to-
Report of legal
analyst, 1 pt. I
GEB records
Columbia University..
College Entrance Examination Board
National Education Association
Progressive Education Association
Teachers College
Lincoln School
University of Chicago
$7, 607, 525
3,483,000
978,312
4, 090, 796
11, 576, 012
6,821,104
118,225,000
3 $3, 804, 644
None
495, 743
1, 622, 506
1,540,397
5,966,138
25,090,562
J Transcript, p. 1568. Ibid., p. 701.
» Includes amount to Teachors College shown below.
Regarding grants by the Rockefeller Foundation, 1929-52
American Council on Education
Columbia University
London School of Economics
Teachers College
University of Chicago
According to—
Report of legal
analyst, 1 pt. I
$1,235,600
33,300,000
4, 105, 592
1, 750, 893
8 25,087,000
RF records
$397, 400
»5,113,248
938, 397
644,271
13, 170, 103
1 Transcript, P. 1574. Ibid., p. 703.
» Includ«s amount to Teachers College shown below.
' The legal analyst's report added to this figure a personal gift of $35 million by John D. Rockefeller, Sr.,
which resulted in a total figure of $60,087,000. The personal gift has been eliminated in this comparative,
statement, wfatch.is limited, to the foundation's contributions.
Regarding further grants by the Rockefeller Foundation
According to—
Report of
legal ana-
list, 1 pt. II
Rockefeller
Foundation
records
$11,069,770
190,830
1,406,405
$4, 758, 775
43,001
561, 505
i Report, pt. II, p. 51. Ibid., p. 294.
If we are furnished information as to the figures desired, we shall
be glad to supply them in the interest of an accurate permanent record.
F. SCOPE OF THE PRESENT INVESTIGATION
At the first public hearing, the chairman of this committee included
the following in his remarks about the scope of the present inquiry :
Moreover, and again with an occasional exception, we shall chiefly confine
our attention to the work of foundations in what are called the social sciences.
1082 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Little criticism has come to us concerning research or other foundation activities
in the physical or exact sciences, such as medicine and physics. 10
*******
If we shall not spend much time in exposition of what great amount of good
the foundations have admittedly done, it is because we deem it our principal
duty fairly to seek out our error. It is only through this process that good can
come out of our work. It will be for Congress, the people, and the foundations
theselves to judge the seriousness of such error, and to judge also what corrective
means, if any, should be taken. Our intention has been, and I wish to make
this doubly clear, to conduct an investigation which may have constructive
results, and which may make foundations even more useful institutions than
they have been."
We appreciate the fact that the chairman has taken note of large
fields of foundation activity which have, over the years, become largely
noncontroversial in character. With full confidence in the import-
ance and usefulness of our support for work in the social sciences, we
urge the committee to take all of our activities into account in any
evaluation of our two foundations. In the case of the Rockefeller
Foundation, for example, it grants in the social sciences represent 15
cents of the foundation's dollar expended. We believe that these ap-
propriations have rendered a notable public service. But the broader
question of the benefit to the public of any particular foundation
necessarily involves a view of its work seen as a whole.
The committee has had little attention drawn to the wide-ranging
scope of the private philanthropy provided by our two foundations.
It would be impossible for us to summarize this activity in the space
reasonably available to us. We respectfully urge any committee mem-
bers who have not had an opportunity to do so to read Raymond B.
Fosdick's book, a copy of which we are furnishing each member of
the committee, our replies to the Cox committee questionnaire, and
our testimony before that committee.
We append two tables 1S which we believe will be of some assistance.
The first is a summary table covering both organizations, which was
furnished to the Cox committee, but now is brought up to date through
1953. The second is a breakdown of grants of the Rockefeller Founda-
tion to show something of the larger purposes for which they were
made.
Mindful of the chairman's desire to concentrate: (a) on the social
sciences, and (b) on seeking out error, we are naturally interested in
the standard by which error is to be identified. If knowledge is much
more elusive in the study of human affairs than in the case of physical
phenomena, just so is it more difficult to be certain about what con-
stitutes error.
Any scholar or scientist is subject to temporary errors ; under con-
ditions of freedom, corrections are worked out in the process of scien-
tific and scholarly debate, oral or written, and the issues resolved by
further testing and experimentation. It is not impossible for such
issues to remain unresolved indefinitely, where no existing hypothesis
appears adequately to explain all the data which must somehow be
taken into account. Such differences are not treated as charges and
countercharges but are the bricks out of which the edifice of Knowl-
edge is gradually built.
" Transcript, p. 3, Ibid., p. 2.
« Transcript, p. 5, ibid., p. 3.
19 Appendixes A and B.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1083
If, however, we classify as error any departure from a generally
accepted principle of dogma, or any view which opposes one's own,
or any questioning of one^s own commonsense experience, or any view
which conflicts with one's own interest, then an official search for error
must evoke the gravest misgiving. We have supposed that our con-
stitutional arrangements and public policies make room for the widest
divergence of ideas, while exacting a course of conduct from each of
us which shares equitably the privileges and responsibilities of free-
dom.
We do not feel it necessary to consider at length the full implica-
tions of the above comments, because we believe that there are other
questions which would be more immediately helpful to the committee
in judging the role of our foundations in the social-science field. These
questions are —
(1) Is it a reasonable exercise of the discretion vested in the
trustees of the Rockefeller Foundation to appropriate funds in
support of social studies as a contribution to the well-being of
mankind ?
(2) Is it a reasonable exercise of such discretion for the trustees
to make such grants almost exclusively to colleges, universities,
and other research and scholarly organizations ?
(3) Is it a reasonable exercise of such discretion to make such
grants to such institutions, without requiring that the resulting
studies conform to predetermined views of the foundation itself ?
(4) Does the totality of grants made in support of the social
sciences by the Rockefeller Foundation represent a body of re-
search and investigation which is consonant with the public
interest of the United States and with the well-being of mankind ?
We believe that all four questions must be answered affirmatively.
III. Organization and Procedures
a. organization and purposes
The Rockefeller Foundation was chartered by a special act of the
Legislature of the State of New York in 1913 for the purpose of pro-
moting the well-being of mankind throughout the world. In 1929
•the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial, another philanthropic
foundation established in 1918 by Mr. Rockefeller, was consolidated
with the Rockefeller Foundation. The total of Mr. Rockefeller's
gifts to the foundation was $182,851,000, and the assets of the memorial
at the time of consolidation had a value of $58,756,000. By the end of
1953, the foundation had made 30,572 grants, totaling $501,749,878 in
expended and authorized appropriations. Its remaining capital funds
have a present market value of approximately $366 mililon. 19
The General Education Board was incorporated in 1903 by a special
act of Congress for the purpose of promoting education in the "United
States of America, without distinction of race, sex, or creed. It
received from Mr. Rockefeller $129,209,117 in a series of grants and
an additional $15,751,625 from the Rockefeller Foundation, making
a total of $144,960,742. 20 The board has made .11,237 grants totaling
$317,733,124, for the benefit of education in this country. Its funds
» As of July 21, 1954.
20 An additional $116,615 was received In gifts from other sources.
1084 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
have now been distributed or allocated except for a relatively small
balance of about $700,000 21 and, for this reason, it is in the process of
winding up its activities.
Although they are legally independent of one another, the Rocke-
feller Foundation and the General Education Board have had close
ties. For many years a substantial majority of both boards of trustees
has been identical. Since 1936 they have had the same chairman
(successively John D. Rockefeller, Jr., Walter W. Stewart, John
Foster Dulles, and John D. Rockefeller 3d) and the same president
(successively Raymond B. Fosdick, Chester I. Barnard, and Dean
Rusk) . For a much longer period they have had a common treasurer ;
they are both served by the same comptroller. They have occupied
offices on adjoining floors of the same building, which has fostered
close contacts between the two staffs.
The operations of each organization have been in a broad sense
coordinated with those of the other. Thus the foundation, authorized
under its charter to promote the well-being of mankind throughout
the world, has tended to defer to the General Education Board on
opportunities for aid to education as such within the United States,
the field to which the board is directed by its charter. Of course, the
Rockefeller Foundation has made substantial sums available to edu-
cational institutions in the United States and other countries in
connection with its own activities.
B. TRUSTEE RESPONSIBILITY
The allegation has again been made before this committee that the
trustees of foundations abdicate their responsibility. The Cox com-
mittee inquired into this point in 1952, hearing considerable testimony
upon it, and reached a finding favorable to foundation trustees which
concluded with the following statement :
As to the delegation by trustees of their duties and responsibilities, the prob-
lem is basically the same one that confronts the directors of a business corpora-
tion. Both must rely in large measure upon their staffs. There is this one
important difference, in the opinion of the committee. The trustees of a public
trust carry a heavier burden of responsibility than the directors of a business
corporation. In fairness it should be said that in the opinion of the committee
this principle is fully recognized by the trustees of foundations and that they
make a determined effort to meet the challenge. 22
It is difficult to understand the allegation in the case of the General
Education Board prior to the recent curtailment of its activities, or its
survival in the case of the Rockefeller Foundation, where the facts
conclusively refute it. The explanation may lie in the quandary in
which a hostile critic finds himself when he wishes to attack a grant
which has been made by a board of trustees of distinguished citizens
whose broad experience, public service, and loyalty cannot be effec-
tively questioned. He elects to retreat into the position that "These
men obviously didn't do it," rather than face the fact that such men
might disagree with him.
The trustees of the Rockefeller Foundation, a complete list of whom
is attached, 23 fully recognize a heavy responsibility for the trust which
has been placed in their hands. They meet it in the following manner :
21 As of July 21, 1954.
22 Final report, p. 11.
23 Appendix C.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1085
(A) Board meetings
The full board of trustees meets twice each year, in April (1 full day) and
in December (2 full days). The 1st day of the December meeting is ordinarily
given over to a general discussion of the policies and procedures of the founda-
tion ; it is here that the trustees are afforded an opportunity to raise new ideas
and offer criticisms and suggestions about the work of the foundation in its
broadest aspects. As for the appropriations of funds to be considered at the 2
full meetings, the trustees are provided a docket at least 10 days in advance,
which contains a description of the activities for which funds are recommended
by the officers. The distribution of such a docket prior to each meeting gives
the trustees an opportunity to study proposed actions in advance and to be
prepared to offer suggestions or raise questions or consult with others before
final action is taken. At each meeting, proposed appropriations are presented
orally by the officers and are subject to discussion, approval, modification, or
rejection by the full board. This consideration is not merely formal in character
but includes the type of exchange which develops a consensus in the board and
between the board and the officers which gives direction and guidance to the
work of the foundation.
(B) Executive committee
The executive committee of the board of trustees has seven regular and two
alternate members under the chairmanship of the president. It meets at least
six times a year at the offices of the foundation. It receives an advance docket
and considers proposed appropriations with the same procedures used by the
full board. It is limited in the amounts it may expend between board meetings
without the express authorization of the board.
(C) Special policy committees
From time to time the chairman of the board of trustees may appoint a special
policy committee of the trustees to review the policies and operations of the
foundation. Such reviews extend over a period of months and require sub-
stantial commitment of time and interest from the trustee members of such
committees. Their conolusions and recommendations are reported to the full
board where thorough discussion serves to clarify policy and to readjust the
work of the foundation to changing conditions.
(Z>) Other trustee committees
Other standing committees of the board are the finance committee, the nom-
inating committee and the committee on audit, whose functions are indicated by
their titles.
(E) Informal discussion
The trustees take a lively interest in the work of the foundation which leads
to a considerable amount of informal discussion among themselves, between
trustees and officers, and between trustees and individuals outside the founda-
tion.
(F) Publications
The trustees: receive and read the publications of the foundation, including a
monthly confidential report prepared by the officers for the information of the
trustees. The latter report is "confidential" largely because it is intended only
for use within the foundation itself and because it occasionally discusses the
progress of scientific and scholarly studies before the scientists and scholars
themselves are ready to make their findings public.
( (?) Visits to foundation activities
Many of the trustees have an opportunity from time to time to see firsthand
some of the work being supported by foundation appropriations, both In the
United States and abroad. On occasion, 2 or 3 members of the board may be
asked specifically to visit a particular activity, such as the Mexican agri-
cultural program, on behalf of the foundation. Since trustees are men whose
other interests require travel, they frequently avail thmselves of opportunities
to discuss foundation affairs with our representatives stationed abroad and to
visit one or another project.
(H) Election of officers
One of the most important duties resting upon trustees is the election
of the officers of the foundation. This is particularly true in the case of the
president, the two vice presidents, the secretary, the treasurer, the comptroller,
1086 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
and the directors of the four divisions. With the exception of the president, the
treasurer and the comptroller, the officers are elected annually upon the nomi-
nation of the president. It is fair to say that the procedures of the foundation
give the trustees an excellent opportunity to know and to judge the personalities,
character, and quality of work of the principal officers of the foundation.
It should be obvious from the above summary account that the role
of a trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation is an active one, particu-
larly for those trustees who serve on one or more of its committees.
Despite the demands made upon trustees' time, the attendance of
trustees at board and committee meetings establishes a remarkable
record of attention to duty on a voluntary and unremunerated basis.
Absences are almost invariably limited to those who are ill, out of
the country, or prevented from attending by some other clearly over-
riding consideration. Over the past 5 years, for example, if we ex-
cludes only trustees actually abroad or on formal leave of absence,
attendance at board and executive committee meetings has averaged
86 percent of the membership. This compares most favorably with
the experience of large business corporations.
We conclude these remarks about the role of trustees by repeating
here a portion of the testimony given before the Cox committee by
Chester I. Barnard, former president of the foundation and general
education board :
* * * I have been a director of business corporations and still am for 40 years.
I never have seen any board that I have been on — and I know how many of the
others operate — in which the attention to the policies and the details by the
directors or trustees, whichever they use, were such as it is in the Rockefeller
Foundation. I do not know any organization in which a week in advance you
have a complete docket book with the explanation of every item over $10,000
that you are going to be asked to vote on, and that includes with it a detailed
list of every grant-in-aid, of every scholarship or fellowship that has been
granted and any other action taken, and that has attached a list of the declina-
tions. That is just as important from a trustee's point of view as the approvals.
Nor have I ever known of any organization in which so much careful atten-
tion was given to it.
In 12 years I have missed no meetings of the board of trustees of the Rocke-
feller Foundation and only 3 of its executive committee meetings, and that is
not unique at all. That is some record for people who are busy, and every one
of the members on this board is busy. They read the docket book in advance.
In addition to the docket book every single item in most circumstances has to
be presented by the director of the division which proposes it, and he has to
subject himself to cross-examination, and he gets it. He doesn't get it on every
item, of course, but he gets it. So the matters that come before the board of
trustees of this foundation in my experience have been given more careful at-
tention by more competent people than I have seen in any other institution.
There is just nothing like it, and the idea that this thing has been run without
adequate attention by the trustees, that it is just in the hands of a bureaucracy
of officers, just certainly isn't true, and it ought to be recorded here that it
isn't true. 24
C. OFFICER AND STAFF RESPONSIBILITY
More has been said about trustees than about the officers and full-
time professional staff, since the role of the latter is better under-
stood. The officers and staff of the Rockefeller Foundation are or-
ganized, broadly speaking, into the divisions of medicine and public
health, natural sciences and agriculture, social sciences, humanities,
and in administration. The full-time personnel of the general edu-
cation board has now been sharply reduced because of the liquidation
of its activities.
24 TJ. S. Congress (82d, 2d sess), House Select Committee To Investigate Foundations
and Comparable Organizations. Hearings (Washington, F>. C. : U. S. Government Printing
Office, 1953, p. 562).
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1087
While, as has been shown, the trustees do not "abdicate" their re-
sponsibilities to the officers of the foundation, they must and do rely
heavily upon the officers for the effective performance of the founda-
tion's tasks. The officers make recommendations on policy, seek the
most promising opportunities for the application of foundation
funds, review and investigate requests, propose grants for trustee
consideration, and keep in touch with educational, scholarly and
scientific leadership in many countries. Some are engaged directly
in scientific research in such fields as virology and agriculture. In
addition to handling the extensive administrative business of the
foundation, the officers are responsible for the approval of small
grants and the award of fellowships under general policies estab-
lished by the trustees and from funds made available by them for
that purpose.
It should be noted that the officers act as a group ; their decisions
and recommendations are not made individually but in a process of
discussion which brings to bear a variety of experience and judg-
ment. The divisions hold frequent staff meetings on requests falling
within their respective fields of interest; discussions between divi-
sions occur where proposals involve more than one ; finally, proposals
to the trustees are considered in a conference of the principal officers
of the foundation, where criticism and discussion can take place on
the broadest basis.
The bylaws of the Rockefeller Foundation provide that the presi-
dent is the only officer eligible to serve as a trustee. Among the
principal officers of the foundation are always a number who by ex-
perience and capacity would be entirely qualified to serve as trustees
and, were they not officers, might well be invited to join the board.
In fact, then, the affairs of the foundation are in the hands of a board
or trustees of 21 distinguished citizens an officer group of highly
qualified individuals, all of whom can be relied upon to carry the
heavy burdens of their philanthropic trust with care and a deep con-
cern for the public interest.
D. TYPES OF GRANTS
The trustees of the Rockefeller Foundation determine, on recom-
mendation of the officers, what grants are to be made by the Founda-
tion, but the trustees delegate to the officers restricted authority to
make certain smaller grants in categories described below. The trustees
also determine, upon recommendations of the officers, what expendi-
tures are to be made for administration and similar purposes.
The foundation makes grants both to individuals and institutions.
Grants to individuals are in the form of fellowships or of travel grants
and are limited in amount and duration. Grants to institutions are,
in accordance with the policy of the foundation, made only to other
tax-exempt institutions in the United States and to such institutions
abroad as are comparable in character and purpose to those receiv-
ing tax exemption in this country. By following this policy, the foun-
dation is assured that its grants to institutions in the United States
are limited to those which the Government itself has recognized as
being philanthropic in character.
In brief, the foundation's grants are handled as follows :
1. The board of trustees, at its meetings, may make grants without
limit in amount, from either income or principal.
49720 — 54 — pt. 2—10
1088 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
2. Between meetings of the board, its executive committee, consist-
ing of seven members and two alternate members (all trustees) may
make grants from either income or principal, subject, however > to the
following limitations :
(a) Each grant must be in accordance with the general policies
approved by the board ;
( b ) No grant may increase by more than $500,000 a grant previ-
ously made by the board ;
(c ) No new grant may exceed $500,000 ; and
(d) Total grants between meetings of the board may not ex-
ceed $5 million unless authorized by the board.
A summary of the minutes of each meeting of the board and of the
executive committee, listing all grants, is sent to all trustees immedi-
ately following the meeting. All actions of the executive committee
are reported to the board at the first board meeting following such
actions.
3. The trustees delegate to the officers authority to make certain
smaller grants in the following categories :
(a) Grants-in-aid. — These are allocations made by the officers
from funds appropriated for this purpose annually for each divi-
sion of the foundation by the trustees. Each allocation is limited
to $10,000; total allocations to a project may not exceed $10,000
in any one year, and total support of a project through grants in
aid may not extend beyond 3 years or be in excess of $30,000. The
formal action authorizing the grant in aid must be signed by the
director of the division concerned, by the president or vice presi-
dent, after examining the supporting materials, and by the comp-
troller, who certifies the availability of funds for the purpose.
The usual grant in aid is about $2,000; not more than about 7
percent are for as much as $10,000. All allocations are reported
promptly to the executive committee of the board of trustees.
(b) Director's fund grants. — A director's fund of not more
than $5,000 is set up annually for each division (as an allocation
from the grant-in-aid appropriation made by the trustees) . Indi-
vidual allocations from this fund may not exceed $500 and are
made through a written action signed by a division director and
certified by the comptroller. All such allocations are reported
twice a year to the trustees. The fund provides a flexible mecha-
nism for prompt response to the needs of individual scholars and
scientists at strategic times in the development of their work.
The grants are used for such things as equipment, honoraria,
travel, materials and research assistance.
(c) FeUoioship awards. —These are awards made by the offi-
cers from funds appropriated annually for this purpose by the
trustees. The action making the foundation's award is signed by
the director of the division concerned, the president or vice presi-
dent, and the comptroller. All fellowship appointments are re-
ported promptly to the executive committee.
IV. Foundation Support for Social Studies
a. background of foundation interest
In a formal sense, the Rockefeller Foundation undertook financial
support for social studies when, in 1929, it was consolidated with the
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1089
Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial and continued an interest al-
ready developed by the latter philanthropy.
In much broader terms, the foundation came to believe that its com-
mitment to promote "the well-being of mankind throughout the
world" compelled it to give attention to the baffling complexities of
human relations — to the processes by which men earn a living and the
difficulties they encounter in working out tolerable relations among
individuals, groups, and nations.
From the beginning the foundation never considered that it had
or should have solutions to social problems behind which it should
throw its funds and influence. It has had no nostrums to sell. Its
approach rested upon a faith that the moral and rational nature of
man would convert an extrusion of knowledge into an extension of
virtue, and that he could make better decisions if his understanding
could be widened and deepened.
The experiences of World War I and the painful uncertainties of
the postwar and depression period seemed to reflect a growing and
menacing gap between man's technical and scientific capacity and his
apparent inability to deal with his own affairs on a rational basis. In
any event, it did not appear that we could escape fundamental poli-
tical, economic, moral, and social problems by concentrating upon
"safe" scientific subjects. Successes in public health were to mean
rapidly falling death rates and increased population pressures upon
resources. The study of nuclear physics, at first only a brilliant exten-
sion of man's intellectual curiosity, was to lead to hydrogen weapons.
There was no illusion about the rudimentary character of the so-
called social sciences or about the severe limitations which are encoun-
tered in attempting to apply the methods of the physical sciences to
man's own behavior. Nevertheless, it was felt that there might be
sufficient regularity about human behavior to permit fruitful study,
and that a scientific approach might evolve methods of study which,
if not a direct application of techniques developed in the older sciences,
might lead to surer bases of knowledge than we now have. In any
event, the possibility was worth the effort and the very attempt might
uncover promising leads which would increase our knowledge to a
- constructive degree.
A further impulse behind the interest in social studies was a con-
viction that the strengthening of our own free institutions required a
" better understanding of the processes of a free society and the frame-
work within which a citizen enjoys the privileges and bears the re-
sponsibilities of liberty itself. At a period when free institutions
< came under challenge from totalitarian ideology of both the left and
the right, it was felt that penetrating studies ofour own free economic
..and political institutions would help them to withstand assault.
It was fully appreciated that social studies would involve contro-
versial subjects. It was felt, however, that a private foundation
could, without itself taking sides on controversial issues, make a con-
tribution by supporting objective studies which might illuminate
such issues and reduce contention.
Three brief excerpts from our records throw light upon the way in
■which the foundation has approached the support of the social
sciences. The first is a memorandum prepared by the executive com-
mittee of the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial in 1924, referred
.to by Dr. Thomas Henry Briggs in his testimony before this com-
1090 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
mittee, 25 the gist of which is quoted in Mr. Fosdick's history of the
foundation :
The present memorandum proposes to indicate principles which affect the
ability of the memorial to become associated with projects in the field of social
science. Certain principles would seem to make association undesirable. It
appears advisable :
1. Not to contribute to organizations whose purposes and activties are cen-
tered largely in the procurement of legislation.
2. Not to attempt directly under the memorial to secure any social, economic,
or political reform.
3. Not to contribute more than a conservative proportion toward the current
expense of organizations engaged in direct activity for social welfare.
4. Not to carry on investigations and research directly under the memorial, ex-
cept for the guidance of the memorial.
5. Not to attempt to influence the findings or conclusions of research and in-
vestigations through the designation of either personnel, specific problems to
be attacked, or methods of inquiry to be adopted ; or through indirect influence
in giving inadequate assurances of continuity of support.
6. Not to concentrate too narrowly on particular research institutions, incur-
ring thereby the danger of institutional bias.
Certain principles would seem to make assistance from the memorial desirable.
It appears appropriate :
1. To offer fellowships to students of competence and maturity for study and
reseach under the supervision of responsible educational and scientific insti-
tutions.
2. To contribute to agencies which may advance in indirect ways scientific
activity in the social field.
3. To make possible the publication of scientific investigations sponsored by
responsible institutions or organizations through general appropriations to be
administered in detail by the sponsoring agency.
4. To contribute toward the expenses of conferences of scientific men for
scientific purposes.
5. To make possible, under the auspices of scientific institutions, governmental
agencies or voluntary organizations, demonstrations which may serve to test, to
illustrate or to lead to more general adoption of measures of a social, economic
or governmental character which have been devised, studied and recommended
by responsible agencies.
6. To support scientific research on social, economic and governmental ques-
tions when responsible educational or scientific institutions initiate the request,
sponsor the research and assume responsibility for the selection and competence
of the staff and the scientific spirit of the investigations. 28
The second quotation is a brief statement on controversy adopted
by the trustees of the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial and sub-
sequently by the trustees of the Rockefeller Foundation, following the
merger in 1929 of the two philanthropies :
Subjects of a controversial nature cannot be avoided if the program is to con-
cern itself with the more important aspects of modern social life. In fact, suc-
cessful treatment of issues of a controversial sort would be so important a con-
tribution to the fundamental objectives of the program that the existence of
militant differences of opinion cannot be thought to preclude the promotion of
inquiry under appropriate auspices. 27
The last is taken from a memorandum prepared by the director of
the division of social sciences of the foundation in 1944 :
1. Though the degree of social need is always pressing toward grandiosity,
modest work will, in the long run, be most effective.
2. In recommending grants officers should try to anticipate the future — never
merely ride the coattails of an already discernible trend.
3. The social sciences division has no "nostrums" to sell. In choosing the ob-
jects of grants the guiding tendency should be not to pronounce answers but to
^Transcript, p. 271 ff. Ibid., p. 102.
28 Raymond B. Fosdlck, The Story of the Rockefeller Foundation (New York: Harper
& Bros., 1952), pp. 200-201.
27 Ibid,, p. 202,
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1091
discover truth— not to manipulate new forces but to understand them— not to
choose society's path but to illuminate it. 2S
B. EMPIRICAL STUDIES
It has been suggested to this committee that foundations have had
an adverse effect on scholarship and research through an undue em-
phasis on empiricism and "a premature effort to reduce our meager
knowledge of social phenomena to the level of applied science." 29
We have presumed to question whether this committee has a man-
date from the Congress to inquire into the decision of foundation
trustees as to the distribution of funds between empirical and nonem-
pirical studies or to inquire into the current practices of our colleges
and universtities in this regard. But we do not seek to evade the
merits of the issue.
The history of the intellectual processes by which man has accumu-
lated knowledge shows that observation, experimentation, induction,
deduction and verification have each had an important role to play
and that it is by their skillful and imaginative combined use that we
have been able to push back the frontiers of knowledge. Without
empirical examination, general propositions fail to establish and main-
tain contact with reality; without general concepts, fact-finding be-
comes aimless wandering and produces helter-skelter collections of
unrelated bits and pieces. By observation and experimentation man
refines his ideas about the world in which he lives ; by other rational
processes he reduces his masses of fact and impression to a degree of
order and gives them meaning. After enough regularity has been ex-
posed to justify the construction of a general theory, then and only
then can occur the crucial test of verification. Throughout this process
the questions "What is it?" and "How does it happen?" are among
the tools man uses while seeking an answer to the underlying question,
""What does it mean ?"
The interplay of observation, experimentation and theorizing has
produced brilliant results in the natural sciences, enabling man to
fight back at disease, to harness new forms of power, and to wrest a
more abundant living from his environment. But even in the case
•of the natural sciences, the path he has traveled has been a tortuous
one, filled with false leads, imperfect observation, inexact experi-
ment, theories which claimed too much, and contradictory facts for
which he could find no adequate explanation. New ideas have had
to run a gantlet of prejudice and entrenched opinion. Today's
firmly held truth is modified by tomorrow's fresh discovery. And
still today, as man looks out from peaks of knowledge which he dared
not hope to scale, he sees still higher peaks on the distant horizon
and vast fields of ignorance still to be explored. The process con-
tinues — with new findings, new mistakes, new instruments, new
techniques, and most important of all, new concepts and fresh
imagination.
It was inevitable that an attempt would be made to apply the
methods of the natural sciences to human affairs. Chemical and
physical approaches to the subtle problems of living matter — once
considered dominated by mysterious "vital forces" had striking and
M Fosdlck, The Story of the Rockefeller Foundation, pp. 211-212.
29 Transcript, p. 42, Ibid., p. 19.
1092 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
promising successes. It was wholly naturall to attempt to apply sim-
ilar analytical and quantitative techniques to social problems. It
should not be surprising that this attempt would encounter major
obstacles — as did the efforts of those who first tried to apply Newton's
physics and Lavoisier's chemistry to biology and medicine. The tech-
niques appropriate to the laboratory were insufficient for the study of
man in his social environment; the circumstances of study were differ-
ent in fundamental respects ; conditions could not be readily controlled'
so as to study one factor at a time, as the physical scientist often does.
The basic equipment of the scientist was nevertheless required : care-
ful examination of the evidence, an objective approach to data, and a
lively and fertile imagination in the construction of hypotheses to be
tested, and, throughout, a clear recognition that there must be a joint
emphasis on speculation and experience. Beyond that, techniques
had to be revised and improved ; the danger of seeing too much had
to be avoided ; and the disconcerting influences of undetected factors :
had to be faced. Although his problems of procedure were difficult
enough, the social scientist also faced the resistance and even hos-
tility of man himself, with his personal or group interests affected and
his emotions and traditional patterns upset by new knowledge.
The social scientist persists in his effort to learn more about human;
behavior, despite the modest beginnings and the challenging com-
plexity of his task. He believes that he is beginning to know some-
thing, even though he is sure that he does notlniow everything. He
is in position to throw some light on some situations, knowing better
than most where his present limitations are. For example, we know
a great deal more now than we did 20 years ago about the processes,
by which we make a living in a free enterprise economy — more about
capital growth, the labor force, the market, rates of productivity,,
prices; and this knowledge is becoming more accessible to the tens
and hundreds of thousands whose decisions determine the ebb and
flow of our economic life. We know more about the consumer, his
plans and prospective demands, his liquid assets, his preferences.
We know more about personnel selection and training, the motiva-
tions which affect productivity, the techniques of management. We
know more about the processes of normal development, the way in
which people learn. We can be quite accurate about short-range pop-
ulation predictions affecting such matters as our requirements for
schools and teachers or our pool of manpower for military service.
We at least know something about what new knowledge we need to
extend these predictions over a longer range.
These few examples are given to illustrate that our knowledge about
human affairs is increasing, even if slowly and imperfectly, and that
such knowledge as we have can contribute practical benefits while
the search continues. If there are claims being made which seem
overreaching, if social scientists are in disagreement among them-
selves and with the layman, if there are many questions which can-
not be answered, all this is entirely normal. If there are errors and
a danger that we shall be misled by errors, the safeguard is the classic
and traditional one: free debate, the empirical testing of opposing
views, and a standing invitation to confront error with truth. Our
society is deeply in debt to the best of the social scientists. They are
among the most important of today's pioneers.
As far as the Rockefeller Foundation is concerned, we attach no
particular importance to the argument about whether the term "social
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1093
science" is properly used. Some of those who object to it probably
overestimate the certainties of the natural sciences. Some who use it
may claim too much for our knowledge of man. It is our view that
much more can be known about man than we now do and that knowl-
edge is to be preferred to superstition or prejudice. If a little knowl-
edge is a dangerous thing, the remedy is to advance further into the
unknown and seek out its mysteries, not to retreat into enforced
ignorance.
Our foundations have provided funds for promising studies of an
empirical character in the social sciences, largely in the fields of eco-
nomics and human behavior, and we take genuine satisfaction from
them. These studies have been, for the most part, much more than
mere fact finding ; they have been accompanied by a sensitive interest
in generalization and underlying principle. It has been our impres-
sion that those who are engaged in such studies are much aware of the
importance of general concepts and are the first to recognize the in-
adequacies of the tentative generalizations thus far reached. The
final answers have not been found is a reason for continuing the effort
rather than for abandoning the approach.
It should not be surprising that, on a comparative dollar basis, foun-
dation funds might seem to be more heavily concentrated in empirical
studies. They represent a relatively new field for academic develop-
ment and reflect, as the president of the Social Science Research Coun-
cil has pointed out, the pragmatic element in the American experi-
ence. Further, they are expensive and are often beyond the reach of
ordinary college and university budgets. Under these conditions,
foundation support is required if significant advances are to be made.
Alongside of empirical studies, our foundations have been interested
in philosophy and theory and have made many grants for the more
speculative fields. We have an active interest in moral, political, and
legal philosophy, in moral and spiritual values, in the philosophy of
history and the theoretical aspects of economics and international re-
lations. If the amounts have not been large in total, it is partly be-
cause large amounts are not needed, as contrasted with empirical
studies. A further reason is that the special combination of interest
and speculative capacity is somewhat rare, professional opportunities
are limited, and large numbers of scholars in these fields do not come
forward. Finally, it is not at all clear just how a foundation interest
is best expressed ; perhaps what is most needed is fellowship or grant-
in-aid opportunities for younger scholars and a certain amount of
tree time for older scholars in widely diverse fields who wish to phi-
losophize about their experience and get their thoughts into more sys-
tematic form. These are questions to which we are giving continuous
attention.
V. Specific Questions
A. INTRODUCTION
We turn now to the specific questions which the Congress has re-
ferred to this committee for determination. According to the report
of the committee's director of research, these questions are the fol-
lowing:
Have foundations —
Used their resources for purposes contrary to those for which they were
established ?
1094 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Used their resources for purposes which can be classed as un-American?
Used their resources for purposes which can be regarded as subversive?
Used their resources for political purposes?
Resorted to propaganda in order to achieve the objective for which they have
made grants ? "
B. CONFORMITY TO CHARTER PURPOSE
The first question cited above is whether foundations have used their
resources for purposes contrary to those for which they were estab-
lished. As to the Rockefeller Foundation and General Education
Board, the answer is clearly "No."
Let us first consider the foundation. It would surely be hard to find
words of broader import than those used in its charter to describe its
purpose, "to promote the well-being of mankind throughout the
world." Only one inference can fairly be drawn from this wording :
that the intent of the founder was to place no limitation on the dis-
cretion of those who from time to time would be responsible for con-
trolling the destinies of the foundation, so long as their decisions could
reasonably be regarded as contributing to the well-being of mankind.
This was the determination of Mr. Rockefeller, based upon his long
experience of personal giving, and his knowledge of the pitfalls await-
ing donors who attempt to circumscribe too narrowly the purposes for
which philanthropic funds will be available over a considerable period
of years. He preferred to leave the decision as to program and policy
in the hands of succeeding boards of trustees, believing that a trust in
their wisdom and experience was less likely to be frustrated than an
attempt on his part to anticipate the needs of later generations.
Where the charter uses such broad language to describe the organ-
ization's purpose, a strong presumption of validity attaches to the
determinations of its trustee, unless they fall clearly beyond the gen-
erally recognized area of permissible philanthropic giving. Whose
judgment is to be substituted for that of the trustees, as better quali-
fied to determine the purposes for which the Rokefeller Foundation
was established ? Is a grant to be condemned as not within those pur-
poses because, for example, it is in support of studies relating to the
United Nations ? True, there was no United Nations when the founda-
tion was established in 1913. But the foundation's charter was framed
to meet the needs of an unforeseeable future. That was the precise
reason for stating the organization's purpose in such comprehensive
terms. Those who would impose a restrictive interpretation on such
language have a heavy burden of proof to carry, and may fairly be
said to expose themselves to the suspicion of wishing to substitute
their own political and economic predilections for the open-minded,
f arseeing vision of the foundation's creator.
Turning to the General Education Board, we find that its charter
expresses a similar breadth of purpose. The special act of Congress
incorporating the board in 1902 declared its object to be "the promo-
tion of education within the United States of America without distinc-
tion of race, sex, or creed." The types of education to be encouraged,
the methods to be pursued, the institutions to be benefited, were wisely
left to the discretion of the Board's trustees. With respect to the
General Education Board we repeat what we have said as to the foun-
30 Transcript, p. 47, ibid., p. 21.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1095
dation, namely, that those who claim that the organization's resources
have been used for purposes which are contrary to those so broadly
expressed in its charter have a heavy burden of proof to carry, and
one which, we submit, has been far from sustained in this investigation.
A criticism has at times been made that the interest of the Rocke-
feller Foundation in the social sciences represented a departure from
"the wishes of the founder." There was discussion in the foundation
from the beginning about a possible interest in the social sciences;
Mr. Rockefeller himself established the Laura Spelman Rockefeller
Memorial to carry on his wife's interest in social-welfare activities.
At an early stage the memorial decided to concentrate largely in the
social-science field ; this interest became a part of the program of the
Rockefeller Foundation upon the consolidation of the two philan-
thropies in 1929.
It should be pointed out that John D. Rockefeller, Jr., served as
chairman of the board of trustees of the foundation for 22 years
(1917-39) . He had been intimately associated with his father's devel-
oping philanthropy and served the foundation during the period
when the natural sciences, social sciences, and humanities were added
to its program.
John D. Rockefeller 3d, the present chairman of the board, testified
at some length on this point before the Cox committee in 1952. 31
There is no credible evidence to support the assertion that our two
foundations have in some reprehensible way departed from the pur-
poses of our founder or the purposes inscribed by public authority in
our charter.
C. ALLEGED SUPPORT OF UN-AMERICAN OR SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES
"We come next to allegations that the foundations have promoted
"un-American" or "subversive" action. This has been defined to this
committee by its director of research as "any action having as its
purpose the alteration of either the principles or the form of the United
States Government by other than constitutional means." S2
The Rockefeller Foundation and General Education Board would
never knowingly participate in or support un-American or subversive
action. We were requested to report to the Cox committee the names
of recipients of grants who had been listed by the Attorney General
as subversive or who had been cited or critized by the House Un-
American Activities Committee or the Senate Internal Security Sub-
committee. ~No grant has ever been made by either foundation to a
recipient whose name appears on the Attorney General's list of sub-
versives. This list, however, applies to organizations only, not
individuals, and to the best of our knowledge there is no similar
comprehensive list of individuals who have been officially designated
by government as subversive. Consequently, independent philan-
thropic bodies such as our foundations, whose earnest desire is to
avoid gifts to subversive individuals, are without reliable and positive
guidance in making their grants. The House Un-American Activi-
ties Committee has published Cumulative Index V to its publications,
but this document states : "The fact that a name appears in this index
is not per se an indication of a record of subversive activities. It
81 Hearings, pp. 565^-568.
34 Transcript, p. 37, ibid., p. 17.
1096 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
simply indicates that said name has been mentioned in connection
with testimony or a report submitted." 33
In making their reports to the Cox committee, our two foundations
revealed the names of all grant recipients who, so far as we could dis-
cover, had ever been commented upon adversely by either of the
House or Senate committees above mentioned, or who had been listed
in any report of either committee as having been identified by a wit-
ness as a Communist, as one of a group affiliated with an alleged Com-
munist-front organization, or as one of the participants in some form
of pro-Communist activity. Because they came within one or another
of these categories, the Rockefeller Foundation named 2 organiza-
tions and 23 individuals who had benefited from its grants, and the
General Education Board named an additional six individuals to
whom or for whose support it had made grants.
The reporting of these names was by no means an acknowledgment
%v our foundations that the organizations and individuals were in
fact subversive. On the contrary, a number of them have steadfastly
denied under oath any Communist affiliations, and now occupy posi-
tions inconsistent with any serious doubt as to their loyalty. Two of
the individuals have admitted that they were Communists at one time,
but they have publicly renounced the party. Neither of the two or-
ganizations has been placed on the Attorney General's list of sub-
Tersive organizations. Furthermore, in most cases the grants were
made by our foundations long before the recipients were named even
in the manner above mentioned, and also before the slightest question
had been raised about them.
Our foundations refrain as a matter of policy from making grants
to known Communists. This rests upon two elements, the clearly ex-
pressed public policies of the United States, within which our founda-
tions operate, and the increasing assaults by communism upon science
and scholarship which would lead our foundations, on intellectual
grounds alone, to withhold support.
We recognize the necessity for Government to seek out and deal
with subversive activity from any quarter. In this, Government is
entitled to the sympathetic assistance of all responsible citizens.
Where freedom and security are balanced against each other and it
becomes necessary to locate the line which separates permitted and
prohibited conduct, difficult decisions have to be made which reach
into the fundamentals of our society. For example, the definition of
subversion is a matter of extreme difficulty.
On broad grounds of public policy, we believe that private citizens
and organizations should approach unofficial definitions of subversion
with the greatest caution. This is not merely because the task is dif-
ficult, as the Congress has found it to be on the official plane. If pri-
vate organizations and associations should produce their own defini-
tions of subversion and should act toward their fellow citizens on the
basis of such private definitions rather than of those furnished by
duly constituted authority, the mutual confidence and trust which are
the cement of our democratic society would rapidly crumble away.
The presumption of innocence is more than a luxury to be enjoyed in
settled times ; it is a vital element in a society of freemen who work
together by consent and not by force. Under the American systeim
ra Cumulative Index to Publications of the Committee on Un-American Activities : Index
(Washington, D. C. : U. S. Government Printing Office, 1953), p. 1.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1097
tyranny in government can be struck down at the ballot box but it is
far more difficult to hold private organizations to proper standards
if these organizations intrude upon security activities which are at the
heart of the governmental function.
A private citizen or organization can properly look to Government
for guidance in matters affecting loyalty and subversion. When one
turns to public laws and to official declarations of public policy for a
definition of the term "subversive," one finds a lack of precision which
itself may reflect differences about what constitutes wise policy in this
field as well as possible concern about the impact of applicable con-
stitutional provisions. For such constitutional provisions as those
concerning treason, bills of attainder, free speech, free press, and due
proeess of law enjoin caution upon Government lest the voice of the
opposition be silenced by public authority and fair differences of
opinion lead to the persecution of those with whom we do not agree.
We attempt to set standards for our activities and appropriations
which go far beyond any definition of subversion. We Tbelieve objec-
tive scholarship to be inconsistent with attitudes predetermined by a
totalitarian ideology or with conclusions which are reached to con-
form to a dictated pattern. The search for the highest quality, for
scholars and scientists of complete integrity, for men and women of
fine character and acknowledged capacity for leadership necessarily
means that questions of loyalty arise only in the rarest instances.
But we have always kept in mind the importance of the noncon-
formist in the advancement of human thought. This is not com-
munism' — it is the antithesis of communism, which regiments its fol-
lowers and tolerates no dissent from the dogma of the Kremlin. Mis-
takes can and will be made and private organizations cannot guar-
antee a perfect record, any more than can an intelligence agency of
Government itself. So long as there is alertness to the dangers in-
volved, and reasonable effort to avoid them, we believe that the public
interest will be adequately protected. It would be gravely injurious
to the public interest if fear should lead to such restrictive procedures
as to impair seriously the work of the foundations at the frontiers
of human knowledge.
We expect Government, acting under the law and the Constitution,
to identify what is subversive. We expect that the standard of con-
duct thus defined will be applied by due process. We believe that
private citizens and organizations are entitled to rely upon a man's
reputation among his fellows for character, honesty, loyalty, and
good citizenship and that private citizens and organizations should
not enter upon certain of the techniques of investigation appropriate
only to Government. We recognize that this is a field of infinite com-
plexity and are prepared to cooperate in any reasonable way to take
account of dangers from any source.
D. SUPPORT OF PRO-AMERICAN PROJECTS
We turn next to the related question whether our foundations have
adequately supported pro- American projects.
Our grants are made almost exclusively to colleges, universities, and
other research and scholarly organizations. We affirm our confidence
in them as patriotic institutions which recognize their obligation to
serve the public interest. The diversity of interest and aspiration
.among the American people forbids our thinking of pro-American
1098 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
in terms of a narrow formula couched in purely political terms. In-
stitutions which nourish the entire range of the religious, scientific,,
economic, social, artistic, and cultural values of our society are, in
the deepest and best sense, pro-American in character. We know
of no class of institutions more alive to our basic values and more-
concerned to see them understood and appreciated than are our col-
leges and universities. We know of no better investment in the-
future of our country than our substantial grants to such institutions. -
If we think, not of institutions, but of the kinds of work performed!
or supported, again we believe that our two foundations have con-
tributed immeasurable benefits to our country. We mention, but do*
not emphasize, that a very large portion of our funds has been spent
in the United States. We would suppose that a 35-year campaign
against yellow fever was pro-American and that those who gave their
lives in the foundation's successful fight against this pestilence served-
America, as well as the rest of mankind, as truly as did the soldier
who gave his life in battle. The building of a giant telescope onj
Mount Palomar, the campaign against hookworm, the large and sus-
tained interest in Negro education, large-scale support for the study
of the economics of a free-enterprise system, the provision for thou-
sands of fellowships, are all examples of activities of which America-
has been a major beneficiary. It does not diminish America's gain,
to know that others benefited as well, nor does it subtract from the-
end result to know that the impetus came from a desire to "promote-
the well-being of mankind throughout the world."
In a somewhat narrower sense, however, our two organizations
have consciously sought ways and means of contributing to the'
strengthening of our national life. This has been expressed in large-
support for medical education in the United States, in grants for ex-
tensive studies of our own economy, in support for studies of our
legal and constitutional system, our State and local governments, by
interest in national, regional, and local history, in support for both
creation and appreciation in the arts. Materials available to the
committee will show many hundreds of grants for such purposes. In
American history, for example, they will show 33 grants in 1953, 27 in
1948, and 25 in 1943 — just to take 3 typical years.
In addition to American studies in the United States, we have en-
couraged American studies abroad, parallel to area studies of other
cultures in this country, as a means of establishing a base of knowl-
edge for broader and more accurate understanding between Ameri-
cans and the peoples of other cultures. Grants for this purpose have
fone to such universities as Oslo, Munich, Ankara, Tokyo, Kyoto, and
)oshisha, to name a few.
We see no basis for any assertion that we have been negligent about
the interests of our own country in carrying out the mandates of our
charters.
From the context in which the question of pro- American projects
was introduced, we infer that it was intended to raise the question of
foundation support specifically for patriotic organizations. Nothing
we say is intended to depricate in any way the value of patriotic and
civic societies, which keep alive a love of country and a respect for the
American tradition. In a free society, particularly where there is a
strong emphasis upon individual liberty and initiative, there is an
important role for those who regularly remind us of the claims of the
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1099
Nation upon our interest and loyalty. But we question whether the
'Congress would wish to use its investigatory or tax power to press
particular claimants upon philanthropic funds which are entrusted
by law to the judgment and discretion of boards of trustees. Such
■ claims, if officially supported, would quickly multiply until they en-
compassed every worthwhile purpose in our society and would not
• obviate the ultimate need to make difficult choices in applying limited
funds to vast human needs. It is not surprising that our foundations,
which have largely concentrated upon basic research and support in
■ certain fields for institutions of higher education, should have had
ilittle or no contact with patriotic, veteran, or civic groups whose ac-
tivities are of a quite different nature. We have supposed that it has
^been well understood that we have elected to work in other directions,
since we have very little correspondence in our files from such groups
raising the possibility of foundation support. Such as we have con-
cerns itself largely with local hospitals or other local charities which,
from the beginning, it has been the policy of our organizations not to
..assist.
There are some indications in the record of these hearings that the
term "pro-American" includes repentant Communists. We know of
repentant Communists who have benefited directly or indirectly from
our grants. If it transpires that a former Communist is to be in-
cluded among those to benefit from a proposed grant, our inclination
would be to make a judgment, however hazardous it might be, on the
merits of each particular case — a judgment as to the ability, charac-
ter, integrity, and present loyalty of the individual concerned. The
fact that a person may in earlier years have been a Communist would
not in itself disqualify him for a foundation grant. Nor does the fact
that he has repented give him a claim to foundation assistance superior
io that of persons without a Communist record.
The committee will recognize that the problem is not a simple one.
For it, apparently, is only in very special cases that a former Commu-
nist and his sponsoring institution gain immunity from continual
harassment. Further, a difficulty arises in applying our usual tests of
high intelligence, strong character, qualities of leadership, and unus-
ual promise for the future. One questions whether there is particu-
larly fertile ground for foundation aid among those who have already
■demonstrated political naivete, and have shown a willingness to sub-
mit their minds and spirits to totalitarian discipline. We are not pre-
pared to express a general view on such cases; it is a matter to which
we have given considerable thought and which will continue to re-
ceive our attention. It is also one of the questions about which public
rpolicy needs clarification by those in responsible authority.
E. ALLEGED "POLITICAL" ACTIVITIES
Another allegation has been that foundations have promoted "polit-
ical" activities. On this the Rockefeller Foundation and General
Education Board enter a categorical denial and observe that no evi-
dence whatever has been produced which relates us in any way to
support for any political candidate or any political party.
On our boards of trustees are some who, quite outside of their service
to our foundations, have publicly identified themselves with one or
the other major political party. Some trustees have accepted public
1100 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
service, whether political or nonpolitical in character, under every
administration in office since our foundations came into existence.
Many trustees, however, have not indicated a political position, even
to their fellow trustees. We do not ask trustees or prospective trustees
about their politics and have no intention of doing so. Emphasis is
upon the nonpolitical and nonpartisan character of our work. The
same holds true insofar as our officers are concerned. It is clearly
understood that no one connected with our foundations may properly
identify these philanthropic institutions with political partisanship in
any form.
Since it is well understood that we do not participate in partisan
politics, the criticism has taken the form of a charge that we have
favored "attitudes normally expected to lead to legislative action." 34
Such a charge eludes examination. The Rockefeller Foundation and
General Education Board do not adopt "attitudes normally expected
to lead to legislative action." We have supported studies about a
wide range of human affairs, the purpose of which has been to add to
our knowledge and to illuminate problems with fact by seeking out the
underlying facts and principles. If legislatures make use of such
knowledge in the course of lawmaking, the relation is much too remote,
and the intervening factors far too complex, to sustain a charge that
the work of our foundations has promoted "political activities.
P. ALLEGED "PROPAGANDA"
This investigation has heard a great deal of talk about "propa-
ganda," coupled with the specific charge that foundations have vio-
lated their tax-exemption privilege by carrying on "propaganda"
activities. The Rockefeller Foundation and the General Education
Board deny this charge and affrm that we have exercised great care
to avoid any such infraction of our tax-exemption privilege. No in-
quiry has ever been directed to the Rockefeller Foundation or the
General Education Board by the Bureau of Internal Revenue or the
Internal Revenue Service raising any question of violation in con-
nection with any grant ever made by either organization.
Where support has been extended to studies in political science,
economics, sociology, or international relations, areas in which con-
troversy is almost unavoidable, these boards have never sought to pro-
mote a partisan or doctrinaire approach to the subjects, but have been
interested solely in the highest standards of objective, scholarly re-
search. If in rare instances the recipient of a grant has departed
from these standards, this has not been done with the consent or
approval of our organizations.
The trustees of the Rockefeller Foundation, to their abiding honor
be it said, have held true to the concept of trusteeship which has for-
bidden them to employ the large funds under their control for ad-
vancing the ideas or interests of any particular class or school of
thought. It is significant that the most violent and unrestrained
charges of "propaganda" have come from the mouth of a witness who
seriously maintained that the Federal income tax reflected a Socialist
plot to destroy the Government. 35 This is the man who charges that
the foundations, through their influence on education, "are directly
32 Transcript, p. 27, ibid., p. 17.
36 Transcript, p. 526, ibid., p. 210.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS HOI
involved" in a movement which is "the greatest betrayal which has
ever occurred in American history." 36
It should be a sufficient answer to these irresponsible allegations
for the Rockefeller Foundation and the General Education Board to
point to the roster of leading citizens drawn from many walks of life
who for periods of 41 and 51 years, respectively, have guided the ac-
tivities of these two organizations as members of their boards of
trustees and as officers. They have included bankers and corporation
executives, officers of leading universities, eminent figures in medi-
cine and the law, Nobel Prize winners, outstanding newspaper pub-
lishers, occupants of high governmental office. They have come from
no one section of the country, and have been chosen with complete
disregard for partisan political affiliation. It is beyond belief that
these men have been guilty, as charged before this committee, of either
perpetrating or conniving at "the greatest betrayal" in American his-
tory, or of not knowing what they were voting funds for. Such
charges are, we submit, false on their face, irresponsible in origin,
and an imposition on the time and attention of this committee.
What are the controlling rules and principles with respect to propa-
ganda activities and their effect on the tax exemption of foundations ?
They have been plainly stated for the benefit of this committee by the
Assistant Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Mr. Norman Sugarman.
He has referred to section 101 (6) of the Internal Revenue Code, which
grants exemption to any foundation —
* * * organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific,
literary, or educational purposes * * * no part of the net earnings of which
inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual, and no substan-
tial part of the activities of which is carrying on propaganda, or otherwise
attempting, to influence legislation." [Italics supplied.]
The italicized words were added by an amendment adopted in 1934.
As Mr. Sugarman said :
The committee reports and the language of the 1934 act establish that the
words "carrying on propaganda" do not stand alone, but must be read together
with the words "to influence legislation." Thus the law expressly proscribes only
that propaganda which is to influence legislation." "
*******
Congress saw fit only to circumscribe the exemption with a restriction against
substantial activities to influence legislation.* 8
As Mr. Sugarman also pointed out, the income-tax regulations de-
fining what is an educational organization entitled to exemption throw
additional light on the meaning of the word "propaganda" as it is used
in the tax law. This paragraph (regulations 118, sec. 39, 101 (6)-l
(c)), after stating that an educational organization is one designed
primarily for the improvement or development of the individual, adds
that, under exceptional circumstances, it may include "an association
whose sole purpose is the instruction of the public," and continues as
follows :
An organization formed, or availed of, to disseminate controversial or partisan
propaganda is not an educational organization within the meaning of the code.
However, the publication of books or the giving of lectures advocating a cause
of a controversial nature shall not of itself be sufficient to deny an organization
the exemption, if carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting, to influence
38 Transcript, p. 508, ibid., p. 211.
"Transcript, pp. 925-926, ibid., p. 436.
38 Transcript, p. 934, ibid., p. 433.
1102 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
legislation forms no substantial part of its activities, its principal purpose and
substantially all of its activities being clearly of a nonpartisan, noncontroversial,
and educational nature.
We think the committee will be interested in comparing those pro-
visions of the law and the regulations with the definition of propa-
ganda which the committee's director of research, after 6 months'
study, offered as a guide to assist in determining the question whether
foundations had forfeited their exemption by their conduct in this
field. That definition is as follows :
Propaganda — action having as its purpose the spread of a particular doctrine
or a specifically identifiable system of principles * * * in use this word has come
to infer half-truths, incomplete truths, as well as techniques of a covert nature. 8S>
In spite of his reference to half-truths, incomplete truths, and tech-
niques of acovert nature, not a word in the report would suggest that,
as Mr. Sugarman later so clearly demonstrated, "propaganda" was
not forbidden to a tax-exempt organization unless it is used "to in-
fluence legislation."
In order to be sure that it is conforming to public policy in this re-
spect, the Rockefeller Foundation follows the practice of making no
grants to any American organizations which have not themselves
established their right to tax exemption by a ruling of the Commis-
sioner of Internal Revenue.
G. ALLEGED "INTERNATIONALIST" BIAS
In his report to the committee, its director of research stated that his
studies of foundation activities "seemed to give evidence of a response
to our involvement in international affairs . While we were at first
inclined to believe that this was intended as a compliment, a closer ex-
amination of the context made it plain that it was offered as a deroga-
tory allegation. This was confirmed by our study of part II of a later
report by the committee's legal analyst, received by us on July 19, 1954,
which purported to deal with the "internationlist" activities of the
Rockefeller Foundation. Before examining some of the curious
charges made in these staff reports, it might be well to look at some
facts.
The foundation is a philanthropy whose activities are not limited by.
national frontiers and whose charter purpose is the promotion of "the
well-being of mankind throughout the world." It has been active in
varying degree in more than 90 foreign countries or territories. It
now has offices or laboratories in London, Paris, Tokyo, Cairo, New
Delhi, Poona, Mexico City, Bogota, Medellin, Rio de Janeiro, Belem,
Port of Spain, Ciudad Trujillo, Lima, Santiago, Johannesburg. Its
officers travel into almost every area on this side of the Iron Curtain.
The international character of the foundation's work has been one
of its major characteristics. Whether in medicine and public health,
natural sciences, agriculture, social studies or the humanities, the
foundation has sought the most fertile ideas, the most urgent needs,
the most capable men, and the most promising institutions wherever
they could be found. There is nothing mysterious or sinister about the
reasons for this.
35 Transcript, p. 37, ibid., p. 17.
*> Transcript, p. 45, ibid., p. 20.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1103
First, Mr, Rockefeller's philanthropic interest was worldwide in
scope, and wag rooted in the sympathetic concern which Americans
have shown for the needs of people in other lands throughout
our history.
Second, an attack up certain types of problems, such as yellow fever,
malaria, wheat stem rust, compels a pursuit of the problem across na-
tional boundaries.
Third ? the general body of knowledge, scientific or otherwise, is an
international heritage and grows through the labor of scientists and
scholars in many centers of learning, in many laboratories, in many
countries. The most cursory glance at the list of Nobel prize winners
and the most elementary understanding of the history of our culture
make it clear that this is so.
Fourth, any philanthropy which is committed to an interest in the
well-being of mankind throughout the world cannot reasonably ignore
the vast problems which are comprised in the term "international re-
lations." If this was true in earlier decades, it is underscored with
fateful emphasis by the statement of the American Secretary of State
at the 1953 meeting of the General Assembly of the United Nations
that "Physical scientists have now found means which, if they are de-
veloped can wipe life off the surface of this planet." 41
We accept as an established fact that the United States is involved
in international affairs and that this involvement produces an impact
upon every home and every citizen. It is as much a part of the en-
vironment in which we live as is the air we breathe.
This recognition does not mean that the Rockefeller Foundation has
any formula of its own as to fust how the problems of international
relations should be resolved. We have no corporate position on such
questions as World Government, Atlantic Union, the role of the United
Nations, international trade policies, regulation of armaments, se-
curity alliances, and so forth. We believe that problems of relations
among peoples and governments are proper subjects of examination
and study, that knowledge about them is to be preferred to ignorance,
and that reliable information will put men into position to make wiser
decisions.
In the field of international relations, the foundation has pioneered
in what has come to be called technical assistance, primarily in such
fields as medicine, public health, and agriculture. In addition, it has
provided support for studies or for creative work in such fields as in-
ternational economics, international law, comparative government,
history, creative arts, and the so-called area studies, that is, studies
which cut across cultural boundaries and establish a bridge of infor-
mation and understanding despite differences in language, race, creed,
are cultural tradition.
We have attempted to be helpful and cooperative in our attitude
toward existing machinery of international cooperation, whether the
League of Nations, the United Nations, the World Health Organiza-
tion, the Food and Agriculture Organization, etc. Where an inter-
national body is undertaking work in which the foundation has an
interest, an occasional grant has been made by the foundation to sup-
port such w ork. On other occasions officers and staff of the founda-
^ " 'The Department of State Bulletin, vol. XXIX, No. 744, Publication 5196 (Washington,
D. C. : U. S. Government Printing Office, September 28, 1953), p. 404.
49720— 54— pt. 2 11
1104 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
tion have been loaned to international organizations for particular
jobs, as in the field of medicine and public health. In working with
international organizations, the foundation does not enter into the
political discussions and decisions which might be made by those
bodies. Our collaboration rests upon a joint interest in activities ap-
propriate to philanthropy.
A complaint has been made that we have directed education "to-
ward an international frame of reference." 42 What we have done
has been to provide financial support to colleges, universities, and
other educational bodies to enable them to do what they themselves
have wanted to do, namely, to study the world outside as well as inside
the United States and to find a reasonable place in school and college
curricula for learning about other peoples and their cultures as well as
our own. We find it puzzling to be called upon to defend what seems
to us to be so obvious, that American scholarship should encompass
other cultures and that educated Americans should know something
about the world in which they live. This is particularly true today
when American citizens are called upon to have reliable information
and balanced judgments about complex international issues which
affect the the very life of the Nation.
Turning to part II of the report of the committee's Legal Analyst,
it is not easy to discover exactly what our sins are supposed to be.
Indeed, its preface states : "There is no distinction here as between so-
called good or bad activities of the foundations * * *."
The report contains a number of statements which are clearly in
error. For example: "As a matter of fact, the [Carnegie] Endow-
ment and the foundation concentrated their grants among the same
agiences in practically every case." ia This is simply not true, quite
apart from whether it would have been reprehensible.
Again, the report refers to "* * * activities of the foundation
in connection with 'one-world' theories of government and planning
on a global scale * * *." 4 *
If the expression "one-world theories of government" means any-
thing, it means world government. No shred of evidence is presented
in the report to show that the Eockefeller Foundation or any of the
organizations to which it has made grants has advocated world gov-
ernment. In an appendix referred to as Exhibit-Rockefeller, the
report gives a number of quotations from our annual reports and
president's reviews. One of these, taken from the 1946 president's
review, reads: "The challenge of the future is to make this world
one world — a world truly free to engage in common and constructive
intellectual efforts that will serve the welfare of mankind everywhere."
That this sole reference to "one world" (an expression first popu-
larized by a former Republican candidate for the Presidency) had
nothing whatever to do with world government is apparent.
The legal analyst's report, part II, contains the following
paragraphs :
There is nothing ambiguous about the warning on page 9 of the 1941 annual
report of the foundation :
"If we are to have a durable peace after the war, if out of the wreckage of
the present a new kind of cooperative life is to be built on a global scale, the
part that science and advancing knowledge will play must not be overlooked."
42 Hearings, r>. 20.
43 Report of the Leeral Analyst, pt. II, hearings, p. 882.
« Report, pt. II, ibid., p. 871.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1105
This statement appears in the report for the 12-month period ending Decem-
ber 31, 1941 — not quite four weeks after Pearl Harbor — yet there con be no
doubt that as far as the foundation was concerned only "a cooperative life * * *
on a global scale" could insure "a durable peace." *
We gladly reaffirm the quoted portion of the 1941 annual report
but it is interesting to see the full context. We quote three full
paragraphs :
"If we are to have a durable peace after the war, if out of the wreckage of
the present a new kind of cooperative life is to be built on a global scale, the part
that science and advancing knowledge will play must be overlooked. For
although wars and economic rivalries may for longer or shorter periods isolate
nations and split them up into separate units, the process is never complete
because the intellectual life of the word, as far as science and learning are con-
cerned, is definitely internationalized, and whether we wish it or not an indelible
pattern of unity has been woven into the society of mankind.
There is not an area of activity in which this cannot be illustrated. An
American soldier wounded on a battlefield in the Far East owes his life to the
Japanese scientist, Kitasato, who isolated the bacillus of tetanus. A Russian
soldier saved by a blood transfusion is indebted to Landsteiner, an Austrian.
A German soldier is shielded from typhoid fever with the help of a Russian,
Metchnikoff. A Dutch marine in the East Indies is protected from malaria
because of the experiments of an Italian, Grassi; while a British aviator in
North Africa escapes death from surgical infection because a Frenchman,
Pasteur, and a German, Koch, elaborated a new technique.
In peace as in war we are all of us the beneficiaries of contributions to knowl-
edge made by every nation in the world. Our children are guarded from diph-
theria by wbat a Japanese and a German did; they are protected from smallpox
by an Englishman's work ; they are saved from rabies because of a Frenchman ;
they are cured of pellagra through the researches of an Austrian. From birth
to death they are surrounded by an invisible host — the spirits of men who never
thought in terms of flags or boundary lines and who never served a lesser loyalty
than the welfare of mankind. The best that every individual or group has
produced anywhere in the world has always been available to serve the race of
men, regardless of nation or color. 46
Apparently the focus of interest of the legal analyst's report,
pt. II, is to be found in the following quotation from its first page :
At the same time that Carnegie and Rockefeller agencies were concentrating
on the chaotic condition of education in the United States (discussed in pt. I),
organizations bearing the same family names were focusing attention on other
types of conditions which in the opinion of the trustees required improvement.
While these so-called problems covered such varied fields as public health,
malaria in Africa, and exchange of professors and students of international law,
there was an indirect relationship between them, and also between them and
education: namel, all of them were on the periphery — if not directly in the
center — of international relations and governmental activities.
That both the foundation and the endowment did carry on activities which
would directly or indirectly affect legislation is borne out by their own state-
ments, as found in their annual reports.
That they both engaged in propaganda— as that word is de c ned in the dic-
tionary (on page 49 of the report this becomes "in the sense defined by Mr. Dodd
in his preliminary report"), without regard to whether it is for good or bad
ends — is also confirmed by the same source.
That both had as a project "forming public opinion" and "supplying in-
formation" to the United States Government to achieve certain objectives, in-
cluding an internationalist point of view, there can be no doubt.
None of these results is inherent in the purposes of either of these or-
ganizations.
Our comments on the above quotation follow :
(1) The Rockefeller Foundation has carried on public health ac-
tivities, fighting malaria and yellow fever, for example, in many for-
15 Report, pt. II. hearings, p. 895.
**The Rockefeller Foundation, annual report, 1941, pp. 9-11.
1106 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
eign countries, and has invariably had cordial relations with the
governments of those countries. The suggestion that there was an
''indirect relationship," apparently regarded as sinister, between these
activities and other "on the periphery" of "'international relations'
and 'governmental activities' " is so vague and unintelligible that we
can make no reply without further specifications.
(2) It is true that studies supported wholly or in part by our grants
may have indirectly affected legislation. The intelligent and alert
legislator is constantly in search of help from the work of scholars, and
like the experienced foundation officer, is quick to distinguish between
true, objective scholarship and propaganda masquerading as such.
Does the legal analyst mean to suggest that foundations should with-
hold support from sound, independent scholars for fear that their
studies will not remain sterile, but will impress legislators sufficiently
to influence their official action ?
Neither of our foundations have ever been directly involved in an
attempt to influence legislation affecting the subject matter of its
grants or has ever made a grant to an organization for the purpose of
assisting is in influencing legislation.
(3) As to the allegation that the foundation has engaged in propa-
ganda, our first observation is that even if the definitions of this word
referred to by the legal analyst are accepted as relevant, the charge
cannot be sustained. We have never offered remedies of our own as a
cure for public problems. We cannot suppose that the term is in-
tended to apply to foundation publications emphasizing the impor-
tance of fighting disease, the desirability of constantly advancing the
frontiers of knowledge, or the urgent need for peace in a troubled
world.
But the fact is that the definitions of propaganda referred to are not
relevant to this inquiry because they ignore the statutory qualifica-
tions of this word as it is used in the section of the Internal Eevenue
Code dealing with tax-exempt institutions. As Mr. Norman Sugar-
man, Assistant Commissioner of Internal Revenue, brought out in his
testimony, the Internal Eevenue Code denies exemption on account of
propaganda activities only where the alleged propaganda is designed
to influence legislation. 47 The only institutions in the United States
receiving grants from our foundations are institutions whose right to
tax exemption has been affirmed by executive ruling. As against the
legal analyst's viewpoint, we adopt and follow the determinations of
those who are charged with the duty of applying and enforcing the
definition as it appears in the Internal Revenue Code.
A possible key to a better understanding of the report is to be found
on page 59 :
There has heen a singular lack of objectivity and a decided bias toward a so-
cialized welfare state in the proposals of these organizations, and every effort
has been made by them to advance the philosophy of "one world" to the complete
disregard of comparable effort on behalf of a more "nationalistic" viewpoint.
We have commented earlier (p. 15) on increases in Federal powers
and expenditures, probably referred to in the above quotation as "a
socialized welfare state." What is the more "nationalistic" viewpoint
to which reference is made? Just as we do not use our funds to sup-
port doctrinaire world government, neither do we use them to support
47 g ee our discussion on p. 1100 ante.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1107
doctrinaire isolation. It is precisely at points where such extreme
views converge in controversy that research and scholarship can con-
tribute to our public life.
The committee's staff reports repeatedly confuse the study and dis-
cussion of public issues with the systematic propagation of particular
points of view. There is much evidence that we have given financial
support to the processes of study and discussion because, indeed, we
have. There is no evidence that we have, as foundations, systemati-
cally urged solutions of our own, for we have not.
The legal analyst's report concludes with 32 pages of quotations
from the publications of the Rockefeller Foundation during the years
1932-51. We regret that there is not space to reprint them here for
we would stand on them now. We see no conflict between respect for
our own national life and culture and a desire to increase "the infinity
of threads that bind peace together" through channels of international
cooperation. It is on this basis that we have made large numbers of
grants both for the strengthening of our own national life and for
more accurate and deeper understandings across national frontiers.
H. ALLEGATIONS OF FAVORITISM
We turn next to the charge that "only a few [colleges] had partici-
pated in the grants which had been made" by foundations and that
foundations have been guilty of "favoritism in making * * *
grants." 48 Such charges have no basis in fact when applied to the
Rockefeller Foundation and the -General Education Board, but we
would not wish the wide scope of our grants to becloud an underlying
issue. Our position is that the concentration or dispersion of grants
is a matter which lies within the discretion of our trustees. They
have no obligation to effect a wide distribution of their funds; the test
is whether they have reasonable ground to believe that their appro-
priations promote our charter purposes. In stating the facts as to the
wide range of institutions which have received our grants, we wish to
avoid even the appearance of criticism of any foundation which might
have concentrated upon a single or a few institutions.
A study of grants made by the foundation since its establishment in
1913 and of grants made by the General Education Board since it was
chartered in 1903 reveals the following facts as of December 31, 1953.
The number of institutions and organizations in this country that
have received grants from one or both of these boards totals 1,061.
These institutions are distributed in 45 States and the District of
Columbia. If assistance given through the foundation's operating
program in public health is included, the distribution of funds covers
all 48 States. .
The Rockefeller Foundation has made grants to 611 institutions
and organizations in the United States, involving a total of over $216
million. This figure does not include grants for our operating pro-
grams in public health and agriculture, or for fellowships and travel
grants. The 611 recipient institutions were located in 41 States and
in the District of Columbia. They were both public and private and
included great universities, small independent colleges, agricultural
colleges and institutes of technology, medical schools and teaching
hospitals, special laboratories, art institutes, symphony societies, mu-
« Hearings, pp. 18, 19, 20.
1 108 ' TAX-EXEMPT* fl3trNiE)ATIONS
seums, special research bureaus, and various organizations of scholars
and scientists.
The General Education Board's record also shows a wide distribu-
tion and a great variety in the types of institutions to which grants
were made. Grants have been made in 44 States to 598 organizations.
They were made to public and private universities, small liberal arts
colleges, State departments of education and agriculture, State
teachers colleges and normal schools, agricultural and technical insti-
tutes, libraries, community schools, medical colleges, museums, and
various scholarly and professional organizations.
It should be stressed, however, that it has not been the objective of
the Rockefeller boards to distribute their funds with a view to secur-
ing extensive institutional representation or geographic coverage.
Eather they have sought to place their funds wherever they would oe
most effective in carrying out the purposes of their charters.
Thus, in an effort to improve knowledge and practice in the field of
public health, the foundation made large grants to Harvard Univer-
sity and John Hopkins University, institutions which were prepared
to establish strong schools of public health, whose faculties could fur-
nish leadership not only within their own institution and locality but
for the field of public health as a whole.
Likewise in seeking to advance knowledge of the biological sciences,
grants were made to institutions that had built up strong departments
in this field and had attracted to their faculties scientists who were en-
gaged in significant research. Advanced research in this field is car-
ried on most effectively where there is ready association with scientists
working in related fields, such as physics and chemistry, where con
tact is possible with doctors trained in medicine, surgery, dermatol-
ogy, etc., where laboratory facilities are generous and graduate as-
sistants are available. Hence, large grants for the expenses of
research in biology have been made to such institutions as the Massa-
chusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, Johns Hop-
kins University, and California Institute of Technology, not because
these institutions were located in particular sections of the country,
or because they were favored institutions, but because they offered
exceptionally good opportunities to advance knowledge in a certain
field.
While it is true that the total funds given to such great universities
as Columbia, Harvard, Chicago, and California were considerably
larger than those given to many other institutions, the reasons for
this lay not in any favoritism toward the institutions but in the fact
that they gave clear evidence of interest and significant achievement
in important fields of learning and had demonstrated their ability to
provide an especially favorable setting for the advancement of re-
search and training in these fields.
Support for our great universities results in direct benefits to insti-
tutions in all parts of the world through the advanced training which
they are able to offer. For example, the Rockefeller Foundation
has given large grants in support of chemistry and biology at the Cali-
fornia Institute of Technology. In the last 5 years alone, 314post-
doctoral faculty members of some 200 colleges and universities in the
United States and abroad have taken advanced training in these 2
departments alone. Ninety-nine doctor of philosophy degrees have
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1 109
been given to representatives of an almost equal number of insti-
tutions.
The Rockefeller Foundation has given $4,687,083.90 to the Harvard
University School of Public Health. In the years 1950, 1951, and
1952, 119 graduates were distributed across the length and breadth of
the country, with 21 going to the Army, Navy, and Air Force ; 22 to
the United states Public Health Service ; 42 to local and State health
services; 19 to teach in other centers; and the remaining 15 to other
posts ;
It is also relevant, in view of the charge that foundations tend to
favor the large institutions, to point out that some of them became
large and strong because of substantial foundation assistance. Chi-
cago, Emory, Vanderbilt, Tulane, California Institute of Technology
are among those whose growth has been actively encouraged by funds
from the Rockefeller boards; Duke is an example where large sup-
port has come from another foundation.
In all these grants, no individual project or institution has been
considered an end in itself. Rather an effort has been made to choose
for assistance only those projects or persons that gave promise of
becoming, in the words of one of our early trustees, "the seed corn for
the future." The idea is to help establish standards that will lead to
continuous improvement in the quality of research and scholarship.
This has been true in the program of the General Education Board
as well as in that of the foundation, although geographical considera-
tions played a greater role in the work of the board, which recognized
a special regional interest in the South. From the beginning, the
board stressed the importance of establishing standards of excellence
and strove, not to help all institutions, or even those whose need was
greatest, but rather to strengthen a number of soundly established
colleges and universities in strategic locations so that they would set
standards and stimulate similar development in other institutions of
the region, and thereby contribute enduring benefits to all education
in this country. Grants involving more than $190 million (in amounts
of $1 million or more) for endowment, buildings and equipment, and
for the increase of teachers' salaries, were made to 37 colleges and uni-
versities scattered throughout the country. Because of the special
needs of the southern region 21 of these institutions were in the South.
If some of them received substantially more than others, the answer
may be found both in their needs and in the opportunities they offered
for contributing to the strength of American education. A further
explanation lies in the high cost of certain kinds of education — such
as medical education. For example, board grants for the building,
equipment, and endowment of the School of Medicine and a Teaching
Hospital at Vanderbilt University ^ Nashville, Tenn., totaled $15 mil-
lion. Similarly, grants for Meharry Medical College in Nashville,
for the training of Negro doctors, totaled $4,800,000.
We are very much aware that the legitimate needs of the Nation's
schools and colleges are vastly greater than the total resources of our
two organizations. We have not taken the view, however, that since
we could not do the entire job we should do none of it. Consequently,
choices had to be made.
The General Education Board has spent over 80 percent of its re-
sources in direct support of institutions of higher education. That en-
dowment, capital plant, and other forms of basic support were con-
1110 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
sidered vitally important (and proved to be costly) is testified by
the fact that the board now terminates its 51 years of activity, having
spent its capital and income, as well as substantial grants from the
Rockefeller Foundation, for the purposes for which it was created.
There has been no regret that the continued activity of the board it-
self seemed less important than the encouragement which its funds
could give to our colleges and universities. There was regret that more
funds were not available to continue a job which was in no sense com-
pleted. We hope that others will see in the experience of the General
Education Board the deep and enduring satisfaction which comes
from investment in vital institutions of learning.
In the case of the Rockefeller Foundation it continues to commit a
large share of its resources to institutions of higher education (over
50 percent in 1953). Some indication of the relation between our
assets and the existing need is given by the fact that our colleges and
universities, in the United Statees alone, could wisely use in a single
year additional funds equal to the present assets of the foundation.
I. RELATION" WITH THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT
Some mention has been made in these hearings of an alleged "pur-
poseful relationship" or "operational relationship between founda-
tions, education, and government." 49
That there are many relationships between education, particularly
public education, and government is a matter of common knowledge.
The annual expenditure of approximately $7 billion of public funds
for education, the many services which educational institutions pro-
vide for Government by contract or otherwise, and the importance
to the Nation of a well-educated population, are major elements in
this common interest.
The very limited relations which the Rockefeller Foundation and
General Education Board have had with government are appar-
ently not so well understood. We have been concerned to preserve
our nonpolitical and nongovernmental status. While acting within
the broad framework of public policy, we do not consider that we are
agents or instruments of government. We have no clandestine
arrangements with government; we are independent philanthropies
committed to publicly known purposes and activities.
Our operational contacts with government arise in the following
ways :
(a) We are encouraged by public official statements to continue
our activities abroad as an expression of technical assistance in the
private nonpolitical field.
(b) Our officers traveling abroad sometimes pay calls upon Ameri-
can Embassies, Legations, and consulates and exchange general in-
formation about the situation in a particular country, as do American
businessmen or other citizens traveling abroad.
(<?) On occasion, an officer or officers of the foundation may be
asked to serve in an individual capacity on some governmental ad-
visory body. The foundation accepts the public duty to free a por-
tion of the time of its personnel for such service, even though the
service itself is not rendered as a representation of the foundation.
* Ibid., p. 20.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS HH
(d) The foundation, with a long experience in what has come to
be called technical assistance, is sometimes consulted by public offi-
cials in regard to methods of rendering such assistance, but this has
happened infrequently.
(e) Our two boards have made grants for projects sponsored by
agencies of government, such as the Library 01 Congress, the United
States Office of Education, the Department of Agriculture, the
United States Public Health Service, State departments of educa-
tion, State boards of health, local government agencies and, of course,
to State-supported colleges and universities.
J. SCHOOL AND COLLEGE CURRICULA
It has also been charged that foundations have been responsible
for "changing both school and college curricula to the point where
they sometimes denied the principles underlying the American way
of life" 49 and for promoting "a national system of education." B0
Our two foundations have had neither the power nor the intent
to bring about such changes. Responsibility for American public
education rests with 48 State boards or State departments of education
and with some 99,000 local school boards whose members are chosen in
accordance with the laws of their communities. It has been noted that
among the outstanding characteristics of the American system of
education are its diversity, the absence of centralized control, and
acceptance of both public and private agencies in the accomplishment
of its purposes.
The vast majority of young people in the United States are edu-
cated in publicly supported and publicly controlled institutions. In
1950 attendance at the public elementary and secondary schools and
at public institutions of higher education was 26,564,436 ; at private
institutions it was 4,723,132. 51 Standards and regulations for the
accreditation of public school teachers are determined by State laws
and State boards of education, and teachers' salaries are determined
and paid by local school boards or under authorities approved by
State legislatures.
The past few decades have witnessed numerous new developments
in American education. One of the greatest factors in this change
has been the phenomenal growth of our school population. From
1900 to 1950 the enrollment in our public secondary schools rose. from
519,257 to 5,706, 734. 52 This meant not only a tremendous increase in
the number of teachers required and more facilities for training them,
but it almost completely changed the job of the secondary school.
Instead of dealing with a student body of fairly similar background
and purposes, it had to provide for the educational needs of young
people who varied greatly not only in their economic and social back-
grounds, but in their abilities, their interests, and their plans for the
future. In many communities not more than 5 percent would go on
to college, and the traditional college preparatory curriculum had
little meaning for them.
*» Ibid., p. 20.
M Ibid., p. 48.
« U. S. Office of Education, Biennial Survey, 1948-50 (Washington, D. C. : U. S. Gov-
ernment Printing Office, 1953, ch. I, table 3, p. 6.
■> U. S. Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstrict of the United States : 1953 (Washing-
ton, D. C. : U. S. Government Printing Office, 1953), table 140, p. 125.
1112 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
This big change had its impact also on the colleges when the prob-
lem arose of articulating the secondary school's curriculum with the
college curriculum, when college enrollments also began to show large
increases, and when changing teacher certification requirements and
the need for more teachers laid new burdens on teacher-training
facilities.
All these changes led to much discussion among educators about
ways in which the secondary schools and colleges could be improved.
A number of State departments of education began studies of the
problem, as did a great many educational organizations, such as the
National Education Association, the American Association of School
Administrators, the American Council on Education, the Progressive
Education Association, the American Historical Association, the
Mathematical Association of America, and the Society for Curriculum
Study. The United States Office of Education made a national survey,
arranged for conferences, and issued a publication on Needed Research
in Education, and the various university schools of education en-
couraged their faculties to undertake studies of the problems of gen-
eral and teacher education.
Some of the witnesses before the committee seem to regard these
activities as the fruit of a malevolent impulse to subvert our institu-
tions. No doubt some of the studies referred to were unproductive,
or went off on the wrong track. Teachers and college professors are
as liable to error as the members of any other profession. But the
wholesale accusations against our leading teachers' organizations,
which have occupied so much of the committee's time, are believed to
rest upon a perversion of the facts and to be an unwarranted attack
upon the loyalty, patriotism, and intelligence of a devoted group of
public servants.
During the period of rapid change in our school population, new
teaching devices had become available to the schools in the form of
radio and films, research had produced a number of new methods of
testing and measuring, studies of human behavior were throwing new
light on the learning process, and advances in science made it necessary
to change the content of many courses of study.
Meanwhile, the country was not only undergoing a vast industrial
development but experiencing a great economic depression and two
world wars. These were the things that were responsible for chang-
ing American education — and not the activities or funds of any
foundation.
With so many cataclysmic changes occurring in so brief a time,
it is difficult to assign relative importance to the various forces just
mentioned. Few can doubt, however, that the great depression of
the thirties was a prime factor in a reappraisal of educational thought.
In a period of insecurity, it was but natural that questions should
arise as to the effectiveness of our educational system. It was but
natural, too, that the millions of restless, unemployed young people
would have questions as to the value of their school experience and
that educators should reexamine not only the purpose but the tech-
niques of education. Consequently, the years that followed witnessed
a considerable number of studies and experiments relating to new
educational programs and methods. As a result much was written
and many controversies developed, although actually few far-reaching
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS ^ 1113
changes occurred in curricula and methods in the high schools and
colleges. Kay Lyman Wilbur, a former president of Stanford Uni-
versity, once said that "Changing a curriculum is like trying to move
a cemetery." The few school systems and colleges where considerable
changes were introduced attracted much comment and perhaps tended
to distract attention from the more persistent and extensive problems
of teacher shortages, crowded classrooms, and outmoded school facili-
ties that were products of the depression and of the war years.
It is in this setting that we must consider the role of the Rockefeller
Foundation and the General Education Board in educational change.
Except in the fields of public health, medicine, and agriculture, the
Rockefeller Foundation has not engaged in or supported educational
activities in the narrowly professional sense of that term; its work
has been concerned chiefly with the support of advanced research
and the training of personnel for leadership in the fields of science
and scholarship. This work has inevitably served not only to increase
the body of knowledge available for educational purposes, but by its
emphasis on excellence, it has raised standards of research and teach-
ing in the United States and throughout the educational world.
In the field of public health, the work of the foundation has been
trail-blazing, both in this country and abroad. The education of
doctors and scientists for public health work has been forwarded by
liberal support of many postgraduate schools of hygiene of university
grade; public health nurses have been trained in institutions from
Johns Hopkins and Toronto to Bangkok and Peking; national and
local health departments in 68 countries have been strengthened with
equipment and essential services.
In medical education in the United States, the joint efforts of the
Rockefeller Foundation and the General Education Board, with con-
tributions of over $100 million, matched many times by the generosity
of others, were to a great extent responsible for raising the teaching
of medicine in the United States from the very immature position it
occupied in 1910 to a status of excellence that today is shared with
only a few countries in the world.
A few exceptional grants by the foundation have been directly con-
cerned with educational activities. One of these was the support given
to the Commission on the Financing of Higher Education of the Asso-
ciation of American Universities. 5 s This commission was set up by
the association to study and make recommendations about ways of
meeting the growing financial problems of our institutions of higher
education. The Institute of International Education in New York
City has received a number of grants B4 from the foundation toward
its general support. These grants were made in the belief that it is
rendering important services as a clearinghouse of information on
student-exchange programs and in helping Government agencies and
many colleges and universities to handle the complicated problems in-
volved in the administration of these programs.
Obviously none of the efforts just described has been instrumental
in changing both school and college curricula in the direction of uni-
form patterns, or in promoting a national system of education.
k A grant of $400,000 made in 1949.
" Grants totaling $388,356.89 during the period 1937-53 ;, prior to 1929 other grants
had been made by the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial.
1114 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
In considering these charges as they relate to the General Educa-
tion Board, it should be noted that the board has never sought to im-
pose a particular doctrine of education or to promote particular forms
of curriculum organization or courses. To be sure, the $99 million
which the board spent to support pioneering efforts in medical educa-
tion resulted in widespread changes in that field. The funds, how-
ever, were granted to strengthen established institutions and to permit
them to offer more through training to medical students.
The great bulk of the board's funds — more than $250 million— were
used for endowment, buildings and facilities, increased funds for
teachers' salaries, and help in meeting current expenses for established
institutions whose activities and traditions had long been part of the
American scene. Some were church-affiliated colleges, others were
well-known independent institutions, and some were State supported.
All were striving to set standards of educational excellence ; all had
had difficulty in providing the evermore costly type of higher educa-
tion demanded and needed by the American people. In this strength-
ening and support of traditional American education, the role of the
General Education Board was simply that of a donor of funds to insti-
tutions that had demonstrated their ability to meet the recognized edu-
cational needs of their communities and to exert leadership in the
maintenance of standards of excellence.
A small part (8 percent of the board's grants has been used, either
directly or through endowment and support of schools of education,
for study and experimentation with educational methods and pro-
cedures. No program of education can remain static and be healthy. 53
There must be constant experimentation with improved methods and
study of ways to utilize new knowledge if American education is to
be adequate to its task.
The board's interest in experimentation dates back to 1917 when the
Lincoln School of Teachers College, Columbia University, was estab-
lished for the purpose of experimenting with educational procedures
and materials. The grant was made in response to a growing recogni-
tion among educators that the curricula of both the elementary and
secondary schools were no longer meeting the educational needs of
great numbers of their pupils. 56
This was the beginning of the board's activity in the science of edu-
cation. A few miscellaneous grants were made in the years that fol-
lowed, e. g., the grant to the University of Buffalo for a study of the
articulation of the college with secondary schools, grants to Antioch
and the University of Chicago for curriculum experimentation, and
the grant to the American Council on Education for the cooperative
test service which was to prepare objective tests for use at the sec-
ondary school and junior college levels. In 1933, however, following
an extensive survey of recent educational developments participated
in by 55 experts in various fields of education, the board began a phase
of its program concerned especially with the improvement of educa-
tion at the secondary school and junior college levels. During the next
6*4 years, while the major part of its funds continued to be spent on
strengthening educational institutions, on support of studies in agri-
56 "Education which is not modern shares the fate of all organic things -which are kept
too long." — Alfred North Whitehead, The Aims of Education and Other Essays (New
York : The Macmillan Co., 1929), p. 117.
M For a fuller discussion of this grant, see the General Education Board's supplemental
statement, p. 3. 'Ibid., p. 1141.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1115
-cultural economics, nutrition, and forestry in the South, and on basic
studies of child growth and development, grants were also made for
studies and experiments concerned with the improvement of general
education or, as later described, with^'the care and education ofyoung
people of high school and junior college age." 57
This program on which some $8,500,000 was spent, stimulated a
widespread interest in educational improvement. Through support of
research, it helped to build up a much-needed body of organized
psychological, physiological, and social knowledge about youth ; and
it did much to encourage a continuing consideration of problems
involved in the care and education of youth in modern society.
It did not, however, attempt to promote any specific form of reor-
ganized education or to introduce any particular ideas or materials
into the curriculum. Rather it provided opportunity for study and
deliberation by 17 national and regional organizations, 6 statewide
organizations, and 10 local educational groups j it supported research
at 5 university schools of education, and enabled 21 colleges and uni-
versities to engage in research and experimentation of a great many
different kinds. This opportunity was still further enlarged by the
support of cooperative studies involving many schools and colleges,
each one of which was enabled to study its own particular problems
in a manner decided by its own staff and administration. Thus there
was the cooperative study of general education which involved 22 col-
leges interested in improving their general education program. There
was the 8-year study of the 30 schools, in which a group of high
schools ranging from the frankly conservative to the advanced pro-
gressive worked together to find out ways of evaluating the results of
their programs. There was also the cooperative study of teacher edu-
cation in which some 25 universities and colleges engaged in teacher
education, 25 school systems, and 10 States with programs of inservice
teacher education, pooled their experience and tried out various ways
of making teacher education more effective.
Efforts to develop new instructional materials were aided and again
these efforts included many different approaches to the problem.
Because it was quite generally admitted that new materials were
needed, particularly in the social studies and in the natural sciences,
grants were made, for instance, to Stanford University for an inquiry
into ways of improving teaching and developing new materials in
the social studies ; to the Society for Curriculum Study to enable it
to prepare a series of teaching units on areas in American life, called
Building America ; 58 to the National Education Association and the
National Council on Social Studies for a series of teaching materials
to be prepared by a group of scholars and experienced teachers ; and to
Teachers College of Columbia University for new teaching materials
in the natural sciences. At the University of Chicago aid was given to
the establishment of a center where research materials on child growth
and development were assembled and made available to teachers of
educational psychology.
Obviously this diversified program in which so many institutions
and so many people with different points of view and different ex-
periences participated was no effort on the part of the board to slant
67 General Education Board, annual report, 1940, p. 3.
58 For a fuller discussion of this grant, see the General Education Board's supplemental
statement, p. 8. Ibid., p. 1142.
1116 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
school and college curricula in a particular direction. Furthermore
any careful examination of these school and college curricula will
reveal not only that they continue to show the wide diversity that
is one of the strengths of our educational system, but also that they
are more concerned with education for good citizenship than ever
before in our history and that through them all runs a common
core of loyalty to bur American way of life.
Here it may be of interest to note that the number of States which
required by law the teaching of the United States Constitution in-
creased from 5 in 1917 to 40 in 1940, and the number of States making
the teaching of United States history mandatory in the high schools
increased from 15 to 26 in the same period. 59 Our foundations do
not claim credit for this development any more than we accept
responsibility for alleged inattention to such matters.
As for the charge of promoting "a national system of education" —
if what is meant here is Federal aid for education, the answer is that
the General Education Board has itself taken no position on this
matter. There are many arguments both for and against Federal
aid to education and they have been discussed since the first bill for
Federal aid to agricultural colleges was introduced by Justin P.
Morrill in 1857. The establishment of the land-grant colleges in 1862
and the passage of the Smith-Hughes Act for Federal aid to voca-
tional education in 1917 show that the issue is not a new one. Studies
supported by our foundations on the financing of education reflect
a wide variety of views. The fact remains, however, that this country
does not have a national system of education and that control of
American education, as stated before, lies in the hands of 48 State
boards of education, thousands of college and university boards of
trustees, and 99,000 local community school boards. No prerogative
of the States has been more jealously guarded against Federal en-
croachment than their educational autonomy. The record speaks
for itself.
K. COMMUNITY SUPPORT OF EDUCATION
It has been alleged that the foundations have decreased the "depend-
ency of education upon the resources of the local community." 60
What are the facts ? In 1920 public expenditures for education in
the United States amounted to $1,151,748,000. 61 By 1950 this had in-
creased to $7,011,768,000. 62 In other words, the public, far from re-
linquishing its responsibility for its schools, had increased its support
of them from taxes by more than sixfold. In 1920 the total expendi-
tures of the Rockefeller Foundation and the General Education Board
were $8,959,942 or just less than eight-tenths of 1 percent of what the
public was then spending for education. In 1950 the expenditures of
both boards totaled $14,414,736, an amount equal to two-tenths of 1
percent of the funds being spent for public education.
In fact the total expenditures of some 100 philanthropic foundations
for education and a wide variety of other things have been estimated at
59 Victor Brudney, Legislative Regulation of the Social Studies In Secondary Schools,
School Law, reprinted for the National Committee for the Social Studies (Washington,
D. C. : American Council on Education, 1941), p. 141.
80 Ibid., r». 20.
81 TJ. P. Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstract : 1943. table 231, p. 218.
"D. S. Office of Education, Biennial Survey, 1948-50, ch. I, table 9, p, 11.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1117
$133 million for 1950 63 — a small sum when compared with the huge
public expenditures for education.
Obviously the contributions of the Rockefeller boards or, for that
matter, of all philanthropic foundations, were not relieving the public
of its responsibility to support education. Thus, education continues
to be paid for at an expanding rate by the local community and is con-
trolled by States and local school boards. Far from decreasing de-
pendency on the local community, the gifts of the Rockefeller boards
have served to encourage from public and private sources increased
support of needed educational services. From the beginning it has
been a policy of these boards to make grants only where there has
existed a strong institutional commitment to the work supported and
where there has been evidence of a sound base of community support
for the institution.
Among the devices used for encouraging the assumption of increas-
ing responsibility on the part of the community has been the making
of appropriations payable against matching funds raised from other
sources. The success of this device is shown by the fact that a sample
of 10 such conditional grants made by the Rockefeller Foundation,
totaling $6,025,000, shows that they encouraged $9,300,248 in contribu-
tions from other sources for the same purposes. Similarly, 10 typical
conditional grants made by the General Education Board, totaling
$3,850,000, were in large part responsible for gifts to the recipient in-
stitutions of about $13 million.
Another device for discouraging dependency upon foundation gifts
is the tapering grant. In writing about this, Raymond B. Fosdick
says :
The proper objective of a foundation, unless created for a particularized pur-
pose, is to prime the pump, never to act as a permanent reservoir. * * * The
proportion of a budget which it provides should not be so large as to discourage
support from other sources. Its contributions should not dry up the springs of
popular giving. On the other hand, when a foundation withdraws from a project,
its withdrawal should not be so precipitate as to wreck the enterprise. A taper-
ing down of contributions over a period of years will, under ordinary circum-
stances, give an organization a chance to build up stable support from its own
natural sources."*
This persisting concern for a project's ability to secure "stable sup-
port from its own natural sources" has been characteristic of the pro-
grams of. both Rockefeller boards. From the beginning they have been
conscious of the importance of avoiding the assumption of obligations
that are properly a public responsibility.
At the end of a report (pt. I) furnished to this committee by its legal
analyst, she makes the extraordinary contention that the great gifts
which foundations have poured into education in this country have
involved an "encroachment on State powers" and that in order to ac-
complish this the States, or at least many of them, have been "invaded
as it were through the back door." e5 So far as the General Education
Board is concerned, nothing could be further from the truth. Before
the committee accepts this conclusion of its legal analyst, why should
it not go to the sources, and inquire of the State departments of educa-
tion with whom the General Education Board has had cordial work-
ing relations for 50 years, whether they feel that State prerogatives
« s F. Emerson Andrews, Philanthropic Giving (New York : Russell Sage Foundation,
1950), p. 93.
M Fosdick, The Story of the Rockefeller Foundation, pp. 294-295.
M Hearings, p. 709.
111.8 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
in the educational field have been invaded or encroached upon? If
space and time permitted, we could furnish innumerable pieces of evi-
dence in contradiction of this perversion of the facts, so far as the
General Education Board is concerned.
L. TRAINING FOE PUBLIC SERVICE
The research director of the committee has called its attention to
foundation grants for "training individuals and servicing agencies to
render advice to the executive branch of the Federal Government." 66
Our two foundations have provided funds to a large number of
institutions which have trained individuals for participation in all
aspects of our national life; Federal, State and local governments,
schools, colleges and universities, business, law, medicine, agriculture,
scientific research, the creative arts, etc.
We make no apologies for the devotion of funds to the training of
individuals for service in executive branch — or any branch — of the
Federal Government. We can imagine few better uses, or more pro-
American uses, of funds dedicated to the public interest.
M. ALLEGED INTERLOCK
Reference has been made in the testimony to an "interlock" 67 among
foundations, even to a "diabolical conspiracy." 6S The allegation
seems to be that foundations act in concert to use their combined funds
to achieve reprehensible objectives by financial pressure and power.
We have already pointed to the well-known intimate association
between the Rockefeller Foundation and the General Education
Board, involving the same founder, a number of the same trustees and
officers, the same location, and programs which have reflected some
division of responsibility between them. This is the only "interlock"
of which we have knowledge.
Some of our trustees also serve as trustees of other institutions and
organizations, including other foundations. These were reported
fully to the Cox committee, which commented as follows in its report
to the Congress: "It is also understandable that the services of an
outstanding man should be sought by more than one foundation and
that we should therefore find a number of individuals serving on the
board of more than one foundation." 69
The counsel of the Cox committee made the following comment
during the hearings of that committee :
Mr. Keele. The remark that Mr. Sloan made this morning leads me to make
a personal observation, which I think good taste would not have permitted had
he not made the remark. He said he did not know many of the people in founda-
tion work.
At that luncheon in New York in September, I observed with some amusement
that there was more introducing of the members of the various foundations to
one another than there was of introducing me to the members of the founda-
tions. It was quite obvious to me that there was a lack of acquaintanceship
among the philanthropoids, if we may say so.™
The overlapping of trustees between particular foundations occurs,
if at all, in the case of 1 or 2 among boards of 15 to 20 in number. If
86 Hearings, p. 20.
87 Ibid., p. 47.
68 Ibid., p. 25.
"Final report, p. 11.
™ Hearings, p. 500.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1119
there is any instance of any manipulation of 2 foundations through
any such relationship, we do not know of 1.
More than one foundation may from time to time make grants to
the same recipient institution. A glance at the public records will
show, for example, that our leading universities quite frequently re-
ceive grants in the same year from a number of foundations for a
variety of purposes. Much more rarely, two or more foundations may
make grants to the same study, project, or purpose. Sometimes the
foundations would be in touch with each other in that situation; at
other times their only contact would be with the applicant institution.
Applications themselves sometimes refer to the fact that a request is
being submitted simultaneously to more than one foundation.
The principal occasion for consultation among foundations, par-
ticularly among those interested in the same broad fields, arises from
the desire on the part of each one to use its funds to the best advan-
tage. Obviously, if one foundation is ready to proceed with signifi-
cant grants in a particular field, others will wish to take that into
account in their own plans. With governments and international or-
ganizations entering the field of technical assistance, an increase in
the number of foundations, and developing interest among business
corporations in philanthropic programs, any single foundation must
give increasing attention to what others are doing if it is to use its
own funds wisely. Informal discussions among foundation officers
are the typical means for exchanging such information.
It need hardly be said that such exchanges do not result in agreed
lists of preferred applicants nor in blacklists. The applicant who
finds his request rejected by a number of foundations is not entitled to
attribute his lack of success to a combination against him. On the
contrary, foundations are jealous of their freedom of action and judg-
ment, and are little concerned about whether or not another founda-
tion would have made the same decision.
One witness stated, "It is my opinion that the Rockefeller, Ford,
and Carnegie Foundations are guilty of violation of the antitrust laws
and should be prosecuted." 71 Such a charge has no rational substance
where, as in our case, there is no monopoly, no combination, no re-
straint, and no trade.
VI. CONCLUSIONS
The committee's director of research concluded his report with the
statement :
It seems incredible that the trustees of typically American fortune-created
foundations should have permitted them to be used to finance ideas and prac-
tices incompatible with the fundamental concepts of our Constitution. Yet
there seems evidence that this may have occurred."
The chairman of the committee, speaking on the floor of the House
of Representatives on July 27, 195S, said :
The method by which this is done seems fantastic to reasonable men, for these
Communists and Socialists seize control of fortunes left behind by capitalists
when they die, and turn these fortunes around to finance the destruction of
capitalism.' 3
•n Hearings, p. 212.
™ Ibid., p. 51.
73 Congressional Record, July 27, 1953, p. 10188 ; hearings, p. 25.
49720 — 54 — pt. 2 12
1 1 20 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
A full examination of the facts will remove these fears. The Cox
committee reported :
It seems paradoxical that in a previous congressional investigation in 1915 the
fear most frequently expressed was that the foundations would prove the in-
struments of vested wealth, privilege, and reaction, while today the fear most
frequently expressed is that they have become the enemy of the capitalistic
system. In our opinion neither of these fears is justified."
We believe that no evidence received by this committee warrants a
change in that opinion. Free enterprise in philanthropy has been an
extraordinary success in the United States. Governmental controls
should be introduced with the utmost caution, so as not to dam up the
stream of philanthropy. However, understanding the desire or the
Congress to protect the public interest, we offer the following sug-
gestions which we believe the committee will find constructive.
(1) Public accounting
We are convinced that tax-exempt organizations should make regu-
lar public reports about their funds and activities. Any such require-
ment should not be so burdensome as to cause an unnecessary diversion
of philanthropic funds to administrative costs. We would not, for
example, propose that smaller foundations be required to undertake
the extensive publication program of the Rockefeller Foundation and
General Education Board. The character of the essential public dis-
closure might vary within broad limits.
One of the two recommendations of the Cox committee was the
following :
1. Public accounting should be required of all foundations. This can best be
accomplished by amendment of the existing laws in substantially the form here-
with submitted as appendix A, to which we direct the attention of the 83d
Congress. 78
We understand that legislation giving effect to this recommendation
was introduced in the 83d Congress by Representatives Richard M.
Simpson (Republican, Pennsylvania) and Brooks Hayes (Democrat,
Arkansas), former members of the Cox committee, but that it has
not yet been enacted. We would support legislation along such lines.
Otherwise, we see no need for new legislation. 76 Abuses can be
dearth with under existing law; the gradual accumulation of legis-
lation affecting religious, education, and charitable activities will, we
fear, inject Government more and more into fields which are more
appropriate to private initiative and judgment.
(#) The role of the Internal Revenue Service
The. Internal Revenue Service carries a heavy burden in its duties
in connection with the granting and withholding of the tax exemp-
tions provided by law and in reviewing the reports which are re-
quired from tens of thousands of tax-exempt organizations. We un-
derstand from testimony that only a limited staff is available to re-
view these reports because Service personnel is ordinarily assigned
to work most likely to bring in a financial return to the Government in
increased collections of taxes due.
Reputable tax-exempt institutions are interested in having the pub-
lic protected against abuses of the tax-exemption privilege. The Con-
» Final report, p. 10.
76 Final report, p. 13,
™See colloguy between Congressman Angier L. Goodwin (Republican, Massachusetts),
and T. Coleman Andrews, Commissioner of Internal Revenue, hearings, p. 460.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1121
gress may wish to make it possible for the Internal Revenue Service
to make modest additions to staff for this purpose, even though such
additions would be unlikely to increase tax receipts.
{3) Congressional investigations
The role and procedures of congressional investigations are being
widely discussed by the public, and now by the Congress itself . We
believe that the experience which foundations have had with a second
investigation in 2 years might well be taken into account in such
discussion.
First, in determining that the public interest requires that an in-
vestigation be undertaken, it is suggested that the burden of such an
investigation on private citizens and organizations be fully considered.
The review of a half century of activity which has been required of
our two foundations was costly both in time and energy and in the
diversion of funds intended for philanthropy. We have no way of
estimating the cost to the colleges and universities of the country of
the replies which they were asked to make to inquiries by the com-
mittee's staff, but we have been informed that it was substantial. These
are not arguments against investigations which are deemed, on sober
judgment, to be essential. The regular committees of Congress can
readily ascertain the facts before determining whether a full investi-
gation of an entire field is called for.
Second, if it is determined that an investigation is in the public in-
terest, it is suggested that it is most important that the charges be
fully and clearly stated. The failure to frame issues in specific terms
and from the point of view of established laws and public policy cre-
ates serious difficulties. The foundations have been criticized before
a congressional committee, largely by the committee's own staff, for
actions taken by the Congress itself. The term "propaganda" has
been used by the committee's staff without apparent appreciation of its
use by the Congress and the courts with respect to tax exempt organ-
izations. Allegations cast in general terms present no ascertainable
issue on which to make reply.
Third, it is suggested that there is fundamental injustice in using
the staff members of an investigating committee in both an accusatory
and an adjudicative role.
(4) Maintenance of free enterprise in philanthropy
Since a congressional investigation carries with it implications of
governmental intervention, we urge the committee to reaffirm estab-
lished American policy in support of private initiative and enterprise
in the philanthropic field. Human needs are vast and foundation
funds are a tiny pool compared to them. Those responsible for the
use of such funds would not claim that they always find the right
answers, for each grant must, in a sense, compete with every other
possible use of the same money. But on one point foundations would
generally agree — philanthropy can flourish only in the air of freedom.
Dated August 3, 1954.
Dean Rusk,
President, the Rockefeller Foundation and
(reneral Education Board.
1122 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
State or New York,
County of New York, ss :
Dean Eusk, being duly sworn, says that he is president of the Rocke-
feller Foundation and of the General Education Board, the organiza-
tions in whose behalf the foregoing statement is made; that the
foregoing statement is true to his knowledge except as to the matters
occurring prior to the dates (as therein set forth) of his association
with said organizations, which are therein stated to be alleged on
information and belief, and that as to those matters he believes it to
be true.
Dean - Rusk.
Sworn to before me this 3d day of August 1954.
[seal] Harold B. Leonard,
Notary Public, State of New York.
Term expires March 30, 1955.
Appendix A
Facts about tht Rockefeller Foundation and General Education Board (as of Dec. SI, 1958)
Founded
Organization.
Purpose
Management.
Program
Total funds received from donors (at
value when received).
Total income collected
Total amount of grants
From principal
From income
Existing principal fund (at market
Dec. 31, 1953) .
Total number of grants made
Average number of grants made an-
nually (1946-53).
Total amount of grants to recipients in
United States, including administra-
tion.
Total amount of grants to recipients in
foreign countries.
Total number of foreign countries and
areas in which grants have been made .
Total number of States (United States)
in which grants have been made.
Totalnumber United Statesinstitutions
and organizations to which grants
have been made.
The Rockefeller Foundation
By John D. Rockefeller, 1913 -.
Incorporated as charitable corporation by
special act of New York State Legislature.
"To promote the well-being of mankind
throughout the world."
Board of 21 trustees, elected for 3-year term.
(1) Grants to institutions and agencies in
support of projects in fields of medicine
and public health, natural sciences and
agriculture, social sciences, and human-
ities.
(2) Work in public health and agriculture
conducted by foundation's own staff.
(3) Fellowships and travel grants for indi-
viduals.
$242,247,098
$381,872,606
$501,749,878
$124,590,545
$377,159,333 ...
$313,479,787
30,572
953
$334,802,585
$166,947,293 .
80
48 (plus Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and
District of Columbia).
611
General Education Board
By John D. Rockefeller, 1902
Incorporated as charitable corporation by
special act of Congress, 1903.
"The promotion of education within the
United States of America, without dis-
tinction of race, sex, or creed."
Board of trustees, not less than 9 nor more
than 17 in number, elected for 3-year term.
(1) Grants toward support of educational
institutions, agencies, and projects.
(2) Fellowships for individuals
$145,077,357
$127,094,019
$317,733,124
$183,028,084
$134,705,040
$813,418
11,237
189.
$317,733,124
None .
None -
44 and District of Columbia
598
Combined totals
$387,324,455.
$508,966,625.
$819,483,002.
$307,618,629.
$511,864,373.
$314,293,205.
41,809.
1,142.
$652,535,709.
$166,947,293.
80.
48 (plus Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and
District of Columbia).
1,061.
00
Facts about tks Rockefeller Foundation and General Education Board (as of Dec. 31, 1958) — Continued
Distribution by institutions and organ-
izations in United States (10 largest
amounts).
Note: Donations to American Red
Cross and United War Work
Fund, and Rockefeller Institute,
General Education Board, and
China Medical Board, Inc., not
taken into account.
Distribution to colleges and universities
by States (10 largest amounts).
Total number of fellowship grants:
Direct
Indirect
Total amount of fellowship grants:
Indirect ._
Indirect
The Rockefeller Foundation
(1) University of Chieago, $14,57(5,044
(2) Harvard University, $12,363,430
(3) Johns Hopkins University, $12,027,871-.
(4) Yale University, $9,765,120
(5) National Research Council, $9,698,552. _
(6) Social Science Research Council,
$9,580,990.
(7) Columbia University, $6,480,231
(8) National Bureau of Economic Research,
$5,845,974.
(9) American Council of Learned Societies
$4,419,262.
(10) Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute,
$3,341,234.
(1) Massachusetts, $15,341,901
(2) Illinois, $15,304,888
(3) Maryland, $12,053,132
(4) New York, $11,149,857
(5) Connecticut, $9,811,230
(6) California, $8,668,195
(7) Iowa, $2,376.054
(8) Tennessee. $2,309,890
(9) Missouri, $2,022,529
(10) Pennsylvania, $1,860,093
7,097
3,917
$23,170,940
$11,811,069...-
General Education Board
(1) University of Chicago, $25,090,562
(2) Vanderblit University, $22,642,314
(3) Johns Hopkins University, $11,476,113..
(4) Emory University, $9,381,225..
(5) Meharry Medical College, $8,317,609....
(6) Cornell University, $8,220,966
(7) California Institute of Technology,
$8,082,298.
(8) Yale University, $8,010,491
(9) Washington University, $7,928,035
(10) University of Rochester, $7,833,470
(1) Tennessee, $45,156,651
(2) Illinois, $28,022,677
(3) Georgia, $25.656,912
(4) New York, $24,663,209
(5) Maryland, $12,436,974
(6) Caliornia, $10,943,898 .
(7) Massachusetts, $10,775,227
(8) Missouri, $9,527,479
(9) Louisiana, $9,056,974
(10) Connecticut, $8,700,234
2,369.
220 . ....
$5,016,451
$474,761
Combined totals
(1) University of Chicago, $39,666,606.
(2) VandcrMit University, $24,295,941.
(3) Johns Hopkins University, $23,503,984.
(4) Yale University, $17,775,611.
(5) Harvard University, $17,247,195.
(6) Cornell University, $10,936,769.
(7) California Institute of Technology,
$10,251,497.
(8) National Research Council, $10,068,112.
(9) Social Science Research Council,
$9,823,172.
(10) Washington University, $9,735,456.
(1) Tennessee, $47,466,541.
(2) Illinois, $43,327,565.
(3) New York, $35,813,066.
(4) Georgia, $26,719,112.
(5) Massachusetts, $26,117,128.
(6) Maryland, $24,490,106.
(7) Call ornia, $19,612,093. .
(8) Connecticut, $18,511,464.
(9) Missouri, $11,550,008.
(10) Louisiana,, $9,623,491.
9,466.
4,137.
$28,187,391.
$12,286,830.
bo
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1125
Appendix B
The Rockefeller Foundation — Grants to principal field of interest through
Dec. 31, 1953
Division of medicine and public health (May 22,
1913, to Dec. 31, 1953) :
Investigation and control of specific diseases
and deficiencies $27, 387, 000
State and local health services 9, 975, 000
Medical care 1, 041, 000
Public health education 34, 103, 000
Medical education - 91, 434, 000
Psychiatry, neurology, and allied subjects 20, 041, 000
Fellowships 16, 454, 000
Endocrinology 2, 248, 000
Other public health and medical subjects 10, 012, 000
Field staff : 25, 910, 000
■ ■ 1 $238, 605, 000
Division of natural sciences and agriculture (May 22,
1913, to Dec. 31,1953) :
Experimental biology _— 25, 928, 000
Physics, mathematics, and other nonbiological
sciences 8, 630, 000
Astronomy 1, 462, 000
Agriculture 5, 854, 000
General support of science 1, 057, 000
Other special projects 1, 609, 000
Fellowships :
Direct $3, 134, 000
Indirect 4, 519, 000
7, 653, 000
Grants in aid (since 1944) 2, 850, 000
» 55, 043, 000
Division of social sciences (Jan. 1, 1929, to Dec. 31,
1953) :
General social science including fellowships and
research aid 15, 932, 900
Economics 14, 205, 575
International relations 9, 896, 957
Institutional centers for research and advanced
training 5, 693, 975
Public administration 7, 716, 475
Community organization 2, 600, 400
Group relations 2,390,320
Development of social sciences in Europe 2, 336, 030
Other, including cultural anthropology, popula-
tion, ethics, etc 6, 027, 025
Unpaid balances of Laura Spelman Rockefeller
Memorial appropriations as of Dec. 31, 1928,
transferred to the Rockefeller Foundation 12, 283, 193
* 79, 082, 850
1 These totals represent gross appropriations ; actual expenditures are slightly less.
1126 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The Rockefeller Foundation — Grants to prinipal field of interest through
Deo. SI, 195S— Continued
Division of the humanities (Jan. 1, 1929, to Dec. 31, 1953) :
Scholarship and the arts :
History $1, 046, 653
Philosophy 507, 857
Language, logic, and symbolism l, 053, 804
General education 345, 875
General purposes 5, 514, 927
Literature—, _ — ___ 1, 129, 001
The arts ___ . 2,883,978
$12, 482, 095
Intercultural understanding :
General _ 307, 865
European studies : 68, 020
American studies 1, 950, 151
Near Eastern studies 811, 944
Slavic studies 1, 287, 718
South and Southeast Asian studies 468, 040
Far Eastern studies 2, 231, 689
Latin American studies 902, 929
African studies 90, 900
■ 8, 119, 256
Other interests :
Film and radio 1,420,776
Communication research 552, 870
Library service 4, 962, 207
Archaeology 4, 759, 716
11, 695, 569
1 32, 296, 920
1 These totals represent gross appropriations ; actual expenditures are slightly less.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
1127
Appendix C
The Rockefeller Foundation — Board of trustees, July 1, 1954
Name
Bowles, Chester.
Bronk, Detlev W.
Claflin, William H., Jr.
Dickey, John S.
Douglas, Lewis W.
Harrison, Wallace K.
Kimberly, John R
Loeb, Robert F.
Lovett, Robert A.
McOloy, John J.
Moe, Henry Allen.
Myers. William I-
Parran, Thomas.
Rockefeller, John D., 3d.
Rusk, Dean.
Smith, Geoffrey S.
Sproul, Robert Q
Sulzberger, Arthur Hays,
Van Dusen, Henry P
Wood, W. Barry, Jr.
Position and address
Former Governor of Connecticut and
former United States Ambassador to
India and Nepal, Essex, Conn.
President, the Rockefeller Institute for
Medical Research, York Ave. and 66th
St., New York, N. Y.
President, Soledad Sugar Co., room 1006,
75 Federal St., Boston, Mass.
President, Dartmouth College, Hanover,
N. H.
Chairman of the board, Mutual Life
Insurance Co. of New York, 1740 Broad-
way, New York, N. Y., former Ambas-
sador to Great Britain.
Harrison & AbramOvitz, architects, 630
5th Ave., New York, N. Y.
President, Kimberly-Clark Corp., Neenah,
Wis.
Bard professor of medicine, Columbia
University, 620 West 168th St., New
York, N. Y.
Brown Bros., Harriman & Co., 59 Wall
St., New York, N. Y., former Secretary
of Defense.
Chairman of the board, the Chase. Na-
tional Bank of the City of New York,
18 Pine St., New York, N. Y., former
High Commissioner for Germany.
Secretary general, John Simon Guggen-
heim Memorial Foundation, 551 5th
Ave., New York, N. Y.
Dean, New York State College of Agri-
culture, Cornell University, Ithaca,
N. Y.
Dean, Graduate School of Public Health,
University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh,
Pa.
Business and Philanthropy, 30 Rockefeller
Plaza, New York, N. Y.
President, the Rockefeller Foundation
and the General Education Board, 49
West 49th St., New York, N. Y., former
Assistant Secretary of State.
President, Girard Trust Corn Exchange
Bank, Broad and Chestnut Sts., Phila-
delphia, Pa.
President, University of California,
Berkeley, Calif.
Publisher, the New York Times, and
president and director, the New York
Times Co., 229 West 43d St., New York,
N. Y.
President, Union Theological Seminary,
Broadway and 120th St., New York,
N. Y.
Professor of medicine, School of Medicine,
Washington University, St. Louis, Mo.
Terms of service
Apr. 7, 1954, to Apr. 6, 1955.
Apr. 1, 1953, to Apr. 6, 1955.
Apr. 5, 1950, to Apr. 6, 1955.
Apr. 2, 1947, to Apr. 4, 1956.
Apr. 10, 1935, to Apr. 2, 1947;
Dec. 6, 1950, to Apr, 6, 1955.
July 1, 1951, to Apr. 4, 1956.
Apr. 1, 1953, to Apr. 3, 1957.
Apr. 2, 1947, to Apr. 3, 1957.
May 20, 1949, to Apr. 3, 1957.
Apr. 3, 1946, to June 11, 1949;
Apr. 1, 1953, to Apr. 6, 1955.
Apr. 5, 1944, to Apr. 4, 1956.
Apr. 2, 1941, to Apr. 4, 1956.
Apr. 2, 1941, to Apr. 4, 1956.
Dec. 16, 1931, to Apr. 4, 1946.
Apr. 5, 1950, to Apr. 3, 1957.
Apr.«5, 1950, to Apr. 6, 1955.
Apr. 3, 1940, to Apr. 6, 1955.
Apr. 5, 1939, to Apr. 3, 1957.
Apr. 2, 1947, to Apr. 3, 1967.
July 1, 1954, to Apr. 3, 1957.
1128 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
General Education Board — Board of trustees, July 1, 1954
Name
Branscomb, Bennett Harvie
Bronk, Detlev W
Coolidge, T. Jefferson
DeVane, William C
Douglas, Lewis W .
Myers, WilliamI
Norton, Edward L
Parran, Thomas
Rockefeller, John D., 3d
Rusk, Dean
Sproul, Robert G
Van Dusen, Henry P._._^
Position and address
Chancellor, Vanderbilt University, Nash-
ville, Tenn.
President, the Rockefeller Institute for
Medical Research, 66th St. and York
Ave., New York, N. Y.
Chairman of Board, United Fruit Co., and
Old Colony Trust Co., 80 Federal St.,
Boston, Mass.
Dean, Yale College, Yale University, New
Haven, Conn.
Chairman of board, Mutual Life Insur-
ance Co. of New York, 1740 Broadway,
New York, N. Y., former Ambassador
to Great Britain.
Dean, New York State College of Agricul-
ture, Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y.
Chairman of board, Voice of Alabama,
(WAPI, WAFM-TV), 701 Protective
Life Bldg., Birmingham, Ala.
Dean, Graduate School of Public Health,
University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh,
Pa.
Business and Philanthropy, 30 Rocke-
feller Plaza, New York, N. Y.
President, General Education Board and
the Rockefeller Foundation, 49 West
49th St., New York, N. Y., former
Assistant Secretary of State,
President, University of California,
Berkeley, Calif.
President, Union Theological Seminary,
Broadway and 120th St., New York,
N. Y.
Terms of service
Apr. 3, 1947, to Apr. 4, 1957,
Apr. 8, 1954, to Apr. 5, 1956.
Apr. 6, 1950, to Apr. 4, 1957.
Apr. 6, 1950, to Apr. 7, 1955.
Apr. 8, 1937, to Apr. 3, 1947;
Dec. 7, 1950, to Apr. 7, 1955.
Apr. 3, 1941, to Apr. 7, 1955.
Apr. 6, 1944, to Apr. 5, 1956.
Apr. 3, 1947, to Apr. 5, 1956.
Jan. 1, 1932, to Apr. 5, 1956.
Dec. 6, 1951, to Apr. 7, 1955.
Apr. 4, 1940, to Apr. 4, 1957.
Apr. 8, 1948, to Apr. 4, 1957.
SUPPLEMENTAL STATEMENT IN BEHALF OP THE ROCKEFELLER
FOUNDATION, BY DEAN RUSK, PRESIDENT
The Rockefeller Foundation submits this supplemental statement
to the Special Committee To Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations
of the 83d Congress. Its supplements the joint principal statement
by the Rockefeller Foundation and General Education Board of the
same date and contains the foundation's comments upon certain spe-
cific grants which were referred to in the public hearings on com-
mittee staff reports.
This statement is verified under oath. Attention is invited to the
second paragraph on page 1 of the principal statement, regarding
the president's personal knowledge and statements made upon in-
formation and belief.
AMERICAN COUNCIL OF LEARNED SOCIETIES
The American Council of Learned Societies has been mentioned in
the testimony as an intermediate organization 1 to which authority
(in this instance in the field of the humanities) is delegated by the
foundations, and the danger of the concentration of power in the hands
of such an organization has been stressed. 2 These observations do
not conform to the facts.
The American Council of Learned Societies is a federation of 25
national organizations devoted to the encouragement of humanistic
studies. These organizations are recognized learned societies of the
1 Hearings, p. 601, 602.
!* Hearings, pp. 469, 601, 612.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1129
United States and represent a combined membership of nearly 50,000
American scholars in these fields. The central function of the coun-
cil is the encouragement of humanistic studies. In serving this cen-
tral function, the activities of the council include: (1) the initiation
and promotion of research, (2) the dissemination and utilization of
the results of research, (3) the training of individuals for research
and teaching, (4) the representation at home and abroad of American
scholarship in the humanities.
It is our understanding that the American Council of Learned So-
cieties has filed a statement with the committee. This statement will
undoubtedly provide ample information of the policies, organization,
and program of the council. Our comment here is therefore limited
to the relation of the council to the work of the Rockefeller Foundation.
The American Council of Learned Societies receives funds from a
variety of sources for various phases of its work. While substantial
grants ($4,788,775) have been made by the Rockefeller Foundation
toward general support and for specific projects of the council during
a period of more than 20 years, these grants represent slightly less
than 15 percent of the funds appropriated by the foundation for work
in the humanities. This foundation plays no part in determination
of council policies and exercises no authority in the appointment of
the council's staff or committees, and in no sense does it delegate re-
sponsibility to the council for the conduct of its program in the
humanities. Aside from the funds contributed for the general sup-
port of the council, appropriations have been made for specific proj-
ects which the council was especially well qualified to carry out and
for which it had submitted carefully prepared proposals. Such special
projects have been directed, in most cases, by committees representative
of American scholarship in the particular academic fields involved.
These committees also assume responsibility for the selection of re-
cipients of fellowships and grants-in-aid awarded by the council.
The foundation's support has been given to the American Council
of Learned Societies in the belief that the organization was playing
an important role in the advancement of American scholarship. This
role was was well stated by Dr. Charles E. Odegaard, former execu-
tive director of the council and now dean of the College of Literature,
Science and the Arts, University of Michigan, in his 1950 annual
report:
* * * the learned scientific societies based on disciplines or fields of in-
terest * * * have attained national representation in their membership. Use-
ful as these are — and no one could deny their significance — there remains a
place for something more, for an association supplementary to colleges and
universities, academies, and learned societies. Historically, it is the research
councils which, within the limits of their slender resources, have tried to fill
this supplementary niche. It is our present duty in this council to see as clearly
as possible the needs which are not met by other agencies and to set in motion
efforts to meet these additional needs by whatever means can be found.
The contribution which the American Council of Learned Societies
has made to American culture is evident from the most casual review
of that organization's history. Its reliability is attested by the fact
that in 1951 the Office of Naval Research, acting on behalf of the three
defense departments, signed a contract with the council for the
preparation of a national register of humanists and social scientists.
1130 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY — RUSSIAN INS TITUT E
The report of the committee's Legal Analyst, part II, refers to
foundation support of studies carried on by the Russian Institute of
Columbia University, studies which the Legal Analyst characterizes,
along with others, as "aimed at the single target of world peace." 3
The quoted phrase is taken by the Legal Analyst from Fosdick's The
Story of the Rockefeller Foundation, p. 219. Mr. Fosdick's state-
ment was : "There is a sense, of course, m which the foundation's en-
tire work in all fields has been aimed at the single target of world
peace." Whether the expression is given the broad meaning in which
it was used by Mr. Fosdick, or a narrower and more specific mean-
ing, it is fairly applicable to the foundation's grants for support of
Columbia University's Russian Institute.
This report of the Legal Analyst was presented after the commit-
tee had cut off public hearings. As a result, we do not have the bene-
fit of any oral testimony by the Legal Analyst, explaining why these
grants were thought to be relevant in the committee's search for error
on the part of the foundations.
The Rockefeller Foundation takes modest pride in having given
substantial aid toward the Russian Institute, which has become one
of the major centers for Russian studies in this country. Knowledge
of our powerful and unscrupulous rival is the cornerstone of our de-
fense against communism. It is the business of the Russian Institute
to supply such knowledge in all its phases. It has provided more
trained specialists in the Russian field than any other center in the
country. During the last 7 years, the State Department, the Army,
the Air Force and the Navy have sent 99 persons to the institute for
training. Of the persons who have completed the institute's pro-
gram, nearly all are making active use of their training in Govern-
ment service, Government-supported research projects, teaching,
journalism and similar useful occupations.
The importance of affording opportunity for study in the Russian
field was well expressed by President Eisenhower in his inaugural
address as president of Columbia University, when he said :
There will be no administrative suppression or distortion of any subject that
merits a place in this university's curricula. The facts of communism, for ex-
ample, shall be taught here — its ideological development, its political methods,
its economic effects, its probable course in the future. The truth about com-
munism is, today, an indispensable requirement if the true values of our demo-
cratic system are to be properly assessed. Ignorance of communism, fascism,
or any other police-state philosophy is far more dangerous than ignorance of
the most virulent disease. 4
Before the committee itself condemns foundation support of an
institution which is playing such a vital role in our defense against
communism, we respectfully suggest consultation with those who are
responsible in executive capacities for the conduct of our foreign
affairs and for the defense of the country.
CORNELL CIVIL LIBERTIES STUDIES
The report of the committee's Legal Analyst, part II, is critical of
the foundation's grants to Cornell University in support of these
studies on the ground that they were under the direction of "two indi-
3 Report of Legal Analyst, hearings, p. 893.
* The New York Times, Oct. 13, 1948, p. 21.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1131
viduals" who were not "sufficiently impartial to insure a 'factual exam-
ination' or an 'objective finding.' " 5 These two individuals, Dr.
Robert E. Cushman, chairman of the department of government at
Cornell, and Prof . Walter Gellhom of the Law School, Columbia Uni-
versity, are then discussed under the heading "The sponsorship of
individuals who by their writings are of a Socialist, if not Communist
philosophy, dedicated to the idea of world government." 6
We will not discuss these charges at length since the president of
the Rockefeller Foundation, Mr. Dean Busk, testified fully before the
Cox committee, and was cross-examined, on the grants to Cornell for
the civil liberties studies. 7 If he were given the opportunity to testify
before this committee, he would not testify differently. We also wish.
to direct the attention of this committee to the testimony and cross-
examination of Professor Gellhorn, who appeared before the Cox
committee at his own request and denied under oath past or present
membership in or sympathy with the Communist Party. 8
In 1948, the Rockefeller Foundation made a grant of $110,000 to
Cornell University for a study of the relation of civil rights to the
control of subversive activities. To permit completion of this work,
three additional grants were made, $20,000 in 1950, $6,000 in 1951, and
$3,500 in 1952. The director of the survey was Dr. Robert E. Cush-
man. chairman of the department of government at Cornell and form-
erly president (1943) of the American Political Science Association.
Dr. Cushman chose his own associates, although foundation officers
knew who the major ones (including Professor Gellhorn) were to be
before the first grant was made.
This was not the first time that the foundation had concerned itself
with the question of civil liberties. In 1944 and 1947 grants totaling
$28,000 had been made to Cornell for a study of civil liberties in war-
time, headed also by Dr. Cushman. This wartime study embraced
questions relating to the civil rights of enemy aliens, of conscientious
objectors, and of civilians under martial law.
Dr. Cushman, director of the program, was experienced in the field
of civil liberties and had (and still has) a reputation for scholarly
competence and objectivity. He had been head of the department of
government in one of the country's leading universities. The founda-
tion knew that he intended to associate with him in these studies Prof.
Robert Carr, department of government, Dartmouth College, formerly
executive secretary of the President's Committee on Civil Rights;
Miss Eleanor Bontecou, formerly an attorney with the Department of
Justice and later in the War Department; and Professor Gellhorn of
Columbia.
Professor Gellhorn was a well-known and distinguished professor
in one of the country's leading law schools, whose colleagues held (and
still hold) him in high regard, and who had been Director of the At-
torney General's Committee on Administrative Procedure in 1939-41.
The results of the research supported by the foundation have not
caused us to change our view of Dr. Cushman or his associates, includ-
ing Professor Gellhorn.
Published reviews of the studies show that they have been widely
regarded as scholarly and objective and as constituting a valuable
s Report of Legal Analyst, hearings, p. 900.
' Cox committee hearings, p. 514 ff.
8 Cox committee hearings, p. 734 ff.
1132 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
source of information on the issues involved in attaining the two im-
portant objectives of national security and civil liberty. The follow-
ing studies have been published :
Security, Loyalty and Science, by Walter Gellhorn, Columbia University Law
School
The Tenney Committee, 9 by Edward L. Barrett, Jr., University of California
Law School
Un-American Activities in the State of Washington, 9 by Verne Countryman,
Yale Law School
Loyalty and Legislative Action, 9 by Lawrence H. Chamberlain, Columbia Uni-
versity Law School
The States and Subversion, 10 partly written and partly edited by Walter
Gellhorn
The House Committee on Un-American Activities, by Robert K. Carr, Dart-
mouth College
The Federal Loyalty-Security Program, by Miss Eleanor Bontecou
A summary volume bringing together the conclusions as a whole is
being prepared by Dr. Cushman, and is scheduled for publication in
1954.
These studies, involving as they do a controversial subject, have
been criticized by some commentators. But a much more widely held
opinion is that they are useful and valuable. Unfortunately, there
are some persons who would view as subversive any criticism of any
phase of the executive loyalty program or of any activity of legis-
lative committees interested in the problem. But the American tra-
dition of concern about individual liberty is older than the Republic,,
as reflected, for example, in the Declaration of Independence. One
of the first acts of the first Congress was to propose 12 amendments to
the States, of which the States accepted 10, which made secure against
Federal encroachment the right of individuals in respect of religion,
freedom of speech, military service, and the use and maintenance of
armies, search warrants, trial in accordance with fixed law and by
judgment of juries, criminal accusation, the inflictment of punish-
ment and the exaction of bail. Stories in the press indicate that many
Members of Congress from both parties are now concerned about
procedures followed by congressional investigating committees, and
that new codes of procedure are under consideration.
We are sure that the proper concern for individual liberty in the
American tradition evidenced by the studies of Dr. Cushman and
Professor Gellhorn will not be considered an indication of Com-
munist or Socialist sympathies.
COUNCIL ON FOREIGN" RELATIONS
The Council on Foreign Relations, which has received substantial
support from the Rockefeller Foundation, is one of the organizations
criticized in the report of the committee's Legal Analyst, part II, 11 as
biased in favor of an "internationalist" viewpoint, and as maintain-
ing close relations with government.
The council is without doubt one of the principal nongovernmental
agencies devoted to a study of our foreign affairs. In this field it has
9 Condensations of these three volumes also appear as chapters in the States and Sub-
version.
10 Chapters for this volume were also prepared by E. Houston Harsha, University of
Chicago Law School, on the State of Illinois ; by William B. Prendergast, assistant pro-
fessor of political science, U. S. Naval Academy, on the Ober Act of the State of Maryland ;
and by Robert J. Mowltz, department of government, Wayne University, on the city of
Detroit.
u Report of Legal Analyst, hearings, p. 884.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1133
a distinguished record of service to the public and to the United States
Government. Perhaps its major service, undertaken shortly after the
outbreak of World War II, developed into the program of war and
peace studies which the Legal Analyst seems to regard as in some
way suspect. The fact is that it was these studies to which Secretary
of State Cordell Hull referred in saying : "I hope you will go on with
this important work and that you will continue to give us the benefit
of research and thinking done under the council's auspices."
On pages 33 and 34 of the report the Legal Analyst sets forth the
names of research secretaries of the war and peace studies who "pro-
gressed to other work related to the organization of peace and the
settlement of postwar problems. * * * The intimation seems to
be that there was something sinister and evil in this relationship.
We cannot believe that the Congress will view with alarm our sup-
port of the Council on Foreign Relations, or will share the strange
viewpoint of the legal analyst that the public service of a grant re-
cipient is a ground for criticism of the foundation responsible for
the grant.
THE FOREIGN POLICY ASSOCIATION
The report of the committee's legal analyst, part II, devotes con-
siderable attention 12 to the Foreign Policy Association, to which from
1933 to 1950 the Rockefeller Foundation has made substantial grants,
largely for the support its its research and educational programs.
The report finds the Foreign Policy Association guilty of an "inter-
nationalist trend," 13 said to be exemplified in certain of its Headline
Books, and claims that, "in those reviewed little attention was paid
to the possibility of a nationalist point of view as opposed to an
internationalist one." u
The facts are that the Foreign Policy Association during the period
covered by the foundation's grants has been one of the leading or-
ganizations in the country devoted to research and study in problems
of international relations. Its series of Headline Books has now
reached 104 titles. The legal analyst comments adversely on 4. The
authors of others include James B. Conant, former president of
Harvard University; Grayson Kirk, now president of Columbia
University ; Allen W. Dulles, now Director of the Central Intelligence
Agency ; and other well-known students of foreign affairs. The Rock-
efeller Foundation cannot claim the credit for these selections, nor it
it responsible for those which have been criticized. For the reasons set
forth in our principal statement, we do not censor publications result-
ing from our grants or control the product of research which we
support.
We express full confidence in the Foreign Policy Association as an
agency for public education in problems of international relations,
which has become so vital since the leadership of the free world has
been thrust upon the United States.
INSTITUTE OP INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION
A witness has implied that the foundation's funds were used for a
summer school in Moscow at which American educators were indoc-
12 Reporto f Legal Analyst, hearings, p., 882.
13 Report of Legal Analyst, hearings, p. 884.
("Report of Legal Analyst, hearings, p. 883.
1134 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
trinated with communism. 15 Although the testimony is confused as
to the exact title of the agency supposed to have sponsored the criti-
cized summer school, it probably refers to the Institute of Interna-
tional Education. This organization, which is located in New York
City, operates a program concerned with facilitating international
student-exchange programs. It renders valuable services to colleges,
universities, and. Government agencies in the administration of fel-
lowships and scholarships for foreign students and for American stu-
dents going abroad. Its support comes largely from grants from a
number of foundations and from Government contracts which amount
to almost one-half of its annual budget.
The Rockefeller Foundation has made grants totaling $396,505
toward the general support of the institute. Prior to 1929, grants
were made by the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial chiefly to
enable the institute to maintain a travel and information service for
American professors and students in France and Great Britain.
Our records do not show that the Rockefeller Foundation appro-
priated funds for the support of a summer school in Soviet Russia.
We have been told that there was a summer school for foreign students
in Russia in 1933 with which the institute had no relation; it seems
that this summer school was repeated in 1934, with some sponsorship
by the Institute of International Education, which had long served
as the principal American contact for summer schools in foreign coun-
tries. In 1935, plans for repetition were frustrated by administrative
inefficiency and lack of cooperation on the Russian side and the pro-
gram for that year was canceled. We know of no resumption.
To the extent that the Rockefeller Foundation had contributed to
the general support of the Institute of International Education, some
portion of its funds can be said to have been involved in the sponsor-
ship of the 1934 school, referred to above. Against the background
of Russian war relief and business and commercial exchanges of the
1920's, diplomatic exchange beginning in 1933, and the official Ameri-
can policy of encouraging exchanges through the Iron Curtain until
as late as 1947, we see no significance in the fact that some of our funds
might have been used for such a purpose in 1934.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Two specific questions in regard to the Rockefeller Foundation's
support of the Institute of Pacific Relations have been raised by wit-
nesses before this committee. Both points had been covered in the
full, detailed statement on this subject made by the foundation's presi-
dent before the Cox committee in 1952, but in the discussions before
this committee neither counsel nor witnesses made any reference to
that previous testimony. It should not be necessary to repeat the en-
tire statement here. We respectfully urge, however, that before
undertaking to criticize the foundation for these grants, this commit-
tee should familiarize itself with the facts by a careful review of our
statement, which appears in the printed report of the hearings of the
Cox committee, pages 520 to 528. This present statement will be lim-
ited to a discussion of the two matters mentioned by the committee's
witnesses, with the addition of such background as seems necessary.
15 Hearings, pp. 26T-283.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1135
The first question relates to the charges made against the IPR by
Alfred Kohlberg. It was testified by one witness, Dr. Kenneth Cole-
grove, that what he couldn't understand "* * * was when Alfred
Kohlberg was able to get the consent of one of the very high officers
in the Kockefeller Foundation, why the foundation would not make
an investigation of the IPR." ie
At a later point in his testimony the following exchange occurred :
The Chaibman. To whom was Kohlberg's request for an investigation made,
Professor?
Dr. Colegeove. It was made to Fred Willetts, an official of the Rockefeller
Foundation, one of the outstanding men, a man of great integrity and a man of
competence and scholarship. I have great respect for Fred Willetts, and he
must have had a good reason for not investigating. But that reason, it seems to
me, ought to be told to the American people."
The actual facts in regard to this episode, which differ materially
from Dr. Colegrove's version, were set forth in the public testimony
of the president of the Rockefeller Foundation before the Cox com-
mittee, as follows :
In 1944 Alfred Kohlberg sent the foundation copies of his charges of pro-
Communist bias in the IPR. The director of the social-sciences division of the
foundation suggested that the charges be referred to an independent body of
competent persons for hearing and determination. This proposal was accepted
by Mr. Kohlberg, but rejected by the IPR. Instead, a special committee of IPR
trustees reported to its board that the executive committee and responsible of-
ficers of the American council had "investigated Mr. Kohlberg's charges and
found them inaccurate and irresponsible." The foundation officers would have
preferred an independent appraisal of the organization's activities, I might say,
not because of any views which they then held on the merits of the problem but
because in their view at the time that was the proper procedure by which you
could get rid of this kind of issue one way or the other. 18
The "director of the social-sciences division of the foundation" re-
ferred to in this quotation was Joseph H. Willits, who is evidently the
person Dr. Colegrove had in mind. As the foregoing testimony shows,
there was no plan to have the foundation conduct a public investigation
of the IPR, an undertaking for which the foundation was neither
equipped nor qualified. Mr. Willits never gave his consent to have
such an investigation undertaken by the foundation, and there was no
mysterious suppression of such a proposal. On the contrary, Mr.
Willits intervened with a suggestion for quite a different type of in-
vestigation which was never carried out because the proposal was not
acceptable to the IPR.
The second question was raised by the testimony of Dr. David N.
Rowe. It related to his understanding "that the Rockefeller Founda-
tion was still contributing money to the IPR after 1950" when, in his
opinion, grants should have been terminated. 19 Before turning to the
facts in that regard, we call attention to the following point which the
chairman of the committee developed in questioning this witness :
The Chairman. I am not sure about the year, but on up until the late forties,
the IPR had an excellent standing; did it not? I am not sure what year it was,
but perhaps up to the midforties.
Dr. Rowe. The IPR had excellent standing in educational circles, in govern-
mental circles, and intellectual circles up until the late forties. That is an
accurate statement. 10
18 Hearings, p. 557.
1T Hearings, p. 559.
18 Cox committee hearings, p. 524.
M Hearings, p. 537.
20 Hearings, p. 541.
,49720 — 54 — pt. 2 13
1136 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
This witness testified that he had joined the IPE around 1939, 21 had
accepted election as one of its trustees in 1947, and had continued to
serve as a trustee until 1950, 22 when he resigned with a letter which he
now feels "was probably altogether too polite." 23 He also testified in
regard to the IPE that :
They were known all over the country as the outstanding center in the United
States for Far Eastern research and study. 24
The bulk of the foundation's grants to the IPE was made during a
period even earlier than Dr. Eowe's trusteeship, when its prestige was
fully as high as he relates.
The foundation's last appropriation for the IPE was made in 1950,
payable over 2 years. The circumstances under which this action was
taken were fully described in the Cox committee testimony. 25 A
highly responsible group, under the chairmanship of Gerard Swope,
former president of the General Electric Co., was undertaking to sal-
vage the great values in the IPE program to which Dr. Eowe testified.
The foundation officers made a full examination of the problem, within
the means proper to an organization like ours. As the committee
knows, the FBI and other Government security agencies give informa-
tion only to Government departments. Four IPE trustees, who had
earlier resigned because of dissatisfaction with the situation, had
shortly after their resignations urged the foundation to continue its
support in order to reinforce the efforts of those who were working to
strengthen the organization. Confronted with the strongest recom-
mendations for continuing support, and with no contrary advice from
the agencies of Government responsible for security problems, the
foundation approved the 1950 grant.
Dr. Eowe's view that the 1950 grant should not have ben made seems
to rest largely on hindsight, based principally on evidence brought out
in the McCarran committee hearings, which did not begin until nearly
a year after the making of the grant.
These hearings obviously prompted the following statement in the
report of the committee's legal analyst, part II :
The Institute of Pacific Relations has been the subject of exhaustive hearings
by other congressional committees in which its subversive character has been
thoroughly demonstrated. 2 *
The only exhaustive hearings on this organization known to us are
those of the McCarran committee whose report was published in 1952.
The foundation does not feel called upon to comment on the legal
analyst's statement other than to observe that editorial comment on the
McCarran committee's report was sharply divided, that the IPE has
not been listed by the Attorney General as a subversive organization^
and that it has not been deprived of its tax-exemption privilege by the
Internal Eevenue Service, a privilege which it would hardly be
allowed to retain if the Internal Eevenue Service agreed with the com-
mittee's legal analyst that the IPE's "subversive character has been
thoroughly demonstrated."
21 Hearings, p. 537.
22 Hearings, p. 537.
23 Hearings, p. 539.
24 Hearings, p. 541. """" " "
25 Cox committee hearings, p. 526 fl.
26 Report of legal analyst, hearings, p. 897.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
1137
THE KINSET STUDIES -
It is not clear from the transcript of proceedings whether or not
the committee wishes us to comment upon the foundation's grants for
sex research, including its support for the Kinsey group at the Uni-
versity of Indiana. At one point, however, the Chairman states:
* * * As one member of the committee, I don't have much interest in the
Kinsey report. Any interest that the committee might have in the Kinsey report
arises out of whether that was a desirable undertaking for a foundation, which
is quite a different matter * * *."
We wish to make the foundation's position clear, even though com-
mittee members have expressed a number of reservations about getting
into the matter.
In 1931 the Rockefeller Foundation became interested in systematic
support for studies in sexual physiology and behavior. This came
at a time when the foundation began to concentrate its natural science
interest more in the life sciences and less in the physical sciences.
The latter decision, a very natural one in view of the foundation's
long and large interest in medicine and public health, was primarily
based on the conviction that the physical sciences had received large
support and were far advanced ; whereas there were great undeveloped
opportunities in the life sciences to serve the welfare of mankind.
Support for studies in reproductive physiology and behavior consti-
tuted an obviously necessary part of this program since the ability to
reproduce is one of the elementary characteristics of living organisms.
The Rockefeller Foundation began in 1931 to make modest grants
to the committee for research in problems of sex of the National Re-
search Council (hereinafter referred to as the NRC committee), sup-
port for which had previously come from the Bureau of Social
Hygiene. Foundation grants to this committee have been the
following :
1931 $150, 000
1932 75, 000
1933 65, 000
1934 80, 000
1935 75, 000
1936 75, 000
1937 - 200, 000
1941.
1944.
1946.
1946.
1949_
1951-
1954-
$150, 000
135, 000
120,000
80,000
240,000
160,000
150,000
The NEC Committee, first organized in 1921, has published a sum-
mary account of its first quarter century in a volume Twenty-Five
Years of Sex Research, 28 which we have supplied to your research
director. A reading of it will suggest, we believe, two conclusions.
First, the NRC Committee has been made up over the years of a
group of our most eminent scientists in biology and medicine. Sec-
ond, it has achieved an extraordinary record in opening up and de-
veloping an entire field of medical physiology.
For example, the three decades during which this program has now
been in operation have seen a most encouraging growth in our knowl-
edge of the reproductive process and in the ability of modern medicine
to control its disorders and diseases. Many of the most significant
advances have stemmed from the work of the NRC Committee and
s 'f Transcript, p. 1854.
58 25 Years of Sex Research, Aberle,
(Philadelphia, 1953).
S, D. and Corner, G. W.., W. B. Saunders Co.
1138 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
the closely related grants made directly by the foundation. Examples
may be cited as follows: (1) The isolation and later synthesis of
estrogen, the first ovarian hormone to be discovered; this important
substance is now widely and safely used to relieve menopausal dis-
tress and discomfort and in the treatment of disordered menstrua-
tion, sterility, and retarded genital development in girls; (2) a similar
identification of the testis hormone, androgen, which is similarly use-
ful in the treatment of disordered physiology in the male; (3) recog-
nition of several different substances from the anterior pituitary
glands which are involved in body growth, sugar metabolism, milk
secretion, and various disorders which apparently result from unusual
stress.
Less completely attributable to the work of the NEC Committee
but still importantly influenced by it was the discovery of hormones
of the adrenal cortex. Increased knowledge of the interactions of
the foregoing hormones in determining the normal physiology of the
reproductive cycle has led to far more intelligent handling of women's
diseases, problems of sterility, and the commercial breeding of fur-
bearing and food-producing animals. Two notable achievements in
the field of cancer have resulted from NRC Committee support : the
diagnosis of cancer of the uterus by study of the cells of the vagina
and the treatment of cancer of the prostate gland by the use of
hormones.
Beginning about 1941, the NRC Committee became interested in the
work of Dr. Alfred C. Kinsey and others at the University of Indiana
in the field of human sexual behavior ; between 1941 and 1946 the NRC
Committee had allocated to this work $120,100 of the total funds avail-
able to it. Beginning in 1946, the NRC Committee and the foundation
discussed the needs of the Indiana study more specifically, and it was
agreed that the 1946 foundation grant to the committee was to be al-
located to Dr. Kinsey's group. Similarly, it was understood that the
NEC Committee would allocate up to 50 percent of the grants of 1949
and 1952 for the same purpose. In addition, the foundation made one
grant of $14,000 direct to the University of Indiana for Dr. Kinsey's
Institute of Sex Research.
Among the published materials issuing from the Indiana group
are the widely discussed volumes Sexual Behavior in the Human Male
and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female. The aim of the studies
was to contribute to the better understanding of some of the elements
in a complex aspect of human behavior in which parents, doctors, min-
isters, teachers, legislators, social workers, penologists, and many
others have a serious interest.
A thoughtful reader will understand why these books have evoked
the greatest variety of both professional and popular interest, ranging
from highest praise to violent condemnation. They dealt with an
aspect of behavior about which comparatively little is known ; to the
extent that they pointed to a possible significant disparity between
acknowledged mores and actual behavior, they touched upon sensitive
issues. They involved complex problems of statistics and procedure,
discussed at length on pages 3-97 of the second of the two volumes and
by other authors in many articles elsewhere. The two studies dealt
almost entirely with the physical aspects of human behavior and did
not purport to speak authoritatively on the moral, legal, social, and
psychological aspects which common experience would recognize as
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1139
being present. That these studies are not definitive would not need to
be said to those who are professionally concerned with the problem^
nor would Dr. Kinsey's group claim them to be such.
In addition to grants made to the NEC Committee for Eesearch ins
Problems of Sex, the Rockefeller Foundation has made grants for
studies of various aspects of sex to more than 2 dozen other university
and research centers, including the National Committee on Maternal
Health, Stanford University, the University of California, the Uni-
versity of Missouri, Yale, Columbia, Harvard, Hebrew University,
McGill University, Ohio State, the University of Berlin, the Uni-
versity of Gottingen, the College de France ? and the Universities of
Pennsylvania, Rochester, Stockholm, Virginia, and Wisconsin.
An examination of this program will show that such studies are an
important part of an advance on a broad front in the life sciences,
taking their place alongside other foundation-supported research in
physiology, psychiatry, genetics, biology, biochemistry, biophysics,
marine biology, and related fields.
LONDON" SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS AND POLITICAL SCIENCE
One of the committee's witnesses was critical of the London School
of Economics and Political Science which had benefited from founda-
tion support. 29
The facts are the following. Between 1924 and 1928 the Laura
Speitnan Rockefeller Memorial made grants totaling $1,245,000 to
the London School of Economics and Political Science, a division of
the University of London. Major aid from the Rockefeller Founda-
tion began in 1931 and continued until 1935, when a 5-year tapering
grant was made terminating general aid to the school, in line with the
policy then adopted by the foundation of discontinuing grants for
general support of social sciences at colleges and universities. Two
substantial grants were made after this date, one in 1939 ($51,250) to
provide funds required as a result of the wartime emergency and one
in 1949 ($50,900) for the new Department of Sociological and Demo-
graphic Research. Several smaller grants have been made for support
of particular programs of research or for support of particular schol-
ars associated with the London School.
Foundation grants to the London School total $873,348, most of
which have been used for physical improvements, for research, and
for postgraduate teaching.
The London School of Economics and Political Science is now and
has been for many years one of the world's important educational and
research institutions. Its faculty has included many distinguished
scholars who have served their country in important posts in war and
have contributed brilliantly to the increase of knowledge and under-
standing in peace. Its faculty, like any other university faculty, in-
cludes persons of varied shades of political opinion.
It is quite true that Sidney Webb played an important part in the
founding of the London School of Economics, and that Harold Laski
served on its faculty. That the school does not exist to inculcate any
particular poltical views should be taken for granted in the case of an
established university in a country with the highest traditions of free
"Hearings, p. 215; see also p. 475.
1140 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
scholarship. That its roster has included such names as Lord Bev-
eridge, Fnedrich von Hayek, Lionel Robbins, Michael B. Oakeshott,
Sir Alexander Carr-Saunders, Sir Charles Webster, A. J. Toynbee,
D. W. Brogan, R. H. Tawney, Herman Finer, and many others of
equal distinction attests the wide range of points of view of its leader-
ship.
In the academic year 1953-54, the London School had a faculty
of 148 and a student enrollment at 3,376, of which 898 (27 percent)
had come from 29 foreign countries.
THE NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH
In view of the chairman's statement that the committee is primarily
interested in the "errors" of foundations, we must assume that when
the legal analyst's report, part II, calls attention to the Rockefeller
Foundation's support of the National Bureau of Economic Research, 30
the intent is to be critical. The basis of the criticism is nowhere ex-
plicitly stated and is not easy to discover.
There is no effort to disparage the work of the national bureau —
rather the contrary. The legal analyst apparently believes that the
attack upon these grants is reinforced by sections of Fosdick's his-
tory of the foundation, which are quoted at some length. These sec-
tions point to the extraordinary value of the service performed by
the national bureau in bringing within reach "basic, articulated, quan-
titative information concerning the entire economy of the Nation";
the quotations conclude with the statement that "without the national
bureau our society would not be nearly so well equipped as it is for
dealing with the leading economic issues of our times."
The legal analyst does not seem to challenge these statements. If
the national bureau performs such a unique and invaluable service,
why is the Rockefeller Foundation open to question for supporting
it ? We have read and reread this section of the report with increas-
ing bewilderment, and without finding an answer which satisfies us.
The author quotes 31 a sentence from the foundation's annual re-
port for 1941 (written, presumably, during the early months of 1942)
reading as follows :
If we are to have a durable peace after the war, if out of the wreckage of the
present a new kind of cooperative life is to be built on a global scale, the part
that science and advancing knowledge will play must not be overlooked.
"In the light of this attitude," the author continues, "some of the in-
dividuals and organizations benefiting from foundation funds in
the years since 1941 may seem a trifle unusual to say the least." 32 This
is the preliminary, in part, to the citation of the national bureau.
Again we ask, in what respect is such an outstanding organization an
"unusual" beneficiary ?
' Coming back to the quotations from Fosdick, we find the statement
that the "basic, articulated, quantitative information" which the na-
tional bureau has brought within reach "has influenced public policy
at a dozen points." 33 Here we may possibly have the clue. Are we
accused of using our grants to shape public policy because the data
and findings of the national bureau studies are cited, as Fosdick says,
30 Legal analysts report, Hearings, p. 894.
31 Legal analyst's report, Hearings, p. 895.
32 Legal analyst's report, Hearings, p. 896.
33 Legal analyst's report, Hearings, p. 896.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1141
in "official documents," because "They are used by businessmen, legis-
lators, labor specialists, and academic economists," 34 because "They
are constantly employed in Government agencies like the Depart-
ment of Commerce and the Bureau of the Census" ? 35
If this is indeed the intended basis of criticism, it reveals little
familiarity with the work of the national bureau. This organization
is engaged, not in policy forming but primarily in factfinding. It
undertakes to supply the bricks, in the form, for example, of measure-
ments of the national income, measurements of money flows, measure-
ments of the volume of consumer credit, which policymakers will use
in developing their legislative and other structures. The best testi-
mony to the national bureau's impartiality is found in the fact that
both business organizations and labor organizations make contribu-
tions to it, not for specific studies but for general support.
It is unnecessary for us to elaborate on the work of the national
bureau, because of the description of this work which will be found
in the testimony before the Cox committee of William I. Myers, dean
of the New York College of Agriculture at Cornell University, and a
trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation and the General Education
Board since 1941. 36
We cannot imagine a less fruitful enterprise than to seek for error
in the foundation's support of the National Bureau of Economic
Research.
THE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION CLEARINGHOUSE
In the report of the legal analyst, attention has been drawn to the
foundation's concern with a "durable peace" as shown in quotations
from its annual reports. Its interest in the cooperative activities neces-
sary for such peace is also mentioned. It is then stated that, in view
of this concern, some of the individuals and organizations benefiting
from foundation funds since 1941 "may seem a trifle unusual, to say
the least * * * ." The Public Administration Clearinghouse is men-
tioned as one such organization. 37
In the light of world events during the past decades, the interest
of the foundation in undertakings that may contribute to a durable
peace needs no defense. The only apparent reason for the listing of
the Public Administration Clearinghouse in this connection appears
to be that since peace involves "cooperation" and the Public Adminis-
tration Clearinghouse is an activity which obviously requires coopera-
tion by those who participate in it and since this cooperative activity
relates to the improvement of Government services, the legal analyst
considers it one of the agencies whose selection for support by the
foundation is considered questionable.
The Public Administration Clearinghouse was set up in 1931 to help
meet the need for an interchange of administrative data and experi-
ence from one public official or agency to another, so that what hap-
pened in one place might be promptly known and perhaps utilized in
another. Initial funds for its establishment and major support came
from the Spelman Fund of New York, which appropriated a total of
$2,805,250 for this work. The Rockefeller Foundation made grants
totaling $14,699.
34 Legal analysts's report, Hearings, p. 896.
85 Legal analyst's report, Hearings, p. 896.
16 Cox committee hearings, p. 123 ffi.
3 ' Report of legal analysts, Hearings, p. 895.
1142 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
When the Public Administration Clearinghouse was organized,
communication between city and State and between States and the
Federal Government was narrowly restricted ; administrators of im-
portant functions too often worked in isolation without opportunity to
benefit from the experience and ideas of others engaged in like func-
tions in other jurisdictions, or from the research and experimentation
carried on in various universities and in centers of public administra-
tion research. The Public Administration Clearinghouse was estab
lished to remedy this situation, and it continues to render important
public service to Government officials and agencies. It has a proud
record of contributions to the improvement of standards, the exchange
of ideas, and the development of stricter codes of 'ethics among those
engaged in the various administrative functions of government. This
record is ample justification for its selection as a recipient of founda-
tion funds.
THE SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH COUNCIL
Testimony before the committee criticizes directly and by infer-
ence the relationship between the Eockefeller Foundation and the
the Social Science Research Council. 38 It has been intimated that the
Rockefeller Foundation and other large foundations have tended to
dominate the Social Science Research Council ; 39 that the council, in
its turn, dominates the field of the social sciences ; i0 that these founda-
tions have used the council as an instrument in forwarding their "col-
lectivist purposes ; 41 and that by overemphasis upon the empirical
method, the council has contributed to a lessened reliance on basic
principles and a deterioration of moral standards. 42
The Social Science Research Council is a voluntary association of
scholars chosen from seven associated professional societies in the field
of the social sciences and from related disciplines. It has spoken for
itself and with conviction. Its objectives are aimed at the improve-
ment of research organization and methods; facilitation of research
efforts of scholars throughout the country ; development of personnel ;
enlargement, improvement, dissemination, and preservation of ma-
terials ; and the enhancement of public understanding and utilization
of the social sciences.
Since these are objectives in which the Rockefeller Foundation is
sympathetically interested, and since the members of the council are
outstanding scholars in thir own fields, the foundation has found sup-
port of the Social Science Research Council an effective means for
assisting the growth of knowledge of human affairs. The council no
more dominates its field than the American Law Institute dominates
the practice of law. The Social Science Research Council does, of
course, exert a large professional influence. But it is not the influence
of the Rockefeller Foundation ; it is the influence achieved by a group
of leading scholars as their abilities and accomplishments are recog-
nized and accepted in their profession.
Grants to the Social Science Research Council since its establish-
ment have been substantial, namely, $10,743,000. This, however,
represents only 13.24 percent of the appropriations of the Rockefeller
38 Hearings, pp. 45, 475 ; report of legal analyst, hearings, pp. 894, 898.
8S Hearings, p. 471.
*> Hearings, pp. 601, 617.
41 Hearings, p. 46.
42 Hearings, p. 47.
Tax-exempt foundations 1143
Foundation in the field of the social sciences. Since our total grants
in this area amount to more than $81 million, it cannot properly be
Said that we have delegated our responsibilities to any single organ-
ization as an "agent."
university of washington far eastern studies
(taiping rebellion)
We refer to this grant only because the testimony about it received
by the committee illustrates the effort to build up a case against the
foundations from inadequately informed sources. One of the few
committee witnesses having an academic background first expressed
his personal discontent with what he described as "the so-called coop-
erative or group method of research." 43 He admitted that in mak-
ing this criticism he spoke for himself alone. "I certainly don't
speak for my university, let alone for all of my colleagues in the uni-
versity, among whom I am sure will be found many people who will
disagree with much that I say." ** He agreed that "there is a great
divergence of opinion on these fundamental matters." 4B Neverthe-
less, this witness furnished 12 pages of testimony expounding his
criticism of foundations for supporting this method of research.
Does the committee feel that the Congress should inquire into and
determine the relative merits of a team approach to scholarly re-
search as compared with an individual approach ? If so, this would
be going far beyond what any foundation known to us has attempted
to do.
The witness who expatiated on this subject was asked by counsel
for the committee to discuss a grant, "I think it was a quarter of a
million dollars for a group study which seemed to be somewhat falli-
ble." 4S He responded by referring to alleged "grants" by the Rocke-
feller Foundation which "probably came to that much" to the Uni-
versity of Washington for the purpose, as the witness put it, "of
group research on the Taiping Rebellion," 47 in China.
The fact is that the foundation made one grant, for a total of $100,-
000, to the University of Washington's Far Eastern Institute, to be
used over a period of 7 years for expenses of research on the Far
East. While there have been other grants to the University of Wash-
ington, they were not directly connected with this group research
project. The university explained that the general aim of the re-
search program was to study Chinese society in transition, with the
Taiping Rebellion as the focal point. The committee's witness
agreed that "The Taiping Rebellion has long interested historians,
and it is worthy of a great deal of study." 48
His sole objection was his individual opposition to the group ap-
proach to the problem. The determination to make this approach
was the decision of the university authorities, upon whom the foun-
dation exercised no influence in this regard. The foundation has
made many other grants to the University of Washington and to
other institutions where group research was not involved. The criti-
cism implies, therefore, that help should have been refused in this
43 Hearings, p. 530.
44 Hearings, p. 526.
45 Hearings, p. 526.
46 Hearings, p. 526.
4T Hearings, p. 530.
48 Hearings, p. 530.
1144 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
case simply because this witness, on an admittedly personal basis,
dislikes such organization of research. We submit that this grant to
the University of Washington does not raise issues deserving of the
committee's time.
Dean Rusk,
President, the Rockefeller Foundation.
Dated August 3, 1954.
State of New York,
County of New York, ss :
Dean Rusk, being duly sworn, says that he is president of the Rock-
efeller Foundation, the organization in whose behalf the foregoing
supplemental statement is made; that the foregoing supplemental
statement is true to his knowledge except as to the matters occurring
prior to the date (as set forth in the accompanying principal state-
ment) of his association with said organization, which are therein
stated to be alleged on information and belief, and that as to those
matters he believes it to be true.
Dean Rusk.
Sworn to before me this 3d day of August 1954.
Harold B, Leonard,
Notary Public, State of New York.
Term expires March 30, 1955.
SUPPLEMENTAL STATEMENT IN BEHALF OF THE GENERAL
EDUCATION BOARD, BY DEAN RUSK, PRESIDENT
The General Education Board submits this supplemental statement
to the Special Committee To Investigate Tax Exempt Foundations of
the 83d Congress. It supplements the joint principal statement by
the Rockefeller Foundation and General Education Board of the same
date and contains the General Education Board's comments upon
certain specific grants which were referred to in the public hearings
or committee staff reports.
This statement is verified under oath. Attention is invited to the
second paragraph on page one of the principal statement, regarding
the president's personal knowledge and statements made upon infor-
mation and belief.
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY TEACHERS COLLEGE
Witnesses before the committee have interpreted grants made by the
General Education Board, particularly grants to Teachers College,
Columbia University, as evidence of an alleged intent on the part of
the board to propagandize a particular philosophy of education. 1 This
allegation is not sustained by the facts.
In 1920, Teachers College, Columbia University, received from the
General Education Board a grant of $1 million for endowment. Sub-
sequently a number of smaller grants were made for various projects
and studies at that institution, bringing the total aid received to
$1,540,397, exclusive of grants for the Lincoln School, which served as
J Hearings, pp. 253, 288, 336, 485, 690, 720, 818-819, 1497, 1603-1607.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1145
a laboratory for the college. Grants in the amount of $667,500 a were
also made by the Rockefeller Foundation, chiefly for research in child,
welfare and in nursing education.
In our principal statement (p. 62) we have pointed out that while
the major portion of the board's funds was used to strengthen and
support traditional education in long established American institu-
tions, some 8 percent of the board's grants were made for studies and
experimentation relating to improved educational methods and ways
of utilizing new knowledge. Much of this assistance was in the form
of endowment and support of graduate schools of education. We
assume that few would question educational research as an appropriate
function of graduate schools of education. The importance of
strengthening and developing such schools was early recognized by
our trustees, and sizable grants for educational research and endow-
ment were made to George Peabody College for Teachers in Nashville,
and to the schools of education at Stanford University, Harvard,
Chicago, and Columbia. In this record of broadly distributed aid
there is no evidence whatever that the General Education Board nur-
tured a particular philosophy of education. These reputable institu-
tions would themselves deplore identification with any one educational
philosophy or practice, and a review of various current theories of
education would show that most of them have been represented at each
of the institutions mentioned. 8
We understand that a statement has been submitted to this commit-
tee by Teachers College. We believe that the committee will find in
that statement evidence regarding the wide range of opinion reflected
in the writings and activities of the college staff, and also that the
college has had a positive program directed toward preventing the
infiltration of Communist doctrine into the teaching and activities of
its faculty and students.
Lincoln School, Teachers College
Mention has been made of the role of the General Education Board
in the establishment of the Lincoln School at Teachers College, Colum-
bia University. 4 Between 1917 and 1929 the board* appropriated
$5,966,138 for the suppport of this school. This support was given in
response to recommendations made by Mr. Abraham Flexner in his
paper on "The Modern School" (a document which may still be read
with interest and profit) and in the light of a growing recognition
among educators that the curricula of both the elementary and sec-
ondary schools were no longer meeting satisfactorily the educational
needs of great numbers of their pupils. The Lincoln School was
essentially a laboratory. Through it one of the leading graduate
schools of education was afforded opportunity to test educational
theories that were then receiving attention from many thoughful edu-
cators. From the beginning its history was a controversial one. Many
of the theories tested there have since been discarded ; some are still
being studied ; others are now widely accepted. The Lincoln School
was closed in 1948 after the trustees of Teachers College, with the
approval of the New York courts, had concluded that the purposes set
2 As of June 30, 1954 ; the statement furnished the committee by Teachers College shows
a lower figure ; our figure Includes foundation payments on grants made by the Laura
Spelman Rockefeller Memorial, prior to consolidation with the foundation, as well as a
grant for nursing education.
" E. g. Judd, Hutchins, Dewey at Chicago ; Cubberley, Cowley, Hanna, at Stanford ;
Bagley, Kandel, Kilpatrick, Counts at Teachers College, etc.
4 Hearings, pp. 253-255.
1146 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
forth in the board's grants for the school could thereafter be more
effectively served by the establishment of an Institute of School Ex-
perimentation and the discontinuance of the private laboratory school.
The board's grants originally made for the Lincoln School are now
being used for this Institute of School Experimentation. Mr. Justice
Botem of the New York Supreme Court in his opinion on the matter
(March 20, 1947) says:
It is inconceivable that the men who planned this thrilling adventure on the
frontiers of educational experimentation with the passionate deliberation of sci-
entists would confine its potentiality for a productive future to one particular
medium which might grow sterile. To analogize the unreality of such a position
we need think only in terms of the present. The plaintiff [Teachers College]
seems quite sanguine about the promise which the institute holds forth for fruit-
ful experimentation. But no educator would dare present it as an immutable
medium for perpetual productivity in experimentation. 5
International Institute, Teachers College
Several references have been made in the testimony to the support
given to the International Institute by "the Rockefeller interests." 8
It is true that the General Education Board made a grant to Teachers
College in support of this institute. The institute, which was part of
the college, was set up in 1923 to develop a specialized service for
foreign students. It provided assistance in the form of scholarships,
travel grants, and language instruction for some 3,852 students from
53 countries. At one time it served a group of more than 100 Ameri-
cans on furlough from missionary colleges and other institutions
abroad whose special circumstances called for something different
from the regular courses in pedagogy and school administration. The
staff of the institute kept in close touch with educational developments
abroad, and it has to its credit many notable contributions in the field
of comparative education, including the Educational Yearbook which
constitutes a comprehensive international review of educational
history for a decade and a half. The institute was discontinued in
1938 when many of its functions were absorbed by other divisions of
the college.
Faculty members, Teachers College
A witness has made numerous criticisms of the writings of Prof.
Harold O. Rugg and Prof. George S. Counts, both members of the
faculty of Teachers College, Columbia University. 7 Inasmuch as no
grants were made by either the Rockefeller Foundation or the General
Education Board to the persons named for the books mentioned by
this witness, we see no necessity for commenting on the criticisms. In
our principal statement we have pointed out that it has been the con-
sistent policy of the Rockefeller boards not to attempt to censor or
modify the findings of scholars and scientists employed by institutions
to which we have made grants ; nor do we attempt to determine faculty
appointments at these institutions.
EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATIONS
There have been many references in the testimony to the support
given by the General Education Board to such educational associations
as the National Education Association and the Progressive Education
5 Teachers College v. Goldstein et al., 70 N. Y. supp. 2d 778 (1947).
'Hearings, p. 287.
7 See, for example, hearings, pp. 255, 48.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1147
Association, with the implication that through this support the board
gave aid to "pro-Socialist and pro- Communist propaganda projects. 1 ' *
In our principal statement (pp. 63-65) we have already discussed that
phase of the General Education Board's program which was especially
concerned with the improvement of general education at the secondary
school and junior college levels. We have shown that throughout this
diversified program in which a great many institutions and many
people with different points of view participated, there was no effort
on the part of the Board to slant school and college curricula in a
particular direction. We categorically deny that any board grants
were ever made for the purpose of supporting pro-Socialist and pro-
Communist propaganda projects.
Our annual reports show that large grants were made to the
National Education Association and to the Progressive Education As-
sociation. When the board began its program in general education,
there were three major educational organizations in this country with
national membership and general concern with education at all levels.
These were the American Council on Education, the National Educa-
tion Association, and the Progressive Education Association. Among
the other large and important groups with broad rather than special-
ized interests at the secondary school level were the Regional Accredit-
ing Associations, the American Association of Junior Colleges, the
American Association of School Administrators, and the National
Association of Secondary School Principals, the latter two being part
of the National Education Association. These groups were bound to
have a strong influence on the future development of education, and it
was natural, therefore, that the General Education Board should re-
spond to requests from them for aid in projects concerned with the im-
provement of secondary education.
Any defense of the character of the organizations mentioned is
properly left to the responsible representatives of those organizations.
With regard to the board's grants to the National Education Asso-
ciation and the Progressive Education Association, we make the fol-
lowing comments.
National Education Association
The National Education Association, which is a large professional
organization of American schoolteachers and administrators chartered
in 1906, received grants from the General Education Board totaling
$495,743. These grants were used for various projects, the largest one
being for support of the Educational Policies Commission ($355,979).
When the commission was organized in 1935, its purposes were pre-
sented to the board as follows :
To stimulate thoughtful, realistic, long-term planning within the teaching pro-
fession on the highest possible level, looking toward continued adaptation of
education to social needs.
To appraise existing conditions in education critically and to stimulate educa-
tional thinking on all levels so that desirable changes may be brought about in
the purposes, procedures, and organization of education.
To consider and act upon recommendations from all sources for the improve-
ment of education.
To make the best practices and procedures in education known throughout the
country and to encourage their use everywhere.
To develop a more effective understanding and cooperation between various
organized groups interested in educational improvement.
8 Hearings, p, 36.
1148 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Board funds aided the commission over a period of 9 years. During
this time its prestige was such that the following eminent persons
were at various times members of the commission :
Dwight D. Eisenhower (then president of Columbia University)
James B. Conant (then president of Harvard University)
Edmund E. Day (then president of Cornell University)
Arthur H. Compton (then chancellor of Washington University)
George D. Stoddard (then commissioner of education for the State of New York)
Frederick M. Hunter (then chancellor of the University of Oregon)
J. B, Edmondson (then dean, School of Education, University of Michigan)
J. W. Studebaker (then United States Commissioner of Education)
Progressive Education Association
The Progressive Education Association was an organization estab-
lished in 1919 to foster a continuous improvement in educational
practices. At the time when the board made its first grant to the
association, its purposes were set forth as follows in a leaflet pub-
lished by the association :
The association is the only organization devoted to the work of spreading
knowledge of progressive education principles. Its membership, numbering over
7,000, is confined to no single group, profession, or locality. It includes admin-
istrators, teachers, and students in public and private schools and the colleges,
parents and the laity generally from every State of the United States and in 20
foreign countries. It is constantly growing, widening its influence, making new
contacts, assuming new obligations, engaging in new enterprises in the field of
education.
The association is not committed, and never can be, to any particular method
or system of education. In regard to such matters it is simply a medium through
which improvements and developments worked out by various agencies can be
presented to the public."
In the 1930's the association was doubtless the most active group of
educators concerned with studies looking toward the improvement
of education, and it was among the first to direct attention to prob-
lems in secondary education. While its members came from both
public and private schools and held a wide variety of beliefs as to what
constituted educational improvement, on one thing they were agreed—
that experimentation and change were necessary if American educa-
tion was to keep abreast of the needs of modern life.
The Progressive Education Association worked through national
commissions engaged in research and investigation of educational
problems and through conferences and summer institutes. It was in
the work of these several commissions that the General Education
Board was interested. There were three of them with large and rep-
resentative memberships. One conducted an 8 -year study of the
relation between school and college in which 30 schools participated ;
another engaged in an extensive study of the secondary school cur-
riculum and in a study of adolescents ; a third experimented with the
use of new materials, such as films, in helping young people gain a
better understanding of personal relationships.
A few small projects related to the studies of these commissions
were also aided, and while the commissions were active the board
made contributions toward the general support of the association so
that it might respond to the interest aroused by studies being con-
ducted by its commissions and coordinate their activities through
its central office. A total of $1,622,506 was made available by the
board to the association.
9 Pamphlet — Progressive Education — What it is, how it is promoted, why it is of
interest to you (Progressive Education Association, Washington, D. C, 1034), pp. 3-4.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1149
The major grants made to the Progressive Education Association
were:
General support (8% years) $119,407
Commission on Relation of School and College (30 schools and a group
of higher institutions participated) 605, 799
Commission on the Secondary School Curriculum 359,965
Commission on Human Relations , 222, 969
Service program ^ 260, 298
The board's last grant for the service program of the association (a
program involving summer workshops in which 14 of the major uni-
versities cooperated) was made in 1939. Meanwhile the commissions
had just about finished their work. With the development of war
tensions there was a rapid decline in interest in educational experi-
mentation; the association's membership dropped off sharply; and
as members entered war service there was a turnover in leadership.
A final grant was made to the association in August 1943 — $1,500 to
meet the expenses of a meeting of its full board of directors for the
purpose of defining future policy and program. It was made clear
at that time that no further assistance might be expected from the
General Education Board. Sometime during 1944 the Progressive
Education Association changed its name to American Education Fel-
lowship. We understand that in 1953, after a study and revision of
policy, it once more assumed its old name.
SOCIETY FOIl CURRICULUM STUDY, BUILDING AMERICA
The charge has been made that the Building America series, which
the General Education Board supported with 3 grants to the Society
for Curriculum Study totaling $51,000, made in 1935, 1936, and 1938,
was propaganda showing that "The United States is a place of desti-
tution, failure, unsound conditions" and that "sympathetic Russia is
sweetness and light." 10
Building America, which was developed as, a new type of teaching
material, was a periodical dealing with important phases of social,
political, and economic life and designed principally to help secondary
schools meet the need for instructional materials dealing with modern
life. The magazine emphasized pictures and graphs as a means of
presenting facts and suggesting problems.
The Society for Curriculum Study was a national organization of
professional workers in public and private schools and in State depart-
ments of education, and of university professors who were especially
interested in curriculum matters. The business of the society was
conducted by an executive committee of reputable and representative
educators, including at various times between 1935 and 1950 the
following :
Fred C. Ayer, University of Texas
H. I). Caswell, Teachers College, Columbia University
Doals S. Campbell, George Peabody College
Prudence Cutright, Minneapolis Public Schools
Edgar Draper, University of Washington
Samuel Everett, Northwestern University
Helen Heffernan, California State Department of Education
O. Robert Koopman, Michigan Department of Public Instruction
J. Paul Leonard, Stanford University
Paul J. Misner, Superintendent ©f School, Glencoe, 111.
10 Hearings, p. 309.
1150 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
J- Cecil Parker, Michigan Department of Public Instruction
Ralph D. Russell, University of Idaho
The editorial board of Building America was selected by the so-
ciety's executive committee and was under the chairmanship of Dr.
Paul R. Hanna of Stanford University. The editorial board's state-
ment of policy, on the basis of which the General Education Board's-
grant was made, indicated that the magazine would strive to present
social data and problems in a fair and scientific spirit. The project
clearly related to the board's program in general education which was
concerned with the improvement of secondary education.
In accordance with the board's basic policies, the aid given to Build-
ing America was considered temporary and was expected only to give
the Society for Curriculum Study an opportunity to explore and
evaluate a new type of teaching material. When board support ter-
minated in 1940, the Society for Curriculum Study X1 continued the
development and publication of Building America in both magazine
and book form. The article on Russia, which was severely criticized
in the testimony before this committee, 12 was published in 1944, 4 years
after board support terminated.
In summary, the board made grants for the benefit of Building
America on the basis that the funds would be used to support a worth-
while test of new teaching material which would be presented ob-
jectively. The board had good reason to believe that the funds would
be so used because of the representative and responsible educators who-
sponsored the project, their assurances as to the nature of the publi-
cation, and the preliminary material furnished the board. Although
the board does not attempt to supervise the studies supported by its
funds, as we point out m our principal statement (p. 11-13), we
believe there is no ground for the charge that the Building America
series was propaganda for communism or socialism.
Dean Rusk,
President, General Education Board.
Dated August 3, 1954.
State or New York,
County of New York, ss :
Dean Rusk, being duly sworn, says that he is president of the Gen-
eral Education Board, the organization in whose behalf the fore-
going supplemental statement is made; that the foregoing supple-
mental statement is true to his knowledge except as to the matters
occuring prior to the date (as set forth in the accompanying prin-
cipal statement) of his association with said organization, which are
therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and that as to
those matters he believes it to be true.
Dean Rusk.
Sworn to before me this 3d day of August 1954.
[seal] Harold B. Leonard,
Notary Public.
Term expires March 30, 1955.
11 In 1942 the Society for Curriculum Study and the Department of Supervisors of the-
National Education Association merged to form the Department of Supervision and Cur-
riculum Development of the National Education Association. In 1946 the name of this
group was changed to the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development,
National Education Association. Upon the merger, Building America became a property
of the denartment and then of the National Education Association.
13 Hearings, pp. 209 et seq.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1151
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM G. CARR, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, THE
NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES
We understand that your committee is authorized and directed,
among other matters, to conduct "an investigation and study of educa-
tional and philanthropic foundations, and other comparable organiza-
tions which are exempt from Federal income taxation, to determine
if any of them are using their resources for purposes other than the
purposes for which they were established, and especially to determine
which, if any, are using their resources for un-American and sub-
versive activities ; for political purposes ; propaganda, or attempts to
influence legislation."
It is also understood that during the public hearings which you
have now terminated, your committee heard testimony derogatory to
the National Education Association. From such of the testimony
as we have been able to collect and examine, we assert that those
derogatory statements are inconsistent, unfounded, and erroneous.
Since we may not testify before your committee in public, we are
unable to learn whether any of the previous testimony is regarded by
your committee as worthy of further examination. If you wish fur-
ther information on any specific allegations in this previous testi-
mony, which is not adequately provided in this memonrandum, repre-
sentatives of the association, upon suitable notice, will be prepared to
supply such information as may be appropriate and relevant.
Therefore, in the brief statement which is hereby submitted for
your record, we have not attempted to deal with previous testimony
on a point-by-point basis. This testimony, insofar as we have been
able to examine it, is so vague and so self -contradictory, that detailed
comment seems unncessary. We have, therefore, included in this
statement a body of information about the association which we deem
adequate to establish that the National Education Association of the
United States has a proud record of loyalty to this country and to its
ideals; that the association is controlled by its members,' and that it
cooperates with the public in the study and solution of educational
problems.
We urge that your committee, in any report it may issue, explicitly
reject any implication that the resources of the National Education
Association are used in an improper manner.
UN -AMERICAN ACTIVITIES
Before presenting this brief statement, it is desirable, however, to
make certain preliminary observations.
It sems obvious that in order to determine what associations and
foundations, if any, are "using their resources for un-American and
subversive activities," it will be necessary for the committee to identify
our basic American traditions and ideals. Unless these criteria are
well established in the minds of the committee and its staff, as well as
in the minds of witnesses who may appear before it, testimony and in-
quiry would seem to be of little value.
The American tradition is a complex one with a long and splendid
history. Your attention is respectfully directed to several components
of this tradition which we deem to be important in the task assigned to
your committee and in the work of the National Education Associa-
tion.
49720 — 54 — pt. 2 14
1 1 52 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
1. One component of the American tradition is the freedom to form
voluntary organizations for the promotion of all lawful purposes and
for the advancement of the principles and ideals to which a group sub-
scribes.
2. A second tradition dear to all Americans is resistance to what
Jefferson called tyranny over the minds of men. In positive terms,
this means the right to express opinions, even minority opinions on
controversial questions, without fear of direct or indirect reprisal, and
the right to revise opinions as conditions change and new circum-
stances come to light.
3. A third tradition basic to the American way of life, and of par-
ticular importance to your committee and to the National Educa-
tion Association, is the value attached to the education of all the people.
By this means, the founders of our country believed, popular govern-
ment may long endure, because its citizens have learned to exercise
independent and informed judgment in the direction and control of
their own personal affairs and in the affairs 6f state.
4. There are many other elements in the rich and varied pattern of
our country's tradition. At least one more such tradition should be
mentioned. To state it negatively first— it is not the American ideal to
be hostile to change. On the contrary, this country is great because its
citizens have been free to propose and to adopt modifications in the
structure of their Government, and of their other institutions. They
have believed it is the right and the duty of good citizens to adapt their
political and social institutions, within the broad framework of our
constitutional freedoms, to meet new circumstances and conditions.
These are some of the American traditions. If loyalty to such
traditions is loyalty to the United States, then the whole program of
the National Education Association and of the teaching profession in
this country has been, and will remain, a basic strength to our country
and to her traditions.
The members of the National Education Association are proud that
they have given effect to these traditions by combining their efforts to
elevate their profession. They are proud of the free and voluntary
nature of their association, and of its sense of responsibility to the chil-
dren and youth of this country. They are proud of its ability to
present the views of the teaching profession, on every appropriate
occasion, to the lawgivers and statesmen who enact legislation which
profoundly affects our schools.
We consider that an association which brings together citizens vol-
untarily for a lawful purpose, which encourages freedom of thought
and expression, which promotes the education of all the people, and
which leaves the door open to change and growth, is essentially in ac-
cordance with the American tradition. Conversely, of course, we be-
lieve that efforts to impede this process, to impair the efficiency of our
voluntary organizations, to hamper and circumscribe their work, to
cast doubts upon the propriety of free discussion, to narrow and im-
poverish the education of the people, or to deny the possibility of all
modifications in our social arrangements, are profoundly un-American
and hostile to the best traditions of our country.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS H53
SOME FACTS ABOUT THE NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION
The remainder of this statement about the National Education As-
sociation of the United States will include condensed facts on the
following :
1. Purpose, history, and records.
2. Membership.
3. Organization and officers.
4. Foundation grants to the agencies of the association.
5. Cooperation with other agencies.
6. International activities.
7. State and local responsibility for public education.
8. Public participation in the formation of public-school policy.
1 . Purpose, history, and records
The National Education Association is an independent, voluntary,
nongovernmental organization. In the briefest possible terms, the
association may be said to support the following ideas : That educa-
tional opportunity is the right of every American child; that sound
education is essential to the safety, happiness, and progress of the
United States ; that our decentralized school system is a valuable part
of the American tradition; that the preservation of freedom in this
Nation depends on a citizenry which has been educated to know, to
appreciate, to understand, and to defend the American heritage.
The ramifications of this general point of view can be traced in
detail in the platform and resolutions of the association, which are
filed as exhibit A.
With such premises, the association is strongly opposed to all forms
and philosophies of Government which deny freedom or ignore the
worth of each individual human being.
The National Education Association was organized August 26,
1857, at Philadelphia, Pa. It was incorporated by the Congress of
the United States on June 30, 1906.
The act of incorporation clearly states the purpose of the organi-
zation :
To elevate the character and advance the interests of the profession of teach-
ing, and to promote the cause of education in the United States.
The act of incorporation also provides for the establishment of
departments, and for the framework within which the members of the
association administer and control its affairs.
The association as a matter of regular procedure makes available
full reports of its meetings, reports, and financial transactions. These
reports and proceedings are published annually and are widely dis-
tributed. Its reports to the Bureau of Internal Revenue, as a tax-
exempt organization, are also a matter of public record.
0. Membership.
On May 31, 1954, the National Education Association had enrolled
561,708 members. This number amounts to approximately half of
the total number of persons engaged in teaching in the public ele-
mentary and secondary schools.
The members of the National Education Association live and work
in nearly every city, town, village, and hamlet in this country.
1154 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The bylaws, a copy of which is attached as exhibit B, state in detail
the conditions and classes of membership in the association. They
also provide that — '
No person shall be admitted or continued in membership in the National
Education Association, who advocates or who is a member of the Communist
Party of the United States or of any organization that advocates changing the
form of government of the United States by any means not provided for by
the Constitution of the United States.
Most of the members of the National Education Association teach
in the public elementary and secondary schools as employees of the
Nation's 60,000 local school boards. The membership includes kin-
dergarten teachers, teachers in the elementary and secondary schools,,
professors in colleges and universities, principals, deans, college
presidents, school superintendents, and all other professional work-
ers in education.
Within the association there are many different civic and profes-
sional opinions. Individually, the members of the National Educa-
tion Association belong not only to all communities, all States, and
all levels of educational effort, but also to all the major churches,
civic bodies, and political parties. However, the National Education
Association itself is not affiliated with any of the political, economic,
or religious groups within the United States. The independent pro-
fessional status of their association is greatly cherished and respected
by its members.
3. Organisation and officers
From June 27 to July 2, 1954, the National Education Association
held its 92d annual convention in New York City. The representative
assembly included 4,970 delegates. They represented all the State
and Territorial affiliates, and most of the 5,000 affiliated local educa-
tion associations. These delegates selected their own officers, evalu-
ated reports, scrutinized their association's budget for the next year r
studied their professional needs and problems, and developed the of-
ficial policy of the association.
The affiliated units, both State and local, which send their delegates
to this policy-forming agency are autonomous. The policies that
guide the National Education Association are established by these
representatives of responsible teacher-citizens from coast to coast.
The decisions of the representative assembly are binding. They are
carried out by the executive committee and the board of directors.
Every member of the executive committee must stand for reelection
every 2 years. A member of the board of directors is elected for a
3-year term by his colleagues in his own State. The executive secre
tary and his staff work under the direct supervision of the executive
committee and the board of directors. All elections are by secret
ballot.
Roughly, two-thirds of all delegates are classroom teachers. Others
hold administrative or other nonteaching educational positions. On
the average, each delegate represents about 113 members of the organ-
ization. The NEA representative assembly is extremely well attended.
Proposed resolutions and other policy-forming decisions are vigor-
ously debated and frequently amended. The budget is reviewed, line
by line, on the request of even a single delegate.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1155
With the exception of certain former presidents of £he association,
who were elected prior to July 1, 1937, there are no permanent officers
whatever in the National Education Association. The surviving life
directors now number only 12.
A full account of the origin, purpose, functions, and programs of
each committee, commission, division, department, or other unit of
the National Education Association, is published annually in the NEA
handbook. The NEA handbook, like the annual proceedings, is pub-
lished and is available for public reference in all important libraries.
A copy is filed with this report as exhibit C.
The charter and bylaws provide for the departments in the National
Education Association. There are currently 29 of these departments.
Their scope is defined in terms of subjects of instruction or of some
other special aspect of educational service. Each department, except
in a few routine respects, is autonomous. Most of the departments
have their own dues-paying members. Every department has its own
constitution and its own separate, elected, policymaking board, re-
sponsible to the members of that department.
In short, the National Education Association is a highly decen-
tralized body of educational workers.
In 1950, the association adopted a code of principles on the extent
to which association policy may be expressed by subordinate units.
Relevant sections of this code are Nos. 6, 7, 8, and 15. They are quoted
below :
No. 6. No NEA ^nit action, becomes association policy without official action. —
No action or pronouncement of any NEA unit is binding upon the NEA until it
has been approved by the representative assembly or, during intervals between
meetings of the representative assembly, by the executive committee.
No. 7. Freedom within general policy. — Units of the NEA are free, within their
respective fields of work, to publish conclusions upon any matter where no gen-
eral NEA policy has been established.
No. 8. Adherence to official NEA policies. — (a) Committees and commissions :
When the NEA decides upon an official policy through action or resolution of the
representative assembly, through its charter and bylaws, or through its plat-
form, then every committee and commission must adhere to that policy as long
as it is the policy of the association.
( 6 ) Departments : Departments of the association, before adopting policies,
should consider the question of possible differences with official NEA policy.
All NEA units should seek at all times to present a united front.
No. 15. Authority to speak for the association or its units. — Only the National
Education Association, through its own duly-authorized bodies or agents, can
speak for the association on matters of policy. The same principle applies to the
departments, commissions, and committees of the NEA ; only the unit itself or its
own duly-authorized officers or committees can speak for the unit. For this
reason, no cooperative council, committee, or other agency in which the asso-
ciation or a unit of the association is a member is authorized to speak for or
represent the National Education Association or any of its units unless written
authorization covering the specific matter involved has been granted.
h. Foundation grants to agencies of the association
Approximately 90 percent of the National Education Association
revenues come from the dues of its individual members. Most of the
remaining 10 percent comes from such incidental sources as sale of pub-
lications, exhibits, and advertising. Grants from foundations have
been even less important as a source of revenuefor the association. In
the rare instances where units of the association have been awarded
such grants, the award and its purposes and results have been publi-
cized.
1156 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
By provision of the charter granted by Congress, the National Edu-
cation Association must annually report to the United States Com-
missioner of Education, stating the property held by the corporation,
and the disposition of the income thereof during the preceding year.
In practice, a very much more complete report than this is filed with
the Commissioner of Education, showing in detail the entire financial
operation of the association, as well as of its committees, commissions,
and departments.
A study has been made, covering the past 11 years, of all gifts,
grants, and foundation awards to the association and its subordinate
units. The value of such gifts, grants, and awards, in the 11 years,
totals slightly over $2,500,000. Over $750,000 of this amount was
given to the NEA by thousands of its own members in small, indi-
vidual gifts to the war and peace fund and to the overseas fund. These
funds were used to finance the special wartime services of the asso-
ciation and, after the war, to assist teachers in war devastated coun-
tries. The overseas fund continues at present to provide material
assistance to teachers in the Republic of Korea.
The total grants by the Ford Foundation, the Rockefeller Founda-
tion, and the Carnegie Foundation, during the 11-year period, have
been less than $400,000. The association has received 13 times as much
income from such minor sources as the sale of publications and ad-
vertising space in its magazine as it did from these foundations.
6i Cooperation with other agencies
The association has a standing policy of active cooperation with
responsible civic and professional groups. It maintains joint com-
mittees, for example, with the American Legion, the American Medi-
cal Association, the National Congress of Parents and Teachers, and
the Magazine Publishers Association. It invests a substantial part
of its resources in endeavoring to discover what the American people
expect of their schools, and in turn to interpret the needs of the schools
to the American people.
For 8 years the National Education Association has cooperated
with the United States Department of Justice in the annual Confer-
ence on Citizenship. The ninth such conference will be held in Wash-
ington on September 15-17, 1954.
In 1950, the NEA helped to organize the All-American Confer-
erence to Combat Communism. It has sent representatives to the
meetings and participated in other ways. Other groups in this con-
ference include the American Legion, Lions International, the Federal
Council of Churches of Christ, and many other national organizations.
The above are merely examples of the many kinds of cooperation
which the NEA, as a matter of policy, extends to other groups.
6. International activities
The National Education association has endeavored to support the
policies of the United States Government regarding good will to
people of other lands, and regarding the success of the United Nations
and its specialized agencies. The association has cooperated with
the United States Government, and with private agencies, in facili-
tating the exchange of teachers and students with friendly, foreign
countries. It has promoted the establishment of a democratic inter-
national teachers organization.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1157
Through the generosity of its individual members, the association
has sent about one-half million dollars' worth of clothing, school sup-
plies, food, book, and medical supplies, to overseas teachers who were
victims of aggression and war devastation.
In its relations with current international issues, the association has
been guided by the following policy which is quoted from the NEA
platform and resolutions :
As a measure of defense against our most potent threat, our American schools
must teach about communism and all forms of totalitarianism, including the
practices and principles of the Soviet Union and the Communist Party in the
United States. Teaching about communism does not mean advocacy of com-
munism. Such advocacy should not be permitted in American schools.
The association is opposed by longstanding policy to the employ-
ment of members of the Communist Party in the schools of the United
States.
The international governmental agency most closely allied to the
work of the NEA is UNESCO. This organization was established
after both Houses of Congress unanimously approved resolutions in-
troduced by Senator Fulbright, the late Senator Taft, and by Senator
(then Representative) Karl Mundt, in favor of international coopera-
tion in this area.
7. State and local responsibility for public education
The control of public education is the responsibility of the States
and localities. The policy of the National Education Association is
unequivocal on this point. A glance at the NEA platform and reso-
lutions will show this clearly.
As a professional association, the National Education Association
does not possess the authority to instruct its members with respect
to curriculum or content of teaching, or to issue any kind of direc-
tives on such matters. It has never issued such directives.
The policies, suggestions, and recommendations offered by the
National Education Association derive their strength from the rea-
soning and evidence which lies back of them. They may be adopted
or rejected by individual members of the profession, or by individual
members of the association, or by local or State school systems as,
seems best to those who do have such responsibility.
8. Public participation in the formation of public school policy
The National Education Association is committed to the principle
that the people of each local community, in each State, and through-
out the Nation should participate actively in the formation of public
school policy. The association has encouraged the growth of the
National Congress of Parents and Teachers. It has cooperated ac-
tively with the National School Boards Association. It has supplied
material to, and welcomed the creation of, the National Citizens Com-
mission for the Public Schools. The association does not advocate that
the teaching profession should have exclusive authority with re-
spect to public school policy. It recognizes that public interest in
these matters is great, and has a legitimate channel of expression.
The best safeguard for our free, democratic schools, is the kind of
wide understanding and broad public participation which the asso-
ciation has consistently advocated.
The association is proud of the record it has maintained. Approval
has been extended to its work by the highest military and civil lead-
1158 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
ers of our country. For example : In 1950 President Truman wrote to
the national conference which the NEA sponsors jointly with the
Department of Justice :
You are making a magnificent contribution to the general welfare of the
Nation. As long as patriotic citizens of every faith and creed, group and in-
terest, gather in harmony and in unity to discuss the problems of the hour, we
need have no fear of ideologies inimical to our precious democratic way of life.
And in 1952, President Eisenhower wrote :
The significant contribution of the National Education Association to the
Nation's children and youth, and its excellent service to the teaching profession,
is well known.
The members and officers of the National Education Association
believe that their professional association merits recognition and com-
mendation from these national leaders. They are proud to affirm that
the teaching profession is devoted and will remain devoted to the
development of freemen.
District of Columbia,
City of Washington, ss :
William Gr. Carr, being duly sworn, deposes and says :
1. I am the executive secretary of the National Education Associa-
tion of the United States and am familiar with the objects, purposes,
and operations of the association.
2. I have prepared the foregoing statement under the direction and
in cooperation with the executive committee of the association and
declare that it is true and correct with respect to those matters stated
upon personal knowledge ; and that with respect to matters not stated
upon personal knowledge, it is true to the best of my knowledge and
belief.
William G. Carr.
Sworn to before me this 9th day of August 1954.
[seal] Mary E. Wibel,
Notary Public.
My commission expires November 1, 1955.
STAFF REPORT ON AMERICAN LABOR EDUCATION SERVICE, INC.
This memorandum is submitted for the purpose of setting forth
some of the activities of American Labor Education Service, Inc.,
which bear on that part of the scope of this committee's investigation
directed to the question of whether certain foundations "are using their
resources * * * for political purposes, propaganda, or attempts to
influence legislation" (H. Res. 217).
The American Labor Education Service, Inc. (hereinafter simply
referred to as "ALES") is a tax-exempt foundation, listed on page 9
of the 1952 Supplement to the Cumulative List of Organizations (con-
tributions to which are deductible) published by the Bureau of In-
ternal Eevenue of the United States Treasury Department. Accord-
ing to United States Citizens in World Affairs, a directory of non-
governmental organizations published by the Foreign Policy Asso-
ciation in 1953, ALES has 10 full-time staff members at headquar-
ters and in the field. The same booklet reports that ALES is a mem-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1159
ber of the International Federation of Workers' Educational Asso-
ciations and that its objectives in international affairs are "to cooper-
ate with the labor movement in intensifying education in the field of
international affairs; to stimulate the interest of leaders in interna-
tional affairs; and to encourage the study of such issues within the
groups and unions."
A perusal of ALES annual reports and conference programs reveals
that intensifying education" is very closely related to, if not iden-
tical with, propaganda and political action. Moreover, the back-
ground of ALES staff members, together with the list of personnel
participating in ALES conferences, suggest an interlocking direc-
torate of individuals and groups who have been associated with mili-
tant socialism, and even, in some cases, with Communist fronts.
For instance, as set forth in exhibit 1 annexed hereto, Eleanor C.
Anderson (also known as Mrs. Sherwood Anderson) listed in the
ALES annual report for 1953 as its treasurer and a member of its
board of directors, was cited 10 times in the Dies committee hearings
and 20 times in the appendix IX of the House Committee on Un-
American Activities ; Max Lerner, its former treasurer and member
of the board of directors, was cited 20 times by the Dies committee and
31 times in appendix IX; J. Raymond Walsh, a director and vice
chairman up until at least 1948, was cited 22 times by the Un-Amer-
ican committee ; and 12 times in appendix IX ; Edward C. Lindeman,
a director until his death in 1953, was cited 8 times by the Dies com-
mittee and 19 times in appendix IX.
The American Labor Education Service sponsors an Annual Wash-
ington's Birthday Workers' Education Conference. According to
page 1 of an ALES invitation to one of these affairs, dated February
25-26, 1950, this general conference for leaders, teachers, and others
professionally interested in workers' education "was started at Brook-
wood Labor College in 1924 under the auspices of Local 189 of the
AFT" (American Federation of Teachers ) i . (In 1928, the A. F. of L.,
with one dissenting vote, issued a ban against Brookwood Labor Col-
lege as "an incubator of Communists." (See New York Times, Nov.
29, 1928, p. 12.)
Under letter of October 2, 1946, ALES invited its members to
attend a conference in Milwaukee, stating, among other things :
"The topic for this year's discussion is a timely one 'How Can
"Worker's Education Advance Labor's Economic and Political Ob-
jectives'.
• **••**
"At the dinner, we shall consider methods labor must use when col-
lective bargaining does not work, especially methods of deeding with
the Government" [Italics ours.]
The agenda for the 1947 ALES Midwest Workers' Education Con-
ference (weekend of November 1-2 at Hotel Moraine, Highland Park,
111.) notes the following discussion groups on the subject of Defin-
ing and Advancing Labor's Objectives in 1947-48: A. Collective
Bargaining Under New Federal and State Legislation,' B. Labor's
Community Relations; C. How to Maintain Union Strength in the
Face of Inflation and Depression; D. Political Action for Labor
[Italics by ALES.]
Workshops on Education, according to the same agenda, included
these topics: "F. Developing Radio Program; G. Utilization of the
1160 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Press; H. Political Action Techniques; J. Improving Farmer-Labor
Relations." [Italics by ALES.] These are the kind of workshops
that would be appropriate for a gathering of politicians ; they do not
suggest the ordinary seminar.
An ALES letter, dated January 30, 1948, which announces the
annual conference for that year, reads in part :
This year special emphasis will be placed on workships for the discusssion
of practical problems of current interest to those working in the field. * * *
Six technical workshops are scheduled from 2 to 5 o'clock on Saturday after-
noon, the topics for which will be : how to integrate educational work in the
unions, the use of sociodrama in the training of shop stewards, specific curric-
ulum and content needs for labor education activities, practical methods for
developing labor's interest as consumers, techniques for more effective farmer-
labor cooperation, and advances recently made in the use of audiovisual aids.
The first three workshops listed on the enclosed program will be open to all
those engaged in any form of workers' education. The second three will be
open to those who carry on labor education in unions. * * *
On Sunday morning a panel of experts will discuss methods and materials
which will implement labor's foreign policy. * * *
Developing farmer-labor cooperation and "implementing labor's
foreign policy" might be characterized as education for labor in order
to obtain political objectives, rather than education of labor.
An ALES letter, dated June 4, 1948, asking for financial aid from
friends reads in part :
Two trends, in American life make workers' education an issue of paramount
importance. One is the attempt to eliminate racial discrimination in trade
unions and the other is the Taft-Hartley labor bill and what it symbolizes. * * *
Certainly, the passage of the Taft-Hartley bill indicates among other things,
the need for an intensive "push" in labor education. The American Labor Edu-
cation Service is equipped to furnish this "push," equipped in every way save
one, namely adequate budget. I am writing, therefore, to ALES friends, who
realize the strategic role which organized labor must play in our democratic
struggle, asking for continued financial help. * * *
"Pushing" against the Taft-Hartley bill— and soliciting funds for
such a "push" — would seem to be activities related to lobbying and,
therefore, not tax exempt.
The tentative program of the ALES Midwest Workers' Education
Conference, November 13-14, 1948, in Milwaukee, Wis., noted that
the keynote session would be "The union's responsibility in forward-
ing democracy in the world scene today." Workshops dealt with the
problem of "How can workers' education stimulate democratic partici-
pation * * * through legislative activity, through winning commu-
nity understanding and more effective participation in community or-
ganization, through political activity and farmer-labor cooperation."
The dinner meeting on Saturday evening was concerned with the
"Development of program of the Economic Cooperation Administra-
tion and labor's responsibility for supporting it."
An ALES conference at the New School for Social Research, held
February 25-26, 1950, discussed The Contribution of Labor in Re-
building Democratic Society and the Role of Workers' Education in
Political Action. (See p. 2 of ALES Agenda that date.) It was
noted that a "panel discussion will cover the urgency of participation
in political action by labor, and the reevaluation of education in re-
lation to political action."
It seems clear that a significant portion of the ALES program is
devoted to planning and promoting political action. It appears to
be especially active in recruiting mass labor support for a private
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1161
brand of interventionist foreign policy, the U. N. and its various
agencies, foreign aid, and the concept of worldwide social and eco-
nomic security. Some of the money for "discussion programs in in-
ternational affairs for labor-union representatives" has been granted
to ALES by a subsidiary of the Ford Foundation, the Fund for
Adult Education. On page 34 of the fund's report of its grants from
January 1, 1952, to June 30, 1953, it is noted that ALES had been
granted a total of $190,000 of which $95,000 was still unpaid.
It is admittedly difficult to draw the line between discussion pro-
grams which are truly "educational" and those which are designed to
proselytize for a particular viewpoint. But it would be safe to say
that no one can accuse the ALES of leaning over Backward to pre-
sent both sides of the "great debate" on foreign policy.
Here is an extract from the 1953 Annual Report of the ALES (p. 9)
which described an ALES-CIO World Affairs Institute, a 2-week
affair at Haven Hill Lodge, north of Detroit, Mich. :
The study program will be developed around these topics : World Popula-
tion and Food ; the U. N. and Its Specialized Agencies ; the Economics of Foreign
Trade ; Comparative Labor Movements ; the Role of the CIO in World Affairs ;
How Foreign Policy Is Made. Throughout the course there will he considera-
tion of how attitudes are formed and of educational methods for local work.
Among those who will serve as faculty and discussion leaders will be : Isidor
Lubin, former United States Representative on the Economic and Social Coun-
cil of the U. N. ; Victor Reuther, assistant to Walter Reuther, president of the
CIO ; James Calderwood, associate professor of economics at Ohio State Univer-
sity (now on leave) ; Stanley H. Ruttenberg, CIO director of education and re^
search ; and Paul Nitze, former Chief of the Policy Planning Board in the State
Department. These will be supplemented by staff and officials from the United
States Labor Department, the ILO, and UNESCO ; delegates from foreign coun-
tries, including Sweden, Germany, Haiti, Tunisia, the Philippines, and New
Zealand ; trade union leaders with experience in Latin America, Europe, the
Middle East, and the Far East.
ALES also runs a Philadelphia center for leadership training in
world affairs. On page 6 of the 1953 annual report it is noted :
A variety of techniques are used: discussion groups, classes, institutes, con-
ferences, film discussion, planning sessions, board and committee meetings, mem-
bership meetings. It is true here, as in all parts of the ALES international
project, that the study of world affairs has covered many topics including, for
example, foreign trade, economic aid, labor movements abroad, and world
economic conditions.
During the period of the Philadelphia project, the study groups on the U. N. and
the U. N. trips have increased in number and have proved effective in broadening
international outlook and sense of responsibility. Preparations for the trips
include always a review of the general purposes of the U. N., the issues under dis-
cussion, the foreign policy of this country and its position on current U. N. issues,
and a briefing or film about the nation whose delegates the group is to meet.
The work of special agencies always is emphasized, particularly the Social and
Economic Council, the Trusteeship Council, and UNICEF. There always is keen
interest in underdeveloped countries.
ALES sponsors a number of short, regional conferences throughout
the year. In 1952 it organized a Second Annual North Dakota Confer-
ence of Farmers and Workers. Delegates from unions, farm organ-
izations, and cooperatives discussed goals and methods of economic
action by organized farmers and organized workers (p. 7, 1953 annual
report).
1162 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
According to the same annual report (p. 7) :
Discussion moved from everyday problems of farmers and workers — the effects
of price supports, the need for organization, opportunities for joint farmer-labor
action — to such questions as the needs of underdeveloped countries, the im-
portance of foreign trade, and the relationships between foreign aid and military
purposes.
Other excerpts from the 1953 annual report which indicate the
nature and scope of the ALES activity include these :
Since the curriculum and study programs relate to the many-sided interests of
adult workers with special reference to their economic and social outlook, ALES
also has cooperative relationships with many types of educational, governmental,
and community agencies (p. 14) .
In its work with organizations outside the labor movement, ALES serves as a
bridge between labor education organizations and many community and educa-
tional bodies (p. 14) .
It goes without saying that the ALES international project has worked in
many ways with community and governmental organizations chiefly concerned
with world affairs and foreign policy (p. 14) .
Cooperative relationships of great educational value to the ALES program
have been developed with members of the Secretariat and the delegations at the
United Nations (p. 14) .
On the local level, ALES works constantly with such organizations as the
American Association for the United Nations * * * (p. 14).
* * * the entire ALES program may be described as leadership training, since
it is planned for those who carry responsibilities within the labor movement —
union officers, committee chairmen, shop stewards, delegates, and others (p. 14).
As a national agency giving service to a great variety of groups concerned with
labor education in this country, it has become the accepted, function of ALES to
carry extensive responsibilities for interpreting labor education to friends, critics,
and the uninformed ( p. 13 ) . [ Italics ours. ]
Cooperation also is extended to student bodies and to social and community
agencies. Board and staff members of ALES serve on the committees of these
organizations * * * (p. 13).
In recent years, ALES has given special attention to areas of work where the
labor movement believes that, through education, responsible action might le
strengthened (p. 1). [Italics ours.]
Our work with foreign trade unionists has included helping to plan programs ;
to make contacts ; and to utilize the skills of unionists from 33 * * * widely
scattered countries * * *. Among the visitors have been experienced labor edu-
cators, teachers, in labor schools, officers of trade unions, and government de-
partment and adult education personnel concerned in labor education (p. 1).
In carrying out its exchange activities, ALES cooperates with various organ-
izations, among them the Institute of International Education, UNESCO, the
National Social Welfare Assembly * * * (p. 1).
ALES * * * itself sponsors foreign trade union visitors * * * ALES extends
opportunities to American workers to study abroad * * * (p. 2).
The ALES director and certain members of the board now serve as members
of the National Selection Committee on Workers' and Adult Education; of the
American Selection Committee for Ruskin College Scholarships (both of the Insti-
tute of International Education) ; and of the Advisory Selection Committee for
Workers' Education of the Conference Board of the Associated Research Coun-
cil's Committee on International Exchange of Persons (p. 2) .
With every passing year it becomes more urgent for white-collar workers to
face their economic realities and to establish their rightful place in the labor
movement * * *. This is the challenge that White Collar Workshops sets out
to meet through its unique resident labor school planned to serve these work-
ers * * * (p. 11).
White Collar Workshops this year planned a shorter school — 1 week — where
intensive work could be carried on, focused on a common concern. The em-
phasis throughout the week was on how white-collar workers themselves, as citi-
zens and trade unionists, can make themselves felt in the local and national
scene (p. 12).
The study program included an analysis of the factors affecting the business
cycle, with special reference to the current situation ; the economics of collective
bargaining ; the legislative and political scene in Washington; with special em-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1163
phasis on legislative and community action carried on by organized labor; and
discussions of the significance and the social attitudes of white-collar workers.
There was also a series of workshops, highlighted by a stimulating panel on
organizing and strengthening white-collar unions in which union staff members,
experienced in handling the problems of white-collar workers, participated
(p. 12). [Italics ours.]
By its own admission, therefore, ALES is in the center of a network
of educational groups, many of whose activities border on propaganda
and political action. ALES is in a position to make its impact felt on
a wide front by virtue of its staffing of interlocking directorates. It
feels that a legitimate function is to convince white-collar workers that
they should join in economic and political action with unionists. It
outlines the legislative terrain in Washington and trains troops for the
battle.
It would appear that ALES relates education to action favored by
the labor movement. It interprets the meaning of education to the
general public. It staffs the committees of student groups and social
agencies. It provides the funds for a two-way transmission belt that
carries American trade unionists to Socialist Europe and brings
Socialist leaders here. It serves as a bridge between many govern-
mental agencies and community groups interested in world affairs. It
trains the leadership of the labor movement, and that leadership, of
course, has a great responsibility for planning and implementing
political action.
In 1938, ALES published for sale a 45-page pamphlet entitled
"Annotated List of Pamphlet Material for Workers Classes." While
this pamplet is now 16 years old, it should be noted that it contains a
foreword by Eleanor Gr. Coit, the then and now director of ALES. In
addition, the sections on The Labor Movement, Labor Economics,
English and On Methods and Materials were prepared by Orlie Pell,
who is still listed on the ALES staff as the publications and research
associate. In reading ALES' own description of the contents of some
of the books which it recommends for use in workers' classes and in
also considering the organizations which sponsored the publication of
such books, one seriously questions how education is served and rather
asks oneself why tax exempt moneys should be used to further class
hatred, social unrest, and economic warfare. One of the books recom-
mended is entitled "Toward a Farmer-Labor Party" written by Harry
W. Laidler, and published by the League for Industrial Democracy,
of which he is the executive director. As stated by ALES, this book
contains :
A brief analysis of the problems confronting an independent Farmer-Labor
Party in America, and an account of past and present developments in that di-
rection. Labor party movements in Minnesota, Wisconsin, New Year, Illinois,
Detroit, Pennsylvania, California, and Oregon included.
On the question of regulating labor unions, the recommended book
is Should Labor Unions be Regulated ? by Hubert Herring and Harold
O. Hatcher, published by the Council for Social Action. Arguments
for and against compulsory incorporation of trade unions are con-
tained in this volume "with conclusion in favor of the negative" as
described by ALES.
Another oook entitled "Shall Strikes Be Outlawed?" by Joel Seid-
man, and published by the League for Industrial Democracy, deals
with "discussion of compulsory arbitration of labor disputes, its dan-
1164 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
gers to workers in countries where labor is politically weak, and ex-
periments in compulsory arbitration here and abroad."
Another book published by the League for Industrial Democracy
and written by Carl Kaushenbush is entitled "Fordism", and is rec-
ommended by ALES as being "useful for workers' classes in showing
concretely some of the methods used to combat organization among
workers, and some of the influences a large company can hare on the
surrounding community."
The ALES pamphlet also contains a bibliography of labor plays,
some of which deserve special mention. For instance, two plays spon-
sored by the Highlander Folk School (referred to in appendix IX as
a revolutionary theater organization) are Gumbo where racial and
antiunion discrimination is depicted and Labor Spy which "shows
methods used by antiunion detective agency to 'hook' an innocent
worker into being a labor spy."
Many plays are recommended which were sponsored by the Brook-
wood Labor College, on which comment has already been made. For
instance, there is the play Step which is described as a "mass recita-
tion on psychology of unemployed", and Uncle Sam Wants You, the
message of which is "a reminder of what recruiting posters really ask
for. Excellent for trained speech chorus."
Under the sponsorship of Southern Summer School, we find other
labor plays depicting "standing in line before a closed bank" in Bank
Run, and "plight of unemployed and hungry southern millworkers
in Job-Huntin', and "Southern mill strikers around a fire on a picket
line at night. Effective use of real strike songs," in On The Picket
Line,
Then there are found additional plays about labor and organization
as Black Pit by Albert Maltz (cited by House of Representatives
on October 24, 1947, for contempt of Congress) which ALES describes
as follows :
A miner, framed because of union activity, after coming out of jail, attempts
to find work but is blacklisted everywhere because of union record. Is driven to
accept position as stool pigeon.. Requires convincing use of Slavic dialect and
intelligent direction.
A play which has been particularly marked "recommended" by
ALES is Rehearsal by Albert Maltz, which revolves around the fol-
lowing situation :
During a rehearsal of a stirring mass chant on the Detroit auto strike, one
actress finally succeeds in playing the part with almost too much realism. Excel-
lent drama ; one rich emotional part.
Also winning the highly recommended award is Waiting for Lefty
by Clifford Odets, described as : "One of the best plays for labor and
leftwing groups. Realistic treatment of strikes, rackets, and stool
pigeons. Requires intelligent directing."
Also recommended is The Maker of Swords by Sterling Olmsted,
described as follows :
Fantasy laid in imaginary country. A maker of swords has become fabulously
rich through selling his product and then stirring up international hatred to the
point of war. Caught and convicted of his crimes, he is condemned to die but
cleverly plants the seeds of mistrust in the hearts of his keepers, two brother
princes, who in their turn declare war against each other, and each secretly or-
ders more swords from the swordmaker. Play ends on ironic note, with no solu-
tion offered.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1165
Classified under the category "fantasy and satire" is a play, Blocks,
by Mollie Day Thatcher, and sponsored by Vassar Experimental
Theater, which is :
A powerful satire in which Green Worker and Tan Worker symbolize all the
masses forced unwillingly to war, while the Green Man and the Tan Man sym-
bolize all the leaders, generals, and capitalists making war without engaging
in it.
Finally, ALES refers to two plays from Soviet Russia, one being
Bread by Vladimir Kirshom, and described as "the best known and
most significant Soviet play of the gigantic effort to change the life
and economic organization of the Russian peasantry."
In 1942, ALES published and distributed a pamphlet entitled
"Songs Useful for Workers' Groups," which is hoped "would be
helpful to groups of workers who want to sing together."
Among the song collections listed in said pamphlet was the fol-
lowing :
Rebel Song Book, compiled and edited by Samuel H. Friedman ; music editor,
Dorothy Bachman. Rand School Press, 7 East 15th St., New York, Paper.
92 pages. 50 cents.
"87 Socialist and Labor Songs," including a number of revolutionary songs
translated from the Russian German, Finnish, Italian, and so on. Also, union
and organzing songs, IWW and strike songs. In most cases the text is set
to old familiar melodies, but there is also some stirring original music by Hanns
Eisler, Herman Epstein, Liebich, and others. The songs are well adapted for
mass singing in unison, with moderately easy accompaniments.
Certainly the question arises whether a tax-exempt fund should be
used to further the sale and use of a rebel song book which contains
among other things organizing songs, IWW and strike songs, many
of which are set to the "stirring original music by Hanns Eisler."
ALES distributes a reprint of a symposium on Some Trends in
Adult Education, originally published in the November 1952 issue
of Adult Education, an organ of the Adult Education Association of
the United States of America. Eleanor G. Coit, director, and Orlie
A. H. Pell, education and research associate of ALES, took part in
the symposium.
It was pointed out by the two ALES participants that labor edu-
cation is no longer a frill but "well on the way to being considered
an integral part of the process of building a strong, effective labor
movement." The reasons why labor education is changing from a
utilitarian approach, with emphasis on techniques, to the kind of edu-
cation appropriate for successful political action were clearly pointed
out:
As our lives in the 20th century become more complex and interdependent,
unions are finding themselves concerned with a wider range of problems. Less
and less is collective bargaining with the employer a fully adequate answer to
their needs ; price levels that affect their standard of living, the housing condi-
tions under which they live, the effects of the cold war, the atmosphere of
loyalty oaths and suspicion — these problems can be met only with action on the
community, national and international scenes (p. 2). (Italics ours.)
Consequently labor education has increased the scope of its responsibility.
The study program for example, of the 1952 union summer institutes held in
all parts of the country, includes among their areas of work such fields as inter-
national affairs (including point 4), wage stabilization, community services,
human relations, political action, public relations, and civic rights * * * (p. 2).
One of the outstanding developments of recent years has been the increased
involvement in international affairs on the part of labor leaders (p. 2).
1166 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
ALES staff members would seem to be preoccupied with the abso-
lute necessity of promoting worldwide labor action.
As we look to the future, we see, perhaps, an intensification of the trend al-
ready apparent. A sober, responsible labor movement, aware of its increasing
responsibilities in a world at crisis, turning to its educational arm for help in
meeting its responsibilities; seeking to understand the problems faced on the
community, the national, and above all, the international levels. Here may lie
the direction of growth during the coming years * * * so that the labor move-
ment may take the lead in the development of insight and action that will be
worldwide in scope (p. 3) .
Irvine L. H. Kerrison, chairman, labor program, Institute of Man-
agement and Labor Relations, Rutgers University, took part in the
same symposium. Here is his concept of "successful" labor education
at the university level, as set forth in the reprint circulated by ALES :
Institutions of higher learning now achieving the greatest success in workers'
education * * * believe that effective workers' education helps the worker be-
come a better individual, a contributing member of his union group, and a par-
ticipating citizen in his community. They base all their work with unions on
three operating principles :
(1) Every activity planned jointly by the union and the university.
(2) Every activity designed to deal with individual problems of union
groups requesting service.
(3) Close cooperation with the labor movement maintained through union
advisory committee members and regular consultation with National, regional,
and State union education directors * * *
University officials, in these troubled times, are fond of extolling aca-
demic freedom and the right of scholars to teach the facts without
fear or favor, pressure or censorship. Yet, in the field of labor edu-
cation, it would seem that union leaders exercise the right of veto and
the privilege of constant consultation. Mr. Kerrison, the author of
this concept of controlled education, then asserts that :
* * * organized labor is one of the few bulwarks, and perhaps strongest of the
few, against a violent dropping of the Iron Curtain on modern civilization (pp.
4-5).
Larry Rogin, vice-chairman and a director of ALES, and a director
of the education department, Textile Workers Union of America,
also participated at the symposium and emphasized the point that
the purpose of labor "education" is to make a good union man :
To the extent that the educational needs and desires of workers are more
widely met, the workers will become more effective trade unionists and better
citizens of their country and of the world (p. 6) .
Mr. Rogin raises another question which may be central to labor
education :
Finally, in these days of Taft-Hartley and McCarthy and Zell, will the educa-
tor stand up for the right to deal with controversial subjects honestly and with-
out fear? From how many subjects will he beg off, saying, "This is a job for the
union?" (p. 6).
Another project of the ALES is the holding of conferences which
promote Farmer-Labor Understanding — And Action (the title of a
reprint from the Journal of Educational Sociology, February, 1952,
which is currently circulated by ALES) . The author noted that some
of the following were points agreed upon by a joint committee at the
1951 Northwest Farmers' and Workers' Education Conference :
The official publications of people's organizations such as labor unions, cooper-
atives, and farmer organizations are important instruments for translating the
common agreements of educational conferences into better rank-and-file under-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1167
standing * * * In recent years nearly all labor papers have protected the work-
ing farm families from legislative attack (by powerful exploiting interests) on
their price-support program by showing urban consumers that working farmers
get a very small percentage of the dollar paid by the consumer for food and
clothing (p. 5) .
Cooperative publications and Farmers Union papers have carried the story to
farmers about the very small percentage of the price of farm machinery and
supplies which goes to the worker in the form of wages. These same publica-
tions have informmed farmers of the basic threat, not only to organized labor
but to organized farmers, in such legislation as the Taft-Hartley Act (p. 5).
As an example of substantial "interlock" it might be pointer out
that the vice chairman of the American Labor Education Service,
Mark Starr, has also been a chairman of the board of the League for
Industrial Democracy. Further, he is the director of education for
the ILGWU and a member of the United States Advisory Commission
on Educational Exchange. He has been appointed to responsible
policy positions in the field of education: as labor consultant to tha
Office of War Administration ; as a member of the American delega-
tion to establish UNESCO ; as a labor education consultant to Ameri-
can military government in Japan ; as a member of President Truman's
Commission on Higher Education during the period 1945-47.
Mr. Starr is also listed as chairman of the board of the Public Affairs
Committee which publishes a great many pamphlets on significant
topics of the day. In view of his prominence in the field of educa-
tion and his position as a key link in the interlocking directorate of
certain groups whose activities border on propaganda and political
action, it is perhaps desirable to examine his philosophy of education
in some detail. Following are excerpts from Labor Looks at Educa-
tion by Mark Starr, published by the League for Industrial Democracy
in 1947:
Later they (the poor) read Marx and Veblen, to name only two of the most
effective intellectual commandos who utilized their own college training as
bombs to blast away the intellectual girders supporting the modern economic
system. Inevitably such individuals are rejected as heretics because the ideas
which they espouse do not support things as they are (p. 4).
This passage is characteristic of Mark Starr and his associates in
ALES who regard education as a weapon which should be used to de-
stroy the foundations of the present social order. Certainly he had in
mind the use of education as a weapon in what Socialists love to refer
to as the class struggle when he wrote :
The labor movement cannot rest content until there are 30 million people or-
ganized in the trade unions of the United States. This means that workers' edu-
cation should keep in mind the conversion of the community to labor's point of
view.
(See Mark Starr's article entitled "Worker's Education, 1900-1940,"
published in May- June 1940 issue of the Workmen's Circle Call).
Note in the following passage Mr. Starr's contempt for the dis-
passionate search after truth. To him, education is propaganda —
there is no distinction. *
Some educators endeavor to satisfy their consciences by suggesting that edu-
cation with an aim is propaganda and that true education deals only in immut-
able, unalterable, fundamental truths, as if abstract ideals could be isolated from
their daily changing content. After all, there is only a relative distinction be-
tween education and propaganda. Tour education is always propaganda to the
other fellow (p. 5).
A new philosophy of education is striving to be born — a planned community to
replace the jerry-built dwellings produced by the haphazard efforts of the past
(p. 10).
49720—54 — pt. 2— —15
1168 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The "planned community" of thought is the lever which can
help build the cooperative commonwealth whose highest ideal is
"group-think." The "haphazard, jerry-built dwellings of the past"
housed Plato, Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas, Milton, Dante, Chaucer,
Tolstoy, Newton, Darwin, Emerson, Edison, Locke, Hume, Kent,
Luther, and a handful of others whose contributions to civilization
should not be overlooked in the new passion for the intellectual
collective.
Mr. Starr, whose own projects have been heavily subsidized by the
Ford Foundation's fund for adult education, has a few words to say
about foundations and their work. He leaves no doubt that the busi-
ness of education is to change society.
One factor in influencing the relation of colleges and universities to labor and
to the type of education which would facilitate necessary social changes by con-
sent, is the role of the foundations. Educational activity in the United States
cannot be fully studied without evaluating the effects of the foundations thereon
(P- 11).
But colleges too often have to go cap in hand and exploit personal eontacta
with the uncrowned kings and agents of philanthropy * * * . There are, of
course, some foundations which delouse effectively the millions accumulated by
monopolies and dynastic fortunes ; but if one could choose a way for the long-time
support of education, it would be done by community intelligence rather than the
caprice of the big shots of big business who wish to perpetuate their names in a
spectacular fashion, a process which may not in all cases coincide with the real
educational activity of the college (p. 12) .
Mr. Starr constantly reverts to the premise of "progressive" edu-
cation — that the school should build a new social order.
Our frame of reference needs revision. Can the school help us to meet the
changed world? Perverted and misused in the past, education can be a cure for
many social ills and labor can help to make it so. Labor's consistent support of
education in the past and its role as the largest organized unit of parents gives
it the right to speak in constructive criticism (p. 14) .
Mr. Starr defines "workers' education" in a way which suggests that
it is almost equivalent to "political action."
At its best, workers' education serves simultaneously as a discipline, a direc-
tive, and a dynamic force to labor organizations. It emphasizes the study of
group problems to the end of group action for their solution (p. 22).
The CIO department of education and research undertakes extensive activity
in public relations among religious, educational, and civic groups in addition to
education for its own membership. Its activity heads up politically into the
political action committee * * * over 500 labor papers, and other publications
ranging from first readers, colored comics, striking posters, and lively leaflets
to ponderous tomes of union history and research use the printed word as an
agency for education and propaganda (p. 23) .
Mr. Starr urges that the public schools be used to sell the concept
of the closed shop :
Permit me to make some specific suggestions on what schools and textbooks
should say about trade unionism :
(1) They should give an explanation of the "closed shop" and the "union
shop" to show that they are no more tyrannical or unfair than our system of
public taxation under which the individual cannot escape his contribution to the
public revenues from which he benefits * * * (p. 37).
(2) The school and the textbook should be at pains to describe the actual
functions of trade unions in improving the wages, hours, working condi-
tions * * *
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1169
Teachers in high schools and elsewhere should be able to see behind the head-
lines of newspapers which report strikes on page 1 and their settlement on page
20, if at all. They should be able to understand the "lusty immaturity" of unions
originating in the New Deal decade, which had to fight bitterly to keep alive in
previous years * * * (p. 38).
(3) Textbooks— should also let the facts of experience speak concerning the
results of technological unemployment — and also the effects of the centraliza-
tion of power in the hands of the banks and the big corporations, with the re-
sulting dangers of monopoly prices as well as unemployment.
(4) The textbooks and the school should also examine carefully the role
played by the middleman and the speculator, who often escape the censure which
falls on high wages as an alleged cause of high prices (p. 39) .
Finally, it would appear that political science and civics classes are
to indoctrinate students with the notion that labor unions and their
leaders have a monopoly on patriotism, while Congress, business, and
everbody else are selfish.
Teachers should currently help their students to see the real factors behind
the industrial unrest and strikes of 1946, namely, the strain of overwork and th&
accumulated grievances unexpressed, for patriotic reasons, in wartime ; the dis-
appointment of the unions because Congress failed to act in * * * securing
full employment; and the indignation against * * * huge wartime profits (pp.
41-42).
Another important member of the ALES board of directors was
Hilda W. Smith, who, like Starr, has played an important role in
labor movements. She has been referred to on pages 565 and 703 of the
Dies committee report as an endorser of Brookwood Labor College,
which was finally disavowed by the A. F. of L. because of its commu-
nistic activities, Hilda Smith also served as a member of the advisory
committee of Commonwealth College of Mena, Ark. (cited in
Attorney General's list) which was finally closed by the State legis-
lature because of its questionable practices. She is also listed in vol-
ume 10, page 6404, of the House committee report on Un-American
activities,, and a member of American League for Peace and Democ-
racy, which was branded as a Communist-front organization by the
Government.
We respectfully submit that the activities of ALES, spearheaded as
they have been by such dynamic persons as Mark Starr and Hilda W.
Smith, raise a serious question whether they have not gone far beyond
the ordinary field of education, and is actually engaged in political
propaganda.
Submitted herewith, with the request that they be deemed part of
the record, are the following documents issued or published by ALES :
1. Invitation for conference on February 25-26, 1950.
2. Letter to members, October 2, 1946.
3. Invitation for conference on November 1-2, 1947.
4. Letter to members, January 30, 1948.
5. Letter to members, June 4, 1948.
6. Tentative program for conference on November 13-14, 1948.
7. Annual report, 1953.
8. Annotated list of pamphlet material for workers' classes.
9. Pamphlet entitled "Songs Useful for Workers' Groups."
1170 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
EXHIBIT 1— CITATIONS
Eleanoh Copenhaver Anderson or Mrs. Sherwood Anderson
dies committee
(Listed as Eleanor Copenhaver)
Page
Brookwood College (endorser) 565,703
American Friends of Spanish Democracy (executive committee) 568
(Listed as Mrs. Sherwood Anderson)
National Citizens' Political Action Committee (member) 10298
Shown as having belonged to one organization which the Attorney General
has characterized as subversive or Communist 10301
American League Against War and Fascism 10304
Shown as having been connected with a Communist front for farmers, con-
sumers, unemployed, and social and economic legislation 10341
.Shown as having been connected with two Communist fronts on war, peace,
and. foreign relations 10345
Shown as having been connected with a Communist front for youth and
education 10346
Shown as having been connected with a Communist front in the miscel-
laneous field 10347
Shown with a total of five front organizations (listed above) 10348
Testimony of Walter S. Steele Regarding Communist Activ-
ities in the United States — Hearings Before the House
Un-American Activities Committee, July 21, 1947
National Council of American-Soviet Friendship— call to a conference on
women of the United States of America and the U. S. S. R. in the
postwar world, held on November 18, 1944 (sponsor) 83
(Listed as Eleanor Copenhaver)
APPENDIX IX
American Friends of Spanish Democracy (executive committee) 380
American League Against War and Fascism (national executive com-
mittee) . 416
National Committee for the Defense of Political Prisoners 1176
National Committee for People's Rights 1179
National Religion and Labor Foundation __ 1304
Nonpartisan Committee for the Reelection of Congressman Vito Marcan-
tonio (committee member) 1 375
Student Congress Against War (national committee) 1620
(Listed as Elmore Coper haver)
Committee To Aid the Striking Fleischer Artists 1774
(Listed as Mrs. Sherwood Anderson)
National Citizens' Political Action Committee 263
American Committee for Democracy and Intellectual Freedom (spon-
sor) - - 323, 334
International Women's Congress Against War and Fascism 848
The League of Women's Shoppers, Inc. (sponsor) 1009
National Committee To Abolish the Poll Tax (sponsor) 1168
. People's Institute of Applied Religion _ 1463
(Listed as Eleanor C. Anderson)
People's Institute of Applied Religion 1470
(Listed as Eleanor Copenhaver Anderson)
Conference on Constitutional Liberties (sponsor) 653
Consumers National Federation (sponsor) 659
Coordinating Committee To Lift the Embargo (representative individual)- 670
Council for Pan American Democracy (sponsor) 675
National Federation for Constitutional Liberties (sponsor) 1 228
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 11 71
EXHIBIT 1— CITATIONS— Continued
Max Lerner
dies committee
Pag*
American Friends of Spanish Democracy (committee) 56&
National Citizens' Political Action Committee, Max Lerner, author, editor,
PM, New York . 10299*
Shown as having been connected with six organizations which the Attorney
General has characterized as subversive and Communist 10301
American League for Peace and Democracy 10304
Citizens Committee to Free Earl Browder, Communist Party, statements
defending 10305
League of American Writers, Michigan Civil Rights Federation, National
Federation for Constitutional Liberties 10306
NEW MASSES
"* * * Max Lerner, one of the editors of the newspaper, PM, and also a
radio broadcaster for Sante Cream Cheese, has a total of 26 affiliations,
covering every category listed here" 10332
Shown as connected with two Communist fronts dealing with racial,
refugee, and alien questions 10340
Shown as connected with four Communist fronts for defense, support, or
honoring of avowed Communists 10341
Shown as connected with two Communist fronts for farmers, consumers,
unemployed, and social and economic legislation 10342
Shown as connected with three Communist fronts for legal defense and civil
rights. Also shown as connected with two Communist fronts for pro-
fessional groups 10343
Shown as connected with three Communist fronts on the Spanish Civil
War 10344
Shown as connected with three Communist fronts for support or praise of
the Soviet Union. Also shown as connected with two Communist fronts
on war, peace, and foreign relations 10345
Shown as connected with two Communist fronts for youth and education. 10346
Shown as connected with one Communist magazine, book or other litera-
ture. Also shown as connected with two miscellaneous Communist
fronts 10347
APPENDIX IX
National Citizens' Political Action Committee 265
Allied Voters Against Coudert (sponsor) 316
American Committee for Anti-Nazi German Seaman . 319
American Committee for Democracy and Intellectual Freedom, signatory
to petition to discontinue the Dies committee "Max Lerner, professor,
Williams College" 322
American Committee for Protection of Foreign Born:
Guest of honor 347
Sponsor 350
American Friends of the Soviet Union : 379
American Friends of Spanish Democracy (sponsor) 380-382
American Investors Union, Inc. (sponsor), "Max Lerner, professor of
political science, Williams College" 388
American League for Peace and Democracy (signatory) 392,411
Golden Book of American Friendship With the Soviet Union (signatory) ,
project of the American Friends of the Soviet Union.. 461, 467, 771
Russian War Relief, Inc 476
American Youth Congress (endorser), "Max Lerner, editor, the Nation". 548
Appeal for Pardon of German Communist (Robert Stamm) (signatory) 571
Ben Leider Memorial Fund (committee member) 585
Citizens Committee for Harry Bridges, "Dr. Max Lerner, Williams
College" i 599
Citizens Committee To Free Earl Browder, "Prof. Max Lerner, Williams
College" 619,621
1172 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
EXHIBIT 1— CITATIONS— Continued
Page
Communist Party, statement defending "Max Lerner, Massachusetts" 649
Consumers National Federation (sponsor) 659
Coordinating Committee To Lift the Embargo (representative individual) . 668
Conference for Pan American Democracy (sponsor) 673
Frontier Films (advisory board) 732
Michigan Civil Rights Federation (speaker) 1 058-1 059
Supporters of Anti-Nazi Seamen (sponsor) 1152
National Emergency Conference (signatory) 1206
National Emergency Conference for Democratic Rights (board of spon-
sors) --__ ,___ 1210
Non-Partisan Committee for the Reelection of Congressman Vito Mar-
cantonio (committee member) 1375
Open Letter to American Liberals (signatory) "Max Lerner, editor, The
Nation" 1379
Open letter for closer cooperation with the Soviet Union (signatory)
"Prof. Max Lerner, Professor of Government, Williams College" 1384
Prestes defense (signatory) "Max Lerner, editor, The Nation" 1474
Soviet Russia Today, a party-line publication (contributor) 1603
J. Raymond Walsh
Twentieth Century Fund, Committee on Cartels and Monopoly
DIES COMMITTEE
Testimony of Robert E. Stripling, Chief Investigator, Special Committee
to Investigate Un-American Activities
"* * * Mr. Chairman, it is interesting to note that the largest contribu-
tors, according to the tabulation filed with the Clerk of the House, are
officials of the Political Action Committee themselves. For instance,
J. Raymond Walsh, who is research director of the organization, con-
tributed $4,750 10231
'Mr. Matthews. * * * here is the name of James H. McGill, who con-
tributed $2,000. Mr. McGill, according to Sidney Hillman's list pre-
sented to the campaign expenditures committee, is a manufacturer in
Valparaiso, Ind. In the early postwar days of World War I, two men
who are now members of the National Citizens Political Action Com-
mittee, one of whom is McGill, signed a contract with the Russian Red
Cross, stating in the contract that it was done because of prejudice
against the Communist regime in Russia 10232
"Mr. McGill was one of the signers of this particular contract. His organ-
ization, the American subsidiary, began to raise funds for the relief of the
destitute in Russia, but according to the record, at the time, the organi-
zation immediately degenerated into a political propaganda machine,
and Mr. McGill and one other who will be named tomorrow, who signed
that contract, were associated with an organization which put out the
statement: 'We will milk the American bourgeoise in order to destroy
it.' That is in the record of some 25 years ago.
"Mr. Thomas. How much did he contribute?
"Mr. Matthews. $2,000.
"Mr. Thomas. Anyone else.
"Mr. Matthews. J. Raymond Walsh has quite a Communist record. He
contributed $4,750."
"Mr. Stripling. Mr. Chairman would it be agreeable to make this list of
contributors a part of the record? 10233
"Mr. Costello. Yes; I think that should be in the record.
"Congress of Industrial Organizations Political Action Committee In-
dividual contributions account — Loans, July 23-Sept. 9, 1944.
"J. Raymond Walsh, New York, N. Y., $4,750.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1173
EXHIBIT 1— CITATIONS— Continued
Statement of J. B. Matthews, Research Director, Special Committee
To Investigate Un-American Activities
Page
National Citizens' Political Action Committee 10300
"Mr. Matthews * * * I offer a list of the 25 organizations (which the
Attorney General has characterized as subversive and Communist) ,
followed by a list of the 82 individuals, who have been affiliated with
them * * * J. Raymond Walsh, 2 10302
League of American Writers, National Federation for Constitutional
Liberties . 10306
J. Raymond Walsh is listed as having been connected with one Communist
front dealing with racial, refugee, and alien questions . 10340
J. Raymond Walsh is listed as having been connected with three Com-
munist fronts for legal defense and civil rights 10343
J. Raymond Walsh is listed as having been connected with one Communist
front for professional groups.
J. Raymond Walsh is listed as having been connected with one Communist
front for support or praise of the Soviet Union 10345
J. Raymond Wash is listed as having been connected with one Communist
front on war, peace, and foreign relations.
J. Raymond Walsh is listed as having been connected with one Communist
front for youth and education 10346
J. Raymond Walsh is shown with a total of eight citations 10349
appendix ix
National Citizens' Political Action Committee 266
American Committee for Protection of Foreign Born (sponsor) 340, 354
American Council on Soviet Relations (signatory of open letter to the
United States urging a declaration of war on the Finnish Government
in the interests of speedy victory by the United Nations over Nazi
Germany and its Fascist allies) 370
American Student Union 514
Council for Pan-American Democracy (executive committee) 672, 674
Interprofessional Association for Social Insurance (chairman of open
forum meeting) 915, 921
League of American Writers 967, 978
Statement in defense of the Bill of Rights (signatory) '„ 1 126
National Emergency Conference (signatory) 1205, 1207
National Emergency Conference for Democratic Rights (executive com-
mittee) 1209, 1210
National Federation for Constitutional Liberties 1222
Open letter for closer cooperation with the Soviet Union (signatory) . 1381, 1384
appendix v
Open letter calling for greater unity of antifascist forces and strengthening
of the front against aggression through closer cooperation with the Soviet
Union (signatory) 1681
Testimony of Walter S. Steele, July 21, 1947
"A World Armenian Congress was held in New York City in May 1947.
In attendance were delegates representing 3% million Armenians in
26 countries. The Congress condemned the Truman doctrines in
foreign affairs. Speakers included S. Edwin Smith of the National
Council of American-Soviet Friendship, John Roy Carlson, and J. Ray-
mond Walsh of Friends of Democracy" 135
"Frank Kingdon and Jo Davidson were selected cochairmen of Progressive
Citizens of America, each having previously served as eochairman of
two of the major merging groups. Both have extensive front back-
grounds. Herman Shumlin, who has a record-breaking background of
front activities, was elected secretary. Michael M. Nisselson, with
some 12 Red-front affiliations, was chosen treasurer. Executive vice
chairmen are C. B. Baldwin and Hannah Dorner. Both have partici-
pated in Red-front activities in the past. Vice chairmen are * * * J.
Raymond Walsh". 148
1174 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
EXHIBIT 1— CITATIONS— Continued
Fag«
"As an example of the manner in which Red frdnters operate through Pro-
gressive Citizens of America, I call attention to the 22 simultaneous
public protest meetings held in New York City earlier this year in an
attempt to 'stop antilabor legislation.' The meetings were under the
auspices of the movement. Speakers at these meetings included Nor-
man Corwin, Dorothy Parker, Olin Downes, William S. Gailmor, Elinor
S. Gimbel, Frank Kingdon, Canada Lee, Lillian Hellman, Dwight
Bradley, Dean Dixon, Henry Pratt Fairchild, Goodwin Watson, Alfred
Stern, and J. Raymond Walsh" 149
Report on Southern Conference for Human Welfare
(June 12, 1947)
t'J. Raymond Walsh, a frank apologist for the Communist line, according
to Prof. John H. Childs of Columbia University, speaking for the
Southern Conference in Washington, flayed President Truman's foreign
policy in Greece and Turkey" 10
J. Raymond Walsh is shown being affiliated with statement defending
Communist Party, December 14, 1939; American Committee for Pro-
tection of Foreign Born; National Federation for Civil Liberties; and
American Committee for Soviet Relations 15
Review of the Scientific and Cultural Conference for World
Peace Arranged by the National Council of the Arts, Sciences
and Professions (H. Reft 1954-April 19, 1949)
"The Win-the-Peace Conference (Congress) was expanded into the move-
ment behind the candidacy of Henry A. Wallace for President, which
crystallized into the Progressive Citizens of America and the Progressive
Party 8, 9
"From its inception this movement had the active approval and support
of Moscow and the Communist Party of the United States. Among the
sponsors of the New York Cultural Conference were the following
Wallace supporters * * * J. Raymond Walsh" 8, 9
"A tabulation of the numerous Communist-front affiliations of the spon-
sors of the Scientific and Cultural Conference for World Peace shows the
following interesting figures: 49 have been affiliated with from 11 to 20
Communist-front organizations, and include * * * J. Raymond
Walsh" 17, 18
American Slav Congress 22
Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy 24
National Citizens Policital Action Committee 31
Progressive Citizens of America 33
Southern Conference for Human Welfare 34
The Panel Room (forum), 13 Astor Place, New York City 36
Support of Soviet Union, miscellaneous , 49
Cultural and Scientific Conference for World Peace (sponsor). 60
Report on the American Slav Congress and Associated
Organizations (H. Repi. 1951-June 26, 1949)
"Money-raising activities in behalf of Communist Yugoslavia were placed
in the hands of two outstanding leaders of the American Slav Congress,
Namely Louis Adamic and Zlatko Balokovic * * * 77-78
"The campaign was actively supported by the Daily Worker, official organ
of the Communist Party, U. S. A. * * *
"Simultaneously it received the approval and support of the following
unions, then controlled by the Communists * * *. It was further
endorsed by the following individuals with long records of affiliation with
Communist front organizations: J. Raymond Walsh * * *."
American Slav Congress (dinner chairman) 106, 107
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1175
EXHIBIT 1— CITATIONS— Continued
Report of the Communist "Peace" Offensive
Fag*
Scientific and Cultural Conference for World Peace (sponsor). 106
"A tabulation of the numerous Communist-front affiliations of the sponsors
of the Scientific and Cultural Conference for World Peace shows the fol-
lowing interesting figures: 49 have been affiliated with from 11 to 20
Communist-front organizations, and include * * * J. Raymond
Walsh." 107
Ediiard C. Lindeman
Dies Committee
Friends of the Soviet Union in the United States (national committee) . _ _ 376
Mr. Matthews. * * * Mr. Goff, can you identify the members of the
managing board and of the editorial board listed in Champion as members
of the Young Communist League? 5605-5606
Mr. Goff. I can identify the managing board. I can identify Francis
Franklin. As to the editorial board, right offhand, I cannot say, but I
can identify, of the contributing group, Edward Strong, James Wechsler,
Angelo Herndon, Abbot Simon, Al Levitt, and there may be some others.
On the advisory committee, they have some other people who are not
Communists.
Mr. Matthews. The advisory editors are also listed there, and that is a
prettv fair indication
The Chairman (interposing) . Read the list of advisory editors.
Mr. Matthews. The names listed are as follows: Senator Lynn J. Frazier,
Dr. Eduard C Lindeman, Prof. Jerome Davis, Oswald Garrison Villard,
Frank Palmer, William Ziegner, C. Hartley Grattan, John R. Tunis,
Kenneth M. Gould, Harry Elmer Barnes, Rose Terlin, and Robert
Morss Lovett.
Mr. Thomas. You mentioned a man named Lindeman. What are his
initials?
Mr. Matthews. Eduard C. Lindeman.
Mr. Thomas. Before vou get away from that in the record, I think we
should know something about Mr. Lindeman, or what his activities are.
Do you mind bringing that up now, or will you do that a little later?
The Chairman. Does the witness know?
Mr. Thomas. I am asking Mr. Matthews.
Mr. Matthews. I am not testifying now.
Mr. Thomas. Will you bring that up later?
Mr. Matthews. Subsequently Mr. Lindeman will be identified as on an
important committee of the national organization.
(Listed as E. C. Lindeman)
Brookwood College (endorser) - - - - 565, 703
<<* * * in this exhibit, I also call the attention of the committee to the 2452
record contained therein of Dr. Harold Rugge, a member of the ad-
visory committee of the Progressive Education Association, as shown in
their publication which is in evidence.
"Other members of the organization, as shown in that magazine are Mr.
Arthur E. Morgan, Mr. Alvin Johnson, Mr. E. C. Lindeman, and Mr.
Carleton Washburne, all of whom are listed in the Red Network as radi-
cal professors. * * *"
American Committee for Struggle Against War (national committee) b236
Second United States Congress Against War and Fascism (national execu-
tive committee) Appendix, vol. 10, xxvij
(.Listed as Edward C. Lindeman)
American Youth Congress, Edward C. Lindeman, New York School of
Social Work 875
(Listed as Dr. Edward Lindeman)
"As further evidence of the communistic character of the IPA" (Inter-
Professional Association), "there have been taken at random a record of
a few of the speakers who appeared at the meetings of this organization.. 1996
1176 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
EXHIBIT 1— CITATIONS— Continued
Page
"Dr. Edward Lindeman, national director of the WPA recreation project
and contribution editor of the Communist weekly, New Republic * * *"
APPENDIX IX
American Committee for Anti-Nazi Literature (sponsor) 322
American Council on Soviet Relations (member) 365
American Investors Union, Inc. (sponsor) 388
American League for Peace and Democracy (sponsor) 396
American Committee for Struggle Against War 409
American Society for Cultural Relations With Russia (U. S. S. R.) (book
committee) 473
American Youth Congress:
National advisory committee 535, 537
Panel member ' 543
Signatory Z_ZZ_Z_ZZ 551
Citizens' Committee To Free Earl Browder (signatory) 623
Coordinating Committee To Lift the Embargo (representative individual). 669
Greater New York Emergency Conference on Inalienable Rights (sponsor) . 776
Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee (sponsor) 94 1
League of American Writers "_ 977
League for Mutual Aid (advisory committee) 982
National Emergency Conference for Democratic Rights 1215
New York State Conference on National Unity 1370
Champion of Youth (party-line publication) — advisory editor 1447
Social Workers Committee to Aid Spanish Democracy (national com-
mittee) 1577
Repoht of the House Un- American Activities Committee on the
Southern Conference fob Human Welfare — June 12, 1947
Member, New York executive board 15
Other fronts also shown: Support or defense of individual Communists—
Browder. Organizations defending Communists ; Joint Anti-Fascist Ref-
ugee Committee, New York Conference for Inalienable Rights. Pro-
Soviet relief or propaganda organizations: American Committee for
Soviet Relations. Organizations defending Soviet foreign policy, Ameri-
can League for Peace and Democracy.
STATEMENT PILED IN BEHALF OF THE FOREIGN POLICY
ASSOCIATION, INC.
Part II of the report entitled summary of activities of the Carnegie
Corporation, Carnegie Endowment, and Rockefeller Foundation con-
tains certain criticisms of the Foreign Policy Association. The pres-
ent statement is made in answer to these criticisms. We ask that it
be filed as part of the official records of the committee.
These criticisms or allegations are in some cases explicitly stated,
in others implied. They can be summarized as follows : (1 ) that under
the guise of education it has engaged in propaganda; (2) that this
propaganda takes the form of advocating an internationalist view-
point, without attention to the "nationalist" position; (3) that its
propaganda further favors a trend toward socialism and left wing
viewpoints; (4) that it has employed subversive individuals; and (5)
that other individuals connected with the association, although not
actually subversive, have lacked objectivity and hold views which are
questionable.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1177
Before answering these criticisms in detail we present the follow-
ing general information concerning the association:
The Foreign Policy Association was founded in 1918 by a group
of distinguished citizens who were deeply concerned over World
War I and the need to create a peaceful world. First known as th&
League of Free Nations Association, the name was changed in 1921
to the Foreign Policy Association, and the organization was incor-
porated under the laws of the State of New York in 1928. The FPA
is a private membership organization financed by membership dues,
contributions from individuals and corporations, grants from founda-
tions, and proceeds from the sale of its literature and other services.
The purpose of the association, as set forth in its bylaws, is as
follows :
The object of the Foreign Policy Association, Inc., is to promote community
organizations for world affairs education, to provide assistance to such local
organizations through a national service center and regional offices, and to
advance public understanding of foreign policy problems through national
programs and publications of a nonpartisan character based upon the principles
of freedom, justice, and democracy.
The FPA publishes material on current issues in world affairs at-
tempting always to present a balanced view. The masthead of the
foreign policy bulletin carries the statement :
The Foreign Policy Association contributes to public understanding by pre-
senting a cross-section of views on world affairs. The association as an organ-
ization takes no position on international issues. Any opinions expressed in
its publications are those of the authors.
The association has a speaker's bureau to aid organizations inter-
ested in programs on world affairs. It has a pamphlet service, a film
program service, and other services of value to local community edu-
cational groups. It maintains at the present time four regional of-
fices to encourage the formation of additional community committees
or councils concerned with American foreign policy and to provide
additional service to existing group.
The first president was the Honorable James Gr. McDonald, sub-
sequently the first United States Ambassador to Israel. Raymond
Leslie Buell served as chief officer from 1933 to 1939, Maj. Gen. Frank
R McCoy from 1939 to 1946, and Brooks Emeny from 1947 to 1952.
The present head is John W. Nason, formerly president of Swarth-
more College. The names of the present board of directors are listed
in appendix A.
II
This statement is submitted as a reply to the criticisms or misinter-
pretations which appear in the report.
(1) That under the guise of education the association has engaged in
propaganda
The distinction between propaganda and education is neither simple
nor clear-cut. Both words are loosely used in modern parlance.
As used in the income tax law, propaganda means the promulgation
of doctrines or views for the purpose of influencing legislation. Thus,
H78 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
section 101 (6) of the Internal Revenue Code enumerates organiza-
tions entitled to tax exemption as follows :
<6) Corporations, and any community chest, fund, or foundations, organized
and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, literary, or educa-
tional purposes, or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals, no part
of the net earnings of which inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or
individual, and no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on propa-
ganda, or otherwise attempting, to influence legislation.
That this is the correct construction of the section is confirmed by
the relevant provision of Income Tax Regulations 118, namely section
39.101 (6) -1(3) which states, as one of the tests which an organization
seeking tax exemption must meet, the following:
(3) It must not by any substantial part of its activities attempt to influence
legislation by propaganda or otherwise.
There is no suggestion in the report that the Foreign Policy Associa-
tion has ever attempted to influence legislation.
The report, however, is based on its own interpretation of propa-
ganda, namely, that given by Mr. Dodd in his preliminary report as
contained in the transcript for May 10, page 37 :
Propaganda— action having as its purpose the spread of a particular doctrine
or a specifically identifiable system of principles and we noted that in use this
word has come to infer half-truths, incomplete truths, as well as techniques
of a covert nature.
This definition breaks down into two parts. The first clause is so
general and inclusive as to become meaningless as a definition. Ac-
cording to it any intelligible set of convictions once stated becomes an
act of propaganda. This is as true of teaching in support of democ-
racy, constitutional government, free enterprise, private property,
Christian morality, scientific research, technological advances, and
public health as it is of international understanding and cooperation.
Schools, colleges, health societies, and civic organizations of many
kinds become automatically vehicles of propaganda according to the
interpretation used in the present report, and the absurdity of so wide
an extension of the term becomes at once obvious.
We submit that most, if not all, of our educational institutions on
some issues advocate a cause or take a point of view, and that the re-
quirement of complete neutrality on all controversial questions would
be a deathblow to our whole American educational system.
Take, for example, the issue of democracy versus dictatorship. The
great majority, if not all, of American colleges are run by trustees and
taught by faculty who believe in democracy and who are opposed to
dictatorship whether of the left or the right. Yet faculty lectures or
books advocating democracy and opposing dictatorship would con-
stitute propaganda according to the definition proposed by Mr. Dodd
and used in the report.
We strongly urge that it is essential to the operation of the demo-
cratic system to give every possible freedom to the presentation of con-
flicting viewpoints, in the belief and hope that as a result of that proc-
ess the American people will make wiser decisions than they would
without benefit of such information.
The second half of the definition of propaganda referring to "half
truths, incomplete truths as well as techniques of a covert nature"
comes closer to the usual meaning of the word. Under that test the
Foreign Policy Association is clearly not a propaganda organization.
tAx-exempt foundations 1179
The Foreign Policy Association in publishing information on for-
eign affairs makes a determined effort to avoid any half truths or in-
complete truths and to present a balanced view as stated on page 2 of
this statement. Particular effort is made to find exponents of varying
points of view. No evidence of the use of techniques of a covert na-
ture has been presented in the report, and it seems hardly necessary to
state that the association does not indulge in such devices.
.(#) That this propaganda takes the form of advocating an inter-
nationalist viewpoint only, without attention to the ^national-
ist' 1 position
We desire to make two answers to this charge.
In the first place, the Foreign Policy Association has not exclu-
sively presented an internationalist point of view in its publications.
As evidence we cite a few examples only. In recent issues of the 5
Foreign Policy Bulletin Vera Micheles Dean has written articles stat^
ing and defending the arguments against further foreign aid to Eu-
rope and summarizing the current arguments against United States
participation in the UN. Between February 15, 1953, and March 15,
1954, issues of the Bulletin have carried articles by Senator Watkins
of Utah and Senator Malone of Nevada on tariffs and trade, by Sen-
ator Bricker of Ohio on curtailing the treaty-making power, and by
Governor Lee of Utah on the United States leaving the UN.
In the second place, the Foreign Policy Association by virtue of
its title and nature has been from its founding in 1918 concerned with
the problems of American foreign policy. It has sought to make the
American people more aware of the issues involved. It has tried to
provide useful information regarding these issues. While it has pre-
sented from time to time in its publications and on its platforms views
which would variously be described as isolationist, hemispheric, or
"nationalist," the association has put major emphasis on international
understanding, cooperation, and good will as means to the development
of a peaceful and prosperous world.
(3) That its propaganda further favors a trend toward Socialist and
left-wing viewpoints
The report gives the impression by the selection of certain state-
ments that the Foreign Policy Association also supports a socialistic
or left-wing position. The only evidence offered in support of this
charge is the extensive quotation from a Headline Series booklet by
Max Lerner entitled "World of Great Powers." Mr. Lerner is well
known for his views on the economc, social, and political issues of our
time. Many who do not agree with his position nevertheless find it
provocative and stimulating. A complete analysis of FPA publica-
tions would have revealed many instances of strong support of free
enterprise and private capital. The roster of public men who have
written for the Bulletin and the Headline Series is sufficient to dis-
credit charges of leftism or of deliberate emphasis on only one point
of view.
(4-) That it has employed subversive individuals
In paragraph 2 of page 63 of the report it is stated of the Headline
Series booklets that :
Many were written by persons cited to be of Communist affiliation and are
-questionable in content.
X180 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
With respect to the first half of the above quotation, while "many"
are referred to, the only author of a headline series mentioned in the
report as possibly being a Communist is Lawrence K. Rosinger, who
was named as a party member by witnesses before the McCarren com-
mittee, but declined to answer.
Mr. Rosinger was on the staff of the FPA from July 1, 1942 (at
which time the late Maj. Gen. Frank R. McCoy was the FPA presi-
dent) , until June 30, 1948. During the time of his employment no one
at the FPA had any reason to think Mr. Rosinger might be a Com-
munist. The testimony above referred to before the McCarran com-
mittee was not given until 1952, which was 4 years after he had ceased
to be employed by the FPA.
Maxwell Stewart, also mentioned in the report, was a staff member
of the FPA from 1931 to 1934 during which time he wrote several
articles for the Foreign Policy Association reports. So far as we
Jmow, he has never been cited as a Communist.
{5) That other individuals connected with the association, although
not actually subversive, have lacked objectivity and hold views
which are questionable
Various individuals are selected from among the board, staff, and
authors of the Foreign Policy Association for special mention. In-
cluded among those names are Roscoe Pound, one of the most dis-
tinguished American students of the law, dean for many years of
the Harvard Law School, author of many books in the field of juris-
prudence, recipient of many awards and distinctions for distin-
guished academic and public service. Another is Anna Lord Strauss
who has had a notable career as businesswoman, editor, member of
local, national, and international boards and committees, active in
public service in many private organizations and governmental
agencies.
Vera Micheles Dean, member of the FPA staff since 1928, is sin-
gled out for special comment of an unfavorable nature. For instance,
on page 28 of the report it is stated that she "is referred to fre-
quently in the MacCarran committee report on the Institute of Pacific
Relations." Again, on page 64 a brief newspaper report of a single
speech is used to describe her point of view as socialistic. In the
same section a quotation is lifted from a book review in the New
York Herald Tribune which read out of context might tend to sup-
port the newspaper story. It is interesting to note that the review
begins :
At a time when virtually every book about Europe presents, usually with
passionate urgency, some solution for the complex problems of that continent,
it is refreshing to read Mrs. Dean's calm and measured discussion of Europe's
place in today's world.
In the quotation from the report cited on page 7 of this statement it is
alleged that "many (of the Headline Series booklets) were written by
persons cited to be of Communist affiliation and are questionable in
content." The first half of this allegation has been dealt with. With
respect to the second half we submit that this charge evidences a point
of view underlying the entire report, which is violative of the most
fundamental principles of our government.
What does "questionable in content" mean ? It apparently means
that the book in question contained views which the author of the
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1181
report disapproved of. It is obvious from a reading of the quota-
tions from the books of Mr. Lerner and Dr. O. Frederick Nolde, whose
writing is referred to in the report as "one further illustration of the
internationalist trend of the Foreign Policy Association," that there
is nothing in either of them which could possibly be considered as
subversive. All that "questionable in content" therefore means is
that the author of the report does not agree with it.
Whether views in a book meet with the approval or disapproval of
the author of the report or any Member of Congress should be, we
submit, wholly irrelevant to the questions before the special commit-
tee. To adopt any other point of view would be tantamount to adopt-
ing the Soviet position, which is that no book may be published which
expresses views not approved of by the Kremlin.
CONCLUSION"
While there are a few other incidental references to the Foreign
Policy Association in the report, we believe that we have dealt with
the important allegations.
We submit that the evidence presented in no way justifies the
charges which the report makes against the Foreign Policy Associa-
tion.
Foreign Policy Association.
By __ — „ — . _ — _ — , ? President.
Appendix A
Board of Directors — 1954
Mrs. George S. Auerbach, G. Fox & Co., Hartford, Conn. ; residence, 1040 Prospect
Avenue, Hartford, Conn.
William H. Baldwin, 205 East 42d Street, New York 17, N. Y.; residence, New
Canaan, Conn.
Melvin Brorby, 135 S. LaSalle Street, Chicago 3, 111. ; residence, 1320 N. State
Parkway, apartment 6B, Chicago 10, 111.
Mrs. Andrew Galbraith Carey, R. D. 2, Westport, Conn.
John F. Chapman, & Walnut Street, Cambridge, Mass. ; residence, 26 East 93d
Street, New York 28, N. Y.
Edwin F. Chinlund, 45 Gramercy Park, New York 10, N. Y.
Edgar M. Church, in care of Lewis & MacDonald, 15 Broad Street, New York 5,
N. Y. ; residence, 164 East 72d Street, New York 21, N. Y.
Ernest T. Clough, 411 East Mason Street, Milwaukee, Wis.
Brooks Emeny, 221 Elm Road, Princeton, N. J.
Mrs. John French, the New York Times, 229 West 43d Street, New York 36,
N. Y. ; residence, 144 East 38th Street, New York 16, N. Y.
Clayton Fritchey, National Democratic Committee, 1200 18th Street NW„
Washington 6, D. C.
Gordon Gray, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill; residence, 402 East
Franklin Street, Chapel Hill, N. C.
Mrs. Albert M. Greenfield, 6399 Drexel Road, Philadelphia 31, Pa.
William W. Lancaster, 20 Exchange Place, New York 5, N. Y. ; residence, Grand
View Circle, Manhasset, N. Y.
Mrs. Henry Goddard Leach, 1021 Park Avenue, New York 28, N. Y. ; summer, in
care of Ausable Club, St. Huberts P. O., Essex County, N. Y.
Edward S. Morris, 123 South Broad Street, Philadelphia 9, Pa. ; residence, 1921
Panama Street, Philadelphia, Pa.
John W. Nason, FPA ; residence Tudor Hotel, 304 East 42d Street, New York 17,
N. Y. ; 530 Walnut Street, Swarthmore, Pa.
J. Warren Nystrom, foreign policy department, United States Chamber of Com-
merce, Washington, D. C.
George W. Perkins, 342 Madison Avenue, New York 17, N. Y. ; residence, 6 East
94th Street, New York 28, N. Y.
1182 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
H. Harvey Pike, 120 Wall Street, New York 5, N. Y. ; residence 54 East 92d Street,
New York 28, N.Y.
George Roberts, 40 Wall Street, New York 5, N. Y. ; residence, 139 East 79th
Street, New York 21, N. Y.
John D. Rockefeller 3d, 30 Rockefeller Plaza, New York 20, N. Y. ; residence,
1 Beekman Place, New York 22, N. Y.
Charles E. Saltzman, Henry Sears & Co., 385 Madison Ave., New York 17, N. Y. ;
residence, 1112 Park Avenue, New York 28, N. Y.
Eustace Seligman, 48 Wall Street, New York 5. N. Y. ; residence, 126 East 74th
Street, New York 21, N. Y.
Miss Anna Lord Strauss, 27 East 69th Street, New York 21, N. Y. ; Stepney, Conn.
Arthur E. Whittemore, 220 Devonshire Street, Boston 10, Mass.
Robert W. Williams, Price, Waterhouse & Co., 123 South Broad Street, Phila-
delphia 9, Pa.
Shepherd L. Witman, Council on World Affairs, 922 Society for Savings Building,
Cleveland 14, Ohio.
James D. Zellerbach, 343 Sansome Street, San Francisco, Calif. ; residence, 2790
Broadway, San Francisco, Calif.
HONOEAET
Paul Kellogg, 265 Henry Street, New York 2, N. Y. ; summer, Cornwall-on-Hudson,
N. Y.
Herbert L. May, the Berkshire, 21 East 52d Street, New York 22, N. Y. (apart-
ment 1610).
The Honorable James G. McDonald, 350 Fifth Avenue, room 5910, New York 1,
N. Y. ; residence, 9 Alden Place, Bronxville, N. Y.
Miss Esther G. Ogden, 139 East 66th Street, New York 21, N. Y.
The Honorable H. Alexander Smith, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. ;
residence, 81 Alexander Street, Princeton, N. J.
Mrs. Learned Hand, 142 East 65th Street, New York 21, N. Y. ; summer, Low-
court, Windsor, Vt.
I have prepared the foregoing statement and I swear that the facts
stated upon personal knowledge are true and that the facts stated
upon other than personal knowledge are true and correct to the best
of my knowledge and belief.
Foreign - Policy Association,
By John W. Noon, President.
Subscribed and sworn to before me the 24th day of August 1954.
Carloyn - E. Martin,
Notary Public, State of New York.
Commission expires March 30, 1955.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1183
Exchange of Correspondence With Mr. Sprtjille Braden
April 5, 1954.
Hon, Sprtjille Braden,
Neto York, N. Y.
Dear Mr. Braden : Mr. Ettinger has told me of your willingness to help us
in onr study and investigation of tax-exempt foundations and comparable organ-
izations. A copy of House Resolution 217, 83d Congress, creating this committee,
is attached for your information.
Your testimony before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee suggests that
your observations of trends in the conduct of foreign affairs coincides wtih one
of our research hypotheses — namely, that our foreign policy is influenced by
persons and groups operating under a veil of anonymity, but nevertheless effec-
tively promoting ideas detrimental to the welfare of this Republic.
Specifically, we would like to know :
1. What is the influence of tax-exempt foundations on our foreign policy?
<e. g., Carnegie Endowment, Rockefeller Foundation, Ford Foundation, Rhodes
Scholarship Trust, etc.)
2. How do foundations operate in the field of foreign relations? (Support
of pressure groups, interlocking directorates, development of literature, spon-
sorship of experts, frequent appointments of foundation officers by Govern-
ment, etc.)
3. Is the influence of tax-exempt bodies, that are free from public control and
responsibility on our foreign policy directly or via control of public opinion and
propaganda media desirable?
We will appreciate your comments on these problems. I would, of course, be
obliged if you would telephone me at your convenience at my New York office
(Murray Hill 2-0127) and perhaps arrange for a meeting.
Very truly yours,
General Counsel.
New York, N. Y., April 10, 1954.
Mr. Rene A. Wormser,
New York, N. Y.
Dear Mr. W'ormser : Please excuse my delay in answering your April 5 letter,
as I have been absent from the city.
As I told Mr, Ettinger, presently I have not enough concrete information in
my possession to be of any real assistance to you as a witness. I have the very
definite feeling that a number of the foundations have been taken over by what I
described in my testimony before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee,
not so much by the Communists, as by State interventionists, collectivists, mis-
guided idealists, "do-gooders" and "whatnots," and that this is one of the great-
est perils confronting our country today.
Similarly, my respect for the Rockefeller Foundation in connection with its
health work in such places as Colombia, in yellow fever, malaria, etc., has been
severely jolted when I read that Chester Bowles has now been made a director
of that institution. The reason for my concern is that only a few months ago,
I heard the former Ambassador and Governor of Connecticut declaim against
the Farewell Address and George Washington as typifying the evils of isola-
tionism [sic].
Perhaps, given time, I could check up on some matters which would make my
testimony more authoritative than it could possibly be now. But, in answer to
your specific questions, all I could say is that I have the very definite feeling
that these various foundations you mention very definitely do exercise both
overt and covert influences on our foreign relations and that their influences are
counter to the fundamental principles on which this Nation was founded and
which have made it great.
While I feel that something should be done about this situation, I would
regret to have even more Government controls, though I recognize that at times
it is necessary to fight tire with tire. But I have not thought through to a con-
clusion in the premises.
With all best wishes,
Faithfully and cordially yours,
Spkt:tlle Braden.
49720 — r>4 — yt. 2 10
Exchange of Correspondence Between General Counsel and
Selected University Professors
Shortly after the committee began its hearings in May 1954 the
general counsel wrote the following letter to professors at leading uni-
versities soliciting their comments on the operation of foundations in
the social sciences :
Mat 13, 1954.
Dear Professor : In connection with the current hearings of the House
of Representatives committee investigating foundations, we shall consider,
among other things, the criticism that the foundations and associated organiza-
tions having to do with social-science research have promoted an excess of
empiricism. It has been suggested that you might be good enough to give us
your reflections in that area.
Would you be good enough, therefore, at your early convenience, to give us
any comments which you might be willing to offer, particularly on these points :
1. Whether there has been an unfair or undesirable preponderance of empirical
research.
2. Whether this has had any unfortunate results and if so what.
3. Whether the apparent emphasis on training researchers in the empirical
approach almost to the exclusion of the theoretical approach is desirable for our
society.
We would appreciate any further comments of any kind which you might wish
to make regarding the operation of the foundations and/or the associated research
organizations in the social sciences.
We would, of course, expect to be permitted to use your comments in our
record.
I would deeply appreciate an early reply.
Sincerely yours,
Rene A. Wormser, General Counsel.
The professors to whom it was sent were :
Prof. Theodore Abel, sociology department, Columbia University, New York, N. Y.
Prof. C. Arnold Anderson, department of sociology, University of Kentucky,
Lexington, Ky.
Prof. Herbert Blumer, chairman, department of sociology and social institu-
tions, University of California, Berkeley 4, Calif.
Prof. James H. S. Bossard, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia 4, Pa.
Prof. R. E. DuWars, chairman, sociology department, Bucknell University, Lewis-
burg, Pa.
Prof. Charles S. Hyneman, professor of political science, Harris Hall 105, North-
western University, Evanston, 111.
Prof. Oliver Martin, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, R. I.
Prof. William M. McGovern, Northwestern University, Evanston, 111.
Dr. Helmut Schoeck, visting research fellow in sociology, Yale University, 206
Highland Avenue, West Haven, Conn.
Prof. Pitirim A. gorokin, Harvard University, Emerson Hall, Cambridge 38,
Prof. Ludwig von Mises, 777 West End Avenue, New York 25, N. Y.
Dr. K. A. Wittfogel, Chinese history project, Low Memorial Library, Columbia
University, 420 Riverside Drive, New York, N. Y.
Prof. Carle C. Zimmerman, department of social relations, Harvard University,
Cambridge 38, Mass.
1184
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1185
No reply was received from Professor Abel, Professor DuWars,
Professor McGovern, or Professor Martin. Correspondence with the
others arranged alphabetically follows:
University of Kentucky,
College of Arts and Sciences,
Department of Sociology,
Lexmgton, May 26, 195%.
Mr. Rene A. Wormser, General Counsel,
Dear Mr. Wormser : Your inquiry about the work of tax-exempt foundations
is most difficult to answer. It will be necessary for me to write at some length
in order to avoid giving you an ambiguous statement. The delay in sending you
this statement has been occasioned by my taking the time to read with some care
the report of the 1952 hearings on this same subject.
The following comments should be regarded as my professional judgments, not
merely opinions, I am, however, expressing my own judgments and not those
of my university, department, or any group of scholars to which I may belong.
In order that you may interpret my remarks, I should state that I am not con-
nected in any way with a foundation. At one time I received a stipend from a
foundation for a year of graduate study. Some years ago, also, I was an editor
for a publication by a foundation. On the other hand, two applications within
recent years for research grants were rejected by foundations. My knowledge
of foundation-supported research is nonetheless rather extensive in that I at-
tempt to read very widely in both my own and related scientific disciplines. I
am also on the advisory editorial board of a professional journal ; in that con-
nection I read a considerable number of manuscripts, including some that do not
receive publication.
It is not within the scope of questions raised by your letter for me to consider
the problem of registration or other methods of insuring that foundations con-
form to the stipulations implied in their tax-exempt status. A clear distinction
between foundations engaged in partisan propaganda or mere tax-evasion and
those engaged in research is obviously necessary. So far as my limited acquain-
tance or that of my colleagues extends, the foundations devoted to the sponsoring
of research and learned studies have an excellent record.
It would seem to be clearly imperative that no effort should be made to
influence by governmental means the manner in which foundations carry out
their support of scholarly work. It would seem prudent to leave the balance
between various kinds of research to be decided by the foundations and the
learned disciplines. Too many efforts are being made today to control science
because one or another group does not find the results of research palatable.
In judging the work of scientists it is too often forgotten that any research
in either the physical or the social sciences has practical implications. Such
research will inevitably affect adversely the prestige or the prosperity of some
groups, agencies, or interests in the Nation. Thus, for example, to demonstrate
that one nieta] is superior to another for some engineering use favors the manu-
facturers of that metal and injures the interests of the makers of competing
metals. In a world of change where we can exist and prospei only with the
aid of research, such effects are inevitable, and indeed desirable. To have judged
research by whether its results were congenial to the buggy industry would
have stifled the automobile industry.
I should like to comment particularly on the relationship of what you have
called the "empirical approach" to the "theoretical approach." Insofar as we
are hopeful that the American way of life may be safeguarded by scholarly re-
search and study, we must recognize that it is impossible to have too many
empirical facts. The reason for this situation is simply stated. It is easy
to draw up the blueprint for an ideal society ; there have been thousands of such
Utopias in human history. But to improve actual societies has proven more
difficult. That our society has manifested a high degree of freedom and prog-
ress is demonstrated by facts. It is empirical fact also that demonstrates the
wide gap between Utopian blueprints of communism and communism in practice.
Facts are the most convincing answer to any who may be swayed by communistic
propaganda.
A democratic society cannot be preserved without freedom of inquiry. Free-
dom of inquiry is the only road to truth. For any body of men to use power or
the regulative agencies to constrict the field of scientific study would be to
imitate the worst features of Soviet society. The future welfare of American
1186 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
society cannot be assured without freedom of research into facts — facts about
our social organization as well as about our natural resources. Whoever would
limit the search for facts in our civilization stands self-convicted of special
pleading. The answer to inadequate facts is more facts.
Critics of the social sciences forget that social scientists are responsible
scholars. The ethical code of science is a strict disciplinarian. We social
scientists spend a large part of our time — and the professional journals devote
a large portion of their space — to debating the merits of one type of facts or
method for obtaining the facts against the merits of other methods. We con-
stantly weigh the importance of particular facts against the analytical concepts
or theories by which we organize those facts into generalizations that will accu-
rately portray the structure of society. Theories and facts are Siamese twins.
The best searchers for facts are usually also the best organizers of facts into
sound theories and vice versa. Fact and theory are constantly at play, one
upon the other. Every reputable social scientist strives constantly to balance
and integrate those two facets of scientific work.
An enticing theory can be developed while stretched out in an easy chair ;
all that is needed is pencil and paper. But of the thousands of theories, how-
ever conscientiously conceived, only a handful will prove valid when subjected to
the crucible of facts. Unfortuntely, to obtain facts requires money. Knowl-
edge is the most expensive commodity in the world. Few professors have private
wealth to underwrite their research. Few colleges or universities have money
to support more than a meager research program. The uniquely sustaining
service of foundations in America has been to provide the money for this indis-
pensable purpose.
If one reads the prefaces of current books or the footnotes of technical articles,
whether they be reports of empirical research or works devoted primarily to-
theory, he must be impressed with the large proportion of contemporary scholarly
work that has received subsidy from some foundation. Unless we are to turn
almost exclusively to the Government for such aid — and this would entail results
more deplorable than any charge that can be brought against the foundations —
scholarship will wither without foundation assistance.
At one time I was an editor for a publication by the Social Science Research
Council. In that publication an effort was made to integrate theory and re-
search. At no time during' the work was any influence brought to bear by the
sponsoring foundation. I read most of the publications by this council. To
me they balance very sagely the needs for fact gathering and the need for
integrating theory. Most of the major foundations, at least, so far as I can
observe or hear, are similarly scrupulous and farsighted.
More than anything else, the foundations desire the good opinion of the world
of scholars. Scholars are the first to censure loaded or biased work. They are
the first to condemn poor work. They are constantly scrutinizing the operations
of the foundations. There is no surer path to professional fame than to have
one's name associated with an acceptable theory and no easier path than to
demonstrate that some grand project has been bumbled.
By its very nature, science is a self-correcting activity. No other human
agency — except a free enterprise economy — has a mechanism for correcting error
built into its very structure.
Every study, whether or not subsidized by a foundation, has defects. But
we have to apply the test of prudential judgment to the work of foundations as
we do to that of any other group in Government or private life. And by that
test, in my judgment, it can be shown that only a small portion of foundation-
supported research studies have been biased or poorly conducted.
To answer your specific questions categorically, on the understanding that these
categoric comments will not be used without the foregoing discussion, I would
make these statements :
1. There has not been an unfair or undesirable preponderance of empirical
research. What the social sciences need is enormously more money for the
collection of facts, and for the testing of theories by facts.
2. The only unfortunate result has been the all too slow accumulation of facts.
The more rapidly we can accumulate reliable facts, the more rapid will be the
codification of sound theory and reliable principles of human behavior — for the
use of our political representatives or other responsible individuals and organi-
zations.
3. There has not been, in my judgment, a disproportionate emphasis in train-
ing researchers in the empirical approach. To refer to my own year of train-
ing by courtesy of a foundation, I was enabled to attend one of our best uni- -
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1187
versities specifically to obtain a better grounding in theory. Innumerable other
individuals have been similarly assisted. The experience of a close friend with
a current committee supported by a foundation leads me to conclude that once
more a strong emphasis is laid upon adequate theory to guide the collection
■of facts with which to develop better theory. Theories by themselves cost little
but sound theory must rest on valid facts, which are enormously expensive.
If I may judge by news items in the New York Times during recent days, the
purposes being expressed through your inquiry are not only multiple but per-
haps contradictory. It seems to me to be imperative that research work be
judged by those who are trained in scientific methods. It is to be hoped that
the conclusions of the committee may be praised in later years principally for
having encouraged the launching of new foundations devoted to the advance-
ment of human knowledge.
It has been a pleasure and a privilege to have the opportunity of contributing
my judgments on this important question. I should be happy to extend my
remarks in a further communication, or in person, at your pleasure.
Sincerely yours,
C. Arnold Anderson.
June 7, 1954.
Prof. C. Arnold Anderson,
Department of Sociology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky.
Dear Professor Anderson : Many thanks for your letter of May 25, which
I have read with great interest. I wish I had time to answer it in considerable
•detail, but the pressure of work prevents.
I would like to suggest, however, that the accounts in the newspapers cannot
give you any fair understanding of the objectives of our inquiry, or of the
limitations which the committee has put upon itself. It stands unanimously
behind the theory of free inquiry, whereas the newspapers have rather broadly
given the impression that ours is an attempt at censorship.
There is, of course, one factor of possible "censorship" involved. The tax law
itself proscribes certain areas of activity (principally subversion, and political
propaganda ) . After all, these are tax-free funds with which we are concerned
and, thus, public trusts. The public is entrusted to be protected against having
tax-free money used for things against the public interest. Outside of this
element of what might be called (but unfairly) "censorship," foundations are
free to do as they choose.
Far from being against free inquiry, we are concerned with the validity of
frequent criticism that the major foundations which operate in some close asso-
ciation through intermediate organizations, etc., have virtually exercised a form
of censorship themselves. This consists of supporting primarily certain ap-
proaches in research in the social sciences to the virtual exclusion of the
■opposites. As research in the social sciences in the United States is now almost
•entirely foundation supported (except for that financed by the Government it-
self — and this, in turn, seems under the control or direction of organizations
and individuals financed by the foundations) it seems to us necessary to
inquire whether this criticism is justified. There should obviously be free com-
petition in matters of the intellect as well as in business.
Nor is there any validity to any newspaper suggestions that this inquiry is
directed against foundations as such. The committee is unanimous in its ap-
preciation of the desirability of foundations. Its interest is in discovering what
abuses may exist, to the end of doing what it can to make these organizations
even more socially desirable than they now are. It may well be that the dis-
closure of criticisms and the airing of abuses may help the foundations to in-
crease their acceptability and utility.
May I thank you again for taking the trouble to answer my letter in detail.
Sincerely,
Rene A. Wormser, General Counsel.
Wharton School of Finance and Commerce,
University of Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia Jf, June 1, 1954.
Hon. Rene A. Wormser, General Counsel.
Dear Mr. Wormser : To answer your letter of May 13, I must first attempt to
qualify, and then to disqualify, myself as a witness.
First, as to qualifications. I have been a professor of sociology now for 44
years. This includes services at the University of Pennsylvania, the University
1188 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
of California at Berkeley, and Yale University. In the course of this period,
I have written, wholly or in part, and edited, wholly or in part, more than 30
volumes and contributed about 75 articles to scientific journals. Research activi-
ties include the direction of two nationwide surveys and the development of sev-
eral volumes of research papers. Since 1938, I have devoted myself largely to the
development of research studies in the field of child behavior.
As to disqualifying myself, I am indicating the reasonable suspicion that I
may be prejudiced, in that I have never been able to obtain a single grant from
any research foundation or organization. On the other hand, I have a number
of times asked for, and I have always been granted promptly, research moneys
from the faculty committee of my university. I have also obtained, without a
single refusal, money for research purposes from people of means who are
familiar with my work.
As a lifelong student of social problems and policies, I am impressed with the
great difficulties and grave responsibilities of administering large amounts of
money for research or any other social purpose. Naturally, this makes me hesi-
tant to criticize those persons who are charged with these responsibilities. I am
willing, however, to express a viewpoint, in the hope that it may in some slight
way contribute to the formation of sound judgments.
For some years, I have regarded with increasing apprehension the develop-
ment of what I have called the comptometer school of research in social science.
By this I mean the gathering of detailed social data and their manipulation by
all the available statistical techniques. Not that I am objecting to such
methods — my reluctance rather lies in an unwillingness to accept these as the
core of research in human behavior.
My own interest lies more in the development of qualitative insights. This
accords with my judgment of the nature of the life process, that it cannot be
reduced to statistical formulas but that it is a richly diversified complex of re-
lationships. The chief purpose of research for university people, most of whom
are limited to working with small groups, should be weighted heavily in the direc-
tion of research in qualitative insights rather than manipulation of mass data.
I am particularly concerned with the impression which the recent emphasis
upon the comptometer approach has created among younger sociologists as to
what constitutes social research. The moneys and the influences of the large
foundations naturally do a great deal to set the norms of professional acceptance
in a given field, and it is in this respect, difficult to measure statistically but
possibly of very great importance, that a distinct disservice may be done to
sociological research by an undue emphasis upon any particular emphasis or
methodology.
Cordially yours,
James H. S. Bossard,
Professor of Sociology.
University of California,
Department of Sociology and Social Institutions,
Berkeley 4, Calif., May 21, 195/,.
Mr. Rene A. Wormser, General Counsel.
Dear Mr, Wormser : I am relying to your gracious inquiry of May 13 soliciting
an expression of my judgment on the character of social science research fostered
by foundations and associated organizations.
I have been critical and am critical of much of this research. However, ques-
tions of what is appropriate in social science research are not in the competency
of congressional committees, but should be determined, properly, by the scientific
professions in whose fields such issues fall. Good avenues of communications
exist between the social science societies and the foundations interested in
social science research. Such channels are the proper medium for the considera-
tion of criticisms and the correction of whatever foundation policies are judged
to be faulty by members of the professions. Since T am wholly unsympathetic to
placing the determination of these matters in the hands of legislative groups, I
am refraining from answering your points.
I trust that this letter will be entered on the records of your committee.
Respectfully yours,
Herbert Bltjmer, Chairman.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1189
Northwestern University,
The College of Liberal Arts,
Evanston, III., July 22, 1954.
Mr. Ren£ A. Worm see, General Counsel.
Dear Mr. Wormser : I did not sooner reply to your letter of June 24 because I
wanted to think over the questions you put to me. I will take them up in the
order of their appearance in your letter.
1. I have always supposed that there is indeed a "close interlock or a concen-
tration of power" between the foundations on the one hand and the so-called
learned societies, such as the Social Science Research Council and the American
Council of Learned Societies, on the other hand. I have long understood that
few, if any, of the learned societies have an endowment of notable size or receive
current income from memberships. It is my understanding that these learned
societies have depended mainly upon the foundations for the principal part of
their financial support. If they did not get money out of the foundations, I
don't know how they would ever be able to do anything of genuine significance.
Where a learned society is dependent on foundations for money, I think it is
inevitable that the men who direct the learned society will try to maintain
close and friendly personal relations with the men in the foundations who decide
whether they will hand over any money and how much, I have never heard
from any source that the foundation people try to dictate or influence the ap-
pointment of men to positions of any character in any of the learned societies.
When an important position in a learned society is to be filled, it is probable
that the people who must make the choice will try to find out whether people in
the foundations have respect for and confidence in the man they propose to
appoint. I have been told* that both the Carnegie Corp. and the Rockefeller
Foundation have pretty consistently, if not in all cases, refused to make any
expression on this point. But you can read men's minds ; you don't always have
to be told who the foundation officials have confidence in and who they don't
have confidence in. I think it is a safe guess that the selection of men for high
positions in learned societies is- influenced by such a reading of the minds of
people who are high up in the foundations. I have more than once been told
by people who manage colleges and universities that "we want to find" a man
for president, or dean, or department head, "who can get money out of founda-
tions." I suppose that people who choose men for positions in learned societies
are just as conscious of the need for winning or maintaining good will in the
foundations.
2a. This question asks whether the relationship between foundations and
learned societies has resulted in promotion of empirical research, and if so,
whether that promotion has been excessive. Certainly the foundations have
underwritten empirical research. I don't know to what extent their support of
empirical research is due to a close relation between the men who manage the
foundations and the men who manage the learned societies. One can form a
judgment as to whether the promotion of empirical research is excessive only
by considering other purposes for which the money is needed and might have
been used. Empirical research is inquiry into factual evidence. This costs
money. For several years I have been trying to make a comparative study of
American State legislatures to see what we can learn in the experience of one
State which will help people in other States decide whether they want to do
something and what they can do to improve the legislative process at home.
This means, among other things, that you have to travel about the country to
talk to a lot of people who have had experience in State legislatures and who
have thoughtfully observed the lawmaking process. I can tell you that it
costs a lot of money to do this kind of job. The alternative to underwriting
empirical study, if a foundation wants to support scholarly research, is to
underwrite men who sit in the library and read books and think. These people
don't need much money. So I would say that a fair balancing of empirical study
in comparison with historical and speculative study requires that much more
than half the money be put into empirical study. I can add to this my personal
belief that what we need more than anything else in the social sciences right
now is a whole lot more effort to get at the facts. Personally I don't think that
either the learned societies or the foundations have been giving excessive sup-
port to empirical research.
2b. Your question inquires whether there is a general political slanting of
research toward the left and whether such a slanting, if it exists, is due to a
tie-up among the foundations and the learned societies. I suppose I am a mid-
dle-of-the-roader in politics ; I voted for Dewey in 1948, for Dirksen in 1950, and
1190 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
for Stevenson in 1952. I think that the college professors who teach in social-
science departments in this country are overwhelmingly left of my position.
Furthermore, I think that many of them show a near disgraceful tendency to
overstate the liberal cause and deride the position of people who hold more con-
servative or right-wing views. I think many of these people show entirely too
little respect for what I consider to be the obligations of a man who claims that
he is an objective student and a scientist. But I must say that I have no evi-
dence whatever to support a view that either the foundations or the learned
societies have supported or wish to support this lack of objectivity and favoring
of the left-wing position. If a foundation or learned society wants to be neutral
in the matter of politics, the safest thing for it to do, in underwriting the social
sciences, is to give its money for empirical research. As I said above, empirical
study is search for factual evidence. In picking the thing he is going to study,
the empirical researcher can choose a problem in terms of his own political be-
liefs. But when he is looking for and examining factual data, he is of necessity
restrained from shooting the works in favor of his political views.
2c. The question asks whether there is a tendency toward monopoly and con-
formity, and, if so, whether this is due to a tieup between foundations and
learned societies. I don't see any tendency which I think leads to monopoly,
hut I do think there is a piling up of foundation money for support of research
in universities on the east coast. I think this is due to two things : First, the
eastern universities are close to the headquarters of the older foundations and
the headquarters of the learned societies. They find it easy to talk their prob-
lems over with these people. They are in a better position to make a case for
what they want to do than are the rest of us who live in the South, Middle West,
and far West. The second factor in favor of the East is that generally those peo-
ple have smaller teaching loads, have more time to plan research and get it
started, and eastern universities on the whole have more men who have actually
gotten forward with research. Now the foundations and learned societies could
follow a policy of trying to find and underwrite the really good men who have not
had a good chance to do research. I personally, think they ought to do more of
this. But on the other hand, they can with good reason argue that they ought to
invest their money in men who have already shown what they can and will do. I
suppose they avoid criticism by doing the latter. If they put their money in men
who are already going ahead with research the foundations and learned socie-
ties can say that they are not trying to remake the country or cause it to go in
different directions from the way it is already going. If they go about hunting
up men and underwriting men who have not yet done much research, they will
be accused of trying to determine the direction in which research will go and of
trying to remake the mind of the Nation to suit the people who manage the foun-
dations and learned societies.
3. I have no evidence to cause me to think that the foundations have any wish
or intention to slant research or slant the mind of the Nation toward collectivism.
But I do think that an overwhelming part of the social science professors in this
county lean toward collectivism. Insofar as the foundations underwrite social
science professors they probably help along more men who favor collectivism
than men who oppose collectivism. Furthermore, many social science college
professors present their personal beliefs when they ought to be trying to do
objective inquiry. Now it may be that the foundations ought to give every man
a test before they give him any money, the purpose of the test being to find out
whether he is really an objective scholar and not a preacher. I will not offer
an opinion as to what they ought to do on this point.
I have tried to address myself to the specific questions you put. Now I will tell
you about my experience with one learned society, the Social Science Research
Council. For 3 years I was a member of its committee which awarded grants-in-
aid for research. The top amount we were permitted to grant any man was $1,000
for a period of 1 year. When we had more applications than we had money to
satisfy we always favored the little fellow and the man who seemed to be over-
looked. If a man had a salary of $9,000 it was a rare case indeed when we gave
him any money. We gave our money to the youngsters who were having trouble
making a living and to men who had heavy teaching loans in colleges and uni-
versities with limited resources. The questions we asked about all applicants
were these: («) Is he an intelligent man; (5) can he actually do the job he is
trying to do; (c) can we be sure he will carry this project to completion; (d) is
the thing he proposes to do worth doing? We gave money for both empirical re-
search and historical and speculative study. I never knew any member of the
committee to raise the question as to whether this man is conservative or lib-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1191
eral or to raise the question whether this project will tend to support a con-
servative or a liberal point of view. I can say with absolute confidence that if
any member of the committee had ever raised either question he would have
been smacked down promptly by other members of the committee.
Now I suppose you need to know what kind of a man I am so that you can
judge whether I may be speaking honestly or trying to pull the wool over your
eyes. I have already told you how I voted in the last three elections. I may add
that I have insisted in conversation with my friends on this faculty that there
are two sides to the McCarthy question. I have furthermore spoken in favor of
McCarthy in these conversations in order to counter what I consider to be
extremism and unwillingness to look at evidence on the part of the anti-McCarthy-
ites I talk to. The consequence of this is that I hear I am a pro-McCarthy man
who wants to destroy freedom of speech for the Nation and render the university
incapable of functioning as a place for freemen to make objective inquiry.
Finally, the total amount of money I have personally received from all founda-
tions and learned societies for my own research is $750.
Sincerely yours,
Charles S. Hyneman,
Professor of Political Science, Northwestern University.
Yale University,
Department of Sociology,
New Eaven, Conn., May 17, 1954.
Mr. Rene A. Wormser, General Counsel.
Dear Mr. Wormser : Your letter of May 13 was missent and reached me with
considerable delay. I shall be very glad to send you my comments on the points
mentioned in your letter. However, in view of the fact that you might use my
comments in your record I should like to have a few days for drafting the reply.
I appreciate your interest in whatever I may be able to contribute.
Sincerely yours,
Helmut Schoeck, Ph. D.,
Visiting Research Fellow in Sociology.
Harvard University,
Research Center in Creative Altruism,
Cambridge 88, Mass., May 18, 1954.
Mr. Ren£ A. Wormser, General Counsel.
Dear Mr. Wormser : My brief answers to your three questions are as follows :
In regard to the first question, I can state that so far as social sciences are
concerned, most of the foundations certainly favor to an excessive degree empiri-
cal research and greatly discriminate against theoretical, historical, and other
forms of nonempirical research. This one-sidedness by itself would not be ob-
jectionable if (a) empirical research were not still more narrowed and reduced
to either statistical research or research along the line of the so-called mathe-
matical and mechanical models, or other imitative varieties of so-called natural
science sociology ; (b) if the topics investigated were of some theoretical or prac-
tical importance; and (c) if most of the favored researchers were competent
social scientists. Unfortunately, in cases of overwhelming bulk of granted
financial help, these three conditions were absent.
As to your second question, the results of the above kind of research (which
has been prevalent for, roughly, during the last 30 years in American social
sciences), with very rare exception, have been of 2 kinds: (1) the bulk of this
sort of research has been perfectly fruitless and almost sterile from a theoretical
or practical standpoint; (2) some of the investigations, made especially along
Freudian and similar theories (or popularizing these sort of views), have been
rather destructive morally and mentally for this Nation.
Third, my answer to the second question partly answers your" third question,
namely, that such an exceptional emphasis on training researchers along the
above-mentioned lines, with almost complete exclusion of the theoretical ap-
proach, is certainly undesirable for our society, either from a purely scientific
or from a practical standpoint.
These, in brief, are my answers to your questions. In giving these answers I
want you to keep in mind that I am not giving them offhand and on the spur of
the moment. For some 32 years I have been in the midst of American social
science, particularly sociology, and correspondingly have been closely following
1192 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
all the main currents in American social thought. In addition, at the present
time I am completing a special volume, the title of which is somewhat self-
explanatory, namely, Fads and Delusions in Modern Sociology, Psychology, Psy-
chiatry, and Cultural Anthropology. In this volume which I hope to complete by
the end of June or July of this year, I am critically examining exactly all the
main currents of impirical research in the social sciences particularly favored
by the foundations — sometimes by colleges and regularly by the United States
Navy, Army, and Air Corps — spending a considerable amount of funds for this
sort of research.
The final conclusions which I have reached in this volume are identical with
the answers which I have given to your questions. I hope that the volume gives
the necessary minimum of evidence to corroborate that my conclusions are
correct. The futility of excessively favoring this sort of research particularly is
well demonstrated by its sterility, in spite of the many millions of dollars, enor-
mous amount of time and energy expended by research staffs. Almost all of the
enormous mass of research along this line in the United States of America for
the last 25 or 30 years has not produced either any new significant social theory
or any new method, or any new technique, or any scientifically valid test, or even
any limited casual uniformity. This sterility is perhaps the most convincing
evidence of unwise policies of the foundations, colleges, and Army, Navy, and
Air Corps research directors.
My book is going to be published by the Henry Regnery Co. I do not know
exactly when it will be published, but probably in 1955 ; or, if it is somewhat
urgently hurried, it may be published at the end of this year. I hope, anyhow,
to deliver my manuscript to the publisher sometime the end of June or July.
I hope, also, that when it is published this volume may be of some help to your
committee.
With my best wishes.
Sincerely yours,
PlTIRIM A. SOKOKIN.
New York 25, N. ¥., May 2k, 1954.
Mr. Rene A. Wormser, General Counsel.
Dear Mr. Wormser : Referring to your letter of May 13, 1954, I should like to
submit the following remarks :
I have in my books and articles critically analyzed the epistemological and
political prepossessions that are responsible for the scientific sterility of the
present-day academic treatment of the problems of human action, in this country
as well as abroad. I think that the fanatical dogmatism prevailing in many
faculties and the virtual boycott of all dissenters are among the most alarming
symptoms of the actual crisis of western civilization.
It is a fact that the intolerant practices of many university departments of the
social sciences are lavishly financed by some rich foundations. These foundations
are uncritically committed to the epistemological ideas and the political bias
prevalent in the university faculties. But it was not foundations that inaugu-
rated this tendency and converted the professors to their own tenets. It was,
on the contrary, the universities that converted the foundations to their opinions.
The trustees and the staffs of the foundations were convinced that the best
method they could choose was to put their trust in the professors. They were
deluded by the prestige that the name universities enjoyed. They adopted the
professor worship current in some European countries.
In the reports of the foundations and in the public utterances of their leading
functionaries one does not discover any propositions about methods and tech-
niques of social studies that would not be stereotyped repetitions of the slogans
coined by the self-styled "unorthodox" professors long before American founda-
tions began to spend money for these studies.
My answer to each of the three questions you formulate in the second para-
graph of your letter is emphatically yes. For a justification of my point of view
I refer to my publications.
With kindest regards.
Sincerely yours,
Iatdwig von Mises.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1193
Chinese History Project,
( Sponsored by University of Washington, Seattle,
in cooperation with Columbia University),
Low Memorial Libbaey, Columbia University,
New York 27, N. Y., June 30, 1954-
Mr. Rene A. Wokmsek, General Counsel.
Dear Mr. Wormser : Thank you for your letter of June 25. I am deeply aware
of the importance of the problems which it raises.
Some weeks ago, I had a stimulating conversation about these problems with
a member of your staff, Dr. Karl E. Ettinger. In the course of this conversation
I conveyed to him whatever ideas I have on the subject. But it became evident
that his study of the matter has gone far beyond my limited insights. I, there-
fore, am afraid that I have no further contribution to make to your investigation.
Yours sincerely,
Karl A. Wittfogel.
Harvard University,
Department of Social Relations,
Cambridge 38, Mass., May 25, 195k.
Mr. Rene A. Wormser, General Counsel.
Dear Mr. Wormser : The matter of false and specious empirical research in-
stigated and supported by our tax-exempt foundations is so grave that it is
highly proper the Congress of the United States take up the matter. However,
an analysis of it requires such detailed time that I would not even answer your
letter if it were from a body less important than the United States Congress.
question i
The tax-exempt foundations in the United States have unfairly and undesirably
emphasized empirical research to such an extent that the whole meaning of social
science research has come to be ridden with sham and dubious practices.
QUESTION II
This has had undesirable and unfortunate results as follows :
A. It has made research grants large and expensive and few in number.
B. A special class of fund getters has grown up who spend all their time get-
ting funds, and have little time or capacity to do original work.
C. A special class of administrators of these funds has grown up and research
is dominated by the administrators rather than the persons who pursue ideas.
D. As a result the large institutions, or a few institutions with prestige, get
the most of the money in large grants. Smaller institutions, or professors there,
get scant encouragement in seeking out new ideas. These large grants are to
big and unity percent wasted and equally brilliant Ph. D.'s, who gradu-
ated in the same classes, get no support at all. In the meantime a careful
analysis of the origins of scientific men who make a mark (Ph. D.'s who finished
by 1940 and were outstanding by 1945) shows that they come from these smaller
institutions. Of course some argue that all the best men are at the big institu-
tions with prestige but that is not true. Finding jobs for young Ph. D.'s puts
more good over at the small institutions because there are only a very few
places each year opened at the others.
E. Since social science is concentrated in a few urban institutions and bossed
both at the foundations and at the institutions by "public opinion" men, prosaic
and important aspects of our life (where real social science needs exist) never
get studied. Illustrations among many possible, it is apparent that no institu-
tion in the United States pays great attention to the problems of our Appalachian-
Ozarkian people, although institutions located in that region do get grants for
extraneous things, involving cultures far away (like South America). No insti-
tution in our arid West studies the total relations of modern man to arid or
semiarid conditions. A biologist will turn naturally to dirty pond water, be-
cause the "cultures" he is interested in are found there, but our human ponds
do not have public opinion prestige, and are not generally studied. (These
statements are not a reflection upon any of the provincial groups in America.)
P. The emphasis upon false empiricism is not only a matter of the biases of
the "bosses" or administrators, the biases of the concentrated favored institu-
tions, and the neglect of the provincial and needed problems for study, but it
also has led to a malfeasance or injury in method and has harmed the growth
of social science.
1194 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
1. Social science is about 95-percent macroscopically, or broad-scale observa-
tional. It is not inevitably less scientific for that reason, as geology and astron-
omy are not less scientific than zoology or chemistry- The extreme methods of
overluseious empiricism on a few prestige problems is as ridiculous as trying
to build a house with the use of a micrometer for each measurement.
2. As a result we overstudy certain aspects of a few problems and never touch
the others. As a professor, well renowned for his own social science researches
(which have not been supported by the big tax exempt foundations), remarked,
"We research ceaselessly upon getting married, but never study what to do about
the problems involved in the act over the next 40 or 50 years."
3. We have many persons who can work out correlation coefficients but no
one so far has told us what they mean in "causal" analysis. Our social science
is increasingly dominated by meticulous clinical procedures and becoming more
and more illiterate as to logic and common observation.
4. As a result we are creating a social science merely which is the doctrine
of a "cult," read only by a few other social scientists, abstruse to the point of
illegibility, valueless for social direction, constantly repeating itself upon imma-
terial problems, and ending in an aimless existential philosophy. As a prominent
European philosopher indicated clearly within the past decade, "modern social
science is becoming an aspect of the existential philosophy of decadence."
(This is a paraphrased quotation from Nordberto Bobbio, Existentialism the Phi-
losophy of Decadence, New York, 1947 (English translation).)
QT7ESTI0K" III
The above analysis leads me to your question 3, which is concerning the
desirability of the exclusive training of researchers in the empirical approach.
The situation outlined in answers to questions 1 and 2 shows that the over-
emphasis upon empirical training and support lead to a division in the social
scientists between those who follow abstruse theoretical "systems" and those
who follow equally abstruse pointless research. Our abstruse theoretical sys-
tems have become increasingly only taxonomie (classifying a society into minute
details according to one scheme or the other) and useless repetition. There is
little or no integration between theory and research, because they deal with
different things. As a result the empiricist has no theoretical foundation for
valid conclusions.
To illustrate this, without citing names, one man gathered numerous empirical
facts upon the existence and widespread use of small-scale torts within our
society and came to the conclusion that torts (he did not use this word because
he had only empirical training) should all be classified as crimes. Another
group gathered a million facts of the same nature in regard to sex ramification
and came o the conclusion that there should be no social control of sex. Both
studies were, in the opinion of many thoughtful persons, extremely socially
disadvantageous and misinforming and both received tax-exempt support in
large sums.
As a result of this I feel that the whole emphasis in training, as dominated
by our tax-exempt foundations, should be overhauled. Our research of an
empirical nature is so unrelated to theory that it becomes interpreted in extrane-
ous surface philosophies, socially harmful, and of no material meaning. (I
can prove this but it would involve me into polemics, and that I consider inad-
visable in a public document. )
One of the aspects, and results of this, is the general feeling that social science
should have no "aim" nor "utility," but should be a "study for study's sake."
"We might discover something which will be good 50 years from now," is a
shibboleth of this school. Now cast back to 1900, and tell me what could have
been discovered by such an activity then, which could have been valuable in
the changed social conditions of today? The idea is ridiculous. Yet this feel-
ing is most prevalent in the groups who have the easiest access to tax-exempt
foundation funds. On the other hand, it is fitting with our culture that the
activities of men should aim to do some "good" or create some understanding,
directly or indirectly, I imagine these foundations are created by funds from
persons who are in the very high brackets of taxation, and the public, in a
large sense, supports almost entirely these exaggerated empirical falsities. Now
just why should the public contribute to an activity which has no social aim?
I hope these remarks and this evaluation is of use to you. The situation is
more serious than most persons think. However, there are all that I care to
mention in a public document.
Sincerely,
Carle C. Zimmekman.
Letters of J. Fred Rippy, Professor of American History, Univer-
sity of Chicago, to the Late Congressman E. E. Cox
(Referred to at pp. 60-62 of pt. 1 of these hearings)
During the course of the hearings, reference was made to letters
written by Prof. J. Fred Rippy, professor of American history, the
University of Chicago, Chicago 37, 111. The correspondence referred
to follows :
The University of Chicago,
Department op Histoky,
Chicago, III., August 4, 1951.
Hon. E. E. Cox,
United States House of Representatives,
Washington, D, C,
Dear Congressman Cox : I take the liberty of writing you this note because
I was born and educated in your part of the country. I hope a committee of
Congress w T i!l investigate the foundations in order to determine their influence
and whether the National Government should lay down some general principles
regarding the manner in which their funds are distributed. Several years ago
these funds were usually distributed by some of the major foundations to faculty
committees of various major universities and were, in turn, distributed by the
faculty committees among such members of the various university faculties as
were deemed competent and reliable. More recently this policy has been
changed, so that the funds are now likely to be distributed by a central com-
mittee at the headquarters of each foundation. This, in my opinion, means a
dangerous concentration of power in the hands of a little group of men who
either engage in favoritism or fail to secure adequate information regarding
the recipients of subsidies. Distribution of funds through widely scattered
university faculty committees would guard against these evils and assure a
wider measure of equality of opportunity based upon relative merit.
At present and for years to come, scholars in our universities will not be
able to do much research on their own because of high prices and heavy taxes.
The recipients of these tax-free subsidies from the foundations will therefore
have great advantages that will be denied the rest of the university staffs.
The favored few r will get the promotions and rise to prominence. The others
will tend to sink into obscurity and have little influence in the promotion of ideas
and culture. Unless the power to distribute these immense foundation funds
is decentralized, the little controlling committees and those to whom they
award grants and other favors will practically dominate every field of higher
education in the United States. Even granting them great wisdom and
patriotism, one might still complain against this injury to the great principle
of equality of opportunity. But I have never been impressed by the superior
wisdom of the foundation heads and executive committees. The heads tend
to become arrogant ; the members of the committees are, as a rule, far from the
ablest scholars in this country.* * *
I make these suggestions: First, examine the methods now employed in
distributing these funds and the qualifications and attitudes of the heads and
executive committees of the foundations ; second, consider the wisdom and
prudence of decentralization in the control of these tax-free funds. If you
should conclude that it would be Wise to force decentralization, consider the
possibility of either taxing these foundations, or a number of them, out of
existence or compelling them to distribute their funds annually among the best
universities and permitting faculty committees in these universities to dis-
tribute these funds among the most capable members of the faculties of the
recipient universities. In numbers there will be more wisdom and justice. I
believe our way, of life is based upon the principles of local autonomy and
equality of opportunity. I strongly approve those principles and I believe you
1195
1196 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
do likewise. I should not be surprised if your proposed committee of investiga-
tion should discover that concentration of power, favoritism, and inefficient use
of funds are the worst evils that may be attributed to the foundations. If they
have supported any Communists, such support has probably been unintentional.
A little group drawn from restricted areas cannot know the attitude and
allegiance of recipients hundreds of miles away who are given grants on the
basis of letters of recommendation and perhaps a brief interview. Locally
chosen faculty members will know more about applicants from each university
than can possibly be learned through casual letters and investigations of little
groups far removed from these campuses. Those who govern this Nation and
the people who pay heavier taxes because of the exemptions granted these
affluent foundations have a right to lay down the general principles for the
distribution of their funds and favors.
$ $ * * * * *
Very sincerely,
J. Feed Rippy,
Professor of American History .
The University of Chicago,
Department of History,
Chicago, III., November 8, 1952.
Hon. E. E. Cox,
United States House of Representatives,
Washington, D. C.
Dear Congressman Cox : Since I wrote you on August 4, 1951, Dr. Abraham
Flexner, a man who has had much experience with the foundations, has pub-
lished a book, entitled "Funds and Foundations," in which he expresses views,
similar to those contained in my letter. I call your attention to the following
pages of Flexner's volume : 84, 92, 94, 124, and 125. Here Dr. Flexner denies
that the foundation staffs had the capacity to pass wisely on the numerous
projects and individuals for which and to which grants were made and contends
that the grants should have been made to universities as contributions to their
endowments for research and other purposes. The problem is clearly one of
the concentration of power in hands that could not possibly be competent
to perform the enormous task which the small staffs had the presumption to
undertake. This, says Flexner, was both "pretentious" and "absurd." In my
opinion, it was worse than that. The staffs were guilty of favoritism. The
small committees who passed on the grants for projects and to individuals
were dominated by small coteries connected with certain eastern universities.
A Committee on Latin-American Studies, set up in the 1940's, for instance, was
filled with Harvard graduates. A single professor of history on the Harvard.
faculty had the decisive word regarding every request for aid presented by
historians.
By granting these subsidies to favorite individuals and favored ideas, the
foundations contribute to inequalities in opportunity and interfere with free
trade in ideas. They increase the power of favored groups to dominate our
colleges and universities. Men whose power exceeds their wisdom, or men
who are not guided by the principle of equality of opportunity, could become
a menace. If possible, under the terms of our Federal Constitution, these
foundations should either be taxed out of existence or compelled to make their
grants to colleges and universities, to be distributed by faculty committees of
these institutions. Even-handed justice may not prevail even then, because such
justice is rarely achieved in human relations. But a greater approximation
of even-handed justice will be made because these local committees will have
more intimate knowledge of recipients. This, as you know, is the fundamental
justification for decentralization of power, for the local autonomy which was
so prominent in the thinking of our Founding Fathers.
Very sincerely,
J. Fred Rippy.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1197
STATEMENTS OF INDIVIDUALS
Statement by Bernard L. Gladiettx, of the Ford Foundation, July 8, 1954
The purpose of this statement is to place on record the facts concerning alle-
gations made about me by Congressman Carroll Reece, of Tennessee, on July 27,
1953, in the course of a prepared statement to the House of Representatives sup-
porting H. R. 217 which authorized the current investigation of tax-exempt
foundations. Congressman Reece's statement concerning me has been incor-
porated in the record before this investigating committee in substantially its
original form. These allegations, imprecise as they were, generally parallel cer-
tain obscure charges originally made in 1950 by Senator George W. Malone, of
Nevada, concerning some of my official actions on loyalty and security matters
while serving in the Department of Commerce.
I am convinced that both Congressman Reece and Senator Malone have been
unwittingly misled by false and malicious innuendoes growing out of the per-
formance of my official duties. As an officer of the Federal Government I held
responsible posts of administrative control for over 10 years. It was necessary
during this time that I make many decisions concerning personnel, budget, or
organization matters which adversely affected the personal interests of partic-
ular employees and officials. I am satisfied that these wholly untrue allegations
had their origins in such administrative situations.
My statement which follows fully and accurately answers every allegation or
inference of Congressman Reece and Senator Malone. Fortunately, most of the
cases and subjects discussed herein concern official actions taken by me or by
my superiors in the Department of Commerce and are verifiable by reference to
Government records and published congressional hearings.
i. employment background
The Congressional Record of July 27 contains some factual inaccuracies con-
cerning my employment experience. I will therefore summarize my background
briefly.
Following graduation from Oberlin College in 1930 I was for 4 years a teacher
and later principal of the American School in Japan, an institution established
by United States missionary groups in Tokyo. Then, after graduate training
in public administration at Syracuse University, I served during 1935-36 as
executive secretary of the City Manager League of Toledo, Ohio, my hometown.
Thereafter, I entered the employ of Public Administration Service of Chicago,
as a governmental consultant with major assignments successively in the State
governments of New York, Michigan, and Virginia, and in a number of Federal
agencies. These all dealt with reorganization and efficiency projects.
My Federal Government career in a civil-service capacity began at the United
States Bureau of the Budget in 1940, where I was first management consultant,
then Chief of the War Organization Section. My work there included planning
and setting up the new wartime agencies, examining and revising war agency
budgets and working on special White House assignments. Early in 1943, I
became administrative assistant to the Chairman of the War Production Board,
Donald M. Nelson. For a short period in 1944 and early 1945 I was associated
with the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration under Herbert
H. Lehman.
In 1945 I became executive assistant to the Secretary of Commerce under
circumstances described hereinafter. As a career officer, I remained in that
post until 1950, serving under 3 successive Secretaries of Commerce — Henry A.
Wallace, W. Averell Harriman, and Charles Sawyer. Here I served as staff
director of operations with responsibilities for general management of the De-
partment, including budget control, personnel administration, and reorganization
work.
I resigned from the Government in November 1950, when Paul G. Huffman,
newly designated president of the Ford Foundation, offered me an attractive
position as one of his assistants. It involved substantially more salary than I
had been receiving in the civil service and gave promise of opportunities for
advancement far beyond what was possible for a career officer in Government.
My decision to leave public service was taken strictly on my own initiative
and was based solely on my belief that this opportunity was one that I could
not afford to pass up in the best interests of my family, as well as myself.
A fuller statement by way of a detailed biography, including a list of my
organization affiliations, is attached as a part of this statement.
1198 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
II. LOYALTY CLEARANCE
The statement was madet by Congressman Reece that no investigation of
my loyalty had "ever been requested or Tnade" while in the Federal service.
The contrary is the fact.
1. Because of the sensitive nature of my duties in both the Bureau of the
Budget and the War Production Board it was necessary that I undergo special
investigation for clearance purposes during the war period. I am not fully
informed as to the character of these inquiries, but I believe they were extensive.
At any rate, I was given the requisite clearance and in both agencies had full
access to top-secret information and reports.
2. When W. Averell Harriman became Secretary of Commerce in 1946, one of
his early actions was to cause a comprehensive investigation to be conducted
by the FBI covering the senior officials of the Department immediately asso-
ciated with him. These investigations were not initiated as the result of any
allegations, but were undertaken simply as a precautionary security measure
to assure full protection at the upper echelons of the Department. The results
of the FBI inquiry in my case were stated in a memorandum from Secretary
Harriman dated August 12, 1947, as follows :
"This memorandum is to place on record the fact that the Department's
loyalty review board, after conducting an investigation at my direction, found
nothing derogatory in the record of Bernard L. Gladieux which reflects adversely
upon him or raises any doubt as to his loyalty. On the contrary, the investi-
gation revealed a constant record of public service of a high order, vouched for
by outstanding Government officials.
"I approve the findings of the board, said approval to be placed in Mr.
Gladieux's official record."
3. By direction of the Secretary of Commerce in 1948 I served as the official
representative and liaison of the Department of Commerce with the Central
Intelligence Agency. In this capacity I was authorized to handle top-security
information. It was necessary that I be given special clearance for this highly
confidential work in which I continued until I left the Government in 1950.
I assume that such clearance resulted from the usual reinvestigation concerning
loyalty and security required of all those engaged in such work. My service
in this capacity is attested in a letter dated November 21, 1950, from Gen.
Bedell Smith, then Director of CIA, to the Secretary of Commerce on the occasion
of my leaving the Department. An excerpt from his letter follows:
"I should like to take this opportunity to express my keen appreciation of
the consistent and highly valuable aid which Mr. Gladieux has rendered the
Central Intelligence Agency. His unfailing cooperation has been a great help
in solving some of the problems which we have faced during the past 2 years."
4. In 1952 and subsequently I served in a consultant and liaison capacity with
the Central Intelligence Agency involving certain highly sensitive matters.
Under its security standards I am certain that this Agency would not have
initiated this new relationship without further investigation and clearances
which gave me access to classified information.
III. EOLE IN LOYALTY APPEALS
Senator Malone has implied that I nullified adverse loyalty or security de-
cisions without authority and contrary to the interests of the Government.
Nothing could be farther from the truth. Here are the facts concerning my
relationship to the administration of the loyalty program during my years in
Commerce :
In June 1948 I was formally directed by Secretary Sawyer, in addition to my
other duties, to serve as his special representative in hearing all appeals from
adverse decisions of the Department's loyalty board. This appeals procedure
was required by the provisions of Executive Order 9835. In fulfillment of this
duty, I heard on appeal a substantial number of loyalty cases. The procedure
was to consider carefully the decisions of the loyalty board against the employee,
to screen and evaluate the FBI reports, to hold hearings at which the defendant
and his legal counsel appeared, and then to write a formal report and recom-
mendation to the Secretary.
Though 2 of the 3 members of our loyalty board were administrative subordi-
nates of mine, we scrupulously observed our respective functions and proper
relations in matters concerning loyalty appeals. Contrary to an inference by
Senator Malone in the Lee case that I might have influenced the loyalty board's
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1199
original clearance of him I followed a fixed policy of not discussing the substance
of this or any other case with loyalty board members during the time they were
tinder adjudication.
Several months after assuming this appellate responsibility the burden of
cases became so heavy, when coupled with my other duties, that I obtained the
Secretary's approval for the designation of the Director of the Field Service of
the Department to serve as my associate in reviewing these cases and to act as
joint presiding officer with me at the formal hearings. At my request the Solici-
tor of the Department and the Deputy Director of Personnel, who was in charge
of personnel security, also sat with me in the hearings on these cases. While
the responsibility was basically mine, I counseled with these associates closely,
and we invariably agreed on the recommendation to be submitted to the Secretary.
In making these recommendations on loyalty cases to the Secretary I exer-
cised my best judgment, keeping in mind the paramount interest of Government
security. It should be understood that during this period, under the terms of
Executive Order 9835, an employee could be separated on disloyalty charges only
if there existed "reasonable grounds" for a finding of present disloyalty. This
required a more positive finding and represented a policy more favorable to the
■employee than the "reasonable doubt" standard which later became effective in
1951. Obviously, some cases which were favorably decided in 1949 or 1950 under
the "reasonable grounds" standard might have been given an adverse decision in
1951 when the "reasonable doubt" standard was instituted.
The standards of evidence required by due process of law were in no way
called for in these proceedings. Nevertheless a finding of "present disloyalty"
under the "reasonable grounds" language of Executive Order 9835 necessarily
i-equired some basis in tangible and credible information clearly adverse to the
■defendant. This became a matter of judgment on the part of the reviewer, since
there could be no precise criteria for determining the weight of the evidence
normally available in connection with these cases. While governed by the
provisions of Executive Order 9835, I nevertheless felt it incumbent upon me to
determine questionable or borderline cases in favor of the Government — even
during that period when a more positive preponderance of evidence was required
for a disloyalty finding. This policy did not at the same time prevent me from
dealing with these cases in a manner fair and equitable to the employees con-
cerned. All my findings and recommendations as to these appealed loyalty
eases are a matter of record, and even with the advantage of hindsight I stand
by my decisions.
Regardless of final decision in the Department, all loyalty cases during the
period under discussion were subject to further appeal to or audit by the Presi-
dent's Loyalty Review Board— the final authority. During my service in the
Department of Commerce, no decision made by the Secretary pursuant to my
recommendation, either for or against the loyalty of any individual, was over-
ruled or reversed on subsequent appeal to or audit by the Loyalty Review Board.
The policy and attitude of the Department in connection with these loyalty
cases were perhaps best stated by Secretary Sawyer in a hearing before the
Senate Appropriations Committee on April 21, 1950 :
"In every case we have made a prompt investigation of any information which
came to us that would even justify an investigation, whether it would indicate
disloyalty or not. * * *
"* * * as far as any dereliction in pursuing disloyal persons or any willingness
to defend them or protect them, there is not one word of truth in any such
claim. * * *"
In addition to scrupulous administration of the loyalty program, the Depart-
ment, under my supervision, inaugurated its own special ■ personnel security
program in 1948. This program exceeded the requirements and standards of
the loyalty program and resulted in the elimination of many dubious employees
who were otherwise cleared under the official criteria established for loyalty.
IV. THE REMINGTON CASE
Senator Malone accused me of "violently defending" William Remington about
whose loyalty case there was much public comment in the period 1948-50. Con-
gressman Reece stated furthermore that I had engaged in "social contacts" with
Remington. Both of these statements and other innuendoes about my part in
this case are completely false. The facts are these :
I had nothing to do with the selection or recruitment of Remington as a staff
member of the Department of Commerce in March 1948. As a matter of fact,
49720— 54— pt. 2 17
1200 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
I met him for the first time only after his case became the subject of congressional
Investigation. Though we now know as a result of public disclosures that Rem-
ington was the subject of FBI information received in late 1945 linking him to
an espionage ring, I did not know nor was I personally informed of this fact
until some time in June 1948. I am also confident that Secretary Harriman
was not alerted or otherwise informed about these suspicions and allegations
during his incumbency in Commerce. In fact a check by the Department with
the central investigative index maintained by the Civil Service Commission for
the entire Government revealed no derogatory evidence about Remington as late
as May 1948.
To my knowledge Secretary Sawyer and Under Secretary Foster were first
■alerted by a communication dated May 11, 1948, from Attorney General Clark to
the effect that Remington was under FBI investigation on charges of espionage.
Following receipt and review of this FBI report in June, Secretary Sawyer im-
mediately placed Remington on inactive duty status. In July, after the facts
became more fully known to us and pending adjudication of his loyalty case,
I arranged for Remington's formal suspension from the Department of Commerce.
' On August 5, 1948, as spokesman for the Department, I appeared before the
Senate Investigating Committee, Senator Homer Ferguson serving as chairman,
to describe the circumstances leading to this suspension and to assure the com-
mittee that we were exercising proper vigilance in such cases as soon as we were
given an FBI alert. I was interrogated on this occasion as to why the Depart-
ment of Commerce was not advised by the FBI or the Department of Justice
that Remington had been under investigation since 1945 and could only reply
that I assumed the FBI had its own reasons for keeping Remington under surveil-
lance without general disclosure of this fact.
The matter of Remington's loyalty was never under the jurisdiction of the
Department of Commerce, and I, therefore, had no part in the decisions con-
cerning this matter. The adjudication of this case was the responsibility of the
Civil Service Commission according to the loyalty regulations existing at the
time.
In the fall of 1948 the Regional Loyalty Board of the Civil Service Commission
found Remington disloyal. On appeal the President's Loyalty Review Board in
February 1949 overruled this adverse decision and declared there was no reason-
able grounds for believing Remington disloyal. The Board thereupon ordered
the Commerce Department to reinstate him in his former position and to his
former status. It was my responsibility to carry out this order on behalf of
the Secretary. I took the precaution of placing security restrictions on Reming-
ton and located him in a nonsensitive position in his former organization, the
Office of International Trade, with duties completely unrelated to his former
responsibilities. In July 1949 I took further steps to minimize his duties and
reduce him in civil-service grade, since his usefulness was now greatly limited.
.The Remington case illustrates the earlier difficulties and uncertainties sur-
rounding the handling of security cases following clearance on loyalty grounds.
In 1949 there was no clear legal authority and no civil-service standards or pro-
cedures for the dismissal of those considered to be of dubious security as this
term is now being used. Actually, it was not until about August 1950 that the
Congress enacted legislation, which had been initiated by the Department, author-
izing the Secretary of Commerce to effect security dismissals in his discretion
and without regard to civil-service regulations. Had we been vested with such
authority earlier Remington's case could have been disposed of with dispatch
in 1949.
A year or more after Remington's reinstatement new derogatory information,
which eventually formed the basis for his indictment, was developed on him by
the House Committee on Un-American Activities. I requested a transcript of
this information, in a letter from me to Chairman John S. Wood dated May 5,
1950, and obtained it from the committee. After review of this new information
and consideration of the entire case, Secretary Sawyer decided Remington must
somehow be removed from the Government. After discussion with me, and
with the Secretary's concurrence, I called Remington and his attorney into my
office on May 26, 1950, and, with the Director of Personnel Operations as a wit-
ness, demanded his resignation. (The forced resignation technique was much
simpler, if successful, than the slow and uncertain civil-service separation proce-
dures in the absence of the summary dismissal authority referred to above.)
Remington refused. Accordingly, I then signed and filed formal charges for his
dismissal in a letter from me to him dated June 5, 1950. Thereupon, a few days
later, Remington resigned from the Department.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1201
The first time I ever met or even saw Remington or had any relationship with
him was after his suspension in 1948, when he came to my office in connection
with some aspect of this action. My subsequent relations were also strictly
official, and I never met him outside my office. I certainly had no social contacts
with him at any time or had any personal interest in his case; nor have I ever
defended his character or conduct before congressional committees or otherwise.
This was an involved case to handle in view of Remington's civil-service rights
under the Veteran's Preference Act and his loyalty clearance by the Loyalty
Review Board. It properly fell to me to handle in view of my position.
V. THE LEE CASE
Congressman Reece claimed that I had "social contacts" with Michael E. Lee
about whose loyalty case there also was much public comment at the time.
Senator Malone stated that I nullified adverse decisions regarding Lee, accused
me of "violently defending" him and made other insinuations concerning my role
in this matter. The record shows that these allegations are false and have
no foundation in fact.
My first contact with the Lee case was to initiate the Department's original
request for a full-scale FBI investigation of this employee as follows : Sometime
in October 1948 I recall the Department's Chief Investigations Officer bringing
to me an unidentified statement, which he had in turn received from a staff
member of the House Committee on Un-American Activities, citing Lee's back-
ground and raising questions as to his character and suitability. I believed this
information, though sketchy, warranted inquiry and accordingly directed the
investigations officer to turn it over to the FBI.
A few weeks later I received further information about Lee from a reliable
private source. This information in particular, and when coupled with that
received earlier, disturbed me in view of Lee's sensitive position in our Office
of International Trade since it raised in my mind serious question as to his
loyalty or at least his security status. Accordingly, on this occasion some-
time in November 1948 on my own responsibility I directed our investigations
officer to make a formal request to the FBI for a full-scale investigation. Shortly
thereafter the assigned FBI agent came to see me, and I informed him of my
information and its source.
This all led to the submission some months later of a comprehensive FBI report
on Lee which was turned over to our loyalty board. At no time in all the sub-
sequent consideration of Lee's case, however, did I myself have any part in
adjudicating its loyalty aspects.
After the usual process of charges and hearings the Department's loyalty
board in July 1949 made a favorable decision as to Lee's loyalty— a decision
confirmed by the Loyalty Review Board on audit. However, while clearing him
on loyalty charges the Department's board recommended that careful study
be given Lee's fitness for holding a sensitive position in which he would have
access to classified materials. This recommendation came to me in accordance
with normal procedure. Since Secretary Sawyer was by now fully familiar with
the facts concerning Lee, and in view of the nature of this particular case, I
referred the matter to him. He informed me that he had decided no security
restrictions should be imposed on Lee, and I so advised our personnel office in
a memorandum dated August 8, 1949. I believe the Secretary again reviewed
the matter of Lee's security status in February 1950 and found no reason to
reverse his earlier decision.
Subsequently further information from the FBI came to the attention of the
Department causing our loyalty board to file new loyalty charges against Lee
in March 1950. This led to an adverse finding against Lee in September 1950.
Secretary Sawyer personally assumed jurisdiction over the appeal submitted
by Lee since again he alone could make a decision in a case of such public interest.
In November 1950 the Secretary overruled the loyalty board and cleared Lee
of disloyalty charges. The Secretary reached his own decision, and I did not
advise on it this all taking place in the period when I was preparing to leave
Government.
My connection with the Lee case principally dealt with the pressing of charges
concerning his administrative capacity. He was a constant source of personnel
problems because of his failure to exert proper direction of his staff in the Far
Eastern Division, Office of International Trade. Several administrative actions
were brought against Lee, ttie course of these paralleling the separate loyalty
proceedings during 1950. After a series of charges and countercharges involving
1202 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Lee and his associates in the Office of International Trade and in consideration
of all the facts in the totality of this case Secretary Sawyer came to the decision
that steps must be taken to remove Lee from the Department. Accordingly, after
discussion with me and with his approval, I called Lee into my office on May 26,
1950, and, with the Director of Personnel of the Department as a witness, de-
manded his resignation from the Department. (Here again we were handicapped
in dealing with such cases by the absence of summary dismissal authority.) Lee
refused to resign, he said, until he had been given loyalty clearance by the
Secretary. On June 1, I again demanded Lee's resignation. When he again re-
fused, I signed and issued formal charges on administrative grounds for his dis-
missal from the Federal service in a letter to him under date of June 1, 1950. I
filed additional charges on July 17. The required civil service hearing on these
several charges was never held, because of Lee's certified illness. These charges,
however, later facilitated his forced resignation.
When Secretary Sawyer advised Lee of his final clearance on loyalty charges in
November 1950, I believe that the Secretary then threatened to use his recently
enacted summary dismissal powers unless Lee resigned. Having been finally
cleared on loyalty grounds, he resigned at last from the Government.
I had nothing to do with Lee's entrance into Government employment and had
no dealings of any kind with him until it was necessary that he see me in my
office on various occasions in connection with his case. My relationships were
strictly official and in line of duty. I had no personal interest in him and cer-
tainly at no time engaged in social contacts with him.
Senator Malone has repeatedly stated that I appeared before the Senate Com-
mittee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce and defended Lee in 1950. This is
simply contrary to fact. I never appeared before this committee in connection
with the Lee case, as the record of this particular hearing will show, and at no
time before this or any other committee did I undertake to defend Lee's character
or conduct.
As to Congressman Reece's reference to the fact that I never appeared before
the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce to answer Senator Malone's
charges about me in connection with the Lee matter, I should like to point out
I was never requested to appear before this committee as were some other officials
of the Department of Commerce. Lee was the one being investigated by the
committee under Senate Resolution 230 — not I. Furthermore, Under Secretary
Whitney's authoritative statement, when testifying before this committee on
March 30, 1950, made the circumstances of Lee's security clearance, which were
at issue, quite clear.
This was another highly complicated case in civil-service terms and much
confusion surrounded its course. Many differences of opinion were expressed at
different stages as between those familiar with the case. I believed then as I
do now that the decision of Secretary Sawyer to separate him was justified and
proper.
VI. BELATIONSHIPS WITH HARBY S. MAGDOFB 1
Congressman Reece on July 27, 1953, stated that he had been advised by a
reliable and responsible source that I had engaged in social contacts not only
only with Remington and Lee, but also with Harry S. Magdoff, who was a sub-
ordinate staff member in the Office of Program Planning for about a year during
the time I was in the Department of Commerce.
I have never at any time engaged in personal social relations with Magdoff
by any stretch of that term as it is universally understood. I have searched my
memory and believe the only association with Magdoff which could conceivably
be twisted into alleged social contact concerns my presence on 1 or 2 occasions
as an invited guest, because of my official position, at a staff luncheon held by
the Office of Program Planning at which Magdoff was also present along with
the other employees of this unit. I also remember noting his presence at a local
group meeting of the League for Women Voters back during this period. But
there was no basis of mutuality for social relationships, and I simply didn't
associate with him outside the office — in fact, I didn't know him very well even
there.
I had nothing to do with Magdoff's employment in the Government and did
not meet him until this time (1945 or 1946). He was not under my direction
and my official contacts with him in Commerce were not extensive, though I
saw him in line of duty now and then. I have not seen him since Commerce
days.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1203
Subsequent to Magdoff's resignation from the Department in December 1946,
information from the FBI about him came to my attention, In accordance with
our established procedure, his name was flagged in our Personnel Office for
purposes of blocking reemployment in the future. This was the first that
1 was aware of the fact that he was considered a "suspect" person. I did not
know that he had been the subject of FBI inquiry and comment as early as
1945 until recent public disclosures. I am certain that neither Secretary Har-
riman nor Under Secretary Foster were likewise made aware of the existence
of this adverse information about Magdoff until after his resignation from
the Department.
VII. RELATIONSHIP WITH PHILIP M. HATJSEB
Congressman Keece claimed that I also engaged in social contacts with Dr.
Hauser and drew an unfavorable inference from this relationship. I con-
sidered Dr. Hauser, who was for 2 or 3 years Chief of the Office of Program
Planning in the Office of the Secretary, a respected associate. I came to know
him well in the office and had a high regard for his capabilities. I was familiar
with the facts involved in his FBI report. More importantly, I was aware that
he had been given full loyalty and security clearance following review by the
Department's loyalty board. He enjoyed the confidence of successive Secretaries
of Commerce and I likewise have had no reason at any time to question his
loyalty or his security. (Incidentally, as I recall it, Dr. Hauser's case prin-
cipally involved allegations concerning other members of his family as well as
a matter of confused identities.)
VIII. RELATIONSHIP WITH HENRY A. WALLACE
Senator Malone has claimed that I was a protege of Henry A. Wallace,
former Vice President. This statement, with its derogatory insinuation, has
been repeated by Congressman Keece.
I have been no man's protege.
I was originally recommended to Mr. Wallace in 1945, when he became Secre-
tary of Commerce, by Harold D. Smith, Director of the United States Bureau
of the Budget. I had met Mr. Wallace a few times earlier in connection with
my duties at the Budget Bureau, when I was assigned to assist in establishing
the new Board of Economic Warfare of which he was Chairman. But I knew
him only slightly before 1945 ; I bad not been associated with him in the Depart-
ment of Agriculture at any time.
As his executive assistant at Commerce for about a year and a half I was con-
cerned exclusively with the internal operations of the Department and never
played any part in any of Mr. Wallace's political speechmaking or other polit-
ical activities. I did not approve of his 1948 campaign for the Presidency and
have had practically no contact with him since 1946. On 2 or 3 occasions in
that time he has phoned me to inquire as to my recollection concerning factual
matters relating to his incumbency as Secretary of Commerce, and I have had
2 chance encounters with him since coming to reside in the New York area in 1951.
IX. CONGRESSIONAL HEARING
Reference was made in the July 27, 1953 Congressional Record to my appear-
ance before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on February 27, 1950.
This hearing was called to inquire into the policies and practices of the Depart-
ment of Commerce regarding loyalty and security. As the officer in general
charge of administration, including security matters, it was my function to
serve as official spokesman.
I presented to the committee facts and statistics which outlined the "tough,
but fair" policy we had adopted. In addition to advising them as to the sub-
stantial number of employees already released on loyalty grounds, I explained
that on our own initiateive we had extended the program beyond the require-
ments of Executive Order 9835 to provide for the designation of security risks
and for dismissals on security grounds wherever this was feasible. More
specifically I was able to report that as of February 21, 1950, a total of 71
Commerce employees had been dismissed or otherwise separated on loyalty or
security grounds as a consequence of our departmental action following the
receipt and consideration of adverse FBI information submitted pursuant to the
new loyalty program.
I explained the legal and civil-service difficulties we were encountering in deal-
ing with security cases which had been cleared on loyalty grounds and indicated
that the Department needed, and was seeking, legislative authority which would
1204 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
empower the Secretary to dismiss dubious employees in his discretion without
reference to the usual civil-service procedures. There is reason to believe that
my testimony on this occasion helped obtain this summary authority as a rider
to our pending appropriation bill.
In spite of the above record of the Department, some of the committee members
protested at my refusal to reveal certain information concerning individual cases
and claimed I was not cooperative with them. I was obliged to explain repeat-
edly that I was under specific instructions from the White House, reinforced by
instructions from the Secretary of Commerce, to reveal nothing but broad sta-
tistics and general policies and to refrain from comment on, or information about,
specific loyalty cases. (Incidentally, President Truman's Executive order pro-
hibiting the release of loyalty information to congressional committees has not
been rescinded by President Eisenhower, and it continues in full force and effect. )
The committee was adamant in its attitude, however, and insisted that I discuss
specifics. Since under the terms of my instructions I could not accede to this
demand, some committee members were obviously not completely satisfied,
In conclusion, I wish to state that, like any other loyal American, I deeply
resent these false and malicious insinuations. I am proud of my career in the
public service. I have nothing to conceal. I will stand by the record of my
official actions and decisions.
State of New York,
County of New York, ss:
Bernard L. Gladieux, being duly sworn on his oath, deposes and says that he
is the person who subscribed his name to the foregoing statement and that the
matters and facts set forth in said statement are true.
(Signed) Bernard L. Gladieux.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 13th day of July 1954.
(Signed) Janice B. La Vine,
Notary Public, State of New York.
Term expires March 30, 1955.
Biographical Statement op Bernard L. Gladieux, of the Ford Foundation,
July 7, 1954
birth, family, residence
My name is Bernard Louis Gladieux. I was born April 12, 1907, in Toledo,
Ohio.
My father, Victor Modest Gladieux, resides in Toledo at 724 Utah Street where,
together with my mother until her recent death, they lived for almost 50 years.
He is of French-Irish descent, his paternal ancestors migrating to this country
from Alsace, France, about 1832. Until his retirement a few years ago, my
father was employed by the City Water Department of Toledo. My mother,
Anna Cook Gladieux, was of English descent and a member of the Daughters of
the American Revolution.
I married Persis Emma Skilliter, also of Toledo, in June 1930. We have 4
sons: Bernard, Jr., age 17; Russell, 14; Larry, 10; and Jay 7. My family and
I now live at 3 Walworth Avenue, Scarsdale, N. Y.
education
I attended Navarre School, a Toledo public school, through the eighth grade
and was graduated from Waite High School of Toledo in 1926. In high school
I participated in athletics and during my senior year was president of the stu-
dent council, president of the Hi-Y Club, and a class officer. I attended and later
joined Trinity Episcopal Church at this time.
In the summer of 1926, following graduation from high school, I was selected
as 1 of 3 youth representatives from Ohio to attend the first world conference
of YMCA's in Helsingfors, Finland.
I entered Oberlin College in the fall of 1926 and received an A. B. degree in
1930. My major course of study was American history. At Oberlin I partici-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1205
pated in athletics and was president of the college YMOA, a member of the men's
senate (student governing body ) , and a founder of the Outing Club. In my senior
year I was elected to Phi Beta Kappa.
During the summer of 1928, while still at Oberlin, I received a fellowship
covering travel in Europe and study at the Zimmern School of International
Studies, at Geneva, Switzerland.
In 1934, I took graduate training in public administration at the Maxwell
School of Citizenship and Public Affairs of Syracuse University. Later, following
submission of a thesis, I was awarded a master of arts degree in public admin-
istration.
CAREER
1930-34 — American School in Japan: Teacher and principal
Upon graduation from Oberlin in 1930, I accepted a position as teacher in the
high-school department of the American School in Japan, located in Tokyo. This
private school was established by United States missionary groups to educate
the American and other English-speaking children of the foreign resident com-
munities in Tokyo and Yokohama. My principal teaching assignments were
American history and government, European history and physics ; I also coached
the school's athletic teams. Mrs. Gladieux taught in the elementary department
of the school.
In 1933 I was appointed principal of the school by its board of trustees, a
position that I agreed to hold for 1 year since I had already delayed my planned
return to the United States. As principal I was responsible not only for academic
administration, but for the business management of the institution as well.
1934-35 — Graduate work at Syracuse University
Upon returning from Japan in the summer of 1934 I entered graduate school
at Syracuse University intending to train for and eventually enter public service.
This course of training was interrupted early in 1935, when I was invited by a
group of civil leaders in Toledo to become executive secretary of the City Manager
League.
1935-36 — City Manager League of Toledo, Ohio; Executive secretary
This civic organization was dedicated to revamping and modernizing the
municipal government of Toledo. I was responsible for planning and directing
its work. The league successfully sponsored a new city charter, electing a
majority of the new city council, and instituted a number of improvements in
municipal management and city finances.
Upon completion of this program of municipal reform early in 1936, 1 returned
briefly to Syracuse University in order to complete my course work in public
administration.
1936 — Regents' education inquiry; Research associate
In April 1936 I became research associate on the staff of the regents' inquiry
into the character and cost of public education in the State of New York. Here
I conducted field surveys covering the administrative organization and business
management practices of 15 New York State school districts, derived and analyzed
data on unit costs of education, and assisted in designing the improved budgeting,
accounting, and other administrative practices recommended in the published
reports of this inquiry.
1936-^40 — Public Administration Service: Management consultant
I had been associated with Public Administration Service during the course
of the regents' inquiry and at the conclusion of this work was invited to join
its permanent staff. Public Administration Service is a nonprofit corporation,
with headquarters in Chicago. It provides technical consultant services on a
contract basis to Federal, State, and. local governments.
From December 1936 to June 1937 I assisted in preparing and executing plans
for the reorganization of the New York State Department of Social Welfare,
including consolidation of the functions of the temporary emergency relief admin-
istration. I was also responsible for designing a system of district offices and
for preparing and presenting a budget to the Governor's office for the reorganized
department.
During this same period I developed and taught a course on "The Organization
and Administration of Public Education" to the graduate class in public admin-
istration at Syracuse University.
1206 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
From July 1937 to March 1938 I was engaged on a project initiated by the
Governor of Michigan, Frank Murphy, the purpose of which was to develop an
improved system of financial administration for the State government. I was
specifically concerned with formulating and installing revised budgetary pro-
cedures to comtrol State expenditures more effectively.
I was next assigned to the Federal Social Security Board where I developed
and installed revised plans of administrative organization and procedures for
the Bureau of Old Age Assistance. This program included simplified adminis-
tive methods, more economical procedures for adjudicating and paying insurance
benefits, and plans for decentralizing operations to the field.
As consultant to the Administrator of the United States Housing Authority,
Nathan Straus, from October 1938 to February 1939, I was charged with the
development and installation of a revised plan of organizaiton for this public
housing agency. I recommended a number of basic changes in both line and
staff functions and upon approval of these by the Administrator, prepared the
necessary implementing orders. I also supervised the preparation of special
reports on financial administration and personnel practices.
I was next invited to serve as consultant to the Administrator of the Wage
and Hour Division of the Department of Labor which was having considerable
program and management trouble administering the Fair Labor Standards Act.
I was able to institute several organizational and procedural changes including
the development of a revised plan of regional administration. Later, when in
the Bureau of the Budget, I was requested to continue my work here, under
Budget Bureau auspices now, however, since the situation was of concern to the
White House. Major personnel and program changes became necessary.
Harold D. Smith, newly appointed Director of the United States Bureau of the
Budget arranged with Public Administration Service to use my services during
the period from June 1939 to March 1940. Here I carried out a number of
special assignments: (1) Served as adviser to the Administrator of the Federal
Works Agency in the developmental stages of this new agency ; (2) supervised a
survey of the organization and administration of the Bituminous Coal Division at
the request of the Secretary of the Interior ; (3) advised the Secretary of Labor
on the continuing problems of administering the Fair Labor Standards Act.
While working in the Bureau as above, I also carried on various activities for
my employer, Public Administration Service. Thus, I gave general supervision
to a survey of the administration of Virginia State welfare services undertaken
at the request of Governor Price. Recommendations were submitted for legis-
lative action and for the internal organization of the department of welfare. I
also developed a plan of administrative organization and formulated an opera-
tions budget for the newly established New York State Division of Housing.
19JfO-43 — United States Bureau of the Budget: Chief, War Organisation Section
In March 1940, I resigned from Public Administration Service to accept a
full-time position as chief investigator with the Budget Bureau. At about the
same time I filed applicaiton for open competitive civil-service examinations to
qualify for budget examiner and management analyst. I was given a sufficiently
high rating on these examinations to permit my appointment shortly thereafter
as Chief Budget Examiner with full civil-service status.
When President Roosevelt established the National Defense Advisory Com-
mission in June 1940, 1 was designated as the representative of the Budget Bureau
in observing its operations, maintaining liaison between it and the Bureau and
advising on management problems.
As the defense effort merged into preparation for allout war, I was placed
in charge of a special staff within the Budget Bureau into which were centered
all new activities dealing with the war effort. My staff and I were responsible
for planning the development and establishment of the new war agencies, sub-
mitting proposals through the Budget Director to the President. Thus during
1941 and 1942, I prepared or supervised the preparation of and cleared and
negotiated the Executive orders which the President signed establishing, defining
the functions of, and delegating powers to: the War Production Board, the
Office of Price Administration, the Board of Economic Warfare, the Office of
Strategic Services, the Office of Civilian Defense, the Lend-Lease Administration,
the Office of Scientific Research and Development, the Office of War Informa-
tion, the Office of Defense Transportation, and others.
My group continued working with these emergency agencies after they were
created by helping with their organization and staffing problems. All budget
requests were reviewed, revised, and approved by my staff in the Budget Bureau.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1207
As the war organization evolved our principal function came to be to exercise
a continuous surveillance over the war agencies on behalf of the Executive Office
ot the President, in order that program gaps, jurisdictional conflicts, organiza-
tional and, 4»ader ship breakdowns .might ijhe detected, reported, and acted upon
by the Budget Director or President before serious damage was done. Pro-
grams and operations were continuously being evaluated for their contributions
to the war effort. Frequently changes in personnel, program policy, and basic
organization were recommended to the Budget Director for submission to the
President.
During this time I was also frequently on special assignment to the White
House working with Judge Samuel I. Rosenman. Judge Rosenman was then
serving as special assistant to the President helping to resolve many of the diffi-
cult situations arising from the unusual pressures, tensions, and personalities
of wartime Washington. I assisted him in working out proposals for the Presi-
dent concerning the assignment of major war powers as between competing
administrators and in developing organizational plans and mechanisms for co-
ordination of war policies at the White House level.
1948-44 — War Production Board; Administrative Assistant to Chairman
In January 1943 I was invited by Donald M. Nelson, Chairman of the War
Production Board, to become his chief administrative assistant. In this capacity
I served as Mr. Nelson's principal adviser and assistant in the administration
of the War Production Board.
I was directly responsible for organization planning, budget and fiscal admin-
istration, personnel management, business services, and operating procedures
for the entire Board. Five divisions covering these activities were under my
direction. I was also Chairman of the Administrative Council.
Much of my time at WPB was devoted to adjusting its organization to meet
. new program needs arising from the war particularly with regard to plans for
the Normandy invasion. I was also engaged in directing an effort to streamline
the agency and reduce its excessive staff. By a process of freezing recruitment,
consolidating functions, reducing budgets, and generally tightening up, we were
able to report to the House Appropriations Committee in April 1944 that the
1944 appropriation of approximately $89 million had been reduced to $69 million
for fiscal 1945. In personnel terms I was able to report that the total WPB
staff of 22,000 in January 1943 had been reduced to 17,500 by March 1944.
1944-45 — United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration
In August 1944 I accepted an invitation to join the staff of the newly formed
United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration. My first task was
to make some surveys toward improving certain management and fiscal aspects
of tbe organization. Then Herbert Lehman, Director General of UNRRA re-
quested and urged me to serve as Deputy Director of the Bureau of Areas, which,
was responsible for all relief operations abroad. I was informed that the
program was being seriously impaired because of poor direction of this Bureau
by its Chief, Michail A. Menshikov, a Soviet national. I accepted this post with
reluctance, and only because I considered it a matter of duty; then was re-
quested to initiate and expedite the work in liberated areas of Europe and the
Far East. I was able to make some progress and improvements in the situation,
reporting directly to Governor Lehman on critical decisions such as the forma-
tion of country missions.
At the end of 3 months, however, I asked Governor Lehman to be relieved of
this assignment since I saw no hope of achieving the degree of improvement
the situation called for as long as the obstructionist and dilatory tactics of the
Director of the Bureau of Areas continued. The international political situa-
tion apparently did not permit the removal of this senior representative of the
Soviet Union at that time. I was permitted to withdraw in accordance with
the agreement made when I originally consented to take on the task.
During raesst of the remainder of my time in UNRRA I served as Assistant
and Acting Director of the Bureau of Finance and Administration.
1945-50 — United States Department of Commerce: Executive Assistant to the
Secretary
In March 1945 I received an offer from Henry A. Wallace, newly designated.
Secretary of Commerce, to serve as his Executive Assistant. I left UNRRA
to accept this post for which 1 had been recommended by Harold D. Smith,
my former chief in the Bureau of the Budget. I continued in this position
under Secretaries W. Averell Harriman and Charles Sawyer until November
1950.
1208 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The following excerpt from my official position description indicates the
scope of my duties during my tenure in the Department of Commerce :
"As the Secretary's principal career assistant and staff director of operations
for the entire Department, the incumbent of this position provides overall direc-
tion, guidance, and coordination in the Secretary's behalf and pursuant to his
general policies for all programs of the Department, to obtain optimum effi-
ciency, economy, and effectiveness in the administration of the affairs of the
Department and its constituent bureaus."
My principal effort during my 6 years in this large and diverse Department
was to work toward its revived importance following the neglect of the war years
and to help make it of more dynamic and efficient service to the business and
industrial community. Much of my work centered around the $1 billion annual
budget: its development, approval, adjustment, and control. Budget requests
and new programs were subject to my approval on behalf of the Secretary before
submission to the Budget Bureau or to congressional committees.
Another activity which took considerable of my personal time was the work
incident to the Hoover Commission. I was designated by the Secretary asi the
official liaison and representative of the Department in regard to this Commis-
sion while it was formulating its recommendations. Subsequently, during the
period of implementation and Installation, it w T as my responsibility to work out
the transfers of functions and agencies and to assure their smooth integration
into the Department's structure.
In addition to these duties, I was responsible for personnel management in the
Department covering some 55,000 employees. With te inauguration of the loyalty
program in 1948, the Secretary of Commerce designated me as his representative
in hearing appeals from casse determined adversely by our Loyalty Board under
Executive Order 9835. This, together with the related security program, came
to demand an increasing amount of my official time. I also served as the central
liaison and representative of the Department in relation to the Central Intelli-
gence Agency.
Note. — During my years of service in the United States Government, I invari-
ably and without exception received civil service efficiency ratings of "excellent"
from my various superiors.
1950 to date — Ford Foundation
In November 1950 Paul G. Hoffman, newly designated president of the Ford
Foundation, invited me to become associated with him as assistant to the presi-
dent. I accepted, as this offered me challenging work at an attractive salary
with good prospects for higher advancement than a career officer could expect in
the Government. During Mr. Hoffman's incumbency I served as chief of the
. New York office of the foundation in which were centered the operational activi-
ties of the organization.
GENERAL PROFESSIONAL
Following the election of President Eisenhower in 1952 I was requested to serve
as a consultant to the committee headed by Mr. Nelson Rockefeller dealing with
reorganization of the Federal Government. I assisted the committee in develop-
ing its plans and in outlining some of the principal management, organization
and civil-service problems which would confront the new administration (tem-
porary assignment).
During the recent school year, in association with Prof. Arthur MacMahon,
I conducted a graduate seminar on the subject American Political Institutions
for the department of public law and government at Columbia University.
At Oberlin on October 31, 1953, I was awarded an alumni citation "in recogni-
tion of outstanding achievements and services which reflect honor upon Oberlin
College."
My writings have all been in the field of public administration. The following
articles of mine have been published :
1. "Administrative Planning in the Federal Government," Advanced Management
1940
2. "Top Management in the War Agencies," graduate school, Department of
Agriculture, 1949
3. "Civil Service versus Merit," Public Administration Review 1952
4. "Civil Service at the Crossroads," Good Government 1953.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
1209
MEMBERSHIPS AND AFFILIATIONS
In the political sphere I consider myself an independent. Since coining of
voting age I have been registered at different times both as a Democrat and as a
Republican and have contributed funds to both parties dependent on my con-
victions at the time.
My other affiliations have been largely limited to religious, professional, or
social organizations in which I have had a direct and tangible interest.
During our 4 years residence in Japan Mrs. Gladieux and I were members
of Tokyo Community Church. During our residence in Maryland, my wife and
I helped establish and attended a community church— Pilgrim Lutheran Church-
though we are not Lutherans ourselves. Since resident in Scarsdale, N. Y., my
wife and I have joined Hitchcock Memorial Presbyterian Church.
I have searched my memory and my records going back to the 1935 period
when I reestablished myself in Toledo following residence in Japan and to the
very best of my knowledge and recollection, the following constitutes a compre-
hensive list of my organizational memberships and affiliations during this period.
National Municipal League, 1936-40, approximately.
International City Manager's Association, 1936-40, approximately.
Governmental Research Association, 1936-39, approximately.
Ys Men's Club, YMCA, of Toledo, Ohio, 1935-36.
American Society of Public Administration (charter member) , 1938 to date.
Group Health Association of Washington, D. C, member hoard of directors,
1944-47, approximately.
Kenwood Golf and Country Club, Chevy Chase, Md., 1946-50.
YMCA of Washington, D. C, 1945-47.
Advisory Council on Public Administration of the Graduate School of the De-
partment of Agriculture, 1945-46, approximately.
Potomac Appalachian Trail Club, 1946-48.
Appalachian Mountain Club, 1946-48.
Oberlin Alumni Club of Washington, D, C, president,, 1946-48.
Alumni Board of Oberlin College, treasurer, 1945-48.
Board of managers of the YMCA schools of New York City, 1951 to date.
Planning committee of Board of Education of Scarsdale, New York, 1952.
Town Club of Scarsdale, New York, 1953 to date.
Men's Club of Hitchcock Memorial Church, 1951 to date.
Greenacres Association (neighborhood association in Scarsdale) 1951 to date.
Advisory council of the department of politics, Princeton University, 1953, to date.
Advisory group, Japan International Christian University, 1953 to date.
Various parent-teacher's associations.
Though it represented a completely futile exercise, I have carefully reviewed
the Attorney General's list of subversive organizations, as well as the broader
Guide to Subversive Organizations of the House Committee on Un-American
Activities, I can say without reservation that I am not now and never have been
a member of any such listed organization, nor have I otherwise been associated
or affiliated in any way therewith. I can make the same statement on behalf of
my wife.
Furthermore, I should like to state for the record and under oath that I am
not now nor ever have been a member of the Communist Party or any of its affil-
iates or sympathetic in any way with its objectives or doctrines.
Bernard L. Gladieux being duly sworn on his oath deposes and says that he is
the person who subscribed his name to the foregoing biographical statement and
that the matters and facts set forth in said biographical statement are true.
(Signed) Bernard L. Gladieux.
State of New York,
County of New York, ss:
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 13th day of July 1954.
Term expires March 30, 1955.
(Signed) Janice B. LaVine,
Notary Public, State of New York.
1210 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Statement of Joseph H. Willits in Reply to Inquiry of General Counsel
of the Special Committee To Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations Dated
Augltst 4, 1954
My name is Joseph H. Willits. My residence address is North Greenwich
Road, Armonk, N. Y. I was director of the division of social sciences of the
Bockefeller Foundation from 1939 until my retirement on June 30, 1954, in accord-
ance with the bylaws of the foundation.
This statement is made in response to a letter which I have received from Mr.
Rene A. Wormser, general counsel of the committee, dated August 4, 1954, con-
taining the following paragraphs :
"It is my understanding that following the statements made by Mr. Kohlberg
regarding the Institute of Pacific Relations you agreed, on behalf of the Rocke-
feller Foundation, to have his charges investigated. However, at a later date
you informed Mr. Kohlberg that no such investigation was to be made, explain-
ing this seeming reversal by a statement to the effect that the Institute of Pacific
Relations was undertaking an investigation of its own.
"The chairman has asked me to take this matter up with you and I would
appreciate your advising me as soon as you conveniently can whether the above
statement is an accurate resume of what took place."
The above statement is not an accurate resume of what took place.
The statement that I "agreed, on behalf of the Rockefeller Foundation, to
have his (Mr. Kohlberg's) charges investigated" appears to be based upon testi-
mony given before the special committee by Dr. Kenneth Colegrove on June 8,
1954. This witness testified that he could not understand, "when Alfred Kohl-
berg was able to get the consent of one of the very high officers in the Rockefeller
Foundation, why the foundation would not make an investigation of the IPR.
* * * We ought to have the whole story of why the Rockefeller Foundation
failed to make the investigation in 1945" (transcript, p. 1235). The chairman
later asked : "To whom was Kohlberg's request for an investigation made,
Professor?" Dr. Colegrove answered :
"It was made to Fred Willetts, an official of the Rockefeller Foundation, one
of the outstanding men, a man of great integrity and a man of competence and
scholarship. I have great respect for Fred Willetts, and he must have had a
good reason for not investigating. But that reason, it seems to me, ought to be
told to the American people" (transcript, p. 1238).
The fact of the matter is that I never "agreed, on behalf of the Rockefeller
Foundation, to have his (Mr. Kohlberg's) charges investigated." I suggested
to both parties that they jointly select an impartial committee of inquiry to hear
and determine the charges, and I acted as an intermediary in trying to bring
about an agreement between them on terms of reference and procedure. The
attempt broke down when the IPR rejected the proposal and decided to act on
its own. There was no "seeming reversal" on my part. I proffered my help to
bring the parties into agreement on the terms and conditions of an independent
inquiry into the charges. I continued to use my best efforts in that direction
until the IPR declined to go further with my proposal. I then notified Mr.
Kohlberg that the IPR (not I and not the Rockefeller Foundation) had broken
off the negotiations. That is the sum and substance of this particular incident.
As will be noted later, however, the Rockefeller Foundation, in coming to a
decision as to whether or not further support should be given to the IPR, made
through its own staff, and for its own purposes, a careful inquiry into the IPR
situation.
The particular incident about which counsel for the committee inquires was
the subject of testimony by both Dean Rusk, president of the Rockefeller Foun-
dation, and Mr, Kohlberg during the hearings before the Cox committee in 1952.
Mr. Rusk's testimony (Cox committee hearings, p. 524) is quoted, with addi-
tional comments, in the supplemental statement of the Rockefeller Foundation
(verified under oath by Mr. Rusk) filed with this committee on August 3, 1954,
as follows (pp. 10-11) :
"The actual facts in regard to this episode, which differ materially from Dr.
Colegrove's version, were set forth in the public testimony of the president of
the Rockefeller Foundation before the Cox committee as follows :
" 'In 1944 Alfred Kohlberg sent the foundation copies of his charges of pro-
Communist bias in the IPR. The director of the social-sciences division of the
foundation suggested that the charges be referred to an independent body of
competent persons for hearing and determination. This proposal was accepted
by Mr. Kohlberg, but rejected by the IPR. Instead, a special committee of IPR
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1211
trustees reported to its board that the executive committee and responsible offi-
cers of the American council had "investigated Mr. Kohlberg's charges and
found them inaccurate and irresponsible." The foundation officers would have
preferred an independent appraisal of the organization's activities, I might say,
not because of any views which they then held on the merits of the problem but
because in their view at the time that was the proper procedure by which you
could get rid of this kind of issue one way or the other.'
"The 'director of the social-sciences division of the foundation' referred to in
this quotation was Joseph H. Willits, who is evidently the person Dr. Colegrove
had in mind. As the foregoing testimony shows, there was no plan to have the
foundation conduct a public investigation of the IPR, an undertaking for which
the foundation was neither equipped nor qualified. Mr. Willits never gave his
'consent' to have such an investigation undertaken by the foundation, and there
was no mysterious suppression of such a proposal. On the contrary, Mr. Willits
intervened with a suggestion for quite a different type of investigation which was
never carried out because the proposal was not acceptable to the IPR."
In further amplification of Mr. Rusk's statements I submit the following :
Toward the end of 1944 the foundation received a copy of Mr. Kohlberg's
charges against the Institute of Pacific Relations. This was followed by an
interview between Mr.- Kohlberg and myself in the spring of 1945, in the course
of which he sought to enlist any interest or help we might appropriately give
toward resolving the situation.
Although I gave Mr. Kohlberg no encouragement at the time of our interview,
after further consideration, I felt that there would be no objection to an entirely
unofficial personal suggestion on my part that the parties agree to refer the
charges to an impartial committee of inquiry, of their own selection, for hearing
and determination. This would not involve any interference or inquiry by the
foundation, which would not even propose names for the committee of inquiry,
much less determine its membership, and which would leave it to the parties
themselves to agree upon the terms of reference and the procedure to be followed
by the committee. I offered to act in the role of mediator only, and even in that
role, I was a mediator, not of the issues in dispute, but of questions relating to a
possible procedure for settling those issues, a procedure in which the foundation
would not be a participant.
Accordingly, I sounded out both parties as to their attitude toward this pro-
posal, Mr. Kohlberg indicated his willingness to proceed, on condition that the
committee's inquiry should include both the Pacific and American Councils of
the IPR, and that the committee should be free to make its inquiry and search for
evidence as it wished.
The IPR was noncommittal, but I continued discussions with them on a basis
which I regarded as encouraging. On July 26, 1945, in an effort to bring the
matter to a head, I wrote a letter to Mr. Kohlberg, with copies to the repre-
sentatives of the American and Pacific Councils of the IPR, enclosing a state-
ment of certain points of agreement between the parties, as I understood them,
and stating that when both sides were in complete agreement as to charges,
terms of reference and methods of procedure I would send each a copy of the
final agreement, and a meeting to decide upon the membership of the committee
of inquiry should follow. This letter and the enclosure to which it refers read as
follows :
[Letterhead of the Rockefeller Foundation]
July 26, 1945.
Mr. Alfred Kohlberg,
Shorehan Hotel, Spring Lake, N. J.
Gentlemen : I enclose a statement of my understanding of the points of sub-
stantial agreement reached in my separate conversations with you concerning a
committee of inquiry to examine into the charges of bias in the IPR.
If this statement does not correctly state your own views, please write or
telephone me the corrections you desire to have made and I shall continue my
efforts as your secretary. If you approve, please write me your approval.
When both sides are in complete agreement as to charges, terms of reference,
and methods of procedure I shall send each of you a eopy of the final statement.
An exchange of letters direct or via me accepting the statement would seem then
to be in order. A meeting to decide upon the membership of the committee of
inquiry would follow.
In these mediation efforts I am not functioning as an official of the Rocke-
feller Foundation but solely as a citizen interested to see the dispute resolved.
I distinctly am not urging a committee of inquiry, but raised the question be-
1212 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
cause each side had expressed sympathy for such a procedure. I am ready and
glad to step out and drop the whole matter at any time, if you can find -some
more satisfactory alternative procedure or mediator.
Sincerely yours,
Joseph H. Willits.
Copy to Mr. Raymond Dennett ; copy to Professor Corbett, whom Mr. Edward
Carter has designated as representative of the Pacific Council.
Enclosure :
POINTS OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN ALFRED KOHLBERG AND THE INSTITUTE OF
PACIFIC RELATIONS
(The following statement represents an attempt to set down the points of
agreement with respect to an impartial committee of inquiry to hear and examine
the charges made by Alfred Kohlberg against the Pacific and American Councils
of the Institute of Pacific Relations. This statement covers my tentative under-
standing of the points of agreement as to charges, terms of reference, and meth-
ods of procedure as reached in separate conversations with Alfred Kohlberg on
the one hand and with Raymond Dennett of the IPR on the other. — Joseph H.
Willits.)
CHARGES
Mr. Kohlberg charges an anti-Chungking, pro-Communist bias in the IPR's
attitude toward China as evidenced by —
(1) Distorted and inaccurate articles on China and the Chinese Government
appearing in publications of the Institute of Pacific Relations. Mr. Kohlberg
charges that this attitude has changed from time to time to correspond with atti-
tude reflected by articles appearing in Communist publications such as The New
Masses, The Communist, and The Daily Worker.
(2) Membership of staff writers on China of the Institute of Pacific Relations
(both American and Pacific Councils) at some time in the last 8 years in Com-
munist or Communist-front organizations or employment by them.
TERMS OF REFERENCE
The committee of inquiry is charged with responsibility for examining the
charges of bias in the publications of IPR and rendering an opinion thereon.
METHOD OF PROCEDURE
It is agreed by both parties that —
(1) The membership of the committee of inquiry shall consist of three
persons, mutually agreed to by both parties.
(2) The inquiry shall embrace both the Pacific and American Councils.
(3) The committee of inquiry shall be free to determine its own procedure
and search for evidence as it sees lit ; and to decide also what testimony is
relevant.
(4) The hearings shall not be public.
(5) Bach party to the dispute shall, within reasonable limits, be free to
bring such assistants and advisers to the hearings as he may wish. The
committee of inquiry shall determine what constitutes "reasonable limits."
(6) Each party to the dispute binds himself (and his organization) to
keep the proceedings secret and specifically to give no report of the proceed-
ings to the press.
(7) A complete transcript of the proceeding shall be made and one copy
each furnished to Mr. Kohlberg and to the IPR. Other copy or copies shall
be the property of the committee of inquiry.
(8) Bach party shall limit its presentation of testimony to 2 days' time.
(9) Mr. Kohlberg agrees to drop his court suit against the IPR and not
again to revive it in case the committee of inquiry comes into being and
reports.
(10) The expenses of the committee of inquiry shall be provided equally
by the two parties to the issue.
(11) A copy of the report of the committee of inquiry shall go to each
member of the American Council.
No decision was reached during August, probably because of the absence on
vacation of a number of those Interested in the matter.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1213
Under date of September 6, 1945, I received the following letter from the
secretary of the American Council, IPR :
[Letterhead of American Council, Institute of Pacific Relations, Inc.]
September 6, '1945.
Mr. Joseph H. Willits,
Rockefeller Foundation, New York, N. Y.
Dear Mr. Willits : The executive committee of the American Council of the
IPR has considered your letter of July 26 in which you transmit a proposed
understanding between the IPR and Mr. Alfred Kohlberg for the constitution of
a committee of inquiry to examine into charges of bias in the IPR.
The committee has instructed me; to inform you that it has decided not to
accept the proposals which have been made, and is instead forwarding to Mr.
Kohlberg, through his lawyers, an alternate proposal, to wit; an offer to mail
all the members of the American Council whatever material he may wish to
send regardless of whether or not it may not contain libelous material.
The reasons for the rejection of this offer and the substitution of an alternate
proposal include a desire on the part of the executive committee of the Amrican
Council to conclude this matter as quickly as possible by offering Mr. Kohlberg
the opportunity to present his charges to the membership, collect his proxies, and
have the matter settled by the decision of the members of our own organization,
who, since they represent a cross section of the American public are presumably
in a position to judge intelligently on the matters at issue.
The committee was further impelled to this decision by noting that Mr.
Kohlberg had continued two additional general circularizations : one an open
letter to Mr. Raymond Gram Swing, and another an open letter to the trustees
of this organization, under date of August 31. Both of these communications
occurred during the time when we were both presumably engaged in considering
the proposals which you were kind enough to suggest.
The committee has also asked me to express to you its deep appreciation of
your courtesies and kind efforts to bring this matter to a conclusion. We feel
indebted to you for your personal interest and kindness in this matter and I am
sure that you will realize that our decision stems from a conviction that our
proposed method, if Mr. Kohlberg accepts it, will be in the best interests of our
organization.
With cordial best wishes,
Sincerely yours,
Raymond Dennett, Secretary.
This letter left me no choice, as a mediator, but to drop the proposal which
for several months I had been trying to bring to fruition. Accordingly, I tele-
phoned Mr. Kohlberg reporting the IPR's decision to him. I received in reply
the following letter :
[Letterhead of Alfred Kohlberg, Inc.]
September 11, 1945.
Mr. Joseph H. Willits,
New York W, N. Y.
My Dear Me. Willits : I desire to take this occasion to thank you for the time
and effort spent in attempting to arrange for an impartial hearing of the charges
I have preferred against the management of the Institute of Pacific Relations.
In our future relations with the nations of the Pacific Basin, the institute should
play an important part.
As I understood you over the telephone yesterday, the institute will take up
directly with me the question of a hearing on my charges and. have asked you
to withdraw from a part in such arrangements. As I understand it, I will hear
from the institute in due course.
Your fairness, impartiality, and patience I hope will bring about a satisfactory
investigation, which will result in strengthening the institute as an organ of
international good will.
Very sincerely yours,
Alfred Kohlberg.
1214 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
This exchange of correspondence was closed with my answer, as follows :
September 14, 1945.
Mr. Alfred Kohlberg,
New York, N. Y.
My Deab Mr. Kohlberg : Thank yon for your letter of September 11. I am
glad if my efforts to bring about some adjustment of the differences between
yourself and the Institute of Pacific Relations have helped toward a mutually
satisfactory conclusion. As you appreciate, I was merely trying to be a mediating
middleman.
Perhaps I should correct one small point in your letter. The institute has
not asked me to withdraw. They have merely said that they were prepared to
make a direct proposal to you and in the meantime the question of a committee
to hold a hearing is withdrawn. I don't know just what their proposal is. That
they will make clear to you.
Sincerely yours,
Joseph H. Willits.
My statement that I did not "agree, on behalf of the Rockefeller Foundation,
to have his [Mr. Kohlberg's] charges investigated" is borne out by Mr. Kohlberg's
testimony before the Cox committee. After referring to the filing of his charges
and to his interview with me, Mr. Kohlberg testified :
"A little bit later in the summer of 1945, Mr. Willetts (sic) proposed that the
institute and I get together and agree on a committee of three impartial persons
to hear my charges and evidence, and hear the institute's side, and make a report
to the institute and to the Rockefeller Foundation" (Cox committee hearings,
p. 652).
Mr. Kohlberg's further testimony as to my report to him on the breakdown of
my negotiations with the IPR (Cox committee hearings, p. 654) is also generally
corroborative of what I have said above.
A special committee of IPR trustees later reported that the executive com-
mittee had investigated Mr. Kohlberg's charges "and found them inaccurate and
irresponsible."
The fact that no investigation of Mr. Kohlberg's charges was made by a com-
mittee of inquiry such as I proposed did not mean, however, that the matter was
dropped by the Rockefeller Foundation. As was fully explained in Mr. Rusk's
testimony before the Cox committee (Cox committee hearings, pp. 524-526) the
question of whether or not a further grant should be made to the IPR came before
the foundation in 1946. As part of a very thorough inquiry into the whole IPR
situation by the foundation staff, we sought the advice of, among many others,
four former trustees of the American Council of the IPR who were understood
to have resigned from its board because of dissatisfaction with conditions in the
organization. After referring to the concern which these former trustees ex-
pressed in regard to certain aspects of the IPR's personnel and organization,
Mr. Rusk correctly summed up their position in his testimony as follows :
"But the overall feeling among this group of former trustees was that the
Kohlberg charges had been exaggerated, and that the most important service the
Rockefeller Foundation could render was not to destroy the American Council
by abruptly ending its support but, rather, to renew its grants and thereby
reinforce the efforts of the group who were working to strengthen the organiza-
tion in line with its original objectives."
The foundation's 1946 grants to the IPR were made only after a careful
investigation by us and after obtaining the advice of such men as these who
were in a position to understand conditions within the IPR. It is interesting
also to note that the committee's witness, Dr. David N. Rowe, who had joined
the IPR around 1939, became a member of its board of trustees in 1947, the year
after these grants were made, and continued to serve as a member of its board
until 1950. His testimony in support of the reputation which the IPR still
enjoyed "up until the late forties" has been quoted in the Rockefeller Founda-
tion's Supplemental Statement, dated August 3, 1954, at page 11.
Joseph H. Willits.
State of New York,
County of New York, ss:
Sworn to before me this 9th day of August 1954.
Tseal"! Harold B. Leonard,
Notary Public, State of New York.
Term expires March 30, 1955.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1215
Report on International Relations Clubs Which are Sponsored by the,
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
(By Felix Wittmer,, Ph. D., formerly associate professor of the social studies,.
New Jersey State Teachers College at Montclair)
When I taught history and political science at the New Jersey State Teachers-
College at Montclair, I was faculty adviser of the International Relations Club,
for a period of about 12 or 13 years, from about 1937 to 1950. This club was
and is one of a network of many hundreds, if not close to a thousand college clubs,,
known as International Relations Clubs, all of which are sponsored by the Car-
negie Endowment for International Peace.
For most of the time when I served as faculty adviser, said club received a
large amount of printed material from the Carnegie Endowment free of charge.
At the beginning of each school year I had to notify the secretariat of the Car-
negie Endowment regarding the number of free copies of the bulletins of the*
Foreign Policy Association which we required for our study groups. We were
regularly supplied with various types of publications of the Foreign Policy
Association, including the pamphlets known as Headline Books. In an article,
Pamphlets Spread Soviet Propaganda, which appeared in the November 1952.
issue of National Republic, I have analyzed the subversive character of these
pamphlets.
Mrs. Vera Micheles Dean figured for many years as research director of the
publications of the Foreign Policy Association. Mrs. Dean belonged among those
who in 1937 signed their names in the Golden Book of American- Soviet Friend-
ship, a memorial which appeared in the Communist-front magazine Soviet Russia
Today of November 1937. According to the testimony of Walter S. Steele before
the House Un-American Activities Committee on July 21, 1947, Mrs. Dean's,
writings figured in the Communist propaganda kit for teachers of the National
Council of American-Soviet Friendship.
Mrs. Dean cooperated with the world's toughest Communist agents, such as.
Tsola N. Dragoicheva, of Bulgaria, and Madame Madeleine Braun, the French
Communist deputy, in helping to set up the Congress of American Women, a
Communist front so important in its worldwide ramifications that the House
Un-American Activities Committee devoted a 114-page pamphlet to it. At one
of the preliminary meetings of this Communist front Vera Micheles Dean, ac-
cording to the New York Times of October 14, 1946 (p. 26) , told 150 foreign and
50 American delegates to "whittle away their conceptions of national sovereignty"
and to pull themselves out of the "ancient grooves of nationalism."
The Carnegie Endownment also supplied our International Relations Club
with a large segment of the publications of the Institute of Pacific Relations,,
whose subversive character has been documented at the hearings of the McCarran
committee. For a great many years the Carnegie Endowment twice a year, i. e.,
each semester, provided our club with about half a dozen books, free of charge..
There was never any opportunity for the faculty adviser to suggest titles of con-
servative books which uphold the principle of competitive enterprise and individ-
ual responsibility, and which warn against close association with state-controlled
nations. The Carnegie Endowment stipulated that these gift books be kept in a
separate department in the college library. In the course of years our club
built up a substantial IRC library comprising several shelves.
Among the books received from the Carnegie Endowment for International-
Peace there were publications of the American Russian Institute, such as The
Soviet Union Today. The American Russian Institute has been cited as Com-
munist by Attorney General Tom Clark. To the best of my knowledge the authors
of these gift books included such stalwarts of the Communist causes as Ruth
Benedict, T. A. Bisson, Evans Clark, Corliss Lamont, Owen Lattimore, Nathaniel
Peffer, and Alexander Worth.
At the hearings on the Institute of Pacific Relations, which were held by the-
Internal Security Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, from
July 25, 1951, to June 20, 1952, T. A. Bisson, Corliss Lamont, and Owen Latti-
more were identified under oath as Communists.
The late Ruth Benedict, along with Gene Weltfish, was coauthor of Races Of
Mankind, a public affairs pamphlet which was barred by the War Department
following upon congressional protest. Dr. Weltfish resigned from Columbia
University after she had refused to tell a congressional committee whether she-
was or ever had been a member of the Communist Party. Dr. Benedict has been
a sponsor of American Committee for Democracy and Intellectual Freedom;:
49720— 54— pt. 2 18
1216 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
American Committee for Protection of Foreign Born ; American Committee To
Save Refugees ; American Friends of the Chinese People ; and the League of
American Writers, all of which have been listed in the Guide to Subversive
Organizations and Publications, which was released by the House Un-American
Activities Committee on May 14, 1951. According to the Communist Party
publication Daily Worker of January 6, 1944, page 3, Dr. Benedict was a lecturer
at the Jefferson School of Social Science, which Attorney General Tom Clark
has cited as an "adjunct of the Communist Party."
Evans Clark, quondam director of the Twentieth Century Fund, which has sup-
ported radical, leftwing publications, along with such oldtimers of the Commu-
nist fronts as Louis Adamic, Erskine Caldwell, Henry Pratt Fairchild, Langston
Hughes, Rockwell Kent, George Marshall, Maxwell S. Stewart, and Max Tergan,
sponsored the Council for Pan-American Democracy, which has been cited as
subversive and Communist by Attorney General Clark. He was also involved
in the sponsorship of American Investors Union, Inc. ; Committee for a Boycott
Against Japanese Aggression ; and Consumers' National Federation, all of which
are listed in the official Guide to Subversive Organizations and Publications of
the House Un-American Activities Committee (82d Cong., 1st sess.). Mr. Clark
also was at one time secretary to Ludwig C. K. A. Martens, the first Communist
ever to be deported from our shores.
Prof. Nathaniel Peffer, of Columbia University, whose Basis for Peace in the
Far East was included in the free shipments of the Carnegie Endowment, has
been exposed by Ralph De Toledano, in the Gravediggers of America, part I
(American Mercury, July 1951), as one of a cabal of 16 authors and book
reviewers who through the media of the New York Times Book Review, the New
York Herald Tribune Book Section, and the Saturday Review of Literature
systematically praised pro-Communist books and discredited anti-Communist
publications. In the New York Times Book Review Peffer called George Creel's
valuable Russia's Race for Asia a foolish book. In this review he reprimanded
Creel bcause "he fears Russia and does not like or trust the Chinese Communists."
The Challenge of Red China, by Guenther Stein (whom a SOAP intelligence
report named as a Soviet agent) was praised by Lattimore in the New York
Herald Tribune Book Section and by Peffer in the New York Times Book Review
In this eulogy of an all-out apologia of communism in the Far East, Columbia
University's Nathaniel Peffer said that the leaders of the Chinese Communists
"are exceptionally straightforward, simple, of unquestionable integrity."
Alexander Werth is the well-known European apologist for various Commu-
'nist causes. His book, Leningrad, was sent as a gift to college clubs by the
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Many other books which the Carnegie Endowment sent to our college clubs as
gifts, while not quite so outspokenly pro-Communist, were of the leftwing variety.
Among these I would include Sir Bernard Pares, Russia and Russia and the
Peace ; Sumner Welles, the World of the Four Freedoms ; and Henry Morgenthau,
Jr., Germany Is Our Problem. I do not recall that the book gift packages of 10
to 12 publications per year ever included a single conservative or anti-Communist
work.
When, in an effort to counteract the pro-Communist influence of the Carnegie
Endowment I ordered some anti-Communist books for our library (including
works by David J. Dallin and Freda Utley), students asked me: "Are you sure
that these are trustworthy publications ? If they are reliable, why is it that the
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace has not included them in its gift
packages?" (This, at least, was the meaning of the students' questions.)
While faculty advisers of the International Relations Clubs corresponded with
a woman secretary of the endowment, it was understood that Dr. Howard Wilson,
well-known leftwing internationalist and one of the top officials of the Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace, was in charge of the nationwide IRC
project. Dr. Wilson was a frequent speaker at radical conferences and institutes.
Thus he participated in a conference of the education committee of the National
Council of American-Soviet Friendship, in New York City, along with such
veteran Communist fronters as Frank E. Baker, Robert S. Lynd, and Arthur
Upham Pope. Another of these education conferences of the National Council
of American- Soviet Friendship, which was held at Boston, included such well-
known sponsors of the Communist cause as Herbert Davis, Corliss Lamont,
Prof. Dirk Struik (who has in the meantime been dismissed from Massachusetts
Institute of Technology because of his membership in the Communist Party ) and
the Carnegie Endowment's Dr. Howard Wilson.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1217
The annual regional conference of International Relations Clubs was the most
widely heralded feature of this Carnegie Endowment project. The club of the
New Jersey State Teachers College at Montclair belonged to the regional group
of the northeastern seaboard and Canada, which to the best of my recollection
included from 125 to 150 college clubs. There must have been at least 7 or S
similar regional conferences, in other parts of the United States,
According to the detailed reports of the student-delegates of Montclair State
Teachers College, a large majority of those students who attended such confer-
ences favored the views which came close to that of the Kremlin. Students
from Catholic colleges, though in the minority, were known to challenge the
pro-Soviet delegates.
For many a year I made it a point to supply speaker-delegates of our college
with reading material which would counterbalance the radical tendencies of
publications with which the Carnegie Endowment had provided us. As a result
of such tutoring the student-delegates from Montclair Teachers College regularly
clashed with the majority.
Either in 1947 or in 1948, the regional conference of the northeastern section
of IRC's was held on the campus of the New Jersey State Teachers College at
Montclair. Our college was not the choice by vote, but substituted for another
college whose facilities had become unavailable. The best our program com-
mittee could do with regard to speakers was to select known anti-Communists
who were far enough to the left not to cause bedlam among the about 300 dele-
gates who attended the 3-day conference. Dr. Harry D. Gideonse, the liberal,
anti-Communist president of Brooklyn College and Prof. George S. Counts, of
Columbia Teachers College, the one-time pro-Communist who had become anti-
Communist, were chosen by the program committee of our college club.
It is worth mentioning that Mr. Alger Hiss, who then was president of the
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, was forced upon our club not
merely as a speaker, but as the speaker of the final meeting. Having observed
the activities of Mr. Hiss in the State Department for several years, including
his role at the Bretton Woods Conference and the San Francisco Conference
(at which the United Nations was founded), I vigorously protested to the
secretary of the Carnegie Endowment against the appearance of Mr. Hiss.
I was reminded in no uncertain terms that our club, like all the other hun-
dreds of clubs, was under the direction of the Carnegie Endowment for Interna-
tional peace, which had for years liberally supplied it with reading material,
and which contributed funds to cover the honoraria of conference speakers.
My repeated protestations were overruled by the secretary of the endowment.
It turned out that a large group of enthusiastic ladies, most of whom were
members of the local chapter of the United Nations Association, flocked to our
campus to hear and see in person the principal American architect of the United
Nations. This United Nations group has held State-accredited summer insti-
tutes on the United Nations at the New Jersey State Teachers College at Mont-
clair, for the past few years.
I might conclude in adding the personal note that soon after the IRC confer-
ence on our campus had taken place a group of radical leftwing students made
successful efforts to infiltrate our International Relations Club by electing some
officers who were hostile to my anti-Socialist-Communist views. As a result
of systematic radical agitation in the club I resigned as its adviser. My suc-
cessor was one Dr. Frank L. Clayton who had been granted a leave of absence
to work at Columbia Teachers College as a member of the staff which developed
the citizenship education project. The subversive and collectivist tendencies of
said project were exposed by Frank Hughes in the Chicago Tribune of August
12-16, 1951. The project, according to the New York Times of April 20, 1953,
page 27, during the first 4 years of its existence received $1,307,000 from the
Carnegie Corp. of New York.
State of New Jersey,
County of Essex, ss:
I, Felix Wittmer, swear and affirm that I have read and am familiar with the
contents of the foregoing report; and that to the best of my knowledge and
belief, every statement of fact contained therein is true.
Felix Wittmer.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this — day of August 1954.
Helen S. Mountjoy,
Notary Public, State of New Jersey.
1218 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Columbia University,
in the City op New York,
School of Law,
New York, N. Y., September 1, 1954.
Hon. Carroll Reece,
Chairman, Special Committee To Investigate Ta» Exempt Foundations,
House Office Building, Washington, D, C.
My Dear Representative Reece: Under date of July 1, 1954, a report was
made to your committee by Kathryn Casey, legal analyst, purporting to sum-
marize some of the activities of the Rockefeller Foundation and others. I have
only recently seen that document for the first time. At pages 69-71 the legal
analyst's report contains references to me and my work that are erroneous-
In all fairness to me they should not stand without correction. I therefore
respectfully request that my attached statement should be made a part of your
committee's records, and that it be included in your printed proceedings if the-
above references are similarly included. In this way the committee can undo
some of the injury that has been done me under its authority.
You will observe that I have made my statement under oath.
So that they too may be informed of the facts, I am sending copies of this
letter and the attached statement to your colleagues on the special committee,,
as well as to the committee's general counsel and research director.
Very truly yours,
Walter Gellhorn,
Professor of Law.
Statement of Walter Gellhorn Before the Special Committee To Investigate:
Tax Exempt Foundations, House of Representatives, 83d Congress
The following statement is made for the consideration of the Special Com
mittee To Investigate Tax Exempt Foundations of the 83d Congress. I am
moved to make it because erroneous information concerning me has been given
to the committee, appearing at pages 69-71 of the (mimeographed) report by
Kathryn Casey, legal analyst, under date of July 1, 1954. At no time was an
effort made on the committee's behalf to verify the report's contents by inter-
viewing or interrogating me. I should like to stress that the statement I am
now presenting to the committee is made upon my own initiative and, moreover,
is made under solemn oath.
My name is Walter Gellhorn. I am now and for 21 years have been a pro-
fessor in the Law School of Columbia University. I am a member of the bar
of New York. I reside at 186 East Palisade Avenue, Englewood, N. J.
1. The central question toward which the legal analyst's attention was ap-
parently addressed was whether I am an objective scholar and thus qualified
to participate in an analysis of governmental security and loyalty programs, as;
part of the Cornell studies in civil liberty supported by the Rockefeller Founda-
tion. As bearing on this question the legal analyst sets forth 5 brief para-
graphs purporting to characterize or synopsize the extensive materials set forth
in my 300-page book, Security, Loyalty, and Science. Inevitably this involves
quotation out of context, incompleteness, and distortion.
A fairer impression of my volume may he derived from its evaluation by the
many reviewers who appraised it in professional as well as popular publica-
tions. From the large number at hand, I shall quote only from a few by com-
mentators who are, I am sure, well known to and much respected by this
committee.
President James R. Killian, Jr., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (in Yale'
Review) : "This is by all odds the best-informed, the most objective, and the
most thorough study yet to appear of the effects of military secrecy and loyalty
tests on scientific progress in America. * * *"
Professor Jay Murphy, University of Alabama (in Vanderbilt Law Review) :
"In the most objective manner conceivable and with real scholarship, Professor
Gellhorn has examined the laws and policies of the Federal Government * * *=
Professor Gellhorn has written this book in a manner which other scholars may
emulate. He has conducted exhaustive, often firsthand, studies of the places,
persons, and methods involved. There is restraint in his orderly analysis. He-
has not destroyed without creating. The book is a real contribution * * *"
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1219
President L. A. Du Bridge, California Institute of Technology (in Standford
Law Review) : "This is a desperately needed and most valuable book. In it
the thoughtful American will find a cool and unbiased appraisal of the
issues * * * The more it [the bQOk] can be read and understood by laymen —
lawyers; newspaper editors, Congressmen, and the public at large— the greater
will be our hope that we can achieve military security without unnecessary
sacrifice of the democratic principles which our military power is intended to
preserve."
Rear Adm. Roger W. Paine, United States Navy (retired) (in Naval Institute
Proceedings) : 'Any officer of the Defense Department presently or likely to be
assigned to duty where he must participate in the administration of the laws and
executive orders devised to safeguard military secrecy or national security, should
have this book in his background. * * * The author * * * is satisfactorily objec-
tive in his approach to th,is highly controversial problem."
Professor W. Mansfield Cooper, University of Manchester, England (in The
Political Quarterly) : "The present writer, whose interest derives not from any
knowledge of science but from having met some of these problems in university
administration, has found it [the book] fascinating and has laid it down with
an increased faith in the American people. And it is a measure of Professor
Gellhorn's achievement that, criticizing certain practices in his own country, he
yet induces in a foreigner a greater respect for it."
I shall not burden this statement with further excerpts from the reviews, but
I should add that in 1952 the first presentation of the Goldsmith memorial award
was made to Security, Loyalty, and Science; the award is made annually "for
the best article, book, or public pronouncement which contributes to the clarifi-
cation of the right relations between science and politics."
These reactions to my work by recognized authorities should adequately refute
any insinuation that I am not a qualified and objective scholar. It is unneces-
sary, however, to rest upon one book alone. My writings extend over a period
of 25 years. One of my books is more widely used than any other in the teaching
of administrative law in American law schools. In 1946 Harvard University
awarded me its Henderson memorial prize for work done in that field. Within
the years immediately past I have been invited to lecture at leading universities
not only in this country, but in Great Britain, Japan, New Zealand, and Western
Germany. In 1952 Amherst College conferred on me the degree of doctor of
humane letters, the citation that accompanied this honor referring among other
things to the "wide recognition" accorded my "judicious examination of the
problem of whether and how liberty and security may be combined in the field
of scientific research." In 1953, I was unanimously elected a member of the
executive committee of the Association of American Law Schools. I have directed
the research of the New York Law Society. The section of judicial administra-
tion of the Amercan Bar Association, under the chairmanship of Judge Harold
R. Medina, requested my direction of a study of the functioning of courts in the
New York metropolitan area.
These are not the sorts of distinctions that come to a scholar whose work is
infected by bias.
Moreover, in the community where most of my professional life has been lived
and where there has therefore been the most sustained knowledge of all my
activities, the derogatory appraisal suggested by your legal analyst is directly
repudiated. Two years ago the Association of the Bar of the City of New York,
widely regarded as the leading legal association of the Nation, requested me to
conduct in its behalf an extensive study of the administration of laws affecting
families and children. The results of that study have been supported and
endorsed by the bar association, and have been praised in the editorial columns
of the newspapers. They have recently been published by Dodd, Mead & Co., in
a volume entitled "Children and Families in the Courts of New York City."
This record of scholarly integrity should not be impugned by uninformed
comment.
2. The Legal Analyst asserts (mimeographed p. 70) that in the Harvard Law
Review of October 1947 I published an article "specifically defending the Southern
Conference for Human Welfare, exposed as a Communist organization, and vio-
lently attacking the House committee."
The actual facts demonstrate beyond question the inaccuracy of the allega-
tions.
1220 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
At the very outset of the Harvard article to which reference is made (Report
on a Report of the House Committee on Un-American Activities, 60 Harvard
Law Review 1193), I stated that the author does not "propose to serve in the
role of defense counsel, as it were, for the southern conference. He is not con-
nected with the conference, has no authorization to speak for it, and has access
to no special body of knowledge about its activities." And again, at the end of
the article, I repeated that I "disclaimed any intent to appraise the Southern
Conference for Human Welfare." These unequivocal and unmodified statements
adequately show that I was not "specifically defending" the southern conference.
As for the alleged "violent attack" upon the House committee, I did no more
than examine its own report in order to analyze the techniques used in that
particular instance. I found— and demonstrated by precise citation of chapter
and verse— that those techniques had in that case included partial and mislead-
ing quotations out of context, the repetition of unverified charges that would
have been dispelled by even a cursory inquiry, the loose and damaging charac-
terization of persons of good standing, the ignoring of relevant information that,
if recorded, would have affected the opinion of fairminded men, and insensitivity
to a cherished American value, the preservation of an individual's reputation
against unfair attack. I did indeed severely criticize those techniques. They
deserve condemnation when used by or in behalf of any committee of the
Congress.
3. The Legal Analyst says (mimeographed p. 70) that I am cited as an "active
leader" of the National Lawyers Guild.
The simple fact is that I have not even been a member of the National Lawyers
Guild for a number of years, and that during the period of my membership I
was not prominent enough in its affairs to be deemed an "active leader." I
doubt that activity in the guild could properly be regarded as reprehensible, in
and of itself, without reference to what the activity was; but in any event I
was, on the whole, an inactive rather than an active member, and am no longer a
member of any sort.
4. The Legal Analyst reports (mimeographed p. 69) that I am "listed in ap-
pendix IX, page 471, as a 'conscious propagandist and fellow traveler.' "
A word needs to be said about the appendix IX upon which this statement so
directly leans.
The Legislative Reference Service of the Library of Congress informs me that
appendix IX, with its cumulative index, was prepared late in 1944 by a subcom-
mittee of the old Dies committee, and fills seven volumes containing 2,166 pages.
A large number of copies of the report were printed. But, continues the letter
to me from the Director of the Legislative Reference Service, "When the report
was brought to the attention of the full committee it was ordered restricted and
the existing copies were destroyed. A number of copies were distributed by the
Government Printing Office to subscribers before the distribution was cancelled
by the committee."
The conclusion seems inescapable that appendix IX was found unacceptable
by the very committee to which it was presented — and very possibly for the
precise reason that it contained just such unsubstantiated comments as the one
referred to by your staff member,
Here again the facts are quite clear. The characterization of me by some un-
identified person in appendix IX is in connection with a little known travel
organization, Open Road, Inc., of which I was a director in 1929-31. My sworn
testimony concerning this organization was freely given before this special
committee's predecessor, the Cox committee, and appears at pages 738-739 of
the hearings conducted by that committee in 1952 pursuant to H. Res. 561. Suf-
fice it now to say that I was 23 and 24 years old at the time of my association
with the Open Road ; that I was then a student in law school ; and that I re-
signed from it when in 1931 I left New York to become law secretary to Supreme
Court Justice Harlan Fiske Stone and, later during the Hoover administration,
an attorney in the Office of the Solicitor General under Judge Thomas D.
Thacher.
The Open Road, as my earlier recorded testimony shows, was a purely educa-
tional and nonpolitical organization devoted to facilitating travel abroad. Its
chief sponsors were distinguished college presidents such as Farrand of Cornell,
Garfield of Williams, and MacCracken of Vassar. It became defunct, some years
after I had terminated my relationship with it, because wartime conditions
from 1939 onward made travel impossible. As I observed before the Cox com-
mittee, "All I can say about the organization is that certainly during the years
of my association with it, it had no political orientation or motivation what-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1221
soever. * * * The worst that can be said about the young people who were
interested in that organization, as I was at that time, is that they entertained
the perhaps naive belief that the world would be a friendlier place if its inhabi-
tants became a little better acquainted,"
This is the setting of the charge that, at the age of 23 and while busily en-
gaged in professional studies, I was a "conscious propagandist" and "fellow-
traveler" in the Open Road, Inc., immediately before becoming the confidential
assistant of a Supreme Court Justice.
5. The Legal Analyst remarks (mimeographed p. 70) that on March 15, 1948,
the Daily Worker quoted from an article by me concerning the House Committee
on Un-American Activities.
The plain fact is that I wrote an article entitled "In Defense of American
Activities" upon the invitation of the American Scholar, in which it appeared
in the spring of 1948. The American Scholar is a quarterly journal published
by Phi Beta Kappa. Subsequent references to the article, whether by the Daily
Worker or by others, are not within the author's control. Since the entire
article is available in the pages of one of the most respected of all American
magazines, I suggest that it be read in full. It cannot be characterized, as the
staff report attempted to do, by lifting two noncontextual quotations from a
notably unreliable secondary source.
6. The Legal Analyst correctly states (mimeographed p. 69) that I was at one
time a national committeeman of the International Juridical Association, but
wrongly implies that an impropriety lurks in that fact.
This association went out of existence some 12 years ago. It was a nonprofit
organization. Throughout my connection with it of about 5 years, it was so-
far as I know devoted exclusively to legal research with particular emphasis upon
labor law and civil liberties. Its primary function was the publication of a
monthly bulletin, which appeared in 11 volumes. The bulletin, as examination
of these volumes will show, was a legal periodical devoted to reporting, analyzing,
and discussing decisions of the courts and administrative bodies and the actions
of the executive and legislative branches of Government. It had widespread
recognition as a scholarly journal and as a source of otherwise unreported legal
material. Among its subscribers were the Library of the Supreme Court, the
Library of the Department of Justice, 28 State supreme court libraries, various
court and bar association libraries, and the libraries of every major university
in the United States. My interest in the IJA was an interest in its bulletin, re-
lated to my academic duties.
7. The Legal Analyst asserts (mimeographed p. 69) that I "was a leading mem-
ber of some 11 Communist fronts."
This statement is unsupported by factual specifications. It is not true. Not
even a superficial inquiry was directed to me to ascertain its accuracy. I repel
the allegation with indignation and with a sense of outrage that, under your
committee's authority, a charge of this nature has been published.
8. The Legal Analyst describes me as "apparently actually" the director of the
Cornell Studies in Civil Liberties (mimeographed p. 69) and as "coauthor of a
study on States and Subversion (with William B. Prendergast, assistant professor
of government at the Naval Academy), and of a study on the Tenney Committee
(with Edward Barrett, Jr., professor of law, University of California * * *)"
(mimeographed p. 71).
Obviously there is nothing derogatory to me in these particular remarks. I
set them forth here only because they reveal how easily error can creep into a
report untested by the scrutiny of one who knows the facts.
The director of the Cornell studies is and was at all times Prof. Robert E. Cush-
man of Cornell, one of America's most distinguished political scientists. The
studies were initiated under his direction before my association with the project,
and they have continued under his direction long after I had completed my
portion of them,. I am proud to have been a part of the project, but at no time and
in no manner was I either "apparently" or "actually" its director. There is not
the slightest basis for a contrary statement.
As for the States and Subversion, I was coauthor not merely with Professor
Prendergast, but with five others as well, and was in addition the editor of this
volume. As for the Tenney Committee, I was in no sense coauthor ; Professor
Barrett alone deserves the credit for that able volume. I emphasize these simple
facts not because they have importance in themselves, but because misstatements
in matters that are so readily subject to verification tend to emphasize the un-
reliability of other observations as well.
1222 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
In closing this statement I desire to add only this : I have held responsible posts
in three national administrations ; my professional career has had its share of dis-
tinctions ; the university of whose faculty I have been a member for 21 years has
reposed a cotffldence in me that is not extended to ose-whose probity <as a man or
as a scholar is suspect. Half a dozen inaccurate paragraphs in a staff report
are a poor offset against the whole record of my adult life.
Walter Gellhorn.
Dated September 1, 1954.
State of New York,
County of New York, ss:
Walter Gellhorn, being duly sworn, says that he is the individual who prepared
the foregoing statement and in whose behalf it is made; and that the statement
is true to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief.
Walter Gellhorn.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 1st day of September 1954.
Cecelia Schlesinger.
Correspondence With Dr. Mortimer Graves, Executive Director,
American Council of Learned Societies
August 19, 1954.
Dr. Mortimer Graves,
American Council of Learned Societies,
Washington, D. C.
Dear Dr. Graves : The committee had intended to ask certain questions of
you about the time of your scheduled appearance before it and since, in line
with the resolution of the committee, no further public hearings will be held,
it becomes necessary to raise those questions through correspondence and request
that your answers be furnished in affidavit form.
The particular information desired concerns the statements which have been
made to the committee and which for convenience in answering, I will list
seriatim below :
1. According to the biography appearing in the 1948-49 issue of Who's Who,
you stated that you were a member of the board of directors of the American
Russian Institute and chairman of the Washington Committee To Aid China.
Are you now or have you been connected with either the institute or the committee,
and, if so, during what period?
2. In the Washington Post of May 11, 1942, page 9, your name appeared as
a sponsor of the Citizens Committee To Free Earl Browder. Were you a sp&nsor
of the committee?
3. Were you a sponsor of the National Council, American-Soviet Friendship?
4. Your name is listed as one of the signers of an open letter, referred to in
the September 1939 issue of Soviet Russia Today, which urged closer cooperation
with the Soviet Union. Is that a fact?
5. We are informed that in February 1941, you presided at a meeting of
the Washington Committee To Aid China, at which the two principal speakers
were Owen Lattimore and Frederick Vanderbilt Field. Is that a fact?
6. We are informed that following the arrest of John Stewart Service in June
1945, you were treasurer of a voluntary committee soliciting funds for his
defense. Is this a fact?
7. We are informed that you have now or have had in your employ, or the
employ of the American Council of Learned Societies, a man named Emanuel
Iiarson. Is this a fact? Did Mr. Larson receive a fellowship from the American
Council of Learned Societies?
8. Did Andrew Ross receive a fellowship from the American Council of
Learned Societies? Are you acquainted with Mr. Ross?
9. The committee is informed that you at one time maintained files on numerous
students of the Far East and on persons given grants and engaged in research
as Far Eastern specialists. Is this a fact? Are these files still available and,
if not, what disposition was made of them? If they are intact, the committee
desires to see them.
10. Did you at any time keep a roster of the scientific and specialized personnel
for the use of various Government agencies or for any other use?
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1223
11. The Reporter for April 29, 1952, contains the following statement at
page 22:
"The personnel selected for Government agencies in the Far East was
picked from a roster of 'Experts' made up by the Council of Learned Societies
under the direction of Mortimer Graves."
Is this an accurate statement? If so, please attach a list of the persons named
by you in this list.
12. Are you acquainted with any of the following individuals?
William Walter Remington
George Shaw Wheeler
Maurice Halperin
Luke I. Wilson
Mary Jane Keeney
Owen Lattimore
Robert Selberstein
Antoli Gromov
Harriet Moore (Gelf an)
Joseph Fels Barnes
Kathleen Barnes.
13. You are shown as a vice chairman and trustee of the Institute of Pacific
Relations in Who's Who from 1942 to 1848. Please name the persons, directly
or indirectly, concerned with the institute with whom you had contact with
regard to the activities of the institute, or with regard to Far Eastern matters.
14. Was your connection with the institute terminated by resignation or by
expiration of a specific term of office? If the resignation was at the suggestion
of some other party, please identify fully. If the resignation was your own
decision, please give the reasons therefor.
As I stated in the opening paragraph of this letter, your answers should be
either in affidavit form or should have the same attestation clause which was
requested in connection with the statement you filed with the committee earlier.
I shall appreciate it if you will submit an original and five copies of this
affidavit.
Sincerely yours,
Rene A. Wormser, General Counsel.
American Council of Learned Societies,
Washington 6, D. C, November 1, 195^.
Mr. Rene A. Wormser,
General Counsel, Select Committee To Investigate Taw Exempt Foundations,
House of Representatives,
"Washington, D. C.
Dear Mr. Wormser : I am enclosing the master of the replies to the questions
which you have asked of me ; the copies which you requested will be sent you as
soon as they come from the machines. The lists of persons requested, and men-
tioned on page 10 of my replies, will reach you at the same time.
I regret what may seem to you a delay in submitting these materials, but the
exigencies of a full-time job and the fact that I could not recall the details of
these minor episodes of years ago in an active life made impossible an earlier
reply which might be useful.
Sincerely yours,
Mortimer Graves,
Executive Director.
Replies by Mortimer Graves To Questions in the Letter of Rene A. Wormsee
of August 23, 1954
1. According to the biography appearing in the 1948-49 issue of Who's Who, you
stated that you were a member of the board of directors of the American
Russian Institute and chairman of the Washington Committee To Aid
China. Are you now or have you been connected with either the institute
or the committee and, if so, during what period ?
1. (a) The American Russian Institute of New York was founded in the early
1930's and continued until 1950. I was a member of the board of directors of the
institute from about 1938 until its dissolution, during which time the principal
purpose of the institute was the establishment and maintenance of a library
1224 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
of contemporary Russian materials in various scholarly fields for the use of
American students of Soviet affairs.
During the time I was a director of the institute I did not attend directors'
meetings, since they were held in New York, while I was kept by my work in
Washington for the most part. I was notified of forthcoming meetings and of
the subjects to be discussed at them. Whenever items on the agenda were of
special professional interest to me, in that they concerned the humanities, I
transmitted my views in writing to the board.
Sometime after the issuance of the President's loyalty order in 1947, it was
rumored that the institute was listed on the Attorney General's list of "sub-
versive" organizations, and after discussion among the directors, the then chair-
man of the board, Mr. Ernest Ropes, formerly of the Russian Division of the
Department of Commerce, consulted Attorney General Tom Clark about the
matter. Thereafter, Mr. Ropes informed the directors that he had received a
written assurance from the Attorney General that the institute was not listed.
I am under the impression that this entire episode arose because of confusion
between the American Russian Institute of New York with which I was asso-
ciated, and the American Russian Institute of San- Francisco which was in no
way connected with the New York organization.
In the late 1940's Columbia University established a Russian Institute which
began to collect published materials about Soviet Russia. In my opinion this
accomplished the main task of the American Russian Institute much more effec-
tively than that organization could do. As a consequence of this my interest In
the American Russian Institute declined and I requested several times that I not
be reelected to the board. My requests were ignored and I continued to be re-
elected in absentia until the dissolution of the organization.
(b) The Washington Committee for Aid to China was a local group in the
District of Columbia which protested and carried on agitation against the ship-
ment of oil, scrap iron, and other strategic materials to Japan as a part of an
attempt to influence the Government of the United States, in the years prior
to World War II, in support of Chiang Kai-shek and the Government of China
and against the Japanese Government which was at war with Chiang. The
wisdom of the course supported by the committee was fully confirmed by later
events.
The committee was founded in 1938. I became associated with it in early 1939
and was its chairman from late in that year until the committee dissolved about
the time of the outbreak of World War II. The declaration of war eliminated
the need for the committee and, so far as I know, it has had no subsequent exist-
ence. At any rate, I have had no subsequent connection with it.
The operations of this committee were carried on through meetings, some large
and some small, which were addressed by persons with special experience or
knowledge of Far Eastern affairs and who were generally sympathetic to the
committee program outlined above. Among those who addressed meetings of
the committee were Congressman Judd, then recently returned from service as
a medical missionary in China, former Ambassador William Dodd, Paul Yu Pin,
the Roman Catholic Bishop of China, Mr. Owen Lattimore, Mr. Frederick V.
Field, Mr. Evans Carlson, and others. I have no present recollection of any of
the dates of the meetings at which these individuals spoke.
2. In the Washington Post of May 11, 1942, page 9, your name appeared as a
sponsor of the Citizens Committee To Free Earl Browder. Were you a
sponsor of the committee?
2. On or about May 11, 1942, I was requested to and did sign an appeal to
the President of the United States to grant clemency to Earl Browder, who was
then serving a 4-year prison sentence which I and others thought was excessive
for a minor violation of the passport laws. Beyond signing the appeal with
knowledge that it was to be used as the basis of a newspaper advertisement, I
had no connection by way of sponsorship or membership with any such committee.
3. Were you a sponsor of the National Council, American-Soviet Friendship?
3. I cannot now recollect whether or not I was ever a sponsor of the National
Council for American-Soviet Friendship. As I recall, this council was organized
in the early 1930's, shortly after our Government recognized the Soviet Union,
with the purpose of making a sincere effort to see whether normal cultural rela-
tions were possible with that country. At that time, I was sympathetic with that
goal, which was indeed the declared policy of the United States Government.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1225
4. Your name is listed as one of the signers of an open letter, referred to in the
September 1939 issue of Soviet Russia Today, which urged closer coopera-
tion with the Soviet Union. Is that a fact?
4. Toward the end of the summer of 1939, I signed a letter urging closer
cooperation between the Western democracies and the Soviet Union as a means of
combating the menace of Hitler and Japan. Although most of the public atten-
tion given to this letter has been in connection with the reference to it in the
September 1939 issue of Soviet Russia Today, the letter was signed by me well
before the announcement of the Hitler-Stalin pact of August 21, 1939, and,
according to testimony given before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee
in 1952, the letter in question was first released to the public on August 14, 1939.
5. We are informed that in February 1941, you presided at a meeting of the Wash-
ington Committee To Aid China, at which the two principal speakers were
Owen Lattimore and Frederick Vanderbilt Field. Is that a fact?
5. See paragraph 1 (Z>).
6. We are informed that following the arrest of John Stewart Service in June
1945, you were treasurer of a voluntary committee soliciting funds for his
defense. Is this a fact?
6. In June 1945, Mr. Service and five other individuals were publicly accused
of unauthorized use of classified material in connection with the magazine Amer-
asia. On the day that this news was released I happened to be at lunch with
a group of people interested in China who knew Mr. Service more or less well.
All of us believed him to be innocent of any unlawful activity, a belief sup-
ported by his ultimate complete clearance. In the course of our luncheon
conversation, it was suggested that Mr. Service would need funds for the con-
duct of his defense. In the informal discussion that followed, each of the people
at luncheon agreed to contribute $50 and to speak to others in an effort to accu-
mulate a fund of perhaps $1,000 to be turned over to Mr. Service for this pur-
pose. For some reason it was suggested that the money should be forwarded to
Mr. Service through me. The luncheon, so far as I know, was not called or
arranged with this purpose in mind.
Thereafter several checks were mailed to me. I made a contribution of $50
from my own pocket but did not solicit any one else. When the sum amounted
to $500, I turned it over to Mr. Service. Later an additional sum came in of
perhaps $200 or $250 which I offered to Mr. Service but which he refused to ac-
cept. The money was returned to the donors.
7. We are informed that you have now or have had in your employ, or the employ
of the American Council of Learned Societies, a man named Emanuel
Larson. Is this a fact? Did Mr. Larson receive a fellowship from the
American Council of Learned Societies?
7. Mr. Emanuel Larsen was 1 of 22 individuals to whom the American Council
of Learned Societies granted study aids to attend a summer session on far
eastern studies inaugurated by Columbia University from June 8 to August 16,
1935. The total amount divided among the 22 students was $1,200. From
September 1 to November 30, 1935, Mr. Larson worked at the Library of Congress
in the center for Far Eastern studies. His activities were in connection with a
project carried out by the Library of Congress, but sponsored in its early stages
by the council. The project was the preparation of a biographical dictionary of
the eminent Chinese of the Ching Dynasty which was subsequently published
by the Library of Congress and printed by the Government Printing Office. As a
part of its sponsorship of this project the council made grants to a number of
those working on it, among them Mr. Larsen, who received a stipend of $400 from
the council on this account.
From June through October 1945, Mr. Larsen worked temporarily on an hourly
basis in the office of the council for its committee on far eastern studies. He
was paid! at the rate of $1 per hour and his total remuneration for this period,
according to the council's records, came to $650.
At no other time has Mr. Larson been employed by the council or has he received
any council funds by way of fellowship or other grant in aid.
8. Did Andrew Ross receive a fellowship from the American Council of Learned
Societies ? Are you acquainted with Mr. Ross ?
8. Mr. Andrew Ross never received any grant from the council, nor am I able
to place him in any way.
It occurred to me that the object of the committee's interest might be Mr.
Andrew Roth and I caused the council's files to be searched in regard to him.
1 226 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
I find that the council never awarded any grant to Mr. Andrew Roth. Our
records show that in 1940-41 he made application for a $200 grant which was
rejected.
9. The committee is informed that you at one time maintained files on numerous
students of the Far East on persons given grants and engaged in research
as Far Eastern specialists.
(a) Is this true?
( & ) Are these files still in existence ?
(c) If not, what disposition was made of them, at what time?
(d) If they are still in existence the committee desires to see them.
9. The statement submitted to your committee by the council on July 21, 1954,
under the heading "The Problem of Highly Trained and Specialized Personnel"
(p. 10 of the mimeographed statement) describes the nature and character of the
information on Far Eastern specialists which in the past was contained in the
council files. For the period from about 1935 to the middle of the war these
were by far the best files in existence on the professional qualifications of persons
in academic life with special competence on Far Eastern subjects. Of course,
since the council's interest is mainly in academic fields, these files were deficient
with regard to persons outside the academic sphere — businessmen, missionaries,
diplomats and the like — with Far Eastern training and experience.
During the war a national roster of scientific and specialized personnel was
developed by the Federal Government. In addition the Ethnogeographic Board,
located in the Smithsonian Institution and financed by the Rockefeller Founda-
tion, prepared a list of area specialists for use of various Government depart-
ments. Much of the material which had been in the council files was included
in these compilations which supplied the need for complete and centralized in-
formation about such personnel more effectively than the more or less, haphazard
activity of the council. As a result the council files gradually disintegrated and
got out of date during the wartime period. After the war, the council made som«
effort to rejuvenate them, but it was generally unsuccessful. A remnant of
these files still remains in the council's office. They have always been open to
any organization, including Government agencies, looking for people with special
competence in the area covered by the files. Consequently the committee is
free to examine what is left of them at any time.
Information with respect to the council's activities in this field since 1949
is contained in paragraph 10 below.
10. (a) Did you at any time keep a roster of scientific and specialized personnel
for the use of any other Government agency in any other area or for any
other use?
{&) Are such files still in existence?
(o) If not, what disposition was made of them, at what time?
( d ) If they are still in existence the committee desires to see them.
10. Prior to 1949, the council, from time to time, for specific and limited pur-
poses related to its own activities, gathered information about the professional
qualifications of persons with special competence in such fields as Byzantine
studies, Slavic studies, American studies, musicology, Indie studies, near eastern
studies, and the like. These collections were of only temporary value, and
are no longer in existence.
Since 1949 we have collected information of this kind in connection with the
national registration in the humanities and social sciences. The character of
that registration and the work on it is described fully in the statement submitted
by the council to the committee on July 21, 1954, both under the heading, "The
Problem of Highly Trained and Specialized Personnel," and on pages IT and 18
of the mimeographed version of the statement. The committee is at liberty to
examine the files, in which such information is recorded on IBM cards.
11. (a) If such a roster was maintained, what use was made of it?
(h) To what Government agencies were names suggested?
(c) Were names suggested to any other agencies, or to individuals? If so,
please name all such agencies or individuals.
(d) Who compiled such lists?
(e) Were they requested by someone outside the Council of Learned Socie-
ties? If so, please explain fully the circumstances.
(/) If the names were suggested spontaneously by the council without prior
request by the person or agency to whom given, how was the decision
to do so arrived at by the council ?
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1227
(q) Was it the decision of an individual? If so, identify such individual
fully.
(70 If by action of the council, explain the circumstances fully, >.
Please send to the committee, in triplicate, all lists prepared by the
council, identifying fully those listed, and indicating to whom sent and
at what date.
The general purposes served by the national registration of the humanities
and social sciences and the council's practices in regard to requests for informa-
tion about personnel contained in the registration is described in the council's
statement to the committee of July 21, 1954.
The registration has been open to the inspection of Government agencies or
any other employer. The Division of Exchange of Persons of the Department
of State and the Division of External Research of the Department of State
have made use of the information contained in the registration in this way : viz.,
members of these divisions visited the council's offices and the workings of the
filing system were explained to them. These representatives went through the
files themselves and made their own selections of names for them. Officers of
the council were neither concerned with nor consulted about the use that was
made of these names, if any. The only information of this character supplied
by the council to the Department of the Army related to one historian, and was
given as illustrative of the type of information available in the national registra-
tion upon request.
The following private agencies have received information from the registration
on or about the dates indicated in regard to the types of specialized personnel
indicated below.
June 1954 : Johns Hopkins University, instructor of French literature.
June 1954: Reed College, Instructor of philosophy.
May 1954 : University of Minnesota, teacher of Scandinavian history.
April 1954: Lewis W. and Maud Hill Family Foundation, director for St.
Paul Council of Arts and Sciences.
January 1954 : Rice Institute, instructor of modern European history.
November 1953 : University of Rochester, senior economist, international
economics.
March 1953: Board on Overseas Training and Research (Ford Foundation),
political scientists with experience in Turkey, Iran, India, and southeast Asia.
In each of these cases the couneil was requested to supply the information.
It was compiled under the supervision of Mr. J. F. Wellemeyer, Jr., staff adviser
on personnel studies, on the basis of IBM cards containing in code the responses
to questionnaire submitted by persons with specialized training. The names of
persons as to whom information was submitted to the foregoing groups are
attached in triplicate as requested.
The council is a member of the Conference Board Committee on International
Exchange of Persons, which participates in the selection of recipients of Ful-
bright awards. In this connection the registration has been used on several
occasions to develop lists of persons for the use of the council's representative
on the conference board committee.
12. The Reporter for April 29, 1952, contains the following statement at page 22 :
"The personnel selected for Government agencies in the Far East
was picked from a roster of 'experts' made up by the Council of
Learned Societies under the direction of Mortimer Graves."
Is this an accurate statement?
12. The full text of the quotation to which you refer is as follows :
"[Mr. Kohlberg's] thesis, a simple one, he has summed up substantially as
follows, to the student previously quoted :
" 'There is a great conspiracy aimed at the destruction of the United States.
Its method is to say "Europe first" in order to throw away Asia, then to do
something about Asia only after it is too late, thus throwing away Europe as
well. (Kohlberg does not appear to consider that the Asia Firsters could, with
equal justice, be accused of the same strategy in reverse.) Recruiting for the
great conspiracy has been going on for years. Its main tools are Communist
ideology and heavy bribes; $20 million a year is spent on buying members and
operating the ring, says Mr. Kohlberg with conviction. During the Second
World War the great conspiracy worked to deliver Asia to Russia. The per-
sonnelselected f or Government agencies in the Far East was picked from a roster
of "experts" made up by the Council of Learned Societies under the direction
■of Mortimer Graves.' "
1228 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
I need not point out that the statement you quoted is not asserted by the-
Reporter magazine to be a fact; it is asserted to be Mr. Alfred Kohlberg's
version of the facts. I have no firsthand knowledge as to how the personneL
for Government agencies in the Far East was selected, hence I cannot vouch
for the truth or falsity of the statement quoted. My belief is that it is nonsense.
13. Are you acquainted with any of the following individuals?
William Walter Remington
George Shaw Wheeler
Maurice Halperin
Luke I. Wilson
Mary Jane Keeney
Owen Lattimore
Robert Selberstein
Antoli Gromov
Harriet Moore (Gelfan)
Joseph Fels Barnes
Kathleen Barnes
13. I never met William Walter Remington.
A George Wheeler (middle name unknown) was active in the Washington
Committee for Aid to China in 1939-41 (see paragraph 1 (b) ), and I knew him
in that connection. I would not recognize him if I met him on the street today.
In 1945 or 1946 a committee on world area studies was set up by the American
Council of Learned Societies and the Social Science Research Council. I was a
member of that committee as was Mr. Maurice Halperin. I attended only one
meeting of the committee and at that meeting I met Mr. Halperin. I have not
seen him since and I would not recognize him if I met him on the street today.
I have never met Mr. Luke I. Wilson. While I was in the Near Bast in 1948-49,
a Washington real-estate agency (Gilliat of Georgetown) rented my house to a
Mrs. Luke Wilson. I met her only once, upon my return, as she was taking the
last of her belongings from my house. I do not know whether her husband lived
with her in the house, or, indeed, whether she had one or not at the time. At
any rate, I never met him.
I have met Mrs. Mary Jane Keeney, perhaps 3 or 4 times at gatherings con-
cerned with the Far Bast. Most of these meetings were from 10 to a dozen
years ago, and the last such meeting was at least 6 or 7 years ago. I do not think
I would recognize her if I met her on the street today.
I first met Owen Lattimore many years ago when we were brought together
by our common interest in matters connected with the Far East. As he is one
of the most eminent scholars concerned with the Far Bast, it was inevitable that
I should meet Mr. Lattimore very early in the course of my own work for the
council in stimulating interest in Far Eastern studies in American institutions
of higher learning. Drawn together by this common interest, we became close
friends and have remained so for perhaps 25 years.
I have never heard of Robert Selberstein or Antoli Gromov.
I met Harriet Moore, Joseph F. Barnes, and Kathleen Barnes several times
from 10 to 12 years ago. The meetings were in connection with my duties as
trustee of the Institute of Pacific Relations and were of the character described
in paragraph 14 below. I have not seen any of these persons since my term as
trustee of the Institute of Pacific Relations expired in 1948.
14. Tou are shown as vice chairman and trustee of the Institute of Pacific Rela-
tions in Who's Who from 1942 to 1948. Please name the persons, directly
or indirectly, concerned with the institute with whom you had contact
with regard to the activities of the institute, or with regard to policy
or recommendations in Far Eastern matters.
14. I was a vice chairman and trustee of the Institute of Pacific Relations from
1942 to 1948. The activities of the institute were primarily directed toward the
fields of economics, politics, and social sciences in the Far East. I considered
my function on the board to be that of stimulating greater interest on the part
of the institute in the Far Eastern cultural activities and the humanities with
which the council is principally concerned, as explained in the statement filed with
your committee on July 21, 1954. So far as I know, I was appointed trustee of
the institute for this reason and was regarded in this light by my fellow trustees
and by the staff of the institute. When I had occasion to discuss the question of
institute activity and policies along the lines described above I did so with my
fellow trustees and with members of the staff of the organization, principally Mr.
E. C. Carter and Mr. William L. Holland.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
1229
15. Was your connection with the institute terminated by resignation or by
expiration of a specific term of office? If the resignation was at the sug-
gestion of some other party please identify fully. If the resignation was
your own decision, please give the reasons therefor.
15. When my term of office expired I requested that I not be renominated. I
did this because I think one ought not to occupy a post of this character for
more than 4 or 5 years. I am still a dues-paying member of the American InstL
tute of Pacific Relations.
verification
District of Columbia,
City of Washington, ss:
I, Mortimer Graves, swear and affirm that I am executive director of the
American Council of Learned Societies ; that I have read and am familiar with
the contents of the foregoing statement; and that to the best of my knowledge
and belief every statement of fact contained therein is true.
Mortimkr Graves,
Executive Director, American Council of Learned Societies.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 1st day of November 1954. My com-
mission expires November 1, 1955.
Mary E. Nobel, Notary Public.
List of individuals sent to institutions which requested information from the
National Registration of the Humanities and Social Sciences — Received from
Mr. Graves Nov. 15, 1954
RICE INSTITUTE
Name
Position
Institutional affiliation
Bishop, Wm. Rowley, Jr
Crapster , Basil Long
Edwards, Marvin Louis...-
Free, Henry John, Jr
Gossman, Norbert Joseph. ..
Motlow John D i
Raymond, Harold Bradford.
Shane, Theodore King
Umseheid, Arthur George-..
Wilbur, Wm. Cuttino, Jr... .
Assistant professor, history...
Instructor in history
Lecturer in history
Graduate instructor, history.
Instructor in history
do.....
Instructor in history (September
19<1 8-September 1951).
Teaching fellow, European history,
1950-51.
Professor of history..
Instructor in history.
Albright College, Reading, Pa.
Gettysburg College.
Columbia University.
Northwestern University.
State University oi Iowa
Sacramento Sta'te College.
University of Delaware.
Indiana University.
Creighton University, Omaha*
Nebr.
Muhlenberg College.
BOARD ON OVERSEAS TRAINING AND RESEARCH (FORD FOUNDATION)
Arens, Herman J. A. C
Austin, Eduardo D. S
Bannni, Amin
Beck, George T__
Boushy, Theodore F
Carroll (Rev.)Thos. D
Cherry, H. Dicken
Dean, Vera Micheles.
Easton, Stewart C
Fletcher, Arnold Charles...
Freeman, Edwin Ruthven..
Gerth, Donald Rogers
Ghosh, Suprakas
Goldner, Werner Ernst
Haddad, Jama]
Halla, Philip J
Harding, Clifford H ,__
Hart, Henry O
Hatami, Abolghassen J
B igelow teach ing fellow
Fellowship of J. H. Whitney Foun-
dation (to July 1952).
Research assistant
International economist
Professor of history
Professor of Chinese history
Principal
Research director and editor
Instructor in history
Lecturer in history
Intelligence research analyst
Psychological warfare officer
Editor and head, India unit
Lecture assistant
Information specialist, radio script-
writer.
Policy report officer :
Instructor... ...
Assistant professor, public adminis-
trator.
Personnel officer and administrative
officer.
University of Chicago.
Georgetown University.
Hoover Institute, Stanford Uni-
versity.
Department of Commerce.
Wayland College, Plainview, Tex.
Chinese Language School, Manila,,
Philippine Islands.
Hartsville School, Hartsville, Ind.
Foreign Policy Association, New
York City.
City College of New York.
University of Southern California.
Department of State.
U. S. Air Force.
Department of State, Internationa]
Broadcasting Division, New York
City.
Stanford University.
Department of State, Voice of Amer-
ica, New York City.
Department of State.
Temple University, Philadelphia,
Pa.
University of Wisconsin.
United Nations.
1230
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
List of individuals sent to institutions which requested information from the
'National Registration of the Humanities and Social Sciences — Received from
Mr. Graves Nov. 15, 1954 — Continued
BOARD ON OVERSEAS TRAINING AND RESEARCH (FORD FOUNDATION) — Con.
Name
Heinrichs, Waldo Huntley .
Hitti, Philip K -
Hurewitz, Jacob C
Kahin, George McT.
Kattenburg, Paul M__
Kazemzadeh, Firuz. _ .
Lacin, Mahmut N
Laurie, Arthur Brace-
Leiden, Carl
Lenczowski, George
Liebesny, Herbert J
McDougall, Archibald.
McFerren, Darel D
Martin, Leslie John.
Mill, Edward W .
Mohan, Pearey...
■Ogden, David L_
Pincus, John A
Robinson, Richard Dunlop.
Russell, James Earl
Rustow, Dankwart A
Shuck, Luther Edward, Jr.
Shah, Hiru Chhotalal
Stevens, Harry R
Stubbs, Roy Manning.
Talbot, Phillips
Thomas, Steven Alexander -
Vandenbosch, Amry
Whitelaw, Wm. Menzies-
"Wolf, Charles, Jr.
Position
Professor
Professor of Semitic literature
Lecturer in Middle Bast political
history and government.
Assistant professor of government,
executive director, southeast Asia
program.
Intelligence research specialist,
southeast Asia.
Publishing Branch
Associate professor
Institutional affiliation
Assistant professor of political
science.
Visiting professor of political science.
Research analyst
Associate professor of history and
social science.
Assistant director
2d secretary, American Embassy,
Manila, and American Consul,
Indonesia.
Political affairs officer
O. and M. examiner
Project officer
Foreign observer-
Associate professor of education
Faculty fellowship (Ford Founda-
tion, to August 1952).
Visiting professor of political science
(grantee SmitV'-Mundt Act).
Moderator, International Radio
Roundtable, WHOM.
Assistant professor
Intelligence research analyst
Executive director _
Manager, Foreign Exchange Fund
of Indonesia (to 1949).
Professor of political science
Professor of history
Economist, Far East Program Di-
vision.
Middlebury College.
Princeton University.
Columbia University.
Cornell University.
Department of State.
Department of State, New York.
Drake University.
Marshall College, Huntington, W.
Va.
University of California.
Department of State.
Hastings College, Hastings, Nebr.
International Relations Center, Uni-
versity of Minnesota.
U. S. Foreign Service, Department of
State, Manila, Philippine Islands,
and Surabaya, Indonesia.
United Nations.
Sacramento Signal Depot, U. S.
Army, Sacramento, Calif.
Department of State.
Institute of Current World Affairs,
New York City.
Teachers College, Columbia Uni-
versity.
Oglethorpe University.
Korea, Philippine Islands, and
Indonesia.
University radio station, Ann Arbor,
Mich.
Duke University.
Department of State.
American universities field staff,
New York.
De Javasehe Bank, Djakarta, In-
donesia, ■
University of Kentucky.
American International College,
Springfield, Mass.
Economic Cooperation Administra-
tion.
UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER
Basch, Antonin.
Beecroft, Eric Armour
Blaser, Arthur Frederick, Jr.
Casaday, Lauren W_
Chudson, Walter A.
Condliffe, John Bell-
Ellis, Howard S
Ellsworth, Paul Theo.
Franck, Peter Goswyn.
Furth, J. Herbert
Gilmore, Eugene Allen, Jr...
Hayes, Samuel Perkins, Jr._.
Kriz, Miroslav A
Luthringer, George F.
Malenbaum, Wilfred-
Chief Economist, Asia Division
Loan officer
Economist
Director, bureau of business research
Principal officer, economics
Professor of economics
do
Special adviser.
Visiting associate professor and
director of research.
Chief, Central and Eastern Euro-
pean Section.
Foreign Service officer, cT.ss II
Chief, United States special techni-
cal and economic mission to Indo-
nesia.
Economist _
Director, Latin American, Middle
and Far Eastern Depirtment.
Chief, Investment and Economic
Development Staff.
International Bank for Reconstruc-
tion and Development.
Do.
Office of International Finance, U. S.
Treasury Department.
University of Arizona.
United Nations.
University of California, Berkeley,
Calif.
Do.
International Bank for Reconstruc-
tion and Development.
Haverford College, Haverford, Pa.
Federal Reserve Bank, Washington,
D. C.
Department of State.
Mutual Security Agency, Djakarta,
Indonesia.
Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
International Monetary Fund.
Department of State.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
1231
List of individuals sent to institutions which requested information from the
National Registration of the Humanities and Social Sciences — Received from
Mr. Graves Nov. 15, 1954 — Continued
UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER—
Continued
Name
Position
Institutional affiliation
Professor of economics - - -
Columbia University.
Director of international finance
section and associate professor of
economics.
Director, Office of Transport and
Communications.
Assistant Director, European and
North American Department.
International economist - - -
Princeton University.
Department of State,
Sturc, Ernest
International Monetary Fund.
Van Sant, Edward R
Staley, Alvah Eugene
Department of Defense.
Stanford University.
Deputy Director, Office of Economic
Defense and Trade Policy.
Chief, Steel Section, Export Supply
Branch.
Department of State,
Williams, Wilbur Laurent- ..
Woodley, W. John R
Office of International Trade, De-
partment of Commerce.
International Monetary Fund.
Research economist
Stanford Research Institute, Palo
Alto, Calif.
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
Ander, Oscar Fritiof
Anderson, Albin Theodore
Bowman, Francis J. E
Clausen, Clarence Arthur .
Falnes, Oscar J
Hovde, Bryn J
Lindgren, Raymond E —
Schodt, Eddie W
Scott, Franklin Daniel
Sorensen, Roland A
Wuorlnen, John Henry —
Professor of history
Assistant professor of history
Professor of history
Cultural attach^, American Em-
bassy, Stockholm.
Associate professor of history
Visiting professor of Scandinavian
area studies.
Associate professor of history
Acting Branch Chief for Northern
European Branch in OIR.
Professor of history
Visiting professor of history
Professor of history
Augustus College, Rock Island, 111.
University of Nebraska,
University of Southern California.
Department of State.
New York University.
University of Wisconsin (1951-52).
Vanderbilt University.
Department of State.
Northwestern University.
Delaware State College, Dover, Del.
Columbia University.
LOUIS W. AND MAUDE HILL FAMILY FOUNDATION
Bach,. Otto Karl
Faulkner, Ray Nelson. .
Frankenstein, Alfred V.
Kwiat, Joseph J
Phillips, John Marshal]
Rath bone, Perry I
Smith, John B
Stout, George Leslie
Lecturer, art history
Director, art gallery and museum:
executive head, department of art
and archaeology; associate dean,
School of Humanities and Sciences.
Music and art critic
Assistant professor of English and
general studies.
Director, art gallery; curator, Amer-
ican art.
Director .-
Dean - —
Director
Denver Art Museum, Denver, Colo.
Stanford University.
San Francisco Chronicle.
University of Minnesota.
Yale University.
City Art Museum, St. Louis, Mo.
Kansas City Art Institute.
Worcester Art Museum, Worcester,
Mass.
THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
Bates, Blanchard W
Bowen, Willis Herbert.
Brown, Harcourt
Burgess, Robert M
Cosentini, John Walter
Crlsafulli, Alessandro S
Frame, Donald Murdoch
Gravit , Francis West
Hassell, James Woodrow, Jr.
Miller, William Marion
Morrissette, Bruce A
Oliver, Alfred Richard..— .
Seetaer, Edward D
Smiley, Joseph RoyalL
Taylor, Cecil Grady....
49720 — 54— pt. 2-
Assistant professor of French
Associate professor of French
Professor of French language and
literature.
Assistant professor of French
Associate professor of French
do
do-....
do -
do
Professor of Romanic languages
Associate professor of romance lan-
guages.
Assistant professor of French and
German.
Professor of French ..
.—.■do
Professor of French; dean, College of
Arts and Sciences.
^19
Princeton University.
University of Oklahoma.
Brown University.
Montana State University.
St. John's University, Brooklyn.
The Catholic University of America.
Columbia University.
Indiana University.
University of South Carolina.
Miami University, Oxford, Ohio.
Washington University, St. Louis.
Washington and Jefferson College.
Indiana University.
University of Illinois.
Louisiana State University.
1232
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
List of individuals sent to institutions which requested information from the-
National Registration of the Humanities and Social Sciences — Received from
Mr. Graves Nov. 15, 1954 — Continued
THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY— Continued
Name
Wadsworth, Philip Adrian -
Weinberg, Bernard
Wiley, William Leon
Position
Intelligence officer (1952)--.
Professor of romance languai
Professor of French
Institutional affiliation
U, S. Navy, Washington.
Northwestern University.
University of North Carolina.
REED COLLEGE
Chambers, Lawson P...
Clapp, James Gordon...
Clark, Gordon H
Cleve, Felix M_
DeBoer, Jesse
Evans, Melbourne G —
Foss, Martin
Gerhard, Wm. Arthur...
Hakmon, Frances B
Jones, Wm. Thomas
Kaufmann, Walter A
Le Vinson, Ronald B
Matson, Wallace Irving.
O'Neil, Charles Joseph..
Reither, Wm. Harry
Schrader, George A., Jr..
Stine, Russell Warren. ..
Professor (emeritus) of philosophy.
Assistant professor of philosophy. ..
Professor of philosophy
Unemployed in 1952
Associate professor of philosophy....
Instructor in philosophy
Lecturer in philosophy
Professor of philosophy
Professor of philosophy
Assistant professor of philosophy.
Assistant professor of philosophy.
Professor of philosophy
Assistant professor of philosophy.
do
Professor of philosophy
Washington University, St. Louis.
Hunter College, New York City.
Butler University, Indianapolis.
University of Kentucky.
Syracuse University (1948-51).
Haverford College.
Brooklyn College.
Briarcliffe Junior College.
Pomona College, Claremont, Calif,
Princeton University.
University of Maine.
University of Washington, Seattle.
Marquette University, Milwaukee.
Ohio State University.
Yale University.
Muhlenberg College, Allentown, Pa,
Statement of Congressman William G. Bray, of Indiana, Regard-
ing the National Home Library Foundation of Washington,.
D. C.
The Honorable William G. Bray, Representative of the Seventh District of
Indiana, presented the following statement relative to the National Home
Library Foundation of Washington, D. C, by means of which, Congressman
Bray stated, with the use of Government loans, rental fees paid, by the Federal
Government, and of tax exemptions, huge profits were diverted from public
philanthropy to the enrichment of private interets and/or individuals.
Congressman Bray stated that his interest in the National Home Library
Foundation stemmed from a constituent, Frances Sinclair, of Sullivan, Ind.
Until her recent serious illness, Miss Sinclair was prominent in the field of
employee counseling in nationally and internationally known retail organiza-
tions, notably Marshall Field & Co. and Julius Garfinekel & Co. ; and she was a
financial "angel" as well as one of the original sponsors and promoters of the
National Home Library Foundation.
In brief, the history of this foundation is as follows :
The late Sherman Mittell, of Washington, D. C, was active in 1933 and later
years in furnishing educational material to the Civilian Conservation Corps and,
subsequently, to the armed services until his death in 1942. He became in-
terested in providing for juvenile and adult education on a community level
through public and private libraries, and conceived the idea of establishing a
foundation for that purpose. This became the National Home Library Founda-
tion, which has numbered among its trustees such eminent citizens as Justice
Felix Frankfurter, former Gov. Paul V. McNutt, of Indiana. Miss Sinclair
was extremely interested in the project from its inception, and contributed,
liberally of her personal funds to underwrite many of the vital expenses, as
well as a vast amount of her own time and energy to its development.
The Mount Vernon Trust Co., a Washington bank, was in financial difficulties
in the early thirties, as were so many other banks in that period. Its largest
depositor was the International Association of Machinists of which the late
Emmett C. Davison was general secretary-treasurer. Mr. Davison, with the
aid of the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, succeeded in salvaging assets
and converting the bank into a mortgage company utnter the name of the Mount
Vernon Mortgage Co.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1233
At that time, there was a scarcity of office space in the city of Washington, and
the Federal Government, among others, was urgently in need of space. Mr,
Mittell owned an option on valuable property which was ideal for that purpose,
at the corner of Connecticut and Rhode Island Avenues NW,, but lacked the
funds to finance the same. By combining the assets of the closed bank (Mount
Vernon Trust Co., later Mount Vernon Mortgage Co.) and the real-estate
holdings of the National Home Library Foundation set up by Mr. Mittell, and
obtaining financing from the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, the present
Longfellow Building was erected on the site in question. Prior to the con-
struction of the building, and prior to RFC's financing, a commitment had been
obtained whereby the Federal Government (General Services Administration)
would lease all of the office space for a period of years, at mutually agreed upon
rentals ; and, in fact, the architectural plans for the building were drawn specif-
ically to accommodate the peculiar needs of the Federal agency that would
occupy it.
Mount Vernon Mortgage Co.'s contribution consisted of its pledged assets of
$750,000 held by RFC against notes for $600,000, which sum had been reduced by
Mount Vernon, by repayment, to $250,000.
The Longfellow Building Corp. was set up with 2,000 shares of no-par common
stock, of which National Home Library Foundation received 1,200 shares, or
60 percent, and the Mount Vernon Mortgage Co. the balance of 800 shares, or
40 percent. The Reconstruction Finance Corporation held all of the preferred
stock as security for its loan. In the intervening years the entire RFC indebt-
edness has been repaid, the preferred stock retired, and the ownership of the
Longfellow Building now reposes entirely in the common stock, with an esti-
mated current cash value of $2,500,000. (See U. S. A. v. Mount Vernon Mort-
gage Co., now pending in the United States District Court for the District of
Columbia, Civil No. 4848-51; trial judge, Hon. Burnita S. Matthews.)
Founder and Director Mittell, of the National Home Library Foundation, lack-
ing ready cash, used shares of the Longfellow Building Corp. common stock (of
which he was owner, through the foundation) to meet pressing obligations of the
foundation for salaries, expenses, fees, etc., in connection with the building opera-
tions, which reduced his holdings from 60 to 51 percent of the total common stock.
Needing further funds, Mr. Mittell borrowed some $23,000 from his partners in
the building project, the Mount Vernon Mortgage Corp., against which he pledged
his 51 percent of the common shares of nominal value at that time in view of the
still outstanding and prior preferred stock pledged to RFC.
After Mr. MittelPs death in 1942, his widow, now Mrs. Fanny Sessions Mittell
Caminita, then trustee of the foundation, transferred title to all of the assets of
the foundation (Mr. Mittell's remaining 923 shares of common stock in Long-
fellow Building Corp.) to the Mount Vernon Mortgage Co., allegedly in settle-
ment of Mr. Mittell's indebtedness.
Through these transactions, Mount Vernon Mortgage Co. was able to acquire
complete ownership of the total assets of the National Home Library Founda-
tion, to pocket all of the profits that had accrued to the foundation, and, in effect,
to liquidate the foundation and its philanthropic purposes.
Subsequently, in 1945, the Mount Vernon Mortgage Co. restored to Mrs. Mittell
Caminita 100 shares of the foundation's Longfellow Building Corp. common stock
(valued at $l,0OO-plus per share) and, as revealed by testimony in Civil Action
4848-51-^17. S. A. v. Mount Vernon — previously referred to, Mrs. Caminita burned
all of the records of the foundation.
In the interim, as further revealed by the testimony in the pending lawsuit,
the Internal Revenue Bureau has recovered in excess of $50,000 in income taxes,
and would have collected additional sums except for the statute of limitations;
and the General Services Administration, in revising its rent formula for the
Longfellow Building space, has likewise recovered approximately another $50,000.
Testimony of these facts was obtained in hearing of the pending lawsuit from
officials of the Mount Vernon Mortgage Co. itself.
During the period from 1942 to 1945, the Mount Vernon Mortgage Co. was also
the defendant in other lawsuits in connection with the Longfellow Building Corp.,
filed against it by several component units of the American Federation of
Labor, including the late Mr. Davison's union, the International Association of
Machinists, which recovered large sums of money in out-of-court settlements.
The current lawsuit, filed against the Mount Vernon Mortgage Co. by the
United States of America, asks for the recision of all of the transactions by which
Mount Vernon acquired complete control and ownership of the Longfellow Build-
ing, less the 100 shares now in the possession of Mrs. Caminita, and for the
1234 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
appointment of successor trustees to operate the foundation and administer its
rightful funds for the purposes for which it was established, i. e., for the benefit
of the American people.
The pending suit exposes, for the first time, the real issues involved, and has
received widespread newspaper publicity. The Committee on Tax Exempt Foun-
dations is in possession of full information, but feels that this condensed revela-
tion of the salient facts may be useful in uncovering other instances in which,
by the same or by entirely different means, tax-exempt funds or profits, or both,
might have been or could be manipulated for the benefit of private purses, to the
loss not only of the intended and rightful beneficiaries — the American people —
but to the loss of the Federal Treasury in income and other taxes. It is, there-
fore, the committee's recommendation that this matter be further investigated
through appropriate committees or commissions — perhaps permanent — or through
executive departments who have heretofore failed to realize the significant and
widespread influence of foundations on the national economy.
The case of the National Home Library Foundation is also peculiarly timely
because the Congress is now engaged in a lend-lease office-building program
similar in some respects to the Longfellow Building project, and the Congress
may wish to set up additional safeguards.
APPENDIX
Bibliography on Educational and Charitable Foundations
books and documents
.A. W. Mellon Educational and Charitable Trust. A report of its work, for the
five years, 1946 through 1950. Washington, 1951. 49 p.
(not catalogued)
American foundations and their fields. [V. 1]— 1931— New York, Twentieth
Century Fund, Inc. [1931] — 35; Raymond Rich Associates, 1939 —
* AS911.A2A6
Andrews, Frank. Corporation giving. New York, Russell Sage Foundation,
1952. 361 p. h „ J*y m - A ^
. Philanthropic giving. New York, Russell Sage Foundation, 1950.
318 p. HV91.A47
Anthony, Alfred W. Changing conditions in public giving. New York, Federal
Council of the Churches of Christ in America, 1929. 139 p. HV41.C63
Ayres, Leonard P. Seven great foundations. New York, Russell Sage Foun-
dation, 1911. 79 p. LC243.A8
Oasey, William J. Tax planning for foundations and charitable giving, by
William J. Casey, J. K. Lasser [and] Walter Lord. [Roslyn, N. Y.] Business
Reports [1953] 234 p. (not catalogued)
. Use of the foundation in your estate planning. New York University
6th Annual Institute on Federal Taxation, 1947. Albany, Matthew-Bender,
1948. p. 98-107. HJ2360.I63
Chambers, Merritt M. Charters of philanthropies; a study of selected trust
instruments, charters, bylaws, and court decisions. New York, 1948. 247 p.
HV88.C45
Charles Hayden Foundation. To the ultimate benefit of mankind ; the story of
the Charles Hayden Foundation. 71 p. (not catalogued)
<Clague, Ewan. Charitable trusts. Philadelphia, 1935. 138 p. ([Joint Com-
mittee on Research of the Community Council of Philadelphia and the
Pennsylvania School of Social Work] Publication No. 10) HV99.P5C63
Coffman, Harold C. American foundations: a study of their role in the child
welfare movement. New York, Association Press, 1936. 213 p. HV741.C54
Commission on Financing Higher Education. Higher education and American
business. New York [1952] 37 p. LB2336.C6
-Coon, Horace. Money to burn; what great American philanthropic founda-
tions do with their money. New York, Longmans, Green, 1938, 352 p.
HV97.A3C6 1938
Dillard, James H., and others. Twenty-year report of the Phelps-Stokes Fund,
1932. 127 p. LC243.P5
Edward W. Hazen Foundation. The Edward W. Hazen Foundation, 1925-1950.
New Haven, 1951. 59 p. (not catalogued)
Elliott, Edward D. and M. M. Chambers. Charters of philanthropies : a study
of the charters of twenty-nine American philanthropic foundations. New
York, 1939. 744 p. HV97.A3.E55
Faris, Ellsworth, and others. Intelligent philanthropy. Chicago, University
of Chicago Press, 1930. 322 p. HV40.F3
Flexner, Abraham. Funds and foundations. New York, Harper, 1952. 146 p.
AS911.A2F6
IFord Foundation. Report of the study for the Ford Foundation on policy and
program, November, 1949. Detroit, 1949. 139 p. AS911.F6A446
Fosdick, Raymond B. The story of the Rockefeller Foundation. New York,
Harper, 1952. 336 p. HV97.R6F6
1235
1236 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The Fund For Adult Education. Pasadena, California. The challenge of life-
time learning. [Pasadena, 1953?] 40 p. (not catalogued)
Glenn, John M., and others. Russell Sage Foundation, 1907-1946. New York,
Russell Sage Foundation, 1947. 2 v. HV97.R8.G55
Golden Rule Foundation. Constructive philanthrophy : an historical sketch, a
review, and an interpretation of the Golden Rule Foundation. [New York,
1941?] HV97.G56A5 1941
Goldthorpe, John H. Higher education, philanthropy and federal tax exemption.
Washington, American Council on Education, 1944. 40 p. L13.A384 no. 7
Hanover, New York. The fine arts in philanthropy. New York, Dept. of Philan-
thropic Information, Central Hanover Bank and Trust Co. [1937] 61 p.
N6505.H27
Harrison, Shelby M. and Frank Andrews. American Foundations for social
welfare. New York, Russell Sage Foundation, 1946. 249 p. AS911.A2H3
Hollis, Ernest V. Philanthropic foundations and higher education. New York,
Columbia University Press, 1938. 365 p. LC243.H6 1938 a
Howard Heinz Endowment. A report of its work, to December 31, 1950. 1951.
40 p. (not catalogued)
Jenkins, Edward C. Philanthropy in America, New York, Association Press,
1950. 183 p. HV91.J4
Jenks, Thomas E. The use and misuse of Sec. 101 (6). New York University
7th Annual Institute on Federal Taxation, 1948. Albany, Matthew Bender,
1949. p. 1051-1062. HJ2360.I63
Josephson, Emanuel Mann. Rockefeller, "internationalist," the man who mis-
rules the world. New York, Chedney Press [1952] 448 p. E744.R65J6
Keppel, Frederick P. The foundation: its place in American life. New York,
Maemillan, 1930. 113 p. AS911.A2K4
■ . Philanthropy and learning. New York, Columbia University Press,
1936. 175 p. LA7.K4
Kiplinger Washington agency. Tax exempt foundations, 1951. 4 p. (The
Kiplinger tax letter) HC101.K5
Lasser, Jacob K. How tax laws make giving to charity easy, a check list of
federal tax aids for the solicitor and the giver. New York, Funk and
Wagnalls [1948] 106 p. Law library
Leavell, Ullin W. Philanthropy in Negro education. Nashville, George Pea-
body College for Teachers, 1930. 188 p. LC2801.L37 1930
Lester, Robert M. Forty years of Carnegie giving. New York, Scribner's, 1941.
186 p. AS911.C3L4
. A thirty-year catalog of grants. New York, Carnegie Corporation of
New York, 1942. 147 p. AS911.C3L42
Lindeman, Eduard C. Wealth and culture : a study of one hundred foundations
and community trusts during the decade 1921-1930. New York, Harcourt,
Brace, 1936. 135 p. AS911.A2L5
National Planning Association. The manual of corporate giving, by Beardsley
Ruml. Washington, 1952. 415 p. HV95.N38
Ogg, Frederic A. Foundations and endowments in relation to research. New
York, Century, 1928. p. 323-361 AZ105.A6
Orton, William A. Endowments and foundations. Encyclopaedia of the social
sciences. New York, Maemillan, 1931. v. 5 : 531-537. H41.E6
Rockefeller Foundation. Directory of fellowship awards for the years 1917-
1950. With an introd. by Chester I. Barnard. New York [1951]. 286 p.
LB2338.R6
Russell Sage Foundation. American foundations for social welfare. New York,
Russell Sage Foundation, 1938. 66 p. HV97.R8A5 1938
Sattgast, Charles R. The administration of college and university endowments.
New York, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1940. 125 p. (contribu-
tions to education, no. 808) LB2336.S3 1940 a
Savage, Howard J. Frait of an impulse ; forty-five years of the Carnegie Foun-
dation, 1905-1950. New York, Harcourt, Brace, 1953. 407 p.
LC243.C35S3
Scudder, Stevens and Clark. Survey of university and college endowment funds
[Prepared by the] Institutional Department. New York [1937]
LB2336.S35
Taylor, Eleanor K. Public accountability, of foundations and charitable trusts.
New York, Russell Sage Foundation, 1953. 231 p. (not catalogued)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1237
Tilt, James T. Legal incidents to the investment of the corporate funds of
charitable corporations organized under the laws of the State of New York,
with comparative analysis of decisional and statutory law in other juris-
dictions of the United States. [ ] 1952. 82 1. Law library
U. S. Congress. House. Committee on Ways and Means. Hearings, revenue
revision, 1947-1948. Washington, U. S. Govt. Print. Off., 1948
HJ2377.A2
. . . . Hearings, revenue revision of 1950. Washing-
ton, U. S. Govt. Print Off., 1950 HJ2377.A3 1950
Senate. Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. In-
vestigation of closing of Nashua, N. H., mills and operations of Textron,
Inc. Hearings. Washington, U. S. Govt. Print. Off., 1948-49. 2 v.
HD9940.U4A55
V. S. Congress. Senate. Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.
Investigation of closing of Nashua, N. H., mills and operations of Textron,
Inc. Keport. Washington, U. S. Govt. Print. Off., 1949. 32 p.
HD9859.T4U5 1949
. . House. Select Committee to Investigate Foundations and Other
Organisations. Final report. Washington, U. S. Govt. Print. Off., 1953.
15 p. (82d Cong., 2d sess. House report no. 2514)
AS911.A2U52 1953
■ — . •. . Select Committee to investigate Tax-Exempt Founda-
tions and Other Organizations. Final report. Washington, U. S. Govt. Print.
Off., 1953. 15 p. (82dCong., 2d sess. House report no. 2514)
AS911.A2U52 1953
■ . . -. Select Committee to Investigate Taw-Exempt Founda~
tions and Comparable Organisations. Tax-exempt foundations. Hearings
before the Select Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations and
Comparable Organizations. House of Representatives, Eighty-second Con-
gress, second session on H. R. 561 . . . Nov. 18 . . . 25, Dec. 2 ... 30, 1952.
Washington, U. S. Govt. Print. Off., 1953 792 p.
AS911.A2U5
Office of Internal Revenue. Cumulative list of organizations contribu-
tions to which are deductible . . . Washington, U. S. Govt. Print. Off., 1950.
331 p. Law library
Viking Fund. The first ten years, 1941-1951 : including a report on the Fund's
activities, for the year ended January 31, 1951. , 1951. 202 p.
(not catalogued)
Werner, Morris R. Julius Rosenwald. New York, Harper, 1939. 381 p.
HV28.R6W4
World almanac and book of facts for 1953. New York, New York World Telegram
and Sun, 1953. p. 573-576. AY67.N5W7
The Yearbook of Philanthropy, 1940 — Presenting information and statistics cov-
ering American philanthropy since the year 1920. New York, Inter-River
Press [1940- HV88.Y4
abucles
Anderson, H. A. Ford millions for education : fund for the advancement of edu-
cation and fund for adult education. School review (Chicago ) v. 59,
Sept. 1951 : 316-320. L11.S55
Andrews, Frank E. The business of giving. Atlantic (Boston) v. 191, Feb. 1953 :
63-66. AP2.A8
. Foundations, a modern Maecenas. Publishers' weekly (New York v.
151, March 8, 1947 : 1464-1468. Z1219.P98
" . New challenges for our foundations. New York Times magazine (New
York) April 3, 1949 : 16
Andrews, Frank. New trends in corporate giving. Social work journal (New
York), v. 33, Oct. 1952: 172-176, 204. HV1.S647
— . Philanthropy's venture capital. Educational record (Garden: City,
N. Y.), v. 32, Oct. 1950: 361-370. L11.E46
Aydelotte, Frank. Educational foundations with reference to international
fellowships. School and society (New York), v. 22, Dec. 26, 1925: 799-803.
L11.S36
Baker, Lawrence G. Community trusts — the new look in charitable giving. State
bar journal of California (San Francisco), v. 26, May-June 1951: 177-181.
Law library
Bendiner, R. Report on the Ford Foundation. New York Times magazine
(New York), Feb. 1, 1953: 12-13.
1238 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Blackwell, Thomas E. The charitable corporation and the charitable trust
Washington University Law quarterly (St. Louis), v. 24, Dec. 1938:1-45
Law library
Bleicken, Gerhard D. Corporate contributions to charities: the modern rule.
American Bar Association journal (Chicago), v. 38, Dec. 1952; 999-1002,
1059-1060. Law library
Bliven, Bruce. Ford's new venture. New republic (Washington), April 9, 1951 :
13-14. AP2.N624
Brown, Robert C. The new restrictions on charitable exemptions and deduo
tions for federal tax purposes. University of Pittsburg law review ( Pitts-
burgh ), v. 13, Summer 1952 : 623-646. Law library
Burke, Earl. The Giannini Foundation: how income from a $1,000,000 trust
will be spent for specialized banking training, other worthy purposes.
Burroughs clearing house (Detroit), Jan. 1953: 31. HG1501.B9
But it's not easy to give money away. Business week (New York), Jan. 12,
1952 : 66-70. HF5001.B89
Carnegie Corporation investment saga. Business week (New York), Mar. 8,
1947 : 62-66. HF5001.B89
Charitable trusts for political purposes. Virginia law review (Charlottesville),
v. 37, Nov. 1951 : 988-1000. Law library
Chodorov, Frank. Bribery by tax exemption. Human events (Washington),
v. 9, Sept. 17, 1952. D410.H8
Clarke, C. M. The Ford Foundation-Arkansas experiment. Journal of teacher
education (Washington), v. 3, Dec. 1952 : 260-264. LB1705.N7
Company gifts : all time high. U. S. news and world report (Washington) , v. 32,
Jan. 18, 1952: 56-58. JK1.U65
Company gifts : bars go down. U. S. news and world report (Washington ) , v. 35,
Nov. 13, 1953 : 104-107. JK1.U65
Cooper, James W. Charitable community trusts, with special reference to New
Haven Foundation. Connecticut bar journal (Bridgeport), v. 25, March
1951 : 17-29. Law library
Cox, Eugene E. Investigation of certain educational and philanthropic founda-
tions. Congressional record (Washington), 82d Cong., 1st. sess., v. 97:
A4833-A4834. J11.R5, v. 97
Davis, Malcolm. The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Journeys
behind the news (Denver), v. 12, Sept. 20, 1950: 317-320. D414.D4
Duling, G. Harold. Approach to foundations. Association of American Colleges
bulletin (Lancaster, Pa.), v. 39, May 1953 : 329-336. LB2301.A5
Dutton, William S. The Rockefeller foundation story : "Our mightiest ghost."
Collier's (New York), April 28, 1951: 18-19+. May 5, 1951: 22-23+. May
12, 1951 : 24-25+. May 19, 1951 : 28-29+. AP2.C65
Eaton, Berrien C. Charitable foundations and related matters under the 1950
revenue act. Virginia law review (Charlottesville), v. 37, Jan. 1951: 1-54.
v. 37, Feb. 1951: 253-296. Law library
— - — --. Charitable foundations tax avoidance and business expediency. Virginia
law review (Charlottesville), v. 35, Nov. 1949 : 809-861. Law library .
Use of charitable foundations for avoidance of taxes. Virginia law
review (Charlottesville), v. 34, Feb. 1948: 182-209. Law library
Edwards, Joel: $500,000,000 grubstaker. New York herald tribune, Feb. 1,
1953, sec. 7 : 13. [Concerns Bernard Gladieux]
Embree, Edwin R. The business of giving money away. Harper's magazine
(New York), v. 161, Aug. 1930:320-329. AP2.H3
— . Timid billions. Harper's magazine (New York), v. 198, March 1949:
28-37. AP2.H3
Faust, C. H. Role of the foundation in education. Saturday review (New York) ,
v. 35, Sept. 13, 1952 : 13-14+. Z1219.S25
Finkelstein, Maurice. Tax exempt charitable corporations: Revenue act of
1950. Michigan law review (Ann Arbor), v. 50, Jan. 1952: 427-434.
Law library
Flexner, Abraham. Private fortunes and public future. Atlantic monthly
(Boston), v. 156, Aug. 1935: 215-224. AP2.A8
Ford Foundation. Fifteen million dollars to study peace. Business week
(New York), Oct. 7, 1950: 30-32+ HF5001.B89
. Social service review (Chicago), v. 26, March 1952: 90-92. HV1.S6
Foundations for health. American journal of public health (New York), v.
43, Feb. 1953: 224-225. RA421.A41
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1239
Foundations on trial. Social service review (Chicago), v. 27, March 1953:
89-90. HV1.S6
Fulton, William. Let's look at our foundations. American Legion magazine
(Indianapolis), v. 53, Aug. 1952: 22-23, 42+ D570.A1A32
Glenn, John. M. The Russell Sage Foundation: forty years of social work
leadership. Compass (New York), Jan. 1948: 14-18. HV1.S647
Grubstakers. Time (Chicago), v. 60, Dec. 22, 1952: 38-39. AP2.T37
Haines, Aubrey B. A half-billion for humanity: nature and work of the
Ford Foundation. America (New York), v. 90, Nov. 14, 1953: 169-
171, BX801.A5
Harrison, S. M. Foundations and public service. American journal of eco-
nomics and sociology (New York), v. 9, Oct. 1949: 107-115. H1.A48
Heilbromer, Robert L. The fabulous Ford Foundation. Harper's magazine
(New York), v. 203, Dec. 1951: 25-32. AP2.H3
High, Stanley. Design for giving. Saturday evening post (Phila.), v. 213,
Aug. 10, 1940: 12-13, 534- AP2.S2
HoIHs, Ernest V. Evolution of the philanthropic foundation. Educational rec-
ord (Garden City, N. Y.), v, 20, Oct. 1939: 575-688. L11.E46
How to have your own foundation. Fortune (New York), v. 36, Aug. 1947:
108-109+ HF5001.F7
Huttchins, Clayton D. Planning foundation programs. School life (Washing-
ton), v. 35, Dec. 1952: 46-47. L11.S445
JEandel, I. L. Educational foundations and progress. School and society (Lan->.
caster, Pa.), v. 76, Jraly 26, 1952: 59. L11.S36
Kandel, I. L. Educational foundations and the quality of higher education..
School and society (Lancaster, Pa.), v. 77, Feb. 14, 1953: 105-106.
L11.S36
. Those subversive foundations. School and society (Lancaster, Pa.), v..
74, Oct. 1951 : 91-92. L11.S36
IKeatley, V. B. They work to give millions away. Coronet (New York), v. 30,
Oct. 1951: 133-136. AP2.C767
Keppel, Frederick P. Opportunities and dangers of educational foundations.
School and society (New York), v. 22, Dec. 26, 1925 : 793-799 L11.S36
. Philanthropic foundations. Science (Washington), n. c, v. 92, Dec. 2ff r
1940: 581-583. Q1.S35
Laprade, William T. Funds and foundations : a neglected phase. American
Association of University Professors bulletin (Washington), v. 38, Winter
1952-53: 559-576. LB2301.A3
ILasser, J. K. Why do so many businessmen start foundations? Dun's review
(New York), Feb. 1949: 15-17, 35+ HF1.D8
and W. J. Casey. The family foundation. Dun's review (New York),
Aug. 1951 : 22-23+ HF1.D8
Latcham, Franklin C. Charitable organizations and federal taxation. Western
Reserve law review (Cleveland), v. 3, Dee. 1951 : 99-138. Law library
— ■ ■ ■ ■ Private charitable foundations: income tax and policy implications.
University of Pennsylvania law review (Philadelphia), April 1950: 617-653.
Law library
Lucas, Scott W. Income-tax deductions for donations to allegedly subversive
groups. Congressional record (Washington), 80th Cong., 2d sess., v. 94:
A826-827. J11.R5 v. 94
Lundborg, Louis B. American business and the independent college : the future
supply of human resources. Vital speeches (Washington) , v. 19, May 1, 1953 :
445-448. PN6121.V5
McDaniel, Joseph M. The Ford Foundation. Fortnightly (London) no. 1027,
n. s., July 1952 : 47-52. AP4.F7
Melch, Holmes. Philanthrophy uninhibited: the Ford Foundation. Reporter
(New York), v. 8, Mar. 17, 1953 : 22-26. D839.R385
Melcher, F. G. Foundations and their support of scholarly publishing. Publish-
er's weekly (New York), v. 162, Nov. 29, 1952: 2169. Z1219.P98
Men of the Ford Foundation. Fortune (New York), v. 44, Dec. 1951: 116-117.
HF5001.F7
Mezerik, A. G. Foundation racket. New republic (New York) v. 122, Jan. 30,
1950 : 11-13. Correction, v. 122, March 6, 1952 : 4. AP2.N624
Miller, James R. He's got to give away $25,000,000 a year. This week magazine
(New York), Sept. 2, 1951 : 5, 10-11. [Concerns Paul Hoffman]. AP2.T326
The Modern philanthropic foundation: a critique and a proposal. Yale law
Journal (New Haven), Feb. 1950: 477-509. Law library
1240 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Moe, H. A. Power of freedom. Pacific spectator (Stanford, Gal.), v. 5, autumn
1951 : 435-448. AP2.P176
Morphet, Edgar L. The foundation program and public school finance. State
Government (Chicago), v. 25, Sept. 1952: 192-196, 215-16. JK2403.S7
Nabrit, S. M. Carnegie grants-in-aid program. Phylon (Atlanta), v. 10, no. 4,
1949:389-391. B185.5.P5
Now the foundations. Nation (New York), v. 174, May 17, 1952: 465-466.
AP2.N2
Paepoke, Walter P. The fruits of philanthropy. Saturday review (New York),
v. 36, Apr. 4, 1953 : 13-14, 66. Z1219.S25
Patch, Buel W. Tax exempt foundations. Editorial research reports (Wash-
ington), v. 1, Jan. 5, 1949: 3-20. H35.E35
Peattie, Donald Culross. Grubstaking the best folks : the Guggenheim Founda-
tion's way. Survey graphic (New York), v. 28, Aug. 1939: 508-510.
HV1.S82
Pollard, John A. Corporation support of higher education. Harvard business
review (Boston), v. 30, Sept./Oct. 1952: 111-126. HP5001.H3
Pritchett, Henry S. The use and abuse of endowments. Atlantic monthly (Bos-
ton), v. 144, Oct. 1929: 517-524. AP2.A8
Ragan, Philip H. Industrial foundations and community progress. Harvard
business review (Boston), v. 30, Nov.-Dec. 1952: 69-83. HF5001.H3
Reece, B. Carroll. Tax-exempt foundations. Statement in the House of Repre-
sentatives of the United States, Apr. 23, 1953. Congressional Record [daily
ed.] (Washington) , v. 99, Apr. 23, 1953 : 3776-3777.
Report on foundations. Higher education (Washington), v. 9, Apr. 15, 1953:
189-191. Government Publications Reading Room
Rockefeller, Winthrop. Philanthropy faces a change. American Mercury (New
York), v. 76, Feb. 1953: 29-33. AP2.A37
The role of the foundation in education. Saturday review (New York), v. 35,
Sept. 13, 1952: 13-14, 45. Z1219.S25
Rosenwald, Julius. Principles of giving. Atlantic monthly. (Boston), v. 143,
May 1929 : 599-606. AP2.A8
Ross, Milton. A primer on charitable foundations and the estate tax. Taxes
(Chicago), v. 27, Feb. 1949: 117-123. HJ2360.T4
Russell Sage Foundation. Social service review (Chicago), v. 23, June 1949:
247-248. HY1.S6
Scott, Austin W. Trusts for charitable and benevolent purposes. Harvard Law
review (Cambridge), v. 58, 1945: 548-572. Law library
Scott, Hugh. ... the greatest of these is charity. Philadelphia Inquirer mag-
azine (Philadelphia), April 13, 1952: 10-11, 47.
Select Committee To Study Tax Exemption of Certain Foundations and Or-
ganizations. Congressional record (Washington), 82d Cong., 2d sess., v. 98:
3491-3504.
Seybold, Geneva. Company giving through foundations. Conference Board man-
agement record (New York) , v. 14, Jan. 1952 : 2-5, 35-37 HD4802.C6
Seyfert, W. C. Role of foundation in public affairs. School review (Chicago),
v. 57, May 1949: 251-252. L11.S55
Sides, Virginia V. National Science Foundation fellowship program. Higher
education (Washington) , v. 9, Nov. 15, 1952 : 67-69.
Government Publications Reading Room
Sligh, Charles R., Jr. Industry support for our colleges) — moral and financial.
Association of American Colleges bulletin (Lancaster, Pa.) , v. 39, May 1953 :
317-28. LB2301.A5
Sloan, H. S. Role of the foundations in postwar planning. School and society
(Lancaster, Pa.), v. 59, March 4, 1944: 166-167. L11.S36
Sloan experiment in applied economics. National Education Association journal
(Washington), v. 36. Jan. 1947: 14-17; v. 36, Feb. 1947: 88-91; v. 36,
March 1947 : 202-205 ; v. 36, Apr. 1947 : 296-298. L11.N15
... So they gave the $500,000,000 away. Changing times (Washington), Feb.
1952: 40-42, HC101.O47
Taylor, Eleanor K. The public accountability of charitable trusts and foundat-
ions: historical definition of the problem in the United States. Social
service review (Chicago) , v. 25, Sept. 1951 : 299-319. HV1.S6
Text of the Trustees of the Ford Foundation's plans to aid world welfare.
New York times, Sept. 27, 1950 : 20.
Un-tory activities probe. New republic (New York), v. 129, Aug 10, 1953: 3.
AP2.N624
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1241
Velie, L. How to give money away. Collier's (New York), v. 122, Dec. 25,
1948-50+ AP2.C65
Welch, Holmes. Philanthropy uninhibited: the Ford Foundation. Reporter
(New York), March 17, 1953: 22-26. D839.R385
Widener, Alice. Who's running the Ford Foundation? American Mercury
(New York), v. 76, June 1953: 3-7. AP2.A37
Wiley, Alexander. News releases by American Heritage Foundation. Exten-
sion of remarks of the Hon. Alexander Wiley, of Wisconsin, in the Senate
of the United States, May 18, 1953. Congressional record [daily ed.]
(Washington), 83d Cong., 1st sess., v. 99, May 18, 1953: A2846-A2848.
Winterich, J. Q. How science aids the golden rule. Nation's business (Wash-
ington) , v. 36, Nov. 1948 : 50-52. HF1.N4
Wooster, J. W., Jr. Current trends and developments in the investment practices
of endowments and pension funds. Law and contemporary problems (Dur-
ham, N. C.) , v. 17, winter 1952 : 162-171. Law library
PERIODICALS PUBLISHED BY FOUNDATIONS
[This listing does not include annual reports nor monographic series]
Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, Inc. :
Bulletin A. P. New York, May 1940. H62.A1A57
Grants-in-aid authorized, publications released and financial statement.
New York, 1940. H62.A1A58
Alma Egan Hyatt Foundation :
Aethiopica : revue philologique. New York, April 1933. PJ9001.A42
Egyptian religion. New York, 1933. BL2441.A1E4
Carl' Shurz Memorial Foundation :
American-German review. Philadelphia, 1934. E183.8.G3A6
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace :
Bulletin bibliographique de documentation internationale contemporaine.
Paris, 1929. Z7136.B936
L'Esprit international : the international mind. Paris, Jan. 1, 1927.
JC362.A1E8
Experience in international administration. Washington, 1943
JX1906.A29
Fortnightly summary of international events. New York. D410.F75
International conciliation. New York, 1907. JX1907.A8
United Nations studies. New York, 1947. JX1977.A1U57
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching :
Review of legal education in the United States and Canada. New York,
1926/27. LC1141.C3
Cranbrook Institute of Science :
Cranbrook Institute of Science newsletter, Bloomfield Hills, Mich., 1931.
Q11.C955
Edward W. Hazen Foundation :
The Hazen pamphlets. Haddam, Conn., 1942 (?). AC901.H34.
Ford Foundation :
Financial statements. Detroit. AS911.F6A44
Foundation for Foreign Affairs, Washington :
American perspectives: a monthly analysis. Washington, April 1947.
E744.A537
Milbank Memorial Fund :
Milbank Memorial Fund quarterly. New York, 1923. HV97.M6A32
Kockefeller Foundation :
Methods and problems of medical education. New York, 1924-1930. 17 v.
R735.R6
Russell Sage Foundation :
Social work yearbook. New York, 1929. HV35.S6
Woodrow Wilson Foundation :
United Nations news. Washington (?). January 1946.
Periodical Reading Room
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
SPECIAL COMMITTEE
TO
INVESTIGATE TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
H. RES. 217
STAFF REPORT NO. 1
CAPITAL VALUES AND GROWTH OF CHARITABLE
FOUNDATIONS
(Page numbers are from printed hearings)
T. M. McNiece, Assistant Director of Research
Printed for the use of the committee
UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
54607 WASHINGTON : 1954
SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
B. CARROLL REECE, Tenne&see, Chairman
JESSE P. WOLCOTT, Michigan WAYNE L. HAYS, Ohio
ANGIER L. GOODWIN, Massachusetts GRACIE PFOST, Idaho
Rene A. Wormseh, General Counsel
Katheyn Casey, Legal Analyst
Norman Dodd, Research Director
Arnold Koch, Associate Counsel
John Marshall, Jr., Chief Clerk
Thomas McNiece, Assistant Research Director
II
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 9
Capital Values and Gbowth of Charitable Foundations
It is apparent from the Cox committee hearings and from the available litera-
ture on the subject that there is relatively little information from which the
magnitude and growth of charitable foundations can be judged.
It seems rather illogical to devote serious and extended consideration to
this complex problem without having some idea of the number, size, and char-
acteristic of these charitable organizations that must exert such a great
influence on our social and economic life.
The Russell Sage Foundation has published some excellent studies in which
the actual data available have been limited to a relatively small number
of foundations.
The Cox committee reported that it had sent questionnaires to more than
1,500 organizations. Based on the record in the flies, there was a return from
approximately 70 percent of these organizations. These returns have provided
the basis for the analysis in this report.
The Internal Revenue Bureau every 4 years publishes a list of tax-exempt
organizations in the United States. In the intermediate 2-year period a sup-
plement is published. The latest major list is revised to June 30, 1950, and
the supplement to June SO, 1952. These are the latest lists available at the
present time and it will be some time after midyear of this year before a new
list is available. It so happens that there is quite a close agreement between
these publication dates just mentioned and the effective dates of the question-
naires from the Cox committee. A large number of them were as of December
31, 1951, and a small number at the end of some fiscal period prior to 1952.
Analysis of this Internal Revenue Bureau list indicates that as of this
period there were approximately 38,000 tax-exempt organizations in the United
States. A sampling of the pages in an attempt to identify foundations included
in this list indicated that there may be an approximate total of 6,300 out of the
38,000 organizations that might be called foundations. We believe that we are
within close limits of accuracy if we state that there are between 6,000 and 7,000
foundations in existence as of this period.
accuracy of data and derived estimates
It should be realized that the ensuing tabulations cannot be accurate from the
standpoint of good accounting standards. A large proportion of the small
foundations is not endowed but derives its capital from recurring contributions.
Some endowments are reported at book value and others at market value. These
must be accepted as reported. It is believed that the greater part of the total
value is based on market value. In the case of foundations with capital of $10
million and over, essentially all are endowed.
The questionnaires' included in the analysis are of two types : the large and
form A as described by the Cox committee. Of the total of 952 included in the
financial summaries, 65 cover foundations with capital in excess of $10 million
and 887 of less than $10 million capital. Approximately 150 of the form A ques-
tionnaries were excluded from the financial summaries because information on
capital, income, or both were omitted from the answers returned. These were
included, however, in the numerical growth data.
In the tabulations of capital, endowment capital and current contributory
capital are added to obtain total values.
estimated total values
Data from 46 of the large foundations as included in this tabulation were cov-
ered by the large questionnaires. These are the big-name foundations and were
specifically and individually selected as such by the Cox committee. The total
values applying to this group were included without change in the grand totals.
Nineteen foundations with capital in excess of $10 million were included in
the tabulations with the 887 that are under $10 million because nearly all of
these were included with a form A questionnaire. This makes 906 question-
naires included in the form A group and these are considered to be about 15
percent of the total remaining foundations in the Bureau of Internal Revenue
list as previously mentioned.
10
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
For this reason, the actual values in this group of 906 were multiplied by 6.66 to
arrive at a total capital value of the foundations estimated to be in the Internal
Kevenue Bureau tax-exempt list. This estimate is considered to be on the
conservative side and in any event sufficiently accurate as a good indication of
growth trends and total values involved.
FINANCIAL CLASSIFICATION OF FOUNDATIONS
The financial classification of the foundations made in accordance with the
foregoing remarks is shown in table I. The first 3 columns show the actual
results derived from the questionnaires, the last 2 show the estimated total
values for each size classification listed. The values shown in the last 2
columns are 6.66 times their respective values in the 2 prior columns except for
the 46 large ones and the resulting grand total as previously mentioned.
Table I
[In thousands of dollars]
Endowment classification,! Form A
questionnaires
Less than $50,000
$50,000 to $99,999
$100,000 to $249,999
$250,000 to $499,999
$500,000 to $749,999
$750,000 to $999,999
$1,000,000 to $9,999,999
$10,000,000 and over
Total, Form A
Large questionnaires.-
Grand total
Total, $10,000,000 and over
Number of
foundations
379
99
125
87
34
30
133
19
906
49
952
65
Total en-
dowment l
6,198
7,076
19, 348
29, 107
20, 604
25, 365
388, 368
304,882
800, 948
2, 129, 746
2, 930, 694
2,434,623
Total
income
5,510
1,895
5,389
5,430
3,355
4,133
43,509
17, 667
96, 062
182,950
113, 729
Adjusted en-
dowment '
41, 277
47, 248
128, 885
193, 850
137, 221
168, 933
2, 586, 530
2,029,405
5, 333, 319
2, 129, 746
7, 463, 065
4, 159, 141
Adjusted
income
36, 698
12, 622
35, 889
36, 162
22, 343
27. 526
289, 769
117, 660
578, 669
96,062
674, 731
213, 722
, ' "Endowment classification" includes endowments as well as contributions to nonendowed or "con-
tributory" foundations that were on hand as of end of calendar or fiscal year 1951.
Adjusted data include total endowment and income reported on Form A questionnaires multiplied by
6.66 because the 906 questionnaires included in the summary are estimated to be 15 percent of those included
in the tax-exempt list.
It will be noted that the estimated total capital for the foundations is
nearly $7.5 billion and total annual income nearly $675 million. Both of these
figures will be subject to considerable variation from year to year, in part be-
cause of the proportion of "contributory" foundations in the smaller groups and
because of varying earnings between good years and bad.
The proportions or percentages of foundations, their capital and their income
in each capital classification as well as the percentage of income to capital in
each class are shown in table II.
Table II. — Percentage distribution
Endowment classification, Form A questionnaires
Percent of
total
number
Percent of
adjusted
endowment
Percent of
adjusted
income
Income as
percent of
capital
Less than $50,000
39.8
10.4
13.2
9.1
3.6
3.1
14.0
2.0
0.5
.7
1.7
2.6
1.8
2.3
34.7
27.2
5.4
1.9
5.3
5.4
3.3
4.1
43.0
17.4
89 2
$50,000 to $99,999
26 7
$100,000 to $249,999
27 8
$250,000 to $499,999
18 7
$500,000 to $749,999
16 2
$750,000 to $999,999
16 3
$1,000,000 to $9,999,999
11 5
$10,000,000 and over
5 8
Total, Form A
95.2
.4.8
71.5
28.5
85.8
14.2
10 8
Large questionnaires
4 5
Grand total
100.0
100.0
100.0
9
Total, $10,000,000 and over ,
6.8
55.7
31.6
5 1
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS H
It is of interest to note that the foundations of less than $50,000 capital are
shown to comprise about 40 percent of the total foundations, 0.5 percent of the
capital and 5.4 percent of the income with a ratio of income to capital of 89.2
percent. These strange ratios result from the fact that these small foundations
are largely of the nonendowed or contributory type and receive frequent contri-
butions of cash from creators and friends. Since much of their income is cur-
rently expended the ratio of income to capital is very high.
At the other extreme are the large foundations of capital of $10 million and
over. These account for 7 percent of the number, 56 percent of the endowment,
and 32 percent of the income. Some cash contributions are occasionally received
by these and their ratio of income to endowment is about 5 percent.
An interesting feature of this table is that the ratio of income to capital
decreases quite steadily as the capital classification increases as would be
expected from the foregoing remarks. This decrease is evident in the last
column of table I.
The great increase in foundations created in the decade of 1940-49 is featured
by the large percentage of small foundations which in turn and as previously
stated are composed of a higher percentage of nonendowed or contributory
foundations. Based on the answers to the Cox committee questionnaires, the
following comparative figures apply:
Nonendowed foundations created : Percent of total
Decade 1930-39 ' 12. 5
Decade 1940-49 27. 5
CHARACTERISTIC DATA ON LARGE FOUNDATIONS
Table III which follows shows data applying to the 65 foundations whose capi-
tal is $10 million and over :
Table III
Number of foundations 65
Original capital 1 $590, 752, 000
1951 capital 1 j. $2, 434, 628, 000
.Ratio 1951 capital to original capital 4. 1
Average annual total income, 1946 to 1951, inclusive $113, 729, 000
Ratio annual income to 1951 capital 4. 7
Cash on hand, 1951 $40, 559, 000
Cash, percent of income 35. 7
Perpetual capital life $1, 120, 202, 000
Limited capital life $99, 777, 000
Conditional capital life $1, 214, 749, 000
Percent perpetual capital life 46.
Percent limited capital life 4. 1
Percent conditional capital life 49. 9
Number of corporations 46
Number of trusts 17
Number of associations. # 2
Number of operating foundations 19
Number of nonoperating foundations 26
Number of combination foundations 20
Average capital per foundation $37, 400, 000
Average income per foundation $1, 740, 000
1 Includes capital of endowed and nonendowed foundations.
This table calls for little comment. The slight discrepancy between the figures
of 5.1 percent in table II and 4.7 percent in table III for earnings as percent of
capital is explained by the larger percentage of "adjusted" earnings estimated
for the 19 large foundations included in Form A group as compared with the 46
in the large group.
As previously outlined, contributions to the nonendowed organizations are
considered as income and unexpended funds largely constitute the capital in lieu
of securities in the portfolios of endowed organizations. This results in a higher
ratio of income to capital than prevails in the endowed organizations.
It is also of interest to note the relative proportions of foundation capital in-
cluded in the perpetual, limited and conditional life classifications.
12
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The endowments of large foundations with definitely limited life comprise only
about 4 percent of the total endowments of this large foundation group while the
perpetual and conditional groups have 46 percent and 50 percent respectively of
the totals. There seems to be very little tendency for the trustees of the con-
ditional life group seriously to reduce their endowments. This might naturally
The numerical data show the number of foundations created each year and
the financial data show the values of the endowments reported for 1951 for the
foundations created each year. The accumulated endowments at 1951 values are
also shown. The values just described are shown in chart I. There is no appre-
ciable increase or decrease shown in the trend of endowment values added since
1900. The trend is essentially horizontal for these large foundations.
GROWTH OF LARGE FOUNDATIONS
The rate of growth both numerically and in capital values of these large
foundations during the last 50 years is shown in table IV.
Table IV. — Foundations with capital $10 million and over (includes only those
reporting on questionnaires)
[In thousands of dollars]
Year created
1900-
1901-
1902..
1903-
1904-
1905..
1906-
1907-
1908..
1909-
1910-
1911..
1912-
1913..
1914..
1915..
1916..
1917-
1918-
1919..
1920_.
1921..
1922..
1923..
1924.
1925..
Number
created
1951 en-
dow-
ment
$11, 769
10, 856
16, 376
13, 173
26,662
160, 897
10, 545
335, 126
17, 118
28,391
81, 170
44, 762
16, 673
13, 703
41, 868
210, 418
41, 685
1951 accu-
mulated
endowment
$22, 625
39, 001
52, 174
78, 836
78, 836
239, 733
250, 278
585, 404
602, 522
602, 522
602, 522
630, 913
712, 083
756, 845
773,518
787, 221
787, 221
829, 089
1, 039, 507
1,081,192
Year created
1926
1927
1928
1929
1930
1931
1932
1933
1934
1935..
1936_.__
1937
1938
1939
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
1946
1947
1948
1949
1950
1951
Total
Number
created
4
4
1
1
4
1
1
3
4
2
2
2
3
2
1
1
3
1
1
65
1951 en-
dow-
ment
$52, 911
56, 814
30. 239
11, 699
125, 369
12, 000
15, 605
54, 383
548, 409
66, 981
57, 292
29, 334
55, 120
27, 291
14, 080
14,507
154, 387
16, 817
10, 300
1951 accu-
mulated
endowment
$1, 134, 103
1,190,917
1, 221, 156
1, 232, 855
1,358,224
1, 370, 224
1, 385, 829
1, 385, 829
1, 440, 212
1, 440, 212
1, 988, 621
2, 055, 602
2, 112, 894
2, 112, 894
2, 142, 228
2, 197, 348
2, 197, 348
2, 197, 348
2, 197, 348
2, 224, 639
2,238,719
2, 253, 226
2, 407, 613
2, 424, 430
2, 424, 430
2, 434, 730
2, 434, 730
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
13
The influence of some of the large foundations of 1951, but shown in the year
of their origin, is apparent on the chart. These are shown in the following
table :
Table V
Foundation
Year
founded
Original
endowment
1961
endowment
Carnegie
Rockefell
Common
Kresge..
Corp ,
1911
1913
1918
1924
1924
1930
1936
1937
1948
$25, 000
100, 000
10,000
1,300
40,000
22, 000
25, 000
17,000
46, 000
Million
$161
sr
323
wealth
81
79
Duke
131
Kellogg ^
51
Ford _
503
Hayden . „ .. _ _ . ..
52
Pew .
105
trf" —
3M
c _
CHART 1
s~
- 1
a ae
i
Financial Growth
°f
65 FOUNDATIONS
WITH
ENDOWMENTS f /O Ml LtlON
AND QV£R AS of 1951
VALUES
220
y
J
2ia
ISO)
—
I7M
AC
CUMULATED GROWTf
i J
AT l9S/Vf
LUES
L
'
'&OC
j
**
cc
i
y^
-j
J
**■ lux
/
o
i I
2
2 ax
j
2 Tee
(
I
1
n —
ANNUAL GROWTH
AT /9 C/ l/A/ '"^
30C
/,
r
A
i\\
A
A
^n
J±
Jw
U>
A
:\_.
A
»o©
BWT
14
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
NUMERICAL GROWTH OP 1,097 FOUNDATIONS
The Cox Committee files contained about 1,100 questionnaires. We have
classified these numerically according to the year of their origin. The numerical
growth of these regardless of type or size is shown for each year since 1900 and
the accumulated increase year by year in table VI. These data are also shown
in graphic form on chart II. The numerical-growth trend shown in table VI and
on chart II is of course confined to the Cox Committee list. It should be reason-
ably indicative of the growth trend of the whole group of foundations on the tax-
exempt list.
Table VI
Number
Accumu-
lated
number
Number
Accumu-
lated
number
Prior to 1900
9
1
1
1
1
3
3
1
3
3
2
2
5
3
4
6
7
4
6
4
11
7
8
1926
7
14
10
20
10
6
9
2
7
10
14
17
20
16
25
30
27
76
123
206
116
132
70
24
8
3
102
1900
9
9
9
10
10
11
12
13
16
19
20
23
26
28
30
35
38
42
48
55
59
65
69
80
87
95
1927
116
1901
1928
126
1902.
1929
146
1903
1930
156
1904
1931
162
1905 —
1932
171
1906
1933
173
1907
1934
180
1908
1935
190
1909
1936
204
1910 -
1937
221
1911
1938
241
1912
1939 ..
257
1913
1940
282
1914
1941 . . .
312
1916
1942
339
1916
1943
415
1917... .
1944 .
538
1918
1945
744
1919
1946
860
1920
1947 .
992
1921
1948
1,062
1,086
1,094
1,097
1922
1949
1923 _
1950
1924
1951
1925
The high peak centering in 1945 is composed preponderantly of the smaller
foundations and is apparently a byproduct of a change in the tax laws and of
a profitable period in the American economy. Due to the sharp decline from
1945, the trend of the accumulated increase curve has flattened considerably since
1948.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
15
1900
UOS" 1910
19(5* 1920
IMf
1930
T93T 1345 W45 »W
16
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Comparative data on cash and income, supplement to capital values and growth
of charitable foundations
Founded
in —
Average
income,
1946-51
Cash,
1951
Cash,
Percent of
average
income
Average
income,
percent of
1961
endow-
ment
Altman Foundation...
M. D. Anderson Foundation
Avalon Foundation
Hall Brothers Foundation
Louis D. Beaumont Foundation
Buhl Foundation
Carnegie Corp. of New York
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie Foundation for Advancement of teaching
Carnegie Institution
A. C. Carter Foundation. __
Cullen Foundation
The Commonwealth Fund
Danforth Foundation
Donner Foundation
Duke Endowment... -.
El Pomar Foundation
Maurice and Laura Falk Foundation
Samuel S. Fels Fund
The Field Foundation
Max C, Fleischman Foundation
Ford Foundation..
Henry Clay Frick Educational Commission
Firestone Foundation
General Education Board
Edwin Gould Foundation tor Children
J. Simon Guggenheim Foundation
Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation
John A, Hartford Foundation
Charles Hayden Foundation
Louis and Maud Hill Family Foundation
Eugene Higgins Scientific Trust .
Houston Endowment
Godfrey M. Hyams Trust
Institute for Advanced Study
James Foundation of New York
Juilliard Musical Foundation.
Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation
W. K, Kellogg Foundation.
Kresge Foundation
Kate Macy Ladd Fund
E. D. Libbey Trust -
Lilly Endowment .
John and Mary Markle Foundation
Josiah Macy Foundation
A. W. Mellon Educational and Charitable Trust..
Mellon Institute of Industrial Research
R. K. Mellon Foundation
Millbank Memorial Fund
William H. Minor Foundation
Charles Stewart Mott Foundation
William Rockhill Nelson Trust
New York Foundation..
Old Dominion Foundation
Olin Foundation
Permanent Charity Fund
Pew Memorial Foundation
Z. S. Reynolds Foundation
Rockefeller Foundation
Rosenberg Foundation
Sarah Mellon Scaife Foundation
Russell Sage Foundation
Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
Surdna Foundation _
Twentieth Century
Estate of Harry C. Trexler
William C. Whitney Foundation
William Volker Charities
1913
1936
1940
1926
1949
1927
1911
1910
1906
1926
1945
1947
1918
1927
1945
1924
1937
1929
1936
1940
1951
1936
1909
1947
1903
1923
1925
1937
1929
1937
1934
1948
1937
1921
1930
1941
1920
1948
1930
1924
1946
1925
1937
1927
1930
1930
1927
1947
1905
1923
1926
1926
1909
1941
1938
1917
1948
1936
1913
1935
1941
1907
1934
1917
1919
1934
1936
1932
Thou-
sands
1,231
687
232
701
581
5,941
646
1,698
989
1,734
1,171
1,996
865
697
4,913
507
417
248
696
9
29, 061
62
57
520
315
1,083
108
1,746
334
1,000
1,622
601
687
2,130
519
13
3,253
4,776
440
595
1,462
728
378
1,763
3,568
482
601
1,052
420
633
465
669
978
367
4,125
376
364
196
200
542
1,329
756
457
433
75
1,027
11
Thou-
sands
$825
424
470
975
416
315
425
117
109
570
760
1,235
23
403
816
169
226
332
449
1
2,580
307
1,575
788
241
461
84
702
800
(?)
(?)
435
480
374
3,388
390
83
356
1,094
249
51
826
2
65
644
274
250
841
87
1,552
77
719
301
2,650
181
487
9
6,535
424
1
381
1,747
558
657
242
10
1,032
165.0
34.0
6.9
420.0
59.0
54.0
7.0
18.0
11.0
33.0
65.0
62.0
26.2
57.9
17.0
33.0
54.0
134.0
64.0
11.0
9.0
495.0
2, 765.
152.0
76.4
43.0
73.0
798.0
46.0
(?)
(?)
27.0
80.0
41.5
159.0
75.0
639.0
11.0
24.0
57.0
9.0
56.0
0.3
17.0
37.0
7.7
51.8
140.0
8.0
370.0
12.0
154.0
45.0
271.0
49.3
12.0
2.5
58.0
216.0
0.6
70.0
132.0
74.0
144.0
558.0
13.0
100.0
4.0
5.4
3.9
3.7
4.2
4.4
3.7
,4.7
15.6
9.2
14.4
22.2
2.4
7.8
4.6
3.7
3.5
3.6
2.1
5.9
.1
5.8
2.6
2.2
10.5
2.9
3.6
2.7
5.8
3.3
2.7
2.9
52.5
4.4
3.5
6.8
3.1
.1
6.4
6.0
3.1
3.6
5.4
4.2
1.9
5.2
23.7
3.3
5.2
8.4
2.9
5.3
3.6
5.0
3.2
3.6
3.9
3.3
3.5
2.7
1.9
3.3
4.5
4.2
It is believed that the data portrayed in this report, while not of provable
accuracy, are sufficiently representative of actual conditions to provide reason-
able guidance in appraising the magnitude of the problems involved. This
should assist in the consideration of any suggestions that may seem advisable for
possible legislative action.
T. M. McNiecb.
o
SPECIAL COMMITTEE
TO
INVESTIGATE TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
H. RES. 217
STAFF REPORT NO. %
RELATIONS BETWEEN FOUNDATIONS AND
EDUCATION AND BETWEEN FOUNDATIONS
AND GOVERNMENT
(Page numbers are from printed hearings)
May 1954
Printed for the use of the committee
54608
UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 1954
SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS!
B. CARROLL REECE, Tennessee, Chairman,
JESSE P. WOLCOTT, Michigan WAYNE L. HAYS, Ohio
ANGIER L. GOODWIN, Massachusetts GRACIE PFOST, Idaho
Rene A. Wormser, General Counsel
Katheyn Casby, Legal Analyst
Norman Dodd, Research Director
Arnold Koch, Associate Counsel <
John Marshall, Jr., Chief Clerk
Thomas McNiece, Assistant Research Director
II ■
STATEMENT OF THOMAS M. McNIECE, ASS^TANT RESEARCH
DIRECTOR, SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE TAX-EXEMPT
FOUNDATIONS
PREFATORY STATEMENT! ; '^'^rVV", ,' ',
Mr. McNiece. From the jungle of semantics varlotis people may de-
rive different interpretations from the f#me statement. In the simplest
terms possible, we wish, to say that in this report, regardless of other
interpretations, we intend to draw no conclusions, but rather to portray
such, available facts as we have been able to gather on this complex
subj ect. This report covers but one phase of the larger work that is
being done. }
Furthermore, we are not criticizing change as such, Bather does
the evidence which will be offered seem to show that the pattern is
one of evolving collectivism, the ultimate aim of several varieties of
political thought with different names and a common objective. l
To explain our reference to a common objective, we wish to quote
from the sources indicated a number of statements on this subject.
Report of the Joint Legislative Committee Investigating Seditious
Activities, filed in New York State, 1920. I beliete that was known
as the Lusk committee.
In the report here presented the committee seeks to give a clear,, unbiased
statement and history of the purposes and objects, tactics and methods, of the
various forces now at work in the United States . . : which are seeking to under-
mine and; destroy, not only the government under which we live, but also the
very structure of American society ;
. . .In the section of this report dealing with American conditions, the com-
mittee has attempted to describe in detail the various organizations masquerad-
ing as political parties, giving the principles and objects for which they stand,
as well as methods and tactics they employ in order to bring about the social
revolution.
In every instance the committee has relied upon the so-called party or organs
Ization's own statements with respect to these matters . . ,
Those (organizations) representing the Socialist point of view aire the Socialist
Party of America, the Communist Party of America, the Communist Labor Party,
and the Socialist Labor Party. Each of these groups claim to be the most
modern and aggressive body representing Marxian theories.
A study of. their platforms and official pronouncements shows that they do
not differ fundamentally in their objectives .. .
These organizations differ but slightly in the means advocated to bring
about the social revolution . . . they differ slightly in the matter of em-
phasis ...
League for Industrial Democracy : Definition of "Democracy", New
Frontiers, Vol. IV, No. 4, June 1936 :
The flght for democracy is at one and the same time also a fight for, socialism,
democracy, to be sure, rests on liberty, but its substance is equality . '*■'."■
But finally, equality is social equality. All political institutions of democracy
are perverted by private property in the means of production. Personal, legal,
political equality — they, all can be fully realized only when private property
is abolished, when men have an equal control over property.
Democratic Socialism by Roger Payne and George W. Hartman,
1948, page 77.
467
468 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
These men are English authors.
In the socialist society of the future there will be two things in which it will
be fundamentally different from the present society. One of these is collective
ownership of the means of production and distribution ; the other is a complete
democracy under which the political, economic, social and international life
will be complete democratized.
', The Socialist Call (official organ of the Socialist Party), April
1954, page 5r -
Socialists regard the capitalist system of private property relations,
with its complex, disputable, sometimes unfathomable inner economic laws and
relationships, as a wall that stands between humanity and its goals in economic
affairs, between man and his bread and peace of mind.
■>.■■ ■'.-■ ■'.. , ■■ rrT ■;, .., - , V: •
;' V ' THE INTRODUCTION
On page A1161 of the appendix of the Congressional Record of
February W, f95^ there appears the copy of an article by Seymour
E. Harris, prbffesSoi' of economics at Harvard University. This arti-
cle is entitled, "The Old Deal," and appeared originally in the maga-
zine Progressive' in the issue of December 1953. We are quoting the
first paragraph of this article :
In the 20 years between 1933 and 1953 the politicians, college professors,
and lawyers, with a little help from business, wrought a revolution in the
economic policies of the United States. They repudiated laissez-faire. They
saw the simple fact that if capitalism were to survive, Government must take
some responsibility for developing the Nation's resources, putting a floor under
spending, achieving. a jnore equitable distribution of income, and protecting the
weak against the strong. The price of continuing the free society was to be
limited intervention by Government.
Stepping backward for a span of 9 years, we wish to submit
another quotation, this time from the issue of October 15, 1943, of
the magazine iFrontiers of Democracy, the successor to an earlier
one to which reference will be made later and which was called "Social
Frontier," Dr. Harold Rugg of Teachers College, Columbia Univer-
sity, was the editor of the latter magazine and the author of the
article from which this excerpt is made.
Thirteen months will elapse between the publication of this issue of Frontiers
and the national eledtipn of 1944. In those months the American people must
make one of the great decisions in their history. J They will elect the President
and the Congress that will make the peace and that will carry on the national
productive system in the transition years. The decisions made by that Gov-
ernment, in collaboration with the British and Russian Governments, will set
the mold of political and economic life for a generation to come. * * * We have
suddenly come out upon a new frontier and must chart a new course. It is
a psychological frontier, an unmarked wilderness of competing desires and
possessions, of property Ownerships and power complexes. Oh such a frontier
Wisdom is the supreme need, rather than technological efficiency and physical
strength in which our people are so competent.
. We are strong enough but are we wise enough? We shall soon see for the
testing moment is now. Our "measure will be taken in these 13 months. The
test is whether enough of our people — perhaps a compact minority of K) million
will be enoughs-can grasp the established fact that, in company wjth other
industrializing peoples, we are living in a worldwide social revolution.
We propose to offer evidence which seems to indicate that this
"revolution" has; been promoted. Included within this supporting
evidence will be documented, records that will show how the flow of
money, men, and ideas combined to promote this so-called revolution
just mentioned.
I'AX-fixMMPT FOtJNDAtaGNS 469
The money in large part came from the foundations. Men and
ideas in a great measure came from the intellectual groups or so-
cieties supported by this money and found their way into the power-
ful agencies of education and Government. Here in these pivotal
centers were combined the professors, the politicians, and the lawyers
mentioned a moment ago.
Foundations, education, and Government form a triangle of influ-
ences, natural under the circumstances and certainly without criti-
cism in itself as long as the three entities exist and the liaison is
not abused or misused in the furtherance of questionable activities.
The Organization Chart
The nature of these threefold relationships can be most clearly and
quickly illustrated by reference to the chart prepared for the pur-
pose and entitled, "Relationships Between Foundations, Education,
and Government." Let it be emphasized again that there is no ele-
ment of criticism or condemnation to be inferred from this chart. It
is what is commonly considered as a functional organization chart,
and its purpose is to display graphically whaf; it is difficult to describe,
to see and to understand by verbal description only.
As previously suggested, the chart is basically in the form of a
triangle with appended rectangles to indicate the functional activi-
ties in their relationship to each other. At the apex we have placed
the foundations. At the lateral or base angles, on the left and right,
respectively, are the educational and governmental members of the
triad. Suspended from the rectangle representing the foundations
are those representing the intellectual groups which are dependent
to a large extent upon the foundations for their support.
The relationships between and among these organized intellectual
groups are far more complex than is indicated on the chart. Some
of these organizations have many constituent member groups. The
American Council of Learned Societies has 24 constituent societies,
the Social Science Research Council 7, the American Council on
Education 79 constituent members, 64 associate members, and 954
institutional members. In numbers and interlocking combinations
they are too numerous and complex to picture on this chart.
Mr. Koch. May I suggest that this chart he refers to should be
deemed in evidence and part of the record?
The Chairman. I so understood.
Mr. Koch. Go ahead.
Mr. Hats. Where will it be inserted, not that it makes any differ-
ence. Will it be at the end of his statement or at the middle ?
Mr. Koch. I should think right here where he is talking about it.
The Chairman. Under the caption "Organization Chart."
Mr. McNiece. I would think that would be the natural place for it.
Mr. Koch. Go ahead.
Mr. McNiece. These typejS of intellectual societies may be con-
sidered as clearing houses or perhaps as wholesalers of money received
from foundations inasmuch as they are frequently the recipients of
relatively large grants which they often distribute in subdivided
amounts to member groups and individuals.
For illustrative purposes, the following four societies are listed r
American Council of Learned Societies, including the American His-
INTER-RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN
FOUNDATIONS, E DUCATION AN D GOVERNMENT
FOUNDATIONS
AMERICAN COUNCIL
OF LEARNED SOCIETIES
AM ERIC AN ~H isTORIC AL "
ASSOCIATION
SOCIAL SCIENCE
RESEARCH COUNCIL
NATIONAL ACADEMY
OF SCIENCES
AMERICAN COUNCIL
ON EDUCATION
FEDERAL ~~
OFFICE OF EDUCATION
NATIONAL
EDUCATION
ASSOCIATION
STATE
DEPARTMENT
RESEARCH:
ECONOMIC
BIOGRAPHIC
SOCIAL SCIENCES
INTERNATIONAL AREAS
NATIONAL
PLANNING BOARD
1933-34
NATIONAL RESOURCES
PLANNING BOARD
1939-43
EDUCATION
PSYCHOLOGICAL
WARFARE
ft
©
!
I
1
%
GD
PRIMARY
SCHOOLS
SECONDARY
SCHOOLS
SOURCE: House of Representatives
Special Committee to Investigate
Tax Exempt Foundations.
May 1954
EDUCATION
CHARITIES
MEDICINE AND HEALTH
NUTRITION
EMPLOYMENT
SOCIAL SECURITY
RECREATION
SOCIAL SCIENCES
NATURAL SCIENCES
INTERNATIONALISM
MILITARY
FINANCE
COMMERCE
AGRICULTURE
INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION
NATURAL RESOURCES
PUBLIC WORKS
HOUSING
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 471
torical Association, Social Science Researc^QounciL National Acad-
enOT of Sciences, Ainerican Council On Education.
t The lour shown on the chart are enough toillustrate the relation-
ship of such societies to the governmental and the other -educational
units shown on the chart. Furthermore, credit or appreciation has
been expressed by both educational and governmental circles for aid
received from each of these four organizations.
Below the rectangle representing education appear the various
branches of the educational effort. To avoid undue complexity, no
attempt has been made here or at any other points on the chart to
portray any but the principal areas of operation. Under the govern-
mental function a few divisions of activity are shown. These are con-
fined to the executive branches of Government where the greatest
changes have occurred.
INTERPRETATION OF THE CHART
The lines connecting the various rectangles on the chart symbolize
the paths followed in the flow or interchange of money, men, and ideas
as previously mentioned. The focal point of contacts between these
connecting lines and the rectangles are lettered somewhat in the man-
Tier used in textbooks of geometry and trigonometry in order to facili-
tate identification and reference in describing the existing relation-
ships. Finally, this chart as a whole will be useful in locating the
areas in which we have found evidence of questionable procedure
against what we deem to be public interest.
Leaving the chart for a few moments, we shall refer to certain
information derived from the record of the Cox committee hearing.
Information From the Cox Committee Hearing
Reference to the record shows that definite orders were issued in
Soviet circles to infiltrate "all strata of western public opinion" in
an effort to accomplish two objectives : one, to penetrate and utilize
intellectual circles for the benefit of the Soviet cause and two, to
gain access to foundation funds to cover the cost of such effort. Tes-
timony of Messrs. Bogolepov and Malkin described firsthand knowl-
edge of these instructions. Testimony of Mr. Louis Budenz confirmed
this, even to listing the names of committee members appointed to
accomplish this objective. Testimony of Mr. Manning Johnson added
further confirmation of these facts and in addition provided the
names of certain individuals who had succeeeded in penetrating or
receiving grants from several of the foundations.
Evidence of actual Communist entry into foundation organiza-
tions is supplied in the Cox committee record. This testimony in-
volves at least seven foundations, namely, the Marshall Field
Foundation, the Garland Fund, the John Simon Guggenheim Founda-
tion, the Heckscher Foundation, the Robert Marshall Foundation,
the Rosenwald Fund, and the Phelps Stokes Fund.
Mr. Hats. Could I interrupt there ?
4^2 ^ax^sxempt Jooifi>ATa5]Srs
Mr. McNiece. Certainly.
Mr. Hays. I don't want to make a habit of this, because I agreed!
not to. I want to know if those are the only foundations that the-
staff found any evidence of Communist infiltration ?
Mr. McNiece. That is the only ones I found. I may have over-
looked some in the mass, but it was not intentional.
Mr. Hats. In other words, you did not find any in the Big Four
or Big Three?
Mr. McNiece. No. I think there was some varying testimony on
that which will come out later.
The tax-exempt status of the Robert Marshall Foundation was
revoked by the Internal Revenue Bureau and the Rosenwald Fund,
which was one of limited life, was liquidated in 1948 in accordance
with the date specified by the founder.
Reference to the Cox committee record shows that some 95 indi-
viduals and organizations with leftist records or affiliations admittedly
received grants from some of our foundations. These were divided
as follows :
Rockefeller Foundation, 26
Carnegie Corporation, 35
Russell Sage Foundation, 1
Wm. C. Whitney Foundation, 7
Marshall Field Foundation, 6
John Simon Guggenheim Foundation, 5
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 15
A total of 95.
It should be clearly understood that there is no significance to be
attached to the numerical differences or comparisons in the foregoing
list. There are too many variables involved to warrant any conclusions
whatever on relative performance among the foundations listed.
Among these are the differing number of grants made and the varying
opportunities for thorough search or screening of the records involved.
This list does not include all the grants of this character that were
made. At this time we are not concerned with the question as to
whether or not the foundations knew or could have found out about the
questionable affiliations of these grantees before the grants were made.
The fact is, the funds were given to these people. This is the impor-
tant point of interest to us. These grants were made to professors,,
authors, lecturers, educational groups, and so forth, and all virtually
without exception were included within educational circles. It should
be obvious that with the passage of time, the activity of this many
people and organizations dedicated to spreading the word in the edu-
cational field, would have an influence all out of measurable propor-
tion to the relative value and number of grants. This influence is
increasing and will continue to increase unless it is checked.
PERSONNEL AND ADVISORY SERVICES FROM HIGH LEVEL
During the last 20 years and especially in the last decade, the Gov*
ernment has made increasing demands upon the educational world for
assistance from academic groups or societies. As will be brought out
later in the documented records, it is from these centralized and inter-
locking educational groups that much of the influence which we ques-
tion has arisen.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 473
To indicate the magnitude of these sources of influence a few matters
of record may be mentioned.
The National Planning Board requested aid from the Social Science
Research Council in compiling a section of one of their planning
reports. A committee from the Social Science Research Council ac-
tually prepared this section of the report. The creation of this com-
mittee for the purpose is described in the annual report for the Social
Science Research Council for 1933-34. The National Planning Board
rendered a final report for 1933-34. On page 54 of this report is the
following caption : "The Aid Which the Social Sciences Have Ren-
dered and Can Render to National Planning, June 1934."
Immediately below this is the phrase :
Memorandum prepared for the National Planning Board by a committee of the
Social Science Research Council.
In 1950, the Russell Sage Foundation published a booklet entitled,
"Effective Use of Social Science Research in the Federal Services."
On page 5 of this report is the following statement to which we have
added some italic :
This pamphlet has been written because the Federal Government has become
the outstanding employer of social scientists and consumer of social science mate-
rials in the conduct of practical affairs. Expenditures of the Federal Government
for social science research projects, either under direct governmental auspices or
under contract with private agencies, and for personnel in administative capaci-
ties having command of social science knowledge, far exceed the amount given
by all the philanthropic foundations for similar purposes.
Further evidence of the importance placed on this source of aid
in governmental operations is offered in the following extracts from
the annual reports of the Rockefeller Foundation wherein they refer
to the granting of a total of $65,000 to facilitate planning for adequate
supply of personnel qualified for "high level work" in public affairs
and education.
On page 313 of the 1949 annual report, the following statement
appears: ,
American council of Learned Societies Personnel in Humanities. Careful
planning to assure a steady supply of people qualified for high-level work is
needed in public affairs as well as in education and institutional research. Con-
siderations of national welfare have led a number of governmental agencies
to ask how many specialists of particular kinds now exist, how they can be
located and whether they are now being replaced or Increased in number.
Another reference appears on page 412 of the annual report for
1951. It follows herewith :
American Council of Learned Societies — Personnel in the Humanities. Dur-
ing the last several years extensive studies have been made of the demands for
and the possible supply in the United States of personnel with unusual academic
training. Because of the importance of having the humanities adequately rep-
resented in such studies, the Rockefeller Foundation in 1949 made a grant of
$31,000 to the American Council of Learned Societies to permit the addition
to its staff of Mr. J. F. Wellemeyer, Jr., as staff adviser on personnel studies.
In view of the effective work done by the staff adviser, the Rockefeller Foun-
dation in 1951 made an additional 2-year grant of $34,000 for continuation of
this activity.
In the foregoing record from the annual report of the Rockefeller
Foundation for 1949 is the very clear statement of the need for an
adequate supply of personnel sufficiently qualified in the humanities
for public affairs, education and institutional research. In itself
54608— B4 2
474 tax-exempt foundations
there should be no criticism of this objective. It does, however, seem
to confirm that much of the influence which we are discussing conies'
from highly centralized sources. This naturally increases the oppor-
tunity to effectuate highly coordinated plans in all affected areas of
activities and functions. Any criticism that arises should be directed
to the final product or end result of this liaison. If such end results
are harmful or opposed to the public interest all who have partici-
pated in the development of the situation should share the responsi-
bility, and especially if such activities and their support are continued.
Inasmuch as the term "public interest" will be used in this report
from time to time, it will be well to define it in the sense that it is
used in this section of the report of the staff committee. The same
conception of the public interest is used in the economic section x>£
the staff's report. Public interest is difficult to define but for the
purpose of this study, we can probably do no better than to refer to
the preamble of the Constitution of the United States wherein it
is stated that the Constitution is established— ■
in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tran-
quility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and
secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.
Mr. Hays. Mr. McNiece, right there, maybe we ought to mark that
passage, because I think the promote the general welfare" clause is
going to be a pretty debatable thing when we get into it.
Mr. McNieoe. I think so.
Mr. Hats You don't have a staff definition of that?
Mr. McNtece. Of public welfare ?
Mr. Hats. Of general welfare.
Mr. McNiece. I think it encompasses a great many activities which
will come out later perhaps outside the pale of enumerated powers.
The last three words in the foregoing quotation impose a respon-
sibility for the future upon us of the present. Later, as we approach
the lower right-hand angle, we will have occasion to introduce for-
mally the report on economics and the public interest. It will be tied
up especially with the rectangle indicated as "social planning."
We would now like to offer the supplement, which is very brief,
entitled, "Supplement to the Initial Staff Report on Relationship
Between Foundations and Education."
The ensuing financial data will give some idea of the great amount
of funds and their distribution made available in the educational field
by a few of the larger foundations.
The statement is by no means complete. In fact it contains the con-
tributions of only six of the larger foundations where the specific bene-
ficiaries are named.
These six are as follows:
The Carnegie Corporation of New York
The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching
The Rockefeller Foundation
The General Education Board
The Ford Foundation (two instances only)
Great benefit has unquestionably resulted to all mankind from the
contributions of these and other foundations and there is no inten T
tion to gainsay or minimize this or to detract from the credit due
the foundations for these benefits.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
475
What this investigation does seem to indicate is that many small
grants have found their way into questionable hands and many large
ones in points of concentrated use have been devoted to purposes that
are promoting a departure from the fundamental concepts of edu-
cation and government under our Constitution. _ That this may be
recognized by those engaged in such activities is indicated by the
frequent references in their own literature to the "age of transition"
through which we are passing, and the responsibility that mustbe
assumed by educators in leading the way. No one in full possession
of his faculties should oppose change for the better but change for the
sake of change alone may prove to be a dangerous delusion.
The following record has been summarized from the annual reports
of the foundations previously named :
Associations receiving grants
Period
American Council on Education
American Historical Association
American Council of Learned Societies
Council on Foreign Relations
Foreign Policy Association -
Institute of International Education
Institute of Pacific Eelations - =■->=— — ™-
National Academy of Sciences (including National Besearch Council).
National Education Association ..„ --
Progressive Education Association -
Social Science Research Council •*
Total.
1920-62
1923-52
1924-62
1923-52
1933-61
1929-52
1929-52
1915-52
1916-52
1932-43
1925-62
Amount
$6,119,700
574, 800
5, 113, 800
3, 064, 800
1,938,000
2,081,100
3,843,600
20,715,800
1,229,000
4,257,800
11, 747, 600
60,686,000
Note.— The foregoing grants follow the lines AD, thence CB on the chart.
Specific university grants
London School of Economics
Teachers College— Columbia University.
Lincoln School— Columbia University-
Period
1929-52
1923-52
1917-52
Amount
$4,106,600>
8,398,176
6,821,100"
Note.— The foregoing grants follow the line AB on chart.
Grants by the Eockefeller Foundation (derived from a consolidated
report of the Rockefeller Foundations) and the General Education
Board combined to universities and including only the totals to the
ten largest beneficiaries of each of the two foundations in each State
of the United States :
Period
Amount
To universities
Total fellowship grants.
1902-51
1902-51
Total.
$256,553,493
33, 789, 569
290,343,026
According to our compilations, the Carnegie Corp. has contributed
to all educational purposes, from 1911 to 1950, approximately
$25,300,000.
(These grants follow the line AB on the chart.)
These data are representative of the conditions which they disclose.
It has been difficult to assemble these figures in the manner shown in
476 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
the time available; If there are any errors in the compilation, we
firmly believe that they minimize the contributions.
A PRODUCT OF FOUNDATION SUPPORT
On the organization chart previously discussed, the American
Council of Learned Societies is the first group listed under the "Clear-
ing House" designation. One of the constituent societies of this
Council is the American Historical Society and it is separately shown
as such because it has a most prominent role in our investigation.
Under this association was formed a Commission on Social Studies.
Its plans and objectives can be most fairly stated by quoting from
the official report of the association. The following statement ap-
pears on page 47 of the annual report of this association:
The study advocated is to comprise a collection of general statistical infor-
mation, the determination of specific objectives, the organization of content, in
the light of these objectives for teaching purposes, the methods of instruction
and testing and of the preparation of teachers. An extensive personnel and
5 years of work were required by this plan. Means for its execution are
now being sought.
The idea just expressed originated in a report in 1926 by a Com-
mittee of History and Other Studies in the Schools.
The "means" for the execution of the plan were supplied by the
Carnegie Corp. In a series of six annual grants extending from 1928
to 1933, inclusive, this foundation supplied a total sum of $340,000
to the American Historical Association for the use of the Commis-
sion on Social Studies formed to carry out the recommendations of
the Committee on History and Other Studies in the Schools.
As finally completed, the report of this committee was published in
16 separate sections. The 16th and final volume of the report was
published by Scribners in May 1934. It is entitled, "Keport of the
Commission on the Social Studies — Conclusions and Recommenda-
tions of the Commission."
It is with this final volume of conclusions and recommendations that
the staff committee is concerned. It covers a tremendous field of
recommendation and application actively in process as of this day.
Support for this latter statement will be introduced later.
Much of this last volume is devoted to recommendations of techni-
cal moment covering content and teaching technique. These are not
pertinent to our problem. Those which do apply to our study of
the case are quoted hereafter under the subheadings and paragraph
numbers as they appear in the book (pp. 16-20).
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMISSION ON SOCIAL STUDIES
8. Under the molding influence of socialized processes of living, drives of
technology and science, pressures of changing thought and policy, and disrupt-
ing impacts of social disaster there is a notable waning of the once widespread
popular faith in economic individualism ; and leaders in public affairs, supported
by a growing mass of the population, are demanding the introduction into
economy of ever wider measures of planning and control.
9. Cumulative evidence supports the conclusion that, in the United States
as in other countries, the age of individualism and laissez faire in economy
and government is closing and that a new age of collectivism is emerging.
10. As to the specific form which this "collectivism," this integration and inter-
dependence, is taking and will take in the future, the evidence at hand is by
no means clear or unequivocal. It may involve the limiting or supplanting of
private property by public property or it may entail the preservation of pri-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 477
vate property, extended and distributed among 'the masses. Most likely, it
•will issue from a process of experimentation and will represent a composite
of historic doctrines and social conceptions yet to appear. Almost certainly
it will involve a larger measure of compulsory as well as voluntary coopera-
tion of citizens in the conduct of the complex national economy, a corre-
sponding enlargement of the functions of government, and an increasing state
intervention in fundamental branches of economy previously left to the indi-
vidual discretion and initiative — a state intervention that in some instances
may be direct and mandatory and in others indirect and facilitative. In any
event the commission is convinced by its interpretation of available empirical
data that the actually integrating economy of the present day is the forerun-
ner of a consciously integrated society in which individual economic actions
and individual property rights will be altered and abridged.
11. The emerging age is particularly an age of transition. It is marked by
numerous and severe tensions arising out of the conflict between the actual trend
toward integrated economy and society, on the one side, and the traditional prac-
tices, dispositions, ideas, and institutional arrangements inherited from the pass-
ing age of individualism, on the other. In all the .recommendations that follow
the transitional character of the present epoch is recognized.
12. Underlying and illustrative of these tensions are privation in the midst of
plenty, violations of fiduciary trust, gross inequalities in income and wealth,
widespread racketeering and banditry, wasteful use of natural resources, un-
balanced distribution and organization of labor and leisure, the harnessing of
science to individualism in business enterprise, the artificiality of political bound-
aries and divisions, the subjection of public welfare to the egoism of private
interests, the maladjustment of production and consumption, persistent tenden-
cies toward economic instability, disproportionate growth of debt and property
claims in relation to production, deliberate destruction of goods and withdrawal
of efficiency from production, accelerating tempo of panics, crises, and depres-
sions attended by ever-wider destruction of capital and demoralization of labor,
struggles among nations for markets and raw materials leading to international
conflicts and wars.
13. If historical knowledge is any guide, these tensions, accompanied by oscil-
lations in popular opinion, public policy, and the fortunes of the struggle for
power, will continue until some approximate adjustment is made between social
thought, social practice, and economic realities, or until society, exhausted by the
conflict and at the end of its spiritual and inventive resources, sinks back into a
more primitive order of economy and life. Such is the long-run view of social
development in general, and of American life in particular, which must form the
background for any educational program designed to prepare either children or
adults for their coming trials, opportunities, and responsibilities.
Page 19:
D. CHOICES DEEMED POSSIBLE AND DESIRABLE
1. Within the limits of the broad trend toward social integration the possible
forms of economic and political life are many and varied, involving wide dif-
ferences in modes of distributing wealth, income, and cultural opportunity, em-
bracing various conceptions of the State and of the rights, duties, and privileges
of the ordinary citizen, and representing the most diverse ideals concerning the
relations of sexes, classes, religions, nations, and races * * *
THE REDISTRIBUTION OF POWER
1. If the teacher is to achieve these conditions of improved status and thus
free the school from the domination of special interests and convert it into a
truly enlightening force in society, there must be a redistribution of power in the
general conduct of education — the board of education will have to be made more
representative, the administration of the school will have to be conceived more
broadly and the teaching profession as a whole will have to organize, develop a
theory of its social function and create certain instrumentalities indispensable
to the realization of its aims.
2. The ordinary board of education in the United States, with the exception
of the rural district board, is composed for the most part of business and pro-
fessional men ; the ordinary rural district' board is composed almost altogether
of landholders. In the former case the board is not fully representative of the
supporting population and thus tends to impose upon the school the social ideas
4*78 ttjBBiiacmEr? Fommsmms
ef a special class j'lh both Instances Its membership is apt to be peculiarly rooted
in the economic IMivWualism of the 19th century.
' 8. If the board of education is to support a school program conceived in terms
of the general welfare and adjusted to the needs of an epoch marked by tran-
sition to some form of socialized economy, it should include in its membership
adequate representation of points of view other than those of private business.
4. With the expansion of education and the growth of large school systems,
involving the coordination of the efforts of tens, hundreds and even thousands
Of professional workers and the expenditure of vast sums of money on grounds,
buildings and equipment, the function of administration has become increas-
ingly important and indispensable.
Page 145:
APPENDIX A — NEXT STEPS
1. The commission has, for reasons already given, rejected the idea that there i«
one unequivocal body of -subject matter, one unequivocal organization of mate-
rials, and one unequivocal method of teaching which, when combined, will guar-
antee the realization in instruction of the broad purposes set forth above. It
was not instructed to provide a detailed syllabus and set of textbooks to be
Imposed on the school system of the country. Had it been so instructed it would
have found the mandate incompatible with its fundamental conclusion that the
frame of reference is the primary consideration and that many methods of
organizing materials and teaching are possible and desirable within the accepted
frame.
2. However, the commission is mindful of the proper and practical question :
What are the next steps? It indicates, therefore, the lines along which attacks
can and will be made on the problem of applying its conclusions with respect to
instruction in the social sciences.
3. As often repeated, the first step is to awaken and consolidate leadership
around the philosophy and purpose of education herein expounded — leadership
among administrators, teachers, boards of trustees, college and normal school
presidents— thinkers and workers in every field of education and the social
sciences. Signs of such an awakening and consolidation of leadership are
already abundantly evident: in the resolutions on instruction in the social
sciences adopted in 1933 by the department of superintendence of the National
Education Association at Minneapolis and by the association itself at Chicago;
In the activities of the United States Commissioner of Education during the past
few years ; and in almost every local or national meeting of representatives of
the teaching profession.
4. The American Historical Association, In cooperation with the National
Council on the Social Studies, has arranged to take over The Historical Outlook 1
(a journal for social-science teachers), has appointed a board of editors chosen
in part from the members of this commission, and has selected for the post of
managing editor, W. G. Kimmel, who has been associated with this commission
as executive secretary for 5 years and is thoroughly conversant with its work
and its conclusions. The purpose of the Outlook under the new management will
be to supply current materials, to encourage experimentation in the organization
of materials, to stimulate thought and experimentation among teachers and
schools, to report projects and results of experimentation, and generally to fur-
nish as rapidly as possible various programs of instruction organized within the
frame of reference outlined by the commission.
5. The writers of textbooks may be expected to revamp and rewrite their old
works in accordance with this frame of reference and new writers in the field
of the social sciences will undoubtedly attack the central problem here con-
ceived, bringing varied talents and methods and arts to bear upon it. Thus
the evil effects of any stereotype may be avoided.
6. Makers of programs in the social sciences in cities, towns, and States
may be expected to evaluate the findings and conclusions of this report and to
recast existing syllabi and schemes of instruction in accordance with their
judgment respecting the new situation.
7. If the findings and conclusions of this commission are really pertinent to
the educational requirements of the age, then colleges and universities offer-
ing courses of instruction for teachers will review their current programs and
provide for prospective teachers courses of instruction in general harmony with
the commission's frame of reference.
1 Hereafter to be cailed The Social Studies.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 479
, $._ : The .same may be said of special institutions for the training of .teachers.
It is not too much :t6 v expect in the near future a decided shift M emp'hasis
from the mechanics and techniques of methodology to the content- afc fun<s-
tion of courses in the social sciences, thus guaranteeing a supply; of teachers
more competent to carry out the philosophy and purpose here presented.
"^ ^.' A. «injilar transfer of emphasis may be expected in the field of 'educational
-fpurialism, resulting in a consideration, criticism, and application of th^funda-
iriental philosophy of education formulated in this volume.
* . ;i0) *lf the present report aids in bringing about a persistent concentration
*$ tfiought on the central issues, findings, and conclusions of the commission,
ft will help to cleat up the confusion ' now so prevalent in the educational
world ,and give direction to powers now wasted in f ormalistic debates on meth-
VdSf'and techniques.
II. In fine, the commission has felt bound, by the terms of its instructions
and the nature of the subject entrusted to its consideration, to provide a frame
of reference for the orientation of philosophy and purpose in education, rather
than a billot minute specifications for, guidance. In so doing, it is convinced
that unless the spirit is understood and appreciated any formulation of the
latter will hamper rather than facilitate the fulfillment of the commission's
offering. . , v ....... .
It would seem that the nature of these conclusions and recommenda-
tions is expressed with sufficient clarity and force to need no further
interpretation from us. It will be important, however, to show how
these ideas have been put into operation and are in operation today
as far as it has proven possible of accomplishment. It is our plan
through the introduction of documented evidence from various
authoritative sources to. show how these recommendations have been
■channeled through the activities in education and government. While
fchetrails criss-cross and are somewhat devious we shall try as far as
ie, feasible to analyze the trend in education first and to follow with
a similar effort in government.
Before undertaking this, it should be of interest to quote from the
record. ,^o show the appraisal by the Carnegie Corp. itself of the prod-
uct for which they had granted the considerable sum of $340,000. We
find no word of criticism or dissent in the following statement which
appears on page 28 of the annual report of the president and the
treasurer of the Carnegie Corp. of New York for 1933-34.
The conclusions and recommendations of the commission on the social studies
appointed by the American Historical Association appeared in May, 1934.
That the findings were not unanimously supported within the commission itself,
and that they are already the subject of vigorous debate outside it, does not
detract from their importance, and both the educational world and .the public
at large owe a debt of gratitude both to the association for having sponsored this
important and timely study in a field of peculiar difficulty, and to the distin-
guished men and women who served upon the commission. The complete report
of the committee will comprise 16 volumes, a list of which will be found in the
appendix, page 671
A somewhat different and more descriptive appraisal of this report
is offered by Dr. Ernest Victor Hollis, in his book entitled, "Philan-
thropic Foundations and Higher Education." Dr. Hollis is Chief
of College Administration in the United States Office of Education,
Washingtbn, D. C.
The following statement is quoted from page 61 of this book :
*Today they (the foundations) have a vital part in practically every type of
progressive educational experiment under way in America. Possibly there has
been no more radical and forward-looking study of the American scene than is
presented in the sixteen-volume report of the Social Studies Commission of the
American Historical Association which was begun in 1927 and very recently
completed. The report demands a radical change in many of the major premises
underlying our social, economic, and cultural life.
480 TAX-E&JMPT lt>TJfrbAtfit)M
, Another comment of interest regarding this report is quoted from
"the Turning of the Tides", part II, by Paul W. Shafer, Member of
Congress, page 30. 2 This was published in 1953.
A strategic wedge was driven in 1934 following the conclusions and recommen-
dations of the American Historical Association's commission on social studies.
Its point of entry was adroitly chosen. The commission proposed to consoli-
date the traditional high school subjects of geography, economics, sociology, polit-
ical science, civics and history, into a single category designated as the social
studies. Here was the most strategic of all teaching areas for the advancement
of a particular philosophy.
Success in enlisting teachers in this field in the cause of a new social order
would have an influence out of all proportion to the number of teachers involved.
What this all meant was summed up by Prof. Harold J. Laski, philosopher of
British socialism. He stated :
"At bottom, and stripped of its carefully neutral phrases, the report, is an edu-
cational program for a socialist America."
EVALUATION OF THE EVIDENCE
Before undertaking a more detailed analysis of the influences work-
ing in the educational world, we wish to say emphatically and to have
it understood clearly that our evidence is not directed toward nor does
it indict our large educational staff, the hundreds of thousands of
teachers and supervisors whose merit and loyalty are beyond all ques-
tion. Let no one overlook this.
We are differentiating between this widely distributed educational
staff and the top level centers of influence in which educational plans
and policies are formulated.
There is in every operating unit, be it factory, office, union, council,
or association a method or fashion of work that is determined by
policies originating at the top. Were it not so, the organization
would soon disintegrate. So it is in the world of education and
government.
Perhaps, as this pertains to the field of education, the principle
and its application can be well illustrated by quotation from some
observations by the Ford Foundation. These quotations, as will be
noted, emphasize the importance of concentrated effort for maximum
results. '•
From the Fund for Advancement of Education, annual report
1951-52, page 6:
In an effort to be useful at too many points in the whole system of education
it could easily fall into what an early officer of the Rockefeller Foundation
called "scatteration giving" and thus fail to be of any real value to education
anywhere. Given limited resources, selection was inevitable. Given a desire
to be of maximum usefulness, concentration was essential.
Referring to a survey on military education (p. 24) :
This survey made clear that the effectiveness of educational work in any
military location depends very largely on the degree of importance which the
commanding officer attaches to it and the interest and competence of the officers
conducting it. It seemed clear, therefore, that the preparation of officers to
assume responsibility for education in the military services was the key to
effectiveness of orientation programs. The fund plans, therefore upon request
from the Office of Defense, to support pilot projects for introducing into the
programs of ROTG units substantial preparation for leadership in the kind
of education appropriate in the military forces of a democracy.
' See also Congressional Record, March 21, 1952.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 481
From the report on the Behavioral Sciences Division of the Ford
Foundation— June 1953 (p. 24) :
Accepting the diagnosis of a leading figure in the field — that "training of
a moderate number of first-rate people is in the present juncture far more
urgent than that of a large number of merely competent people." The division
took as a first step the development of plans for what came to be known as
the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences.
Page28:
In sum, then, the Foundation's hope and expectation is significantly to
advance the behavioral sciences — to get farther faster — through the temporary
concentration at one place of the ablest scholars and the most promising
younger people studying together in the most effective way that the state of
the field now permits.
(Note. — All emphasis supplied.)
While we have noticed other references of similar nature and import
in various places, there should be sufficient to support our view that
the pattern is determined at the top. It is also obvious on slight
consideration that in education as in government, the most effective
megaphones and channels of communication are centralized in the
same places. These thoughts should be kept in mind in the evaluation
of the evidence as it will be presented.
There is another point for consideration that bears upon the
excerpts which will be quoted later. Criticism is frequently made
about distortion of meaning by lifting such quotations from context.
This is sometimes true. In this case a consistent effort has been made
to avoid such distortion and we believe we have succeeded. In any
event full reference as to source is given and anyone who wishes to
criticize may have access to the complete text if he wishes to be right
before he comments. Furthermore, the confirming similarities of so
many quotations from various sources should clearly mark the paths
they follow.
Attention should be called to still another significant factor in
this situation. It is the fact that most of the information submitted
in these quotations appears and is available only in professional publi-
cations whose circulation is largely confined to those engaged in these
professions. This results naturally in two things: One, the coordi-
nated effectiveness within the professional groups is increased; two,
relatively few of the citizenry outside these professional circles have
any means of knowing what is developing and therefore of organiz-
ing any protest against it. In fact much of the meaning of some
articles would be obscure to the average citizen because of the subtle
approach and highly technical vocabulary.
This closely channeled flow of information should also be a con-
cern of the trustees of the foundations. Men of unquestioned com-
petence and integrity must often be selected as trustees for their
proficiency and prestige in their chosen lines of work. They have
little time in their busy lives for studious attention to the develop-
ments in the highly professional fields bearing little direct relation
to their own responsibilities. If this be true, the problem posed should
be searched for a solution.
THE AGE OF TRANSITION LAISSEZ FAIRE IS CLOSING
In proceeding with an analysis of the application of the conclu-
sions and recommendations of the Commission on Social Studies as
54608—54 3
482 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
they specifically pertain to education, we wish to call attention to the
emphasis given to the alleged transitional character of the present
period. In addition to the previous quotations, the following
excerpts also tend to confirm these views.
Page 647:
A dying laissez faire must be completely destroyed and all of us, including
the "owners" must be subjected to a large degree of social control. A large
section of our discussion group, accepting the conclusions of distinguished
students, maintain that in our fragile, interdependent society the credit agencies,
the basic industries and utilities cannot be centrally planned and operated
under private ownership.
That is from Education for the New America, . by Williard E.
Givens, in the proceedings of the 72d annual meeting of the National
Education Association.
Mr. Givens was executive secretary of the National Education
Association from 1935 to 1952. At the 79th annual convention of the
American Association of School Administrators held February 14-19,
1953, at Atlantic City, N. J., the annual American education award
was presented to Mr. Givens, "whose many contributions to the field
of education are without parallel."
Page 125:
The days of little-restricted laissez faire, the days when government was
looked upon as a necessary evil— these have gone for a long time, perhaps
forever, although in the mutations of time one never knows what forms may
recur.
"On the Agenda of Democracy , rt by C. E. Merriam, vice chairman,
National Resources Planning Board, Harvard University Press, 1941.
EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP IN THE AGE OF TRANSITION
We find that the responsibilities of the leaders and teachers in the
world of education are especially emphasized during this age of transi-
tion, as demonstrated in the final report, 16th volume, of the Commis-
sion on Social Studies as previously quoted on page 15.
In the- midf orties, the President appointed a Commission on Higher
Education. Their conclusions and recommendations were reported in
a series of six pamphlets in December 1947. Mr. George F. Zook,
president of the American Council of Learned Societies, was chairman
of this Commission.
In the Commission's reports they gave credit to the following organ-
izations for aid received : American Council of Learned Societies,
American Council on Education, National Research Council, Social
Science Research Council, American Association of University Pro-
fessors, and Association of Land Grant Colleges and Universities.
The following quotations are taken from the pages indicated in vol-
ume I of the Report of the President's Commission on Higher Edu-
cation :
Page 6 :
Education: Perhaps its most important role is to serve as an instrument of
social transition, and its responsibilities are denned in terms of the kind of
civilization society hopes to build.
Page 84 :
Higher education must be alert to anticipate new social and economic needs,
and to keep its programs of professional training in step with the requirements
of a changing and expanding cultural, social, and econ inic order.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 483
Page 85
Social forces have modified and are continuing to modify at an increasingly
rapid rate, the context within which graduate schools must function, and read-
justments of a fundamental nature are urgently necessary if these university
units are not to block rather than advance the progress of education — and,
through education, of the Nation.
With all the emphasis placed upon this age of transition and edu-
cation's important part in it as typified by the foregoing quotations,
and since we are deluged with the idea that change itself is progress,
a note of interest is struck by another thought. It is that perhaps
this agitation for and about change is only a temporary means to a
different end— one of unchanging stability when certain objectives are
reached.
As far in the past as 1918, the Intercollegiate Socialist for October-
November 1918 published an article entitled, "The Minimum of Edu-
cation," by Ellen Hayes. The ensuing quotation is the opening para-
graph in that article :
Assuming the surplus wealth secured to the public for social purposes, how can
a fraction of it be used educationally to promote and stabilize the common
good ; and to this end, what is the irreducible minimum of education which must
be guaranteed to every member of the national commonwealth?
Volume I of the Report of the President's Commission on Higher
Education also includes additional interesting comments :
Page 6 :
The efforts of individual institutions, local communities, the several states,
the educational foundations and associations, the Federal Government will be
more effective if they are directed toward the same general ends.
Page 16 :
PREPARATION FOR WORLD CITIZENSHIP
In speed of transportation and communication and in economic interdepend-
ence, the nations of the globe are already one world ; the task is to secure recog-
nition and acceptance of this oneness in the thinking of the people, as that
the concept of one world may be realized psychologically, socially and in good
time politically.
It is this task in particular that challenges our scholars and teachers to lead
the way toward a new way of thinking.
Page20:
There is an urgent need for a program for world citizenship that can be
made a part of every person's general education.
Page 21:
It will take social science and social engineering to solve the problems of
human relations. Our people must learn to respect the need for special knowl-
edge and technical training in this field as they have come to defer to the expert
in physics, chemistry, medicine, and other sciences.
Page 22:
The colleges and universities, the philanthropic foundations, and the Federal
Government should not be tempted by the prestige of natural science and its
immediately tangible results into giving it a disproportionate emphasis in
research budgets or in teaching programs. It is the peculiar responsibilty of
the colleges to train personnel and inaugurat extensive programs of research
in social science and technology. To the extent that they have neglected this
function in the past, they should concentrate upon it in the decades just ahead.
Page 23 : .
Colleges must accelerate the normal slow rate of social change which the
educational system reflects ; we need to find ways quickly of making the under-
484 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
standing and vision of our most farsighted and sensitive citizens the common
possession of all our people.
Pages 38 and 39 :
Educational programs everywhere should be aimed at undermining and
eventually eliminating the attitudes that are responsible for discrimination
and segregation— at creating instead attitudes that will make education freely
available to all.
Page 91 :
The detached, perceptive scholar, is still sorely needed — in increasing num-
bers and in all disciplines. But if higher education is to discharge its social
obligations, scholars also are needed who have a passionate concern for human
betterment, for the improvement of social conditions, and of relations among
men. We need men in education who can apply at the point of social action
what the social scientist has discovered regarding the laws of human behavior.
Page 92 :
It will be a little short of tragic if provision for social research is not included
in the program of Federal support and organization planned under a National
Science Foundation. Certainly the destiny of mankind today rest's as much with
the social sciences as with the natural sciences.
One of the members of the President's Commission on Higher Edu-
cation was Horace M. Kallen who for years has been active in the edu-
cational field.
In the issue of Progressive Education for January-February, 1934,
in an article called, Can We Be Saved by Indoctrination ? Mr. Kallen
says on the pages noted :
Page 55 :
I find, within the babel of plans and plots against the evils of our times, one
only which does not merely repeat the past but varies from it. This is a proposal
that the country's pedagogues shall undertake to establish themselves as the
country's saviors. It appears in two pamphlets. The first is a challenge to teach-
ers entitled, "Dare the Schools Build a New Social Order?" Its author is George
Counts. The second is, "A Call to the Teachers of the Nation."
Page 56 :
With an imagination unparalleled among the saviors of civilization, with a faith
stronger than every doubt and an earnestness overruling all irony, Mr. Counts
suggests that the Great Revolution might be better accomplished and the Great
Happiness more quickly established if the teachers rather than the proletarians
seized power.
Having taken power, the teachers must use it to attain the "central purpose" of
realizing the "American Dream." They must operate education as the instrument
of social regeneration. This consists of inculcating right doctrine.
The milder Call says :
Teachers cannot evade the responsibility of participating actively in the task of
reconstituting the democratic tradition and of thus working positively toward
a new society. <
The references to Mr. George Counts in the foregoing excerpts natu-
rally bring to mind Teachers College of Columbia University and its
group of contemporary professors, John Dewey, W. H. Kilpatrick,
George Counts, and Harold Rugg, all identified actively for many
years with educational organizations and activities of one form or
another.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 485
One of the students who graduated from Teachers College is Nor-
man Woelfel. After attending State Normal School in Buffalo, N. Y.,
he entered Teachers College of Columbia University where he received
his bachelor of science degree in 1923, his master of arts in 1924.
After further work in study and teaching at other institutions includ-
ing Johns Hopkins, he returned to Teachers College and in 1933, at
the mature age of 38 years, received his degree of doctor of philos-
ophy. His doctoral dissertation was entitled: "A critical review of
the social attitudes of 17 leaders in American education."
At this point we wish to make it emphatically clear that we know
of no grants from any foundation in the prosecution of this work.
Other connections will be reviewed later that identify Mr. Woelfel
with educational activities in a similar field.
This doctoral thesis, of which a copy is on file in the Congressional
Library, was published as a book by the Columbia University Press
under the title, "Molders of the American Mind." At least three
printings were made which indicates a good circulation. It is based
upon a review of social attitudes of 17 leaders in American educa-
tion. The following excerpts are taken from the pages indicated.
The dedicatory page :
To the teachers of America, active sharers in the building of attitudes, may
they collectively choose a destiny which honors only productive labor and pro-
motes the ascendency of the common man over the forces that make possible
an economy of plenty.
Page 10:
The younger generation is on its own and the last thing that would interest
modern youth is the salvaging of the Christian tradition. The environmental
controls which technologists have achieved, and the operations by means of
which workers earn their livelihood, need no aid or sanction from God nor
any blessing from the church.
Page 26:
The influence which may prove most effective in promoting the demise of
private business as the dominant force in American economic life is the modern
racketeer. His activities are constantly in the spotlight of public attention,
and the logic upon which he pursues them is the logic of competitive business.
He carries the main principles of the business life to their logical extreme and
demonstrates their essential absurdity. Like the businessman he is interested
in gain, and like the businessman he believes in doing the least to get the most,
in buying cheap and selling dear. Like the businessman he believes in attain-
ing a monopoly by cornering the market whenever possible. The chief differ-
ence between the racketeer and the businessman is that the businessman's
pursuits have about them an air of respectability given by customary usage and
established law. He may pursue them in the open, advertise them in the pub-
lic press and over the radio, whereas the racketeer must work undercover.
Page 240 :
In the minds of the men who think experimentally, America is conceived as
having a destiny which bursts the all too obvious limitations of Christian
religious sanctions and of capitalistic profit economy.
From the vantage point of the present study, the following objectives for edu-
cators are suggested. They, in no sense, purport to be all-comprehensive or
final. They do, however, lay claim to be along the line of much needed strat-
egy if educational workers are to play any important part in the society which
is building in America.
486 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
1. The maturing of personal viewpoint by reading and discussion, by scrutiny
of contemporary civilization, and by self-examination.
2. A continuing effort to clarify the vision of an educator's function in Amer-
ican civilization. In what degree does he carry the responsibility for controlled
social evolution? To what extent is he more than a mere public servant engaged
in carrying out orders issued by executives ?
3. The blotting out of the "brass halo" which teachers have long suffered under.
This means a will not to be affected by the slushy epithets of public apologists
for existing social institutions and a will to assist youth constantly towards
ready discernment of apologetics in any form. ' ■
4. Immersion into the budding native culture by steady enlargement and culti-
vation of professional and nonprofessional cultural opportunities available
in the social environment. This is really the highest obligation of an intelligent
teacher, because the value of any form of specialized professional endeavor
can be gaged only by reference to the extent and depth of the individual's par-
ticipation in, and appreciation of, existing social life. •
5. Active participation by educators and teachers in various organizations of
the lay public agitating for social reforms whose realization would be in har-
mony with evolving ideals of American society.
6. The thoroughgoing renovation of existing professional organizations of edu-
cators so that in aim and principle they shall be intelligently militant in criticism
of all vested interests in society and similarly militant in support of evolving
modern standards of value in all fields of human interest.
7. Amalgamation of existing professional educational organizations for the
purpose of united action on all questions of broad social import at anytime before
the public anywhere in the land.
8. Promotion of the spiritual solidarity of all classes of intellectuals in the
interest of enlightening and possibly of guiding inevitable future mass movements
within the population.
9. Active participation of individual educators and of professional organiza-
tions of educators in the gradually crystallizing public effort to create out of pre-
vailing chaos and confusion in economic, political, spiritual, ethical, and artistic
realms a culture which is under no continuing obligations to past American or
foreign cultural pattern.
10. A teacher-training program conceived in the light of the changing aims and
functions of education in contemporary America. This implies the critical re-
examination of all established precedents in teacher-training organization.
11. A system of school administration constructed under the guidance of ex-
perimental social philosophy with the major aim of meeting the professional
needs of teachers. This implies relegating the elaborate administrative tech-
nology modeled after business practice and capitalistic finance to the background
where it may be drawn upon when needed in reconstruction programs.
12. The attitude of creative inquiry to be clearly recognized as essential in
all people of the teaching profession. The trained specialists and the elaborate
scientific technology of educational research, as conceived at present, to be made
available as supplementary service agencies in the solution of the actual prob-
lems of teaching.
13. The incorporation of graduate and undergraduate schools of educatipn into
a general plan of public education, so that their resources in experts and in ex-
perimental facilities may be used effectively in continuing educational recon-
struction. . .
14. A program of public elementary and secondary education organized in the
interest of collective ideals and emphasizing the attainment of economic equality
as fundamental to the detailed determination of more broadly 'cultural aims.
15. Centralized organization in public education to an extent which will not
only guarantee provision of the most valid knowledge together with adequate
facilities for incorporating it into educational practice in every local community
throughout the country, but promote as well the construction of attitudes, in the
populace, conducive to enlightened reconstruction of social institutions.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 487
16. A program of public vocational, professional, and higher education inte-
grally organized in terms of a social order wherein all natural resources and the
entire industrial structure is controlled by governmental agencies'and operated
for the equal benefit of all. This portends educational planning in terms of
broadly cultural and creative motives and the final disappearance of programs of
education based upon the motive of individual monetary success.
17. Gradual amalgamation of all cultural forces in community life, including
industry, radio, motion pictures, newspapers, libraries, art galleries and
museums, the theater, the opera, musical organizations, book publication, and»the
school itself into an educational program as wide and as continuous as life.
18. Such autonomy for every classroom teacher, from the nursery school
through the university as accords with true artistic integrity. This implies that
teachers shall be answerable for their professional conduct to their own profes-
sional organizations which, in turn, shall be fully responsible to the public.
19. The abolition of the present supervisory system in public education and
its replacement by higher professional qualifications for teachers and by public
teacher service bureaus equipped to continue on a voluntary basis the in-service
education of teachers.
20. Gradual abolition of specified grades, subjects, textbooks, testing, and
promotion schemes as conceived under the present administrative-supervisory
set-up in public education. The development of a series of flexible organiza-
tional schemes and teaching programs by local faculties under the guidance
and sanction of professional associations and of the lay public.
21. Domination of all specific teaching aims for an indefinite period by the
general aim of rendering the attitudes of all normal individuals toward all
the problems of life sufficiently tentative to allow for growth and change.
22. Determination of all directly functional teaching aims in and during the
educational process by reference to the needs and possibilities of pupils as
determined by professionally qualified and socially conscious teachers.
The value of these extended excerpts might be questioned in this
case were it not for the fact that so many of the suggestions conveyed
in the foregoing paragraphs have their counterparts on the other
side of the triangle in the field of governmental planning for the
Nation.
In the January-February issue of the magazine, Progressive Educa-
tion in 1934, there appeared an article called "The Educator, The
New Deal, and Revolution," by Normal Woelf el. On the pages noted,
the following statements appeared in this article.
Page 11:
The call now is for the utmost capitalization of the discontent manifest
among teachers for the benefit of revolutionary social goals. This means that
all available energies of radically inclined leaders within the profession should
be directed toward the building of a united radical front. Warm collectivistic
sentiment and intelligent vision, propagated in clever and undisturbing manner
by a few individual leaders, no longer suits the occasion.
I would like to pause to call attention again to the phrase "in
clever and undisturbing manner by a few individual leaders, no longer
suits the occasion."
Page 12:
If we wish the intelligent utilization of the marvelous natural resources
and the superb productive machinery which America possesses, for all ■ of the
people, with common privileges, and an equal chance to all for the realization
of exclusively human potentialities — that is possible, although we must not
blindly shrink from the fact that it may require some use of force against those
at present privileged.
488 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
I wish to state here that these quotations just given, as previously
said, are from the magazine Progressive Education, a publication of
the Progressive Education Association which has received at least
$4,258,000 from the foundations.
In October of 1934, the first issue of a new magazine appeared,
entitled, "The Social Frontier." It was described as "A Journal of
Educational Criticism and Reconstruction." George S. Counts was
the editor and Mordecai Grossman and Norman Woelfel were the
associate editors.
The first pages were devoted to editorials which were unsigned.
There follows hereafter a copy of the material appearing on the cover
page and after that excerpts from the editorials named on the pages
noted.
Quoting the cover page we have :
The Social Frontier — A Journal of Educational Criticism and
Reconstruction
1776
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that
they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among
these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (the Declaration of Inde-
pendence ) .
1934
The age of individualism and laissez faire in economy and government is
closing and a new age of collectivism is emerging (Report of the Commission on
Social Studies of the American Historical Association).
In this issue : John Dewey, Charles A. Beard, Henry P. Fairchild, Sidney Hook,
Goodwin Watson.
Volume I—October 1934— No. I— $2 a year
Now quoting from page 3, Orientation :
In a word, for the American people, the age of individualism in economy is
closing and an age of collectivism is opening. Here is the central and dominating
reality in the present epoch.
Page 5, Educating for Tomorrow :
To enable the school to participate in raising the level of American life the
educational profession must win meaningful academic freedom, not merely the
freedom for individuals to teach this or that, but the freedom of the teaching
profession to utilize education in shaping the society of tomorrow.
Mr. Hats. Mr. McNiece, I have a question right there. Does that
magazine still exist ?
Mr. McNiece. It ran for quite awhile, and the name of the asso-
ciation itself was changed subsequent to this. Then I was informed
only yesterday, and I haven't had time to look it up, it was converted
back to its original name. So far as the continuation of the magazine
itself is concerned, I would have to check that.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 489 1
Mr. Hays. Well, if you have time during the lunch hour, would
you check that ?
The reason I interrupted yon, I wanted you to do that for this-
afternoon.
Mr. McNiece. We will try to do that.
Now, on page 7, there is an editorial called The lyes Law :
On August 10 4 1934, Governor Lehman of New York signed the Ives bill. * * *
According to the provisions of the law, every professor, instructor, or teacher
employed in any school, college, or university in the State must subscribe to the
following oath or affirmation : "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will sup-
port the Constitution of the United States and the constitution of the State of
New York, and that I will faithfully discharge, according to the best of my
ability, the duties of the position to Which I am now assigned."
The reaction of teachers to such a governmental measure is naturally one of
resentment.
Page 8, The Ives Law :
There is grave danger that the new law will have the effects desired by its-
sponsors, not however, because of any restrictions inherent in the oath itself
but rather because of the traditional timidity and ignorance of teachers. Yet
forward-lodking members of the profession can find in this oath a direct mandate
for broad participation in the alteration of the now existing pattern of American.
Society.
Quoting again from Educating for Tomorrow, page 7 :
The task of enlarging the role of education in shaping the future of our collec-
tive life cannot be accomplished by individual educators nor by individual!
institutions. It is a task for an organized profession as a whole. It is a task:
which the NBA might make its central project.
Page 7, Educating for Tomorrow :
We submit to the membership of the NBA that its role in the life of the*
nation would be greatly enhanced if it identified itself with an ideal of social
living which alone can bring the social crisis to a happy resolution — a collecti-
vistic and classless society. We further submit that the effectiveness of the
NBA would be greatly increased if instead of looking for defenders of education,
among the ranks of conservative groups, it would identify itself with the under-
privileged classes who are the real beneficiaries of public education and who>
can find their adjustment only in a radically democratic social order.
It is interesting to note that Norman Woelfel, then an associate
editor of the Social Frontier, who is now professor of education at
Ohio State University, is now actively participating in the activities;
of the National Education Association.
Mr. Hats. Just a moment, you say you are talking about Woelfel!
now?
Mr. McNiece. Yes.
Mr. Hats. And he is at Ohio State and he is a member of the
NEA, too ?
Mr. Mc Niece. According to the NEA booklet.
Mr. Hats. How subversive can you get ?
Mr. McNiece. One of the departments of NEA is the Association
for Supervision and Curriculum Development. This association
recently issued its yearbook for 1953 under the title "Forces Affect-
490 TAX-EXEMPT; FOUNDATIONS
ing American Education." Professor Woelf el was a member of the
supervising committee responsible for the creation of this work.
Under the caption Culture Affecting Education the following state-
ments appear, and this is in 1953 :
Page27: ;
Teachers in our schools have an immediate responsibility to their students and
to the community at large to rethink their programs in terms of the necessity of
social adaptation to changing technology.
Page 27:
We began our government with the rule of law — the Constitution. The federal
judicial system has become its special guardian. Over the years there has been
a gradual modification of the principle of property rights and of public welfare.
An illustration of a fundamental transition which is affecting our lives is the
modification of the old concept of the common law. The common law in America,
which is merely English law built up through decisions of the courts, has been
individualistic. It has stressed protection of property and freedom of contract
Where the welfare of society has been concerned, the common law has been
assumed to be sufficient to effect this through the individual. The rationale has
been liberty rather than either equality or fraternity.
This trend toward a balance between the welfare of the individual and the
welfare of society is in conflict with earlier assumptions. It is a trend which
we cannot ignore. It presents fundamental problems for education in modern
society.
Pages 36-37:
There are tensions and overt conflicts in our present society over the functions
and methods of education. Men who are established at the pinnacle of success in
the typical American conception can and sometimes do find themselves more
interested In shaping society according to their own wishes, through the public
schools, than in conforming to society's newer demands for free intelligence.
The very power of their positions makes them formidable foes of any concep-
tion of education for all the people that is in conflict with their special con-
victions.
Through the strength of our success patterns it is quite possible for men whose
lives are wholly unrelated to the process of education to come to power and to
assume the role of determining what should be taught and how it should be
taught. The professional educator whose business it is to know both the process
and the method is not always a match for such opposition. But we should not
forget that many other men, who are also at the pinnacle of success, are the firm-
est defenders of the public schools and the method of intelligence. In recent
years, the public schools have received excellent support from just such per-
sons. Throughout the years, such men have established foundations for the
advancement of education and culture.
Directly or indirectly, the NEA is identified with an interesting situ-
ation involving an article recently published by Look magazine. In
this issue of this magazine of March 9, 1954, an article by Robert M.
Hutchins was published under the title "Are Our Teachers Afraid to
Teach ?" The opening statements in this article are as follows :
Education is impossible in many parts of the United States today because free
inquiry and free discussion are impossible. In these communities, the teacher
■of economics, history or political science cannot teach. Even the teacher of
literature must be careful. Didn't a member of Indiana's Text Book Commis-
sion call Robin Hood subversive?
The National Education Association studied no less than 522 school systems,
covering every section of the United States, and came to the conclusion that
American teachers today are reluctant to consider "controversial issues."
KJKrESSaMtt?-: FOUNDATIONS 491
This article and the statement quoted above were of interest to ixs.
A letter was therefore written to the NEA asking for information
about the report on the 522 school systems. The letter in reply to our
request is quoted herewith, together with our letter which preceded it.
*, ^ ™- „ MAbch 19, 1954.
Mr. Fbank W. Hubbard,
Director of Research, National Education Association, Washington, D. O.
Dear Mb. Hubbard: In an article in Look magazine of March 9, 1954, Mr.
^Robert M. Hutchins refers to a survey made by your association.
. He reports that this survey came to the conclusion that teachers of economics,
history and political sciences in 522 school systems, covering every section of
the United States, are reluctant to consider controversial issues in their teaching.
This statement suggests the possibility of a serious handicap to education.
We want to evaluate your report so that we may learn the nature of the fears
to- which Mr. Hutchins refers in this article.
Tour report will offer us a welcome contribution to our understanding of
the nature of the services rendered by your tax exempt organization to edu-
cation.
With thanks for your attention,
Very truly yours,
( " - NOBMAN DODD,
■ Research Director.
- 1 will now quote the reply :
National Education Association of the United States,
Washington 6, D. C, March 24, 1954.
Mr. Norman Dodd,
Research Director, Special Committee to Investigate Tax Exempt Founda-
tions, House of Representatives,
Washington 25, D. C.
Deab Me. Dodd: In reply to your letter of March 19, I am sending you a copy
-of the report prepared by the NEA research division in June 1953 for the
NEA committee on tenure and academic freedom. This report has never been
;printed or issued in any form other than the enclosed typewritten form.
So far as I know Mr. Hutchins did not have a copy of this typed memorandum,
altho he may have borrowed one from someone who received a copy. A few
typewritten copies have been sent to members of the committee on tenure and
academic freedom and to a few other individuals who have written asking
for copies. It is possible that Mr. Hutchins drew his information from the
newspaper stories which were issued from Miami Beach during the summer of
1953 as a result of a press conference on this report. At any rate, I am not
sure that Mr. Hutchins' conclusions would be exactly those of the NEA re-
search division or of the NEA committee on tenure and academic freedom.
Cordially yours,
Fbank W. Hubbabd,
Director, Research Division,
Inference from this letter seems reasonably clear. Careful reading
by the staff failed to disclose any basis for the conclusion reached by
Mr. Hutchins.
Kegardless of the letter quoted, the NEA had many reprints of
this article. The mere existence of these reprints suggests that they
must have been intended for distribution to interested parties.
Whether or not they have been or are being distributed, we do not
know.
We also wonder how many educators would support the conclud-
ing line of Dr. Hutchins' article :
No country ever needed education more than ours does today.
610 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Before beginning a discussion of the relationships between founda-
tions and government, it should be understood by all that we realize
that we are entering the sensitive area of political controversy. One
reason for mentioning this at this time is that we wish it to be under-
stood that we are limiting our analysis of the conditions as we shall
describe them, first to documented statements from the sources quoted
and^ second, in the economics section of the report to statistical infor-
mation available in the Government's own publications.
The economic facts seem to substantiate the conclusion that many
of the proposals advanced by the planners and deemed experimental
by some and questionable by others have been put into practice and
are a part of our everyday lives as we are now living them. Congres-
sional appropriations and governmental expenditures indicate this.
While these facts seem to speak for themselves, there are certain inter-
pretations which we shall make especially with reference to future
conditions if we choose to continue these collectivistic ventures.
In these conclusions we are taking no partisan political position, nor
do we wish to encourage or support any other attitude than this.
Our interest in these problems as they affect the state of the Nation
and its future far exceeds our interest in any form of political pref-
ferment.
Now, this section of the manuscript report is headed, "Relationships
Between Foundations and Government." It is particularly concerned
with the national and social planning.
Before proceeding with the submission of evidence bearing upon
the relationships between foundations and government, we wish to
make some comments by way of background as they pertain to na-
tional and social planning by government.
Three things should be obvious to anyone reasonably familiar with
the interlocking complexities of our production, distribution, service,
and financial problems in our economy :
(1) The successful correlation of all these activities would require
the complete control of all phases of our economic endeavors. Price
control, for example, cannot be effectively maintained without rig-
orous control of material supply and costs, wages, transportation, and
all other elements entering into final costs.
Mr. Hats. Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that these reports are very
long, and if Mr. McNiece is going to read all of them today, that is
about all we are going to get done. I have read them. I have some
questions I would like to ask about them. I would like to just have
them put in the record as is, and then go on with the questioning. I
think it would save a lot of time.
Mr. Koch. He was just going to read the shorter one.
Mr. Hays. Is he going to read the typewritten introduction of this ?
Mr. Koch. No.
Mr. McNiece. I had expected to take selective manuscript reading.
It would be dull and deadly, and I would say completely impossible
to convey to anyone the message involved in that great series of, I
think, 20 statistical tables. I could not hope to do that by reading.
I had not expected to do that.
Mr. Koch. You intended to read only the mimeographed statement ?
Mr. McNiece. Yes, and certain conclusions and introduction ma-
terial from the Economic Report.
The Chairmak. This is 19 pages.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 611
Mr. McNiece. That is all.
Mrs. Pfost. There is a lot of single spacing and tightly written
pages.
The Chairman-. The quotations are single spaced. Had you ex-
pected to read the quotations in full ?
Mr. McNiece. I had intended to read the quotations in full. It is
immaterial to me.
The Chairman. Why don't you continue with the shorter form?
The other material is to be inserted in the record.
Mr. McNiece. That is right. There are certain things in these
quotations that I think from my point of view are very important
from the standpoint of Mr. Hays' questions.
The Chairman. Very well.
Mr. Hays. I have about 8 or 10 questions to this document, and I
was wondering if you have any objection in order to prevent the dis-
organized thing we have had in the past, and going some other day,
you could read them and answer all of my questions before noon?
Would you have any objection if I stopped you at the bottom of page
2 and asked a question right there while it is fresh in mind ?
The Chairman. What he had in mind, as I understood a while
ago, in the remainder of this brief form might be the basis for answers.
I have not read these quotations. I would rather like to hear them,
if I might, before the questioning. I think we would have time before
noon to conclude this and have the questioning also before noon, which
I would like to do.
Mr. McNiece. Yes, we could.
The Chairman". For my own information, I would rather like to
have it,
Mr. McNiece. It is very vital, Mr. Reece, to the questions which
Mr. Hays very properly asked. I would like at least to present those
that bear upon this idea of, let us say, a concentrated corps of influence.
It is involved here to a certain extent. It is involved in one of the
very first questions Mr. Hays asked me this morning. So I think it
would be better if we could at least go this far with it.
Mr. Hays. Read this whole thing?
Mr. McNiece. Yes, it is not going to take very long.
The Chairman. Very well.
Mr. McNiece. Otherwise, shortages, surpluses, and bottlenecks
would bob up continuously and everywhere.
(2) With the complexity due to the literally millions of points or
junctures where difficulties may arise, no man or centralized group of
men possess the knowledge or judgment that will equal the integrated
judgment of thousands of experienced men applied at the points where
and when troubles first develop.
_ At the time when increased complexity of national and interna-
tional affairs seem to make more governmental planning and control
necessary, the Government is actually becoming less and less able to
exercise rational and competent control over the multiplicity of details
essential to good planning. To be even superficially effective, it must
be completely autocratic.
(3) Even though such centralized planning were physically pos-
sible, the net results would be a smaller and smaller percentage of
goods and services produced that would be available for those who
produce them. This would result from the increasing cost of the
,(J12 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
governmental agencies and bureaus necessary to devise and maintain
control. Of course this would have to be met by increasing taxation.
That is the experience in Russia and it has been developing here for
some years as will be shown in the staff's economic report.
From the beginning, the Socialist programs have called for national;
ownership and planning of productive facilities.
Such references are frequent and clear. Perhaps the following quo-
tation from Engels, friend and contemporary of Marx, may illustrate
the point.
The planless production of capitalist society capitulates before the planned
production of the invading Socialist society.
To emphasize the reiteration of this concept by a responsible body
of men in our own times and country, we may again refer to a para-
graph from the report of the Commission on Social Studies. After 5
years of deliberation they say (American Historical Association,
Committee on Social Studies, p. 16) :
Under the molding influence of socialized processes of living, drives of
technology and science, pressures of changing thought and policy, and disrupt-
ing impacts of economic disaster, there is a notable waning of the once wide-
spread popular faith in economic individualism ; and leaders in public affairs,
supported by a growing mass of the population, are demanding the introduction
into economy of ever wider measures of planning and control.
In what way has this expression of belief found its way into our
governmental activities ?
In 1933, the National Planning Board was formed. How did it look
upon its task and what seem to be its final objectives? These may be
indicated in part by the following extracts from its final report for
1933-34— National Planning Board, final report 1933-34, page 11 :
State and interstate planning is a lusty infant but the work is only beginning.
Advisory economic councils may be regarded as instrumentalities for stimu-
lating a coordinated view of national life and for developing mental attitudes
favorable to the principle of national planning.
Page60:
Finally, mention should be made of the fact that there are three great national
councils which contribute to research in the social sciences. The Council of
Learned Societies, the American Council on Education, and the Social Science
Research Council are important factors in the development of research and add;
their activities to the body of scientific material available in any program of
national planning.
The Council of Learned Societies has promoted historical and general social
The American Council on Education has recently sponsored an inquiry into
the relation of Federal, State, and local governments to the conduct of public
education. It has served as the organizing center for studies of materials of
instruction and problems of educational administration. It represents the educa-
tional organizations of the country and is active in promoting research in its
special field.
The Social Science Research Council, a committee of which prepared this
memorandum, is an organization engaged in planning research. It is true that
its object has not been to make social plans, but rather to plan research in the
social field. A decade of thought on planning activities through its committees,,
distributed widely over the social sciences, has given it an experience, a back-
ground with regard to the idea of planning, that should be of value if it were
called on to aid in national planning. Furthermore, the members of the Social
Science Research Council, its staff, and the members of its committees are per-
haps more familiar than the members of any other organization with the per-
sonnel in the social sciences, with the research interests of social scientists, and
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 615
with the experience and capabilities of social science research workers in the
United. States. TJhe members of the council are familiar with the different bu-
reau's of research^ The couneil has been concerned chiefly with the determina-
tion of the groups and persons with whom special types of research should be
placed. For this purpose it has set up committees, organized commissions, pro-
moted research, and sponsored the development of various research agencies and
interests. With its pivotal position among the social sciences, it could undoubted-
ly render valuable aid if called on to do so, in the formidable task of national
planning.
Page 66 :
It was after the Civil War that American economic life came to be dominated
by the philosophy of laissez faire and by the doctrines of rugged individualism.
But the economic and social evils of the period resulted in the development of
new planning attitudes tending to emphasize especially public control and
regulation.
Page 67 :
Summing up the developments of these 125 years, one may say that insofar as-
the subject here considered is concerned, they are important because they left
us a fourfold heritage :
First, to think in terms of an institutional framework which may be fashioned'
in accordance with prepared plans ;
Second, a tendency to achieve results by compromise 4n which different lines-
and policies are more or less reconciled ;
Third, a tendency to stress in theory the part played in economic life by
individualism, while at the same time having recourse in practice to govern-
mental aid and to collective action when necessary ; and
Fourth, a continued social control applied to special areas of economic life.
Page 71:
Such was the note already heard in America when during 1928-29 came the
first intimations of the 5-year plan, and the Western World began to be inter-
ested in the work and methods of the Gosplan in Moscow. The Russian expe-
rience was not embodied in any concrete way in American thinking, but it stim-
ulated the idea that we need to develop in an American plan out of our American-
background.
The National Planning Board after furnishing its report in 1934
was discontinued.
The National Resources Committee was in existence from 1934 to
1939.
In 1939, the National Resources Planning Board was constituted, in
part with the same personnel. After a few years of deliberation, it
rendered its final report, from which the following verbatim and
continuous extract is quoted from page 3 :
The National Resources Planning Board believes that it should be the declared 1
policy of the United States Government to promote and maintain a high level
of national production and consumption by all appropriate measures necessary
for this purpose. The Board further believes that it should be the declared 1
policy of the United States Government.
To underwrite full employment for the employables ;
To guarantee a job for every man released from the Armed Forces and the
war industries at the close of the war, with fair pay and working conditions;
To guarantee and, when necessary, underwrite :
Equal access to security,
Equal access to education for all,
Equal access to health and nutrition for all, and
Wholesome housing conditions for all.
This policy grows directly out of the Board's statement concerning which'
the President has said :
"All of the free peoples must plan, work, and fight together for the mainte-
nance and development of our freedoms and rights."
■614 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
THE FOUK FREEDOMS
Freedom of speeeh and expression, freedom to worship, freedom from want,
and freedom from fear : and
A NEW BILL OF BIGHTS
1. The right to work, usefully and creatively through the productive years;
2. The right to fair pay, adequate to command the necessities and amenities
of life in exchange for work, ideas, thrift, and other socially valuable service.
Mr. Hays. Would you mind identifying where this came from ?
Mr. McNiece. Yes, sir. This is the final report of the National
'Resources Planning Board.
Mr. Hats. All right.
Mr. McNiece (reading) :
3. The right to adequate food, clothing, shelter, and medical care ;
4. The right to security, with freedom from fear of old age, want, dependency,
sickness, unemployment, and accident ;
5. The right to live in a system of free enterprise, free from compulsory
labor, irresponsible private power, arbitrary public authority, and unregulated
monopolies ;
6. The right to come and go, to speak or to be silent, free from the spyings
of secret political police ;
7. The right to education, for work, for citizenship, and for personal growth
and happiness ; and
8. The right to equality before the law, with equal access to justice in fact ;
9. The right to rest, recreation, and adventure, the opportunity to enjoy
life and take part in an advancing civilization.
Plans for this purpose are supported and explained in this report. The pre-
vious publications of the Board, including National Resources Development
Report for 1942, transmitted to the Congress by the President on January 14,
1942, and a series of pamphlets (After Defense— What? After the War— Full
Employment, Postwar Planning, etc.), also provide background for this pro-
posal.
The plans just mentioned are incorporated in a series of points
under the following captions :
Page 13 : A. Plans for Private Enterprise.
Page 13 : B. Plans for Finance and Fiscal Policies.
Page 13 : C. Plans for Improvement of Physical Facilities.
Page 16 : D. Essential Safeguards of Democracy.
Under a caption, "Plans for Services and Security" are extensive
recommendations under the descriptive headings which follow:
Pages 16-17:
A. Plans for Development of Service Activities.
1. Equal access to education.
2. Health, nutrition, and medical care.
B. Plans for Underwriting Employment
C. Plans for Social Security
Still another basic caption appears as follows :
Pages 60-66 : Equal Access to Health :
I. Elimination of All Preventable Diseases and Disabilities.
II. Assurance of Proper Nutrition for All Our People.
III. Assurance of Adequate Health and Medical Care for All.
IV. Economical and Efficient Organization of Health Services.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 615
A statement of authorship of the section on Equal Access to Health
says that it was prepared under the direction of Assistant Director
Thomas G.BlaisaeH, by Dr. Eveline M. Burns, of the Board's staff.
Dr. Burns is a graduate of the London School of Economics, which
has received grants from the Rockefeller Foundation totaling
$4,105,600.
The discussion and detailed recommendations in this final report
of the National Resources Planning Board are far too lengthy to be-
incorporated in this study. Certainly, some of them seem reasonable
from the standpoint of our former governmental procedure but others
are sufficiently novel to warrant mention herein in order to clarify
the underlying objectives in the fields mentioned.
PLANS FOE IMPROVEMENT OF PHYSICAL FACILITIES *
We recommend for consideration : With private enterprise, through the Kecon-
struction Finance Corporation or possibly one or several Federal Development
Corporations and subsidiaries providing for participation of both public and
private investment and representation in management — particularly for urban-
redevelopment, housing, transport terminal reorganization, and energy develop-
ment Government should assist these joint efforts through such measures as;
(1) Government authority to clear obsolescent plant of various kinds, as, for
instance, we have done in the past through condemnation of unsanitary dwell-
ings, to remove the menace to health and competition with other or better
housing.
(2) Governmental authority to assemble properties for reorganization and
redevelopment— perhaps along the lines of previous grants of the power of
eminent domain to canal and railroad companies for the acquisition of rights-
of way.
HEALTH, NUTRITION, AND MEDICAL CAEE
Assurance of adequate medical and health care for all, regardless of place of
residence or income status and on a basis that is consistent with the self respect
of the recipient, through :
(1) Federal appropriations to aid States and localities in developing a system
of regional and local hospitals and health centers covering all parts of the
country ?
(2) Assurance of an adequate and well-distributed supply of physicians-
dentists, nurses, and other medical personnel.
PLANS FOB UNDERWRITING EMPLOYMENT
To guarantee the right to a Job, activities in the provision of physical facilities
and service activities should be supplemented by :
(1) Formal acceptance by the Federal Government of responsibility for
insuring jobs at decent pay to all those able to work regardless of whether or
not they can pass a means test ;
(2) The preparation of plans and programs, in addition to those recommended
under public works (II-B-3), for all kinds of socially useful work other than
construction, arranged according to the variety of abilities and location of
persons seeking employment.*
* From final report, NEPB, p. 13.
s Ibid., p. 17.
616 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Page 17:
PLANS FOB SOCIAL SECURITY
Reorganization of the unemployment compensation laws to provide broad-
ened coverage, more nearly adequate payments, incorporating benefits to depend-
ents, payments of benefits for at least 26 weeks, and replacement of present
Federal-State system by a wholly Federal administrative organization and a
single national fund.
Creation of an adequate general public assistance system through Federal
financial aid for general relief available to the States on an equalizing basis
and accompanied by Federal standards.
Strengthening of the special public assistance programs to provide more ade-
quately for those in need, and a redistribution of Federal aid to correspond to
differences in needs and financial capacity among the States.
Page 69:
EQUAL ACCESS TO EDUCATION
That equal access to general and specialized education be made available to
all youth of college and university age, according to their abilities and the
needs of society.
Page 70 :
That adequate provision be made for the part-time education of adults through
-expansion of services such as correspondence and class study, forums, educa-
tional broadcasting, and libraries and museums.
Page 71 :
That camp facilities be made available for all youth above the lower ele-
mentary grades, with work experience provided as a part of camp life.
Page 72:
That the services of the United States Office of Education and State depart-
ments of education be expanded and developed to provide adequate research
facilities and educational leadership to the Nation.
Page73:
That inequality of the tax burden for education within and among the States
"be reduced through the distribution of State and Federal funds on the basis
of need.
The quotations from the reports of the National Planning Board,
and the National Resources Planning Board should suffice to show
how they have followed the lead of the Commission on Social Studies
-and how completely they have embraced virtually all phases of our
economic life including education.
It will be of interest and significance to trace the progress of one
who was undoubtedly a leader in the evolution of this influence as it has
heen set forth. In this case, we refer to Mr. Charles E. Merriam and
in so doing we wish to have it thoroughly understood that we are
casting no aspersions on his name or memory.
The following statement regarding the origin of the Social Science
Research Council is found in the annual report of that organization
for 1928-29.
3^-EXEJiffiT FOUNDATIONS 617
From page 39, appendix A :.'-''
In 1921, the American Political Science Association appointed a Committee on
Political Research, with Prof. Charles F. Merriam as chairman. The purpose
of this committee was to scrutinize the scope and method of research in the field
of government in order to obtain a clearer view of the actual situation and to
offer constructive suggestions.
In a preliminary report in December 1922, the following statement
appeared :
That a sounder empirical method of research had to be achieved in political
science if it were to assist in the development of a scientific political control.
Quoting further the report said:
As one of its major recommendations, the committee urged "the establish-
ment of a Social Science Research Council consisting of two members each from
economics, sociology, political science, and history, for the purpose of:
"(a) The development of research in the social studies.
" (.6) The establishment of a central clearing house for projects of social inves-
tigation.
"(c) The encouragement of the establishment of institutes for social-science
study, with funds adequate for the execution of various research projects and
publications, in the various fields of science."
The Social Science Research Council was formed in 1923 and incor-
porated in 1924. Charles E. Merriam served as its president from
1924 to 1927. He was president of the American Political Science
Association during 1924 and 1925, a member of the Hoover Commis-
sion on Social Trends and of the President's Commission on Adminis-
trative Management from 1933 to 1943.
In 1926, a Committee of the American Historical Association made
a preliminary study and recommendation on the subject of social
studies in the schools. Mr. Merriam was a member of this committee
and later of the final commission on social studies whose report of May
1934 we have discussed at length.
In spite of his retention of membership, he with 3 others out of
the Committee of 14 members failed to sign the final report. Since
no dissenting report or advices are recorded, we can only guess at the
reason. In fairness to Mr. Merriam and from an examination of some
of his later writings on other matters, we are led to believe that he was
sufficiently opposed to the extreme revolutionary plans of Marxism
to disassociate himself from the more radical conclusions in this report.
Be that as it may, he retained his interest and activity in national
planning to the last. Following his connections with the American
Political Science Association, the Social Science Research Council,
and the American Historical Association, he was a member of the
National Planning Board in 1933-34; the National Resources Com-
mittee 1934-39 ; the National Resources Planning Board 1939-43 ; the
President's Committee on Administrative Management 1933-43 and
the United States Loyalty Review Board 1947-48.
Mr. Merriam is the author of a book published in 1941 by the Har-
vard University Press, entitled "On the Agenda of Democracy." This
book is composed of a series of lectures delivered by the author.
618 ^AX-SSftMt^ tfOtfNSATICJNS
The opening statement in the introduction follows (p. ?iii) :
Foremost on the agenda of democracy is the reconsideration of the program-
in the light of modern conditions. The old world is gone and will not return.
We face a new era, which searches all creeds, all forms, all programs of action^
and spares none. Reason and science have made basic changes that demand
readjustment at many points. * ♦ *
One of the chief tasks confronting democracy is the development of a program
adequate to meet the changes of our time. * * *
Mr. Merriam defines planning as follows (p. 77) :
Planning is an organized effort to utilize social intelligence in the determina-
tion of national policies.
The ensuing extracts from the pages indicated throw additional
light on Mr. Merriam's views (pp. 86-87) :
From the organizational point of view the NRPB (National Resources Plan-
Ding Board) is part of the Executive Office of the President. This includes the
White House Office, the Bureau of the Budget, the National Resources Planning
Board, the Office of Government Reports, the Liaison Office for Personnel Man-
agement, and the Office for Emergency Management. With the reference to other
Federal agencies outside of overhead management, the Board has endeavored to
encourage planning activities in the various departments of the Government.
There is now a Planning Division, specifically so-called, in the Department of
Agriculture.
There is one in the making (provided Congress gives an appropriation) in the
Federal Works Agency ; there is a general committee in the Department of the
Interior which is not called a planning committee but which may serve the same
purpose, and there are Planning Divisions in the War Department and in the
Navy Department. There are similar enterprises not labeled "planning" but
doing much the same work in a variety of other agencies, as, for example, in the
Treasury, in Commerce, in the Federal Reserve Board, and in other independent
agencies. The Board has endeavored to make a special connection with Federal
agencies through its various technical committees, dealing with particular topics
assigned by the President. These committees usually have representatives of
several Federal agencies, as, for example, the Committee on Long-Range Work
and Relief Policies.
The Board (National Resources Planning Board) has also dealt with private
agencies interested in planning. The most notable example is its Science Com-
mittee. Here groups were brought together that never came together before,
namely, the National Academy of Sciences, the Social Science Research Coun-
cil, the American Council of Learned Societies, and the American Council on
Education with its 27 constituent organizations. The members of the sci-
ence committee are designated by these four groups. These scientists have
undertaken with the United States Government some very important studies,
notably the study of population, the study of the social implications of tech-
nology, and the study of research as a national asset — research in the National
Government, in private industry, and ultimately in the various local govern-
ments.
Pages 110-11 :
As a student of planning, I see the possibility of adapting our national resources
to our national needs in peace as well as in war, in the development of national
productivity and higher standards of living as a part of the same program.
This is the bill of rights in modern terms.
Page 113 :
It will be important to have a shelf of public work and projects ready fos
use, if there is need, available to combat any wide tendency toward general
unemployment. .
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 61$
In another book called the New Democracy and the New Despotism,
Mr. Merriam states (pp. 58-59) :
Out of the field of science and education emerged the body of inquiry, experi-
ment, and reflection known as social sciences. The developing range of knowl-
edge regarding the principles and techniques of social behavior tended to in-
crease human confidence in conscious social control. The tendency was not
merely to accept the environment as given, but to understand it, then to devise
appropriate methods and techniques for the guidance of social forces.
Pagel48:
My own preference is for a national planning board appointed by the Execu-
tive and responsible to him, serving on an indeterminate tenure. Such an organ-
ization might act as a long-time planning agency for the coordination of various
plans among departments or bureaus and for the elaboration of further lines
•of long-time national policy in the larger sense of the term.
All in all, the long record of Mr. Merriam in his participation in
the general field of the social sciences and in the governmental. opera-
tions, and the quoted excerpts from his writings should serve to iden-
tify hint thoroughly with the policies and practices, the effects of which
are shown in the staff's report on economics and the public interest.
To emphasize the importance of the parts played by the specialists
from the field of education, it may be said that the staff has lists of
some of these consultants and advisers that total as follows : Depart-
ment of State, 42; Department of Denfense, 169.
Before taking up the report on economics and the public interest,
it will be well to take a moment or two to close the triangle of relation-
ships among foundations, education and Government by reference to
the United States Office of Education. . It is the official center of con-
tact between the Government itself and the outside educational world.
In table 7 of the Economic Report, it is shown that from 1945 to
1952 inclusive, the Federal Government has expended the total sum
of $14,405,000,000 on education in its various forms. Much, if not all,
of this is under the jurisdiction of the United States Office of Educa-
tion.
As part of this vast project, the Office itself issues many good book-
lets on various phases of education and collects many valuable statis-
tics on cost, attendance, and other matters of interest in this domain.
Among the booklets issued by this agency are a few which may be
mentioned and identified.
They are:
The U. N. Declaration of Human Rights : A handbook for teachers, Federal
Security Agency, Bulletin 1951, No. 12, Office of Education.
; How Children Learn About Human Rights : Place of subjects series, Bulletin
1951, No. 9, Federal Security Agency, Office of Education.
Higher Education in France : A handbook of information concerning curricula
available in each institution, Bulletin 1952, No. 6, Federal Security Agency, Office
of Education.
Education in Haiti: Bulletin 1948, No, 1, Federal Security Agency, United
States Office of Education.
This brief reference is purely factual and without appraisal or
comment.
It is made only as a matter of information for the consideration of
the committee when it considers the problems involved.
620 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
This is the conclusion of th© report.
The Chairman. You are including the other parts in the record?
Mr. McNiECE* Yes, the economics report is separate and I had
hoped if the; time were available we might read certain parts of that^
but include the whole thing for the record^ avoiding the complications
and confusion and time involved in reading a lot of statistics which
are of value only for study.
The Chairman - . The Rockefeller Foundation has given a total in
excess of$4 million to the London School of Economics ?
Mr. McNmcE.'That "is right, according to the record, as we have
compiled it.
, The Chairman. That is a lot of money. And the London School
of Economics is generally recognized as being liberal, with liberal in
quotations? —
Mr. McNiece. Yes.
The Chairman. Or by some people referred to as leftist. Having
attended the London School of Economics for a time, that accounts
for my leftist leanings.
Mr. Hays. I would say by the process we are going here that makes
you subversive. I don't really think you are, but you could certainly
imply that from some of the things. I am glad you brought that up t
because I had read this before, and I have listened carefully, and you
have put your finger on the only thing in this whole document that
has anything to do with foundations, mat reference on page 9. The
rest is just airing somebody's political views.
Mr. McNiece. No.
The Chairman. No. The National Resources Planning Board, the
way it was set up, it did tie into the foundation funds, did it not ?
Mr. McNiece. Certainly, through the American Historical Asso r
ciation, the Social Science Research Council, the American Council
on Education, the aid of all of which is acknowledged in the official
reports of the National Resources Planning Board. It is stipulated by
them. That is a definite hookup with the foundations.
Mr. Hats. You say yourself they suggest that; is that bad ? •
Mr. McNiece. They have not the power of Congress to authorize
its adoption. They have gone as far as they can.
Mr. Hats. Now, you are getting some place. In other words, none
of this has any validity or authority unless Congress decides to imple-
ment it.
Mr. r McNiece.' I have suggested here in the preliminary statement
that the appropriations by Congress and the record of governmental
expenditures follow very closely the line of recommendations which
I just finished reading.
Mr. Hats. Are you saying that Congress has a bunch of nitwits
and dupes or just-been subversive, or what ?
Mr. McNiece. No ; I am not saying any such thing, and it should
not be inferred from any remark I have made.
The Chairman. My knowledge is just to the contrary.
Mr. Hats. You seem to indicate that Congress was pushed into
this by the statement you just made^ that their appropriations par-
alleled this and these people influenced them.
Mr. McNiece. Inferences are free to those who make them. I have
only stated the facts. I am making no inference beyond the state-
ment of facts.
o
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
SPECIAL COMMITTEE
TO
INVESTIGATE TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
H. RES. 217
STAFF REPORT NO. 3
ECONOMICS AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST
(Page numbers are from printed hearings)
May 1954
Prepared by Thomas M. McNiece, Assistant Research Director
Printed for the use of the committee
UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
54609 WASHINGTON : 1954
SPECIAL COMMITTEE. TO INVESTIGATE TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
B. CARROLL REECE, Tennessee, Chairman
JESSE P. WOLCOTT, Michigan WAYNE L. HAYS, Ohio
ANGIER L. GOODWIN, Massachusetts GRACIE PFOST, Idaho
Rene A. Wormsek, General Counsel
Kathryn Casey, Legal Analyst
Norman Dodd, Research Director
Arnold Koch, Associate Counsel
John Marshall, Jr., Chief Clerk
Thomas McNiece, Assistant Research Director
II
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 627
Preface
Over the past 50 years sweeping changes have occurred in this country in the
functions and activities of the Federal Government. Some of these changes are
to be expected as a result of increasing population, industrial, and commercial
growth and our greater participation in world affairs.
By no means have all of the changes resulted from the foregoing causes. On
the contrary other deviations have occurred which are totally unrelated to chang-
ing requirements of Government and which in fact have not been considered as
functions of Government under our Constitution and its enumerated powers.
Among these is the increasing participation of the Federal Government in edu-
cation, slum clearance, nutrition and health, power generation, subsidization of
agriculture, scientific research, wage control, mortgage insurance, and other activ-
ities. Most if not all of these were politically conceived and depression born.
They represent new ventures in our Federal Government's activities.
Most, if not all of these newer activities of Government are recommended in
one place or another in publications of socially minded committees of Govern-
ment and of reports by various educational groups, social science and others,
supported by foundation grants.
They are so foreign to the conception of our Government of enumerated pow-
ers as we have known it under the Constitution, that the departure has been
referred to as a "revolution" by one of its proponents who will be quoted later.
While the groundwork for these changes has been underway for a long time,
the real acceleration of progress toward these objectives began about 20 years
ago. Since then, the movement has grown apace with little or no sign of slow-
ing down.
The word "revolution" is commonly associated with a physical conflict or
development of some sort accompanied by publicity that marks its progress one
way or another. Not all revolutions are accomplished in this manner.
The lower the social stratum in which a revolution originates, the noisier
it is likely to be. On the contrary a revolution planned in higher circles by some
segment of people at policymaking levels may be very far advanced toward
successful accomplishment before the general public is aware of it.
A plan may be formulated with some objective in mind, agreement reached,
organization effected, and action begun initially with a minimum of publicity.
Such a program has been in progress in this country for years. Originally, the
thought of such a revolutionary change was probably confined to very few peo-
ple — the organizers of the movement. With the passage of time and under the
influence of the growing emphasis on the so-called social sciences, the Federal
Government began to push forward into areas of activity formerly occupied by
State and local government and private enterprise.
As an indication of this trend, a statement may be quoted from regional
planning, a report issued by the National Resources Committee in June 1938.
"More than 70 Federal agencies have found regional organization neeessary
and there are over 108 different ways in which the country has been organized
for the efficient administration of Federal services."
Arrangements of this type facilitate the gradual expansion of governmental
action and control through executive directives as distinguished from specific
legislative authorization.
Much of this planning was done with the aid of social scientists in Govern-
ment employ and of outside individuals or groups with similar ideas and ob-
jectives. Many of these were directly or indirectly connected with educational
organizations who have and still are receiving very substantial aid from the
large foundations.
Some of these activities were undertaken under the guise of temporary aid
during depression but they have been continued on an increasing scale as will
be shown in the ensuing report.
Evidence indicates that a relatively large percentage of foundation giving
was originally in the form of grants to endowment funds of educational insti-
tutions. There has been a sizable shift in later years from grants for endow-
ment to grants for specific purposes or objectives but still through educational
channels.
As far as the economic influence on Government is concerned, the results-
were manifested first through the planning agencies. The recommendations:
made by these groups finally evolved into more or less routine matters in which
Congress is now asked to approve each year a series of appropriations to cover
the cost- These various classes of expenditures are listed and discussed in the
628 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
ensuing report. Charts are included at the end. In a number of cases, trends
are shown for the greater part of this century.
It should be understood that not everyone who has assisted in furthering these
objectives is guilty of conscious participation in questionable action. Those who
have studied these developments know that many well-meaning people have
been drawn into the activities without knowledge of understanding of the final
objectives. A well-organized central core of administrators with a large num-
ber of uninformed followers is standard practice in such organized effort.
Economics and the Public Interest
introduction
This report is made for the purpose of showing the nature and increasing costs
of governmental participation in economic and welfare activities of the Nation.
These were formerly considered as foreign to the responsibilities, particularly
of the Federal Government.
The nature of these recent activities is briefly described and data shown in
tables 1 to 8. The results are shown annually in these tables since 1948 in order
to indicate the generally increasing trends in recent years.
Tables 9 to 16 and charts 1 to 12, together with the accompanying data sheets
from which the charts are constructed, afford some measure, both volumetric
and financial, of the effect these activities have had on national debt, taxes, and
personal income of the people.
Finally, the conclusion is drawn that the financial integrity of the Nation
will be jeopardized by a continuation of the policies which may be ineffective
an the end as far as their stated objectives are concerned.
INDEX OF TABLES
Table 1. New permanent housing units started in nonfarm areas.
Table 2. Federal contracts awards for new construction.
Table 3. Federal food programs.
Table 4. Federal expenditures for promotion of public health.
Table 5. Federal expenditures for social security and health.
Table 6. Federal expenditures for vocational education.
Table 7. Federal educational expenditures.
Table 8. Federal funds allotted for education for school year 1951.
Table 9. Government civilian employees per 1,000 United States population.
Table 10. Government civilian employees versus other civilian employees.
Table 11. Departments and agencies in the executive branch.
Table 12. Ordinary Federal receipts and expenditures.
Table 13. Comparative increases in taxes and population— excluding social se-
curity taxes.
Table 14. National income versus total Federal, State and local taxes.
Table 15. National income and national debt per family.
Table 16. Comparative debt and income per family.
Table 17. Gross national product and national debt.
Table 18. Gross national product, Federal debt and disposable personal income.
Table 19. Percentage of gross national product — Personal versus governmental
purchases.
Table 20. Price decline 8 years after war.
REVOLUTION
In the 20 years between 1933 and 1953, the politicians, college professors, and
lawyers, with little help from business, wrought a revolution in the economic
policies of the United States. They repudiated laissez-faire. They saw the
simple fact that if capitalism were to survive, Government must take some
responsibility for developing the Nation's resources, putting a floor under spend-
ing, achieving a more equitable distribution of income and protecting the weak
against the strong. The price of continuing the free society was to be limited
intervention by Government. [Italics added,]
The foregoing statement is the opening paragraph in an article by a Harvard
professor (Seymour E. Harris, professor of economics, Harvard University in
the Progressive, December 1953) as printed in a recent issue of a magazine and
as included in the appendix of the Congressional Record of February 15, 1954.
TAX-EXEMPT FO CJND ATIONS 629
It is a very broad and emphatic statement. Numerically, the "politicans, college
professors, and lawyers" comprise a very minute percentage of the total popula-
tion of the country— a minute percentage of the people who, under the Constitu-
tion are responsible for effecting "revolutionary" changes in governmental prac-
tice. Certainly these changes as enumerated have never been submitted to nor
ratified as such by the people or their duly elected representatives.
Evolution accomplished: How then could a departure so drastic as to be
called a "revolution" be accomplished ?
Normally a revolution is not accomplished without a considerable measure of
publicity attained through fuss and fireworks that attend such efforts. In the
absence of such developments, it could only be achieved through carefully coor-
dinated effort by a relatively small group centered at policy making levels.
In connection with this latter throught, it is interesting to compare the state-
ment quoted in the first paragraph with the five points for Federal action
enumerated shortly hereafter.
Evidence of such changes in Federal policy, their direction and effect will
be submitted later, but it will be first in order to mention that the Federal Gov-
ernment is a government of enumerated powers. Certainly the powers enum-
erate do not mention the "development of the Nation's resources, putting a floor
under spending, achieving a more equitable distribution of income and pro-
tecting the weak against the strong." Neither has the Government itself prior
to the period mentioned in the opening paragraph, assumed such rights and
responsibilities.
These and other changes which have been effected are revolutionary. They
have been accomplished not openly but indirectly and without the full knowl-
edge, and understanding of the people most affected.
Subversion: In fact, the methods used suggest a form of subversion. Sub-
version may be defined as the act of changing or overthrowing such things as
the form or purpose of government, religion, or morality by concealed or insidi-
ous methods that tend to undermine its supports or weaken its foundations.
Public interest: It may be said by the proponents of such procedure that
it is warranted by the "public interest." Public interest is difficult to define but
for the purpose of this study, we can probably do no better than to refer to
the preamble of the Constitution of the United States wherein it is stated that
the Constitution is established—
"in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic
tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and
secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity."
The last three words in the foregoing quotation impose a responsibility for
the future upon us of the present. A risk for the future is implicit in some
of the measures advanced for the advantage of the present and such measures
may be said to be subversive, un-American and contrary to the public interest.
To subvert or circumvent the Constitution or to change authorized procedure
under its provisions by other than the methods established by the Constitution
itself may with certainty be called un-American. The Constitution is not a
static or dead document. It has been amended with reasonable frequency and
can always be modified if a real need for change develops.
Methods of procedure : Mr. A. A. Berle, Jr., formerly Assistant Secretary
of State and one of the active proponents of increased governmental participa-
tion in economic life made the suggestion that the Federal Government supply
cash or credit for the following purposes after World War II (The New Phi-
losophy of Public Debt by Harold G. Moulton, the Brookings Institution, Wash-
ington, D. C).
(1) An urban reconstruction program.
(2) A program of public works along conventional lines.
(3) A program of rehousing on a very large scale.
(4) A program of nutrition for about 40 percent of our population.
(5) A program of public health.
Progress toward objectives : It will be informative to record a few measures
of progress toward the objectives that focus so sharply on paternalism and
socialism in government.
This Nation has attained a standard of living that is higher and more widely
distributed than that reached by any other nation in history. It has been
accomplished in a very short span of years as compared with the lives of other
nations and it is still increasing. Impatience and envy unrestrained may con-
ceivably wreck the future for the sake of the present. The possibilities of this
are indicated in factual evidence of today. The public interest will not be
served thereby.
630
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
(1) An urban reconstruction program: (e) A program of rehousing on a
very elaborate scale : It is difficult to differentiate clearly between items 1 and
3 and such data as are available will pertain largely to both.
Table 1. — New permanent housing units started in nonfarm areas publicly owned *
Period
Number
Total
Average per
year
1935-39
87,000
224,800
67,000
173,500
17,400
1940-44 -
44.960
1945-49.. ,
13,400
l«50-52-_ . __ - - -
57,833
Total
532, 300
30,000
1 Data from Supplement to Economic Indicators.
Data are not available on the total value involved in this increasing scale of
public construction. Neither do the available data indicate the division of cost
between local, State, and Federal Governments.
On February 27, 1954, the Housing and Home Finance Agency reported that
there were 154 slum clearance projects underway in January 1954 compared
with 99 at the beginning of 1953. This is an increase of 56 percent in number
during the year. 1
These tabular statements should be sufficient to indicate planned action in
conformity with the suggestions involved in items 1 and 8. There are no data
available that show any such Federal activities prior to 1935.
(2) A program of public works along conventional lines: The following table
shows the value of Federal contracts awarded for new construction. It is not
possible from the information available to determine the real proportion of cost
furnished by the Federal Government. The fact that the work is covered by
Federal contracts suggests that Federal participation is an important percentage
of the total which also includes whatever proportion is furnished by owners,
whoever they may be.
Table 2. — Federal contract awards for new construction 1
1935 $1, 478, 073, 000
1940 2, 316, 467, 000
1945 1, 092, 181, 000
1948 1, 906, 466, 000
1949 $2, 174, 203, 000
1950 2, 805, 214, 000
1951 4, 201, 939, 000
1952 4, 420, 908, 000
Regardless of the degree of Federal participation in this work, the rising trend,
even in years of high economic output, is obvious.
A less pronounced trend but a large volume of expenditure is shown in the
following data.
Federal expenditures for public works 1
1952 (actual) $3, 116, 000, 000
1953 (estimate) 3, 419, 000, 000
1 Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1953.
These data are sufficient to indicate the possibility, if not probability, of spend-
ing for public works on a grandiose scale. The fact that such spending would
be accelerated when economic activity and governmental income are low would
mean drastic increases in public debt which is now at extreme and dangerous
levels. It is significant that the debt has not been reduced but is increasing even
at the continuing high level of tax collections.
It is also well to remember that the cost of public works does not cease with
the completion of the works. On the contrary, increased and continuing costs
are sustained for operation and maintenance of the additional facilities. This
is not to condemn or disapprove of reasonable and required expenditures to meet
the normally growing needs of our increasing population.
i New York Times, Feb. 28, 1954.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
631
(4) A program of nutrition: The Suggestion for a Federal program of nutri-
tion implied that about 40 percent of our population should be the beneficiaries
of such a plan. It is scarcely conceivable that any such proportion of our people
are or have been undernourished.
The Federal Government since 1936 has been participating in food distribution
to institutions and welfare cases as well as to school-lunch programs. From
1936 to 1952, inclusive, the cost of these programs has been as follows :
Table 3. — Federal food program 1
Institutional and welfare cases (direct distribution) $306, 090, 000
School-lunch programs (direct distribution) 290,330,000
School-lunch programs (indemnity plan) 498,909,000
Total 1,095,329,000
1 Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1953.
(5) A program of public health : It was announced by the United States Pub-
lic Health Service that in October 1952, the One-thousandth hospital had been
completed under the Hospital and Construction Act. Since 1946, the Federal
Government has contributed $500 million to this program. The Health Service
announced that it had 800 additional projects underway or planned as of 1952.
State and local governments have contributed about twice as much toward this
work as the Federal Government.
The record of Federal budgetary expenditures for promotion of public health
shows the following expenditures for the years indicated.
Table 4
1945 $186, 000, 000
1946 „_ 173, 000, 000
1947 146, 000, 000
1948 139, 000, 000
1949 171, 000, 000
1950 242, 000, 000
1951 304, 000, 000
1952 328, 000, 000
Total 1, 689, 000, 000
At intervals, agitation is repeatedly renewed on the subject of publicly financed
medical care.
Benefits under the various forms of social insurance and public assistance pro-
grams are increasing rapidly from year to year. Total payments made by Fed-
eral and State Governments are indicated herewith.
Table 5. — Federal expenditures for social security and health 1 (excluding ex-
penditures from promotion of public health as previously shown)
1945 $802, 000, COO
1946 821, 000, 000
1947 1, 117, 000, 000
1948 1, 667, 000, 000
1949 1, 672, 000, 000
1950 1, 900, 000, 000
1951_ 1, 992, 000, 000
1952 2, 163, 000, 000
1 Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1953 (p. 343).
Education : A program of Federal contributions to education was not included
in the five classifications just previously discussed. Such participation has oc-
curred and in some groups in rapidly increasing amounts.
Federal aid in vocational education includes expenditures in agricultural trade
and industrial pursuits and in home economics and to some extent has been
granted over a period of 30 years or more. The following totals apply to the
years indicated :
Table 6. — Federal expenditures for vocational education l
1936 $9, 749, 000
1940 20, 004, 000
1944 19, 958, 000
1948 26, 200, 000
1950 26, 623, 000
1951 26, 685, 000
1 Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1953 (p. 135).
Two other classes of educational expenditures are made by the Federal Govern-
ment, one the large payments for the education of veterans which is now decreas-
ing and the other much small but increasing expenditures for general education
and research. These data are shown herewith :
632
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Table 7. — Federal educational expenditures 1
[In millions]
Veterans'
education
General
purpose
Total
1845 -
$158
85
66
65
75
123
115
171
$158
1946
$351
2,122
2,506
2,703
2,596
1,943
1,326
436
1947
2,188
1948
2,571
1949
2,778
1950.
2,719
1951
2,058
1952 -
1,497
Total
13,547
868
14,405
i Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1953 (p. 343),
Under the limitations of the law, the cost of veterans' education should con-
tinue to decline rapidly. If another war should ensue and the GI bill of rights
be taken as a precedent, the cost of veterans' education would become a tre-
mendous economic burden on the country. The former bill was passed without
any consideration of the capacity of the educational system to absorb the greatly
increased number of students. Chaotic conditions due to crowding existed in
many educational institutions.
Still another form of tabulation of educational funds made available by the
Federal Government is of interest. It pertains to funds allotted for 1951 and
includes those made available to agricultural experiment stations and Coopera-
tive Agricultural Extensions Service.
Table 8. — Federal funds allotted for education for school year 1951 x
Administered by:
Federal Security Agency $171, 720, 000
Department of Agriculture 161, 658, 000-
Veterans' Administration 2, 120, 216, 000
Other 97, 049, 000-
Total 2, 550, 643, 000
1 Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1953 (p. 1S7).
The trend of Federal educational expenditures, aside from those made for
veterans' education is unquestionably upward. That further increases are urged,
especially by those in the educational field, is illustrated by the following extract
from the discussion by Alvin H. Hansen, Professor of Political Economy, Harvard
University, before the meeting of the joint committee of the Senate and House
on the President's economic report. This meeting was held on February 18, 1954.
The quotation follows;
"There is no recognition of the fact, well known to everyone who has studied
State and local finance, that the poorer States which contain nearly half of our
children fall far short of decent educational standards ; yet they spend more on
education in relation to total income of their citizens than do the wealthier
States. For this situation there is no solution except Federal Aid."
General comments: The foregoing evidence and discussion have been pre-
sented in an effort to show why the statement of revolution accomplished seems
to be supported by the facts. That a continuation of the policies is probable
seems apparent from the statistical trends as presented.
Quite regardless of the real propriety of this great and revolutionary departure
from our former constitutional principles of government, a serious question
must be raised about its effect on the future life of the Nation. Most of these
new Federal objectives of expenditure have hitherto been accepted as lying with-
in the province of the State and local governments. It is of course absurd to
assume that aside from the printing press, the Federal Government has access
to any greater supply of funds than exists within the States themselves. And
yet greater funds are necessary when the Federal Government embarks upon
all of these security and welfare activities. Each new or increased channel of
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
633
expenditure calls for additional bureaucratic control without any diminution of
similar control by State and local governments. In fact, as will be shown the
very conditions of distribution imposed by the Federal Government are appar-
ently causing some similar increases in State and local governmental costs.
The tremendously high level of taxes and debt and the pressure for still higher
debt limits and greater expenditures should convince any thoughtful and under-
standing people that danger is in the offing, that the public interest is not being
well served, but on the contrary is being placed in jeopardy. Our obligation to
posterity is apparently submerged in our sea of current self-interest.
The following discussion, with the aid of data and charts will show in both
physical and financial terms the increasing burdens imposed on the populace by
these governmental policies originating during the past twenty years.
Civilian employees in Government: The ensuing table shows the drastic
increases in governmental civilian employes that have occurred since 1930. The
peak was encountered in 1945 from which time there was a gradual reduction
to 1948. Note the level of stability attained in 1948, 1949, and 1950 at 280 percent
of the 1930 figure.
Table 9. — Government civilian employee per 1,000 United States population
Federal
State and
local
Total
Percentage of 1929
Federal
State and
local
Total
1930 -
5.0
8.2
25.5
14.1
14.1
13.8
16.0
16.6
16.2
21.3
24.3
22.4
25.8
26.5
27.1
26.7
26.9
27.2
26.3
32.5
46.8
39.9
40.6
40.9
42.7
43.5
43.4
102
168
520
288
288
282
327
339
331
102
117
108
124
127
130
128
129
131
102
1940 —
127
182
1945
1948
155
158
159
1949
1950 _
1951
165
169
169
1952 —
1953
Note that Federal civilian employees are now over three times as numerous
in proportion to the total population as they were in 1929 while State and
local employees are about one-third greater. For government as a whole, the
civilian employees per capita of total population have increased nearly 70 per-
cent over those of 1929.
These trends are shown graphically on charts 1 and 2 and the supporting
data as they exist for the period from 1900 to 1953 on the accompanying data
sheet 1.
Because governmental employees have no part in the production of eco-
nomic goods and on the contrary must be supported by those who do, it will
be informative to show the comparison between governmental civilian employees
and the nongovernmental labor force. This comparison is shown in table 10
herewith :
Table 10. — Government civilian employees versus other civilian employees
Total gov-
ernment
Other than
government
Government civilian em-
ployees per loo other em-
ployees
Actual
Percent of
1929
1930
Millions
3.15
4.19
5.97
5.99
6.37
6.63
6.67
Millions
46.1
51.4
47.9
57.1
56.5
56.4
56.7
6.7
8.2
12.5
10.5
11.3
11.8
11.8
100
1940
122
1945
187
1950
157
1951-
169
1952 - -
176
1953 - — -
176
54609—54-
634
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
These data show that as of 1953 there were virtually 12 Government employees
for every 100 other workers, excluding all military forces. The increase since
1930 has been 76 percent. From the economic standpoint a parasitic load of 12
employees for every 100 others is quite a burden to bear.
The military forces of the United States have purposely been omitted from
consideration in the two foregoing tables. It is of interest to note, however,
that the inclusion of these military forces for the years 1951 and 1952 respectively
would show 16.7 and 18.2 total governmental employees that must be supported
by each 100 other workers in the United States. Indeed a heavy load.
Trends for all years from 1929 to 1953 are shown on chart 3 and in the accom-
panying data sheet 2.
It should be noted that the trends for the years 1948-53 shown on charts 1, 2,
and 3 are continuations of the upward trends which began in the early 1930's
and show no indication of change. Here in physical rather than financial terms
is evidence of the "revolution" mentioned in the beginning of this report. This
observation will be confirmed by still another instance of expansion measured
by the increase in the number of departments and agencies in the executive
branch of the Federal Government. These data apply only to major groups and
not to their recognized subdivisions or components.
Table 11. — Departments and agencies in the executive branch
1926.
1927_
1928_
1929-
31
31
31
31
1930_
1940_
1950_
1951.
37
47
61
69
1952.
1953-
69
69
The data which follow will measure the increased operations in financial terms.
Federal receipts and expenditures : The ensuing as well as the foregoing
data are shown upon a per capita basis rather than in totals only as it is to be
expected that total expenditures and taxes will normally rise as the population
increases. An increase on a per capita basis calls for analysis and explanation.
In the following table a comparison is shown on both a total and a per capita
basis between Federal receipts and expenditures. The term "receipts" naturally
includes income from all forms of taxation including income, capital gains,
excises, customs, etc.
Table 12.— Ordinary Federal receipts and expenditures
In billions
Revenue
per
capita
Expenditures
Revenue
Expenditures
per
capita
1930 ._.
$4,178
5.265
44. 762
42.211
38. 246
37. 045
48. 143
62. 129
65.218
$3. 440
9.183
98. 703
33. 791
40. 057
40. 167
44. 633
66. 145
74. 607
$33. 90
40.00
320. 50
288. 00
256. 50
245. 00
311.80
396.00
410.00
$27. 95
1940 _-..-_
69.60
1945 -
706. 80
1948 - - :
231. 00
1949 ... . - --
268.20
1950 _ . -_ _ _
265. 00
1951 ___
289. 00
1952 ... --- -
421. 00
1953
466.50
These data in per capital trends since 1900 are shown graphically on chart 4.
As in the prior tables, there is no evidence of a declining trend in the actual
data.
Federal, State, and local taxes : Further light is thrown on tax trends by com-
paring increases in population and taxes since 1930. This information is given
in table 13.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
635
Table lS.-^-Comparative increases in taxes and population excluding social
security taxes *
[In millions]
Population
Federal
taxes
State and
local taxes
Percentage of 1929
Population
Federal
taxes
State and
local taxes
1930
123.1
131.8
139.6
146.6
149.1
151.1
154.4
157.0
159.7
$3, 517
4, 921
40, 989
37, 636
35, 590
34, 955
45, 984
59, 535
62, 656
$6, 798
7,997
9,193
13,342
14, 790
15,914
17, 554
101.2
108. 5
115.0
120.7
122.1
124.4
127.0
129.1
131.3
105.1
147.6
1, 228.
1, 129.
1, 066.
1, 049.
1, 378.
1, 785.
1, 878.
105.7
1940
124.4
1945 .
143
1948
207. 5
1949
230.0
1950
247. 5
1951 -
273.0
1952
1953
1 Except portion used for administrative social security costs.
Maximum activity in the Korean war occurred in 1952 and in World War II
in 1945. Despite the relatively smaller operation represented by the Korean
war, Federal taxes in 1952 were 45 percent greater than in 1945. In the mean-
time the Federal debt has not been decreased but is rising and pressure for
higher debt limit has not been removed. The reasons for some of this great
increase have been indicated in the prior tables.
Annual data including those shown in table 13 for the period from 1916 to
1951 are given in data sheet 3 and are shown graphically on chart 5. The strik-
ing comparison between the increases of Federal taxation and of State and
local taxation and of both in comparison with the increase of population justi-
fies some comment on the difference. Obviously State and local taxation by
1951 had increased 173 percent since 1929 while population has increased but
54 percent.
Federal taxation in the same time has increased 1,278 percent or nearly 13
times with no decrease in Federal debt and strong prospects of further increase.
The prstwar trend merely continues that established before World War II,
although it is of course higher than it would have been had the war not occurred.
On the other hand tables 9 and 10 and charts 1, 2 and 3 indicate conclusively
that civilian employees in Government show an increasing trend, particularly in
the Federal Government since the early thirties. This measure is quite inde-
pendent of continuing financial increases due to costs introduced by war.
It seems natural to assume that real "welfare" needs should be most apparent
in the localities where they exist and that State and local taxes would show
a responsive trend. The fact that such "on-the-spot" trends are but a fraction
of the Federal trends may indicate the correctness of the early statement that
the revolution "could only be achieved through carefully coordinated effort
by a relatively small group centered at policy making levels," a group possibly
composed of "politicians, college professors and lawyers" as quoted in the first
paragraph. The comparison also warrants the inference that local control
of spending and taxes is more effective than remote control which impairs both
knowledge and understanding.
Taxes as a percentage of national income : It will be of informative value
to show the trend of taxes as a percentage of national income which provides
the fund out of which taxes must be paid. The following table for the years
shown will indicate such percentage and the trend.
636
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Table 14. — National income versus total Federal, State, and local taxes in
Mllions by calendar years
National
income
Total taxes
Taxes as
percent of
income
J929
$87.4
75.0
81.3
182.7
223.5
216.3
250.6
278.4
$10. 30
9.77
16.95
52. 52
58.10
54.93
67.75
84.56
11.8
1930 .
13
1940
20 9
1945
28 7
1948
26
1949....
25 4
1950
28 2
1951
30 4
Taxes as a percent of national income increased from 11.8 in 1929 to 30.4 in
1951. In other words, the tax bite took 18.6 cents or 158 percent more out of
the income dollar in 1951 than it did in 1929, a prosperous though shaky year.
This is another illustration of the effect on private income caused by the ex-
panding activities of Government.
Government debt and national income : It might be expected that the increas-
ing percentage of national income that is taken in taxes would result in some
reduction of the national debt. It is now 8% years since the close of World
War II. Taxes have been increasing but so has the debt which is now push-
ing through its legal ceiling. The difficulty in visualizing the relationships
between debt, income, and population when all are changing makes it advis-
able to express income and debt in terms of the population. This has been done
in the following table wherein both are expressed in terms of the family as
a unit because it has more personal significance than a per capita basis.
Table 15. — National income and national deot per family
National
income
(billions)
Number
families
(millions)
National
income per
family
Federal
debt per
family
1929
$87. 4
75.0
81.3
182.7
223.5
216.3
240.6
278.4
291.6
306.0
29.40
29.90
34.95
37. 50
40.72
42.11
43.47
44.56
45. 46
47.50
$2, 972
2,510
2,325
4,870
5,490
5,140
5, 530
6,250
6,415
6,440
1576
1930
542
1940
1,230
1945
6,900
1948-.- _
6,200
1949..
6,000
1950
6,930
1951 ___ _
5,750
1952
5,700
10S3'
5,eoo
» Estimated.
National income per family increased 250 percent in current dollars while
the Federal debt per family increased 855 percent.
The foregoing data in decennial terms from 1900 to 1930 and in annual terms
from 1929 to 1953 are shown on data sheet 6 and income and debt per family
on chart 7.
The amount of debt overhanging a nation has a tremendous influence on that
nation's solvency and therefore its stability under impact caused either by eco-
nomic depression or additional forced expenditures to relieve depression or to
prosecute another war. It has been stated many times that we as a Nation were
in a vulnerable debt or credit condition when the collapse began in 1929. It will
therefore be interesting to compare the conditions of 1929 with those of the
present and of the time intervening.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
637
Again, the comparisons will be upon a per-family basis and will show the
changes in total private debt including corporate debt and total public debt
compared with national income per family. The data follow in the next table :
Table 16. — Comparative debt and income per family
Private
debt
Total public
and private
debt
National
income
per family
1929
1930.
1940.
1945.
1948.
1949.
1950.
1951.
$5,600
5,380
3,700
3,755
4,975
4,985
5,670
6,230
$6, 500
6,400
5,460
10, 860
10.690
10,600
11, 180
11,650
$2, 972
2,510
2,325
4,870
5,490
5,140
5,530
6,350
While the total debt per family has nearly doubled, national income has some-
what more than kept pace with it. The disturbing factor from the standpoint
of Federal financial stability is the fact that in the interval from 1929 to 1951,
the Federal proportion of the total debt has increased from l, r > to 40.5 percent.
The foregoing data in annual terms from 1929 to 1951 are given in data sheet
7 while the trends of private debt and total debt are shown on chart 8.
Gross national product : It is contended by some that internal Federal debt is
of little importance and that no attempt should be made to place a ceiling upon
it. Rather is it argued that an increase in public debt will be a needed stimulant
to keep national production in step with our expanding population. It has also
been argued as a part of this philosophy that the only safeguarding thing to
watch is the ratio between national debt and gross national product and that
the ratio now existing will provide a safe guide in such control. It will be of
value to examine these factors in the light of these claims.
Gross national product may be defined as the total value of all goods and
services produced in a period of time and usually valued in terms of current
prices. It does not include allowances for capital consumption such as depletion,
depreciation, and certain other adjustments. Efforts have been made to compute
the value of gross national product at intervals over many years past. Gross
national product has been tabulated for each year since 1929. The comparative
data on gross national product and national debt are shown in table 17.
Table 17. — Gross national product and national debt values in billions
Gross na-
tional prod-
uct at cur-
rent prices
Federal debt
Gross na-
tional prod-
uct at 1929
prices i
1929.
$103. 8
90.9
101.4
215.2
259.
258.2
286. 8
329.8
348.0
' 366.
$16.9
16.2
48.5
2S9. 1
252.4
252.8
257.4
255. 3
259.2
266.1
$103. S
93 4
1930
1940
124. 0>
205.
184.6
186.tr
205.2
217.0'
223.5
234.0
1945 __
1948
1949
1950 -
1951
1952
1953
1 Consumer's prices.
' Estimated.
638
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
At current prices, gross national product increased 252 percent between 1929
and 1953 but at constant prices the increase was 125 percent. In the same
interval Federal debt increased 1475 percent in current prices. It is this in-
crease in Federal debt which in this recent philosophy is of no practical sig-
nificance. The measure of control under this theory is the ratio between debt
and gross national product.
Data in the foregoing table are shown from 1900 to date in data sheet 8 —
trend values only for 1900 to 1920. This information is shown in chart form
on Chart 9. The dotted line shows what gross national product would have
been at constant prices, in this case at consumers' prices of 1929, a year of high-
level production. The lightly shaded area between the adjusted and unad-
justed values after 1943 shows the inflationary spread due to postwar rising
prices or in other words to the increased cost of living. A still greater area
of inflation must be expected if the dollar is weakened by increasing Federal
expenditures and debt.
Ratio of Federal debt to gross national product : Since, as has been previously
^mentioned, the ratio between Federal debt and gross national product has been
suggested as an effective measure of control in the prevention of excessive debt,
it will be well to observe the values of this ratio for a period of time embracing
widely varying conditions in our national economy.
It will also be informative to show the effect of these policies of great Federal
-expenditure and high taxes on citizens' personal income after taxes as it relates
to gross national product. This latter division of income is known as dispos-
able personal income and together with its ratio to gross national product is
rShown in the following table :
Table 18. — Gross national product, Federal debt and disposable personal income
[Values In billions of current dollars]
National
product
Federal
debt
Disposable
personal
income
Percent
Federal
debt, gross
natioral
product
Percent
disposable
personal
incorne,
gross .
national
product
1929 - --
$103 8
90.9
101.4
215 2
259. C
258.2
286 8
329.8
348
366.0
$16 9
16 2
48 5
259 1
252 4
252 8
257.4
255 3
259. 2
266.1
$82.5
73 7
75.7
151.1
188.4
187.2
205.8
225.0
235.0
250.0
16 3
17.8
47.8
120 5
97.5
97. 9
89 8
' 77.5
74.5
72.7
79.4
1930 - - ---
81.0
1940 . ___ --- ---
74.7
1945 _ _
70.2
1948 -
72.7
1949
72.5
1950 --- --
76.7
1951 -
68.2
1952
67.5
1953 1 ... ...
68.3
« Estimated.
It is apparent from the data that Federal debt increased from 16 percent
of gross national product in 1929 to 73 percent in 1953. In the same period
the citizens' share of their own income available for their own purposes de-
clined from 79 to 68 percent of gross national product. This declining per-
centage of gross national product left to the consumer himself will be par-
ticularly noticeable when business volume declines to a more nearly normal
level. This sacrifice has been made without any reduction in the total debt
level. This is due largely to the Federal Government's increasing participation
in what might be termed extracurricular activities based upon the conception
of government defined in the Constitution and previously followed during our
unprecedented rise in economic status.
The data in table 18 are shown in extended form since 1900 in data sheet 9
and on chart 10. The chart clearly indicates the tremendous change that has
occurred in this ratio between Federal debt and gross national product. From
1900 to 1916 there was a steady decline in the ratio which averaged only 4.4
percent for the period. This means that the citizen was realizing a larger and
larger percentage of his earnings for his own needs and desires.
The effect of debt arising in World War I is apparent in the increased ratio,
but following the peak in 1921 there was a gradual decline to 16.3 percent in
1929 when the upward climb began again. Beginning in 1948, 3 years after the
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
639
end of World War II and 2 years before theKorean war, the Federal debt again
began to climb.
The decline in ratio since 1948 is caused entirely by the abnormally high output
of economic goods in terms of both volume and price and not by a decline in the
debt level. This distinction is important. Gross national product is the arith-
metical product of price multiplied by physical volume. Physical volume lately
has been abnormally high because extensive military rearmament has been
underway since World War II, not only for ourselves but for other nations.
Physical volume was also increased by certain relief measures and military
aid for other countries and production to meet domestic demand deferred by
World War II. In addition, prices have risen 49 percent since 1945. The point
to be emphasized is that the physical volume of output for the period since 1940
has been abnormally high due to production for war and its waste and for demand
deferred from wartime. Without" another war we cannot hope to maintain this
physical output regardless of what happens to prices and it should not be con-
sidered a function of Government to try it.
Disposable personal income : The citizen's reduced share of his own personal
income as a percentage of the goods and services he creates is also portrayed
on chart 10. The declining trend shown in table 18 is clearly denned on the
chart. The trend was even more sharply downward prior to 1943 when wartime
output Increased greatly and to be continued, as previously mentioned, by renewed
abnormal production for military purposes and deferred civilian demand.
The larger the share of production and its value absorbed by Government,
the less the citizen has for his own choice of expenditures. The following data
are taken from the Economic Report of the President for 1954.
Table 19. — Percentage of gross national product, personal versus governmental
purchases
Year
Personal
consumption
expenditure
Total Gov-
ernment
purchases
1930 „
Percent
78.0
71.0
68.7
69.9
67.9
63.1
62.7
62.6
Percent
10.1
1947 ,
12.3
1948 -
14.1
1949 _ ___
16.9
1950
14.6
1951
19.1
1952 „, — -
22.3
1953 1 _ _
22.7
i Estimates.
Here indeed in the declining share of his own output that is allotted to him
is one result of the revolution at work.
■ • The extraordinary expenditures of Government beginning in the early thirties
are continuing with increasing volume.
Changes in post war policies: Changes in governmental policy with respect
to expanding participation in and control of our economic activities has been
repeatedly emphasized in this study. Further light on these policies and their
effect may be shown by reference to the long-term history of prices in this
country. On chart 11, the trend of wholesale commodity prices a in terms of
1910-14 as 100 percent are charted. Two outstanding features of this long-term
trend are obvious at once :
1. The great price peaks that occur as a result of war.
2. Even in annual terms there is no such thing as price stability or normal
prices.
A glance at the chart and consideration of the continuous change in the
price level should suggest the impossibility of price stabilization by the Gov-
ernment. Complete regulation of all things economic within the country and
complete insulation from all influences from without would be essential.
Manifestly this is impossible. The payment of subsidy, as in agriculture, is to
admit the impossibility of price control and to continue subsidy is to encourage
excess production and high governmental expenditure with its evil results.
'Data for 1800-1933 from Gold and Prices by Warren and Pearson,
date derived from Statistics by TJ. S. Department of Labor.
Data for 1984 te
640 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Without war the great price peaks with their resultant periods of chaos would
not occur. With war, they may be temporarily distorted or deferred but the
effects of abnormal war conditions cannot be permanently averted. One of the
unavoidable features of war is that the cost must be paid in full in one way or
another. There is no relief from this.
The great price recessions following the War of 1812, the Civil War, and World
War I are typical of those which have occurred throughout history in other
countries after major wars. It has now been over 8 years since hostilities
ceased in World War II. Within 8 years following the close of hostilities in
the prior wars mentioned, price declines from the peak values were as follows :
Table 20. — Price declines 8 years after war
Percent
War of 1812 42
Civil War 33
World War I 3o
World War II 3 - 7
The depreciation of the dollar in terms of gold in 1934 would prevent an
ultimate decline of prices to the low levels following earlier wars. The closer
price control in effect during World War II retarded the price increase and the
advent of the Korean war has helped to sustain if not to increase the latest price
peak. .
Present policy seems to be to prevent any such decline as we have sustained
after past wars. Painful and disturbing as they were, these past declines at
least resulted in paying much of the cost of the war in money of approximately
the same value as that which was borrowed for its prosecution, and that except
for the duration of the price peaks, those who depended upon fixed income for
their living expenses were not permanently deprived of much of their pur-
chasing power.
The new economic and debt policies seem to be designed in an effort to main-
tain productive activity and prices at or near the present plateau. The deluge
of complaints that flow forth when a small decline from the recent peak occurs
seems to indicate an unwillingness and lack of courage to face the responsibili-
ties for our actions. This tendency is not limited to any one class or group in
our citizenry. This softening of character is probably to be expected as a result
of the protective and paternalistic atitude and activities assumed by Govern-
ment in recent years. This may be due largely to an increased emphasis on
expediency rather than to a lessening of integrity, or it may be due to both. Be
that as it may, the continuation of the new philosophy will mean the retention
of high-debt levels, high governmental expenses, and a high cost of living. It
is important not only to balance the Federal budget but to balance it at a lower
level of cost. There is no margin of safety in the advent of a serious depression
or of a new war.
This is a most important point from the standpoint of public interest. In the
event of a depression, Government income will drop far more rapidly than the
volume of business declines. Government expenses will not decline but will
increase greatly if they "remain a significant sustaining factor in the economy"
as stated in the President's Economic Report. This means additional deficit
financing of large magnitude and therefore increasing public debt to unman-
ageable proportions.
The possibility of this coming to pass is indicated by the National Resources
Planning Board in a pamphlet of its issue under the title, "Full Employment
Security — Building America," The Board asks:
1. What policies should determine the proportion of required Government
outlay which should be met by taxation and by borrowing?
2. What special methods of financing, such as non-interest-bearing notes, might
be used?
What are the non-interest-bearing notes to which reference is made? This-
is merely a euphonious term for paper money, a product of the printing press.
But this paper money is also a debt of the nation. The various denominations
of paper money are non-interest-bearing demand notes, payable by the Govern-
ment to the holders on demand by them. The phraseology on the notes indicates
this and the Supreme Court has so held :
In the case of Banh v. Supervisors (7 Wall., 31), Chief Justice Chase says:
"But on the other hand it is equally clear that these notes are obligations of
the United States. Their name imports obligations. Every one of them expresses
upon its face an engagement of the Nation to pay the bearer a certain sum. The
dollar note is an engagement to pay a dollar, and the dollar intended is the
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 641
coined dollar of the United States, a certain quantity in weight and fineness of
gold or silver, authenticated as such by the stamp of the Government. No other
dollars had before been recognized by the legislation of the National Govern-
ment as lawful money."
And in 12 Wallace, 560, Justice Bradley says :
"No one supposes that these Government certificates are never to be paid;
that the day of specie payments is never to return. And it matters not in what
form they are issues Through whatever changes they pass, their ultimate
destiny is to be paid."
In commenting upon these decisions Senator John Sherman said in the Senate
of the United States :
"Thus then, it is settled that this note is not a dollar but a debt due."
Aside from the fact that paper money outstanding is strictly speaking a debt
of the Nation, the importance of the non-interest-bearing note question raised by
the National Resources Planning Board lies in the threat of greatly increased
supply of paper money. The effect of such action if taken will be a renewed
stimulation of drastic inflation with all its evil results.
Based upon the most reliable data available s our margin of national solvency
is rather small. According to these figures the total debt of all forms, public
and private, in the United States was 86.5 percent of the total wealth, public
and private, in the country in 1944. Since 1944, prices have risen due to inflation,
generally from 40 to 50 percent.
In terms of current prices, this raises the value of national wealth. For this
reason and because the total debt of the country, public and private, increased
only about one-third as much as prices, the ratio of debt to wealth as of 1948|
had dropped to 63 percent. While later data are not available, the comparative
increases in prices and debt by the end of 1951 lead to the conclusion that this
ratio of debt to wealth may be somewhat higher at the present time. In 1929,
the debt-wealth ratio was 51 percent. In the interval from 1929 to 1948 the
ratio of Federal debt to national income (from which debt is paid) increased
from 4 to 32 percent. The influence of public debt on the integrity of money
values is far greater than the influence of private debt can possibly be.
If income goes down and debt goes up there will be a double adverse leverage
on the debt situation as measured by the ability to pay. If increased Federal
expenditures fail to work in stemming the depression, the situation will be loaded
with inflationary dynamite to the permanent detriment of all of us. The present
high level of prices is quite a springboard from which to take off.
Industrial production in the United States: Industrial activity is of over-
whelming importance in the economic life of the Nation. On chart 12 is shown
in graphic form a measure of this activity year by year since 1900. The smooth
line marked "calculated normal trend" was computed from two long series of
data and is based on the period from 1898 through 1940. The rising trend is
based on the increase in population from 1900 through 1953 and the annual rise
in productivity due to increased efficiency from 1898 to 1941. With this trend as
a starting point, the data made available monthly by the Cleveland Trust Co.
were used to compute the total production as shown. The Cleveland Trust Co.
is in no way responsible for the index values of total production as shown on the
chart. The dotted line shows the corresponding index as published by the Federal
Reserve Board.
Except for the war years, the agreement between these two series is close.
The disagreement during the war period is possibly due to the inclusion by the
Federal Reserve Board of certain labor-hour data in computing physical output —
a method not followed by the Cleveland Trust Co.
The long-sustained upward progression in our productivity is a testimonial to
the industry and technical ability of our people. The increasing output in terms
of both efficiency and volume is the only source of our high and continued rise
in standard of living. It shows no abatement. The temporary interruptions we
call depressions are deviations from trends and are to be expected until we rec-
ognize their causes and if possible counteract them.
The significant part of the long-term trend at this time is from 1940 to date.
Since 1940, industrial output has been accelerated far beyond normal peacetime
requirements by the wasteful consumption and demand created by war. This
was followed by a resurgence of civilian demand composed of new and deferred
replacement needs. Before this was satisfied new military preparations were
resumed and the Korean war began.
s See vol. 14 of Studies in Income and Wealth by National Bureau of Economic Research,
1951.
642 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Only with the stoppage of hostilities in that area has demand begun to slacken
although it is still fortified by continued production of munitions for war, some
of which we still supply to other countries. This sustained abnormal production
is evident on chart 12. Some of the more optimistic interpretations of these
characteristics are inclined to consider that we have embarked upon a new and
steeper trend to be traced from the beginning of recovery in the thirties to the
present time.
Obviously, the assumption that this is a normal trend discounts completely
the abnormally low starting point at the bottom of the depression and the
causes for the sustained bulge previously mentioned. It also assumes an increase
in productive efficiency that is not warranted by the facts. For years, the annual
increase due to improving productivity has been approximately 3 percent.
An increase to 3.5 percent would mean an overall improvement of 17 percent
in productivity accomplished almost overnight. During the wartime portion of
this period great numbers of unskilled employees were engaged in productive
work and many overtime hours were also utilized. Both of these factors reduce
output per employee hour. Furthermore, the increasing practice of sharing the
work and of limitations of output by labor unions have tended to offset what
would otherwise mean further gains in productivity.
The reason for the discussion of this point is the emphasis placed on the con-
clusion that the level of output since 1940 is abnormal unless we assume that
war and preparation for war are normal and that the great deferred demand
for housing, clothing, automobiles, and other articles was nonexistent.
For the Government to attempt to offset a return to normal peacetime levels
of output is to force a return to deficit financing on such a scale as to endanger
seriously the present value of the dollar. Then would follow further increases
in the cost of living and to the extent that it would occur, a further repudiation
of public debt.
Conclusions: The 20-year record of expanding Federal expenditures for hous-
ing, slum clearance, public works, nutrition, public health, social security, edu-
cation, and agricultural support clearly outlines the course of Federal procedure.
The great and increasing expenditures for the purposes just listed have been
made not in a period of declining output or depression, but simultaneously with
and in further stimulation of the greatest output in our history. This undue
and unwise stimulation, when output was already high, will make a return to
normal conditions additionally hard to bear or to prevent if Federal expenditure
is used for this purpose. The designation of "welfare state" seems to be well
earned under the developments of recent years. Perhaps the philosophy behind
it might be summarized in a remark made by Justice William O. Douglas in a
speech made in Los Angeles in February 1949.
The sound direction of the countermovement to communism in the democ-
racies — is the creation of the human welfare state — the great political inven-
tion of the 20th century."
Of course, this is not an invention of the 20th century. It was, for example,
practiced by ancient Greece and Rome to their great disadvantage.
It would seem to be countering communism by surrendering to it, wherein
the state assumes the ascendancy over the individual and the responsibility for
his personal welfare and security. It would seem more courageous and forth-
right for the Government to cease the cultivation of clamoring minorities, for
those minorities to stop demanding special favor in their behalf and for the
Nation as a whole to maintain its integrity by its willingness to pay the cost
of its deeds and misdeeds. Public interest many times requires the suppression
of self-interest and under our Constitution requires the maintenance of the
Nation intact for posterity.
Early in this study, there were listed the five channels of increased Federal
expenditure which the proponents of the welfare activities of Government sug-
gested. In tables 1 to 8 are listed the growing expenditures of the Government
under these classifications. The viewpoint that these activities are not in
accordance with our constitutional provisions is supported in principle by the
following opinions of the Supreme Court Justices quoted :
"There can be no lawful tax which is not laid for a public purpose." (Justice
Miller, 20 Wallace 655 ; 1874) ; and again :
"Tax — as used in the Constitution, signifies an exaction for the support of the
Government. The word has never been thought to connote expropriation of
money from one group for the benefit of another." ( Justice Roberts, United
States v. Butler (297 US ; 1936) .)
It is the departure from these long-standing principles that in a large measure
Is the "revolution" which its proponents are announcing and endorsing.
^TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 643
Power travels with money. It is not feasible for the Federal Government
to assume the responsibility for collecting or printing money and for doling
it out to State and local governments and their citizens without imposing the
conditions upon which it will be spent. Thus by indirection Federal power will
grow and insidiously penetrate the areas reserved by the Constitution to the
States and their citizens.
Former Supreme Court Justice and Secretary of State James F. Byrnes, now
Gbvernor of South Carolina has said :
We are going down the road to statism. Where we will wind up no one can
tell, but if some of the new programs should be adopted, there is danger that
the individual— whether farmer, worker, manufacturer, lawyer or doctor — will
soon be an economic slave pulling an oar in the galley of the state.
The increasing confiscation of income through the power to tax, confirms the
thought expressed by Mr. Byrnes. We are on the road and it runs downhill.
The evidence is strong.
Abraham Lincoln once expressed his convictions on this relationship in the
following words :
"The maintenance inviolate of the rights of the states, and especially the right
of each state to order and control its own domestic institutions, according to its
own judgment exclusively, is essential to the balance of powers on which the
perfection and endurance of our political fabric depend."
The conviction persists that the increasing welfare activities in which the
Federal Government has been engaged for 20 years can only come to some such
end as previously suggested if they are continued. It also seems certain that
heavy Federal expenditures to counteract a depression will prove ineffective.
Those important industries whose decline leads us into a depression are the ones
whose expansion should take us out of it.
An increase in road building will not put idle automobile mechanics back to
work, nor will a rash of public building construction or alleviation of mortgage
terms send unemployed textile workers back to their spindles and looms. Pro-
posed governmental measures will not be successful because they do not strike at
the causes of the trouble they seek to cure. After all, these same things were
tried in the long depression of the thirties without success. Pump priming did
not pay.
There is no thought or conclusion to be derived from this study that Govern-
ment has no responsibility in meeting the extraordinary conditions imposed by
crises due to financial or other causes. In the "arsenal of weapons" as men-
tioned in the Economic Report of the President are certain responsibilities and
procedures available for use as the need may develop. Undoubtedly, the most
important of these, implicit even if not specifically mentioned, is the maintenance
of the integrity and value of our money and of our credit system. The ventures
into "revolutionary" and socialistic fields of expenditure and especially in ex-
panding volume to stem a depression will be hazardous to and in conflict with
this major responsibility.
These two conceptions are completely antagonistic especially because our tax
and debt levels are so high as to leave little or no margin of financial safety. Our
recurring "crises" have been utilized in accelerating the progress of the "revolu-
tion" which we are undergoing. A further depreciation of our currency value
would provide opportunity for additional acceleration in the same direction.
In The New Philosophy of Public Debt, Mr. Harold G. Moulton, president
of the Brookings Institution, says :
"The preservation of fiscal stability is indispensable to the maintenance of
monetary stability * * *. It is indispensable to the prevention of inflation with
its distorting effects on the price and' wage structure, and thus to the mainte-
nance of social and political stability."
As someone has said, "What the government gives away, it takes away," and
this is true even if it comes from the printing presses.
Perhaps this study can be closed in no better manner than to quote from a
statement * by Mr. Dwlght D. Eisenhower while president of Columbia University :
"I firmly believe that the army of persons who urge greater and greater cen-
tralization of authority and greater and greater dependence upon the Federal
Treasury are really more dangerous to our form of government than any external
threat that can possibly be arrayed against lis."
* Dwlght D. Eisenhower, in letter to Ralph W. Gwinn, dated Columbia University, New
York, June 7, 1949, in opposition to a general Federal-aid-to-education program. (Con-
gressional Record, 81st Cong., 1st sess., vol. 95, p. 14, p. A3090.)
644
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Chart 1.
Chart 2.
Chart 3.
Chart 4.
Chart 5.
Chart 6.
Chart 7.
family
Chart 8.
Chart 9.
Chart 10
Chart 11.
Chart 12.
Index of Chaets
Government civilian employees per 1,000 United States population.
Index of Government civilian employees.
Total civilian employees of Government— Federal, State, and local.
Federal receipts and expenditures per capita.
Population compared with Federal, State, and local tax receipts.
Federal, State, and local taxes — cents per dollar of national income.
United States Federal debt per family versus national income per
Total debt per family versus private debt per family.
Gross national product versus gross national debt.
. Gross national debt and disposable personal income.
United States wholesale commodity prices in currency.
Industrial production in the United States.
Data Sheet 1, Chart 1
Government civilian employees
1901..
1902..
1903..
1904..
1905..
1906..
1907..
1908..
1909..
1910..
1911..
1912_.
1913..
1914..
1915..
1916..
1917..
1918..
1919..
1920-
1921..
1922..
1923..
1924..
1925..
1926..
1927..
1928..
1929..
1930..
1931..
1932..
1933..
1934..
1935..
1936..
1937..
1938..
1939..
1940..
1941..
1942. _
1943..
1944..
1945...
1946...
1947...
1948...
1949...
1950...
1951...
1952...
1953...
Federal
employees
per 1,000
population
8.3
3.7
4.2
4.1
4.1
4.0
4.6
4.6
4.3
8.8
6.5
5.5
5.1
4.9
4.9
4.9
4.8
4.7
4.8
4.9
5.0
5.0
6.0
5.0
5.7
6.4
7.0
7,0
6.9
7.4
8.2
10.8
16.6
23.2
24.2
25.5
19.1
15.0
14.1
14.1
13.8
16.0
16.6
16.2
State and
local
employees
per 1,000
population
Total Gov-
ernment
employees
per 1,000
population
Federal
20.8
21.3
21.8
21.4
20.6
20.9
21.4
23.3
22.7
23.5
23.6
24.3
24.9
24.3
23.2
22.6
22.4
23.7
25.0
25.8
26.5
27.1
26.7
26.9
27.2
25.7
26.3
26.8
26.4
25.6
26.6
27.8
30.0
29.7
30.4
31.0
32.5
35.7
40.9
46.4
46.8
46.8
42.8
40.0
39.9
40.6
40.9
42.7
43.5
43.4
State and
local
100.0
102.0
102.0
102.0
102.0
116.4
130.6
142.9
142.9
141.0
151.0
167.5
220.5
339.0
473.5
494.0
520.0
390.0
306.2
288.0
288.0
281.8
326.5
339.0
330.8
Total
100.0
100.0
102.4
102.3
104.8
104.2
102.8
102.7
99.1
99.4
100.5
103.5
102.8
108.1
112.0
116.6
109.1
115.5
112.9
117.5
113.4
120.6
116.8
126.5
119.6
138.9
116.8
159.1
111.5
180.5
108.6
182.0
107.6
182.0
113.9
166.5
120.1
155.6
124.0
155.2
127.4
158.0
130.2
159.1
128.3
165.2
129.3
169.2
130.7
168.8
Note— Indexes, 1929=100. Not charted.
Source: Data on governmental employment from Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1953
employment, table 404, p. 379, State and local employment, table 424, p. 393.
Federal
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
645
646
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Data Sheet 2, Chakt 2 and Chart 3
Government civilian employees compared with other civilian employees
la millions
Government
employees
per 100 other
employees
Total civilian
labor force
Total civilian
Government
employees
Labor force
other than
Government
Percent of
1929
1929
49.2
49.8
50.4
51.0
51.6
52.2
52.9
53.4
54.0
54.6
55.2
55.6
55.9
56.4
55.5
54.6
53.9
57.5
60.2
61.4
62.1
63.1
62.9
63.0
63.4
3.7
3.1
3.3
3.2
3.2
3.3
3.5
3.7
3.7
3.9
4.0
4.2
4.6
5.4
CO
6.0
6.0
5.6
5.5
5.6
5.8
6.0
6.4
6.6
6.7
46.1
46.7
47.1
47.8
48.4
48.9
49.4
49.7
50.3
50.7
51.2
51.4
51.3
51.0
49.5
48.6
47.9
51.9
54.7
55.8
56.3
57.1
56.5
56.4
56.7
6.7
6.7
6.9
6.3
6.5
6.7
7.0
7.4
7.5
7.6
7.8
8.2
9.0
10.6
12.2
12.4
12.5
10.8
10.0
10.1
10.4
10.5
11.3
11.8
11.8
100.0
1930
100.0
1931
103.0
1932
94.0
1933
97.0
1934 _
100.0
1935
104.5
1936
110.4
1937 -.
111.9
1938
113.4
1939 .-
116.4
1940 - -
122.4
1941
134. 3
1942
158.1
1943
182.0
1944
185.0
1945 -
186.5
1946
176.0
1947 —
149.2
1948
150.7
1949
155.2
1950
156.6
1951
168.6
1952
176.0
1953
176.0
Source: Total civilian and Government civilian employees from Economic Report of the President, 1954.
Total civilian labor force, table G16, p. 184. Total Government civilian labor force, table G21, p. 189.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
647
» « M
-4Z -H
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
649
:||
TTT 'TTTT
gg±
P'i
|H:
nfH'ftfa
TnTT[
ggp
tpfer
Ull
S:|||
Hm
: i
3*t
1
lip
m
! Sl
:p
iftg|
ffl : J
iBpi
WH] j 1
tjrllgttrew
; liPffifnfSwT
4
HE::
frmnFT
fff V
+4
EsBs
it iri±
HU
-JPI'-'
SiMjil
1111
ffi
hllfjlif
1m mi
t 1 »il 1 likil IKWrt 1 iii Ifrttltttffl^ifc
ffiffl
MziMi
:ffi:
w4twf
TltiRTinTtr
tH"TtttH 1 ' rn 1 U Rl t|1
ijipmmMM^
= B
il
|ff|puiilll||li
;&
TtnTr'niTnTl
iee:
H
stt .Ui J-t-pJ- »fjfU{ I ■{ ffF i
-ffl
k m
m fffl
1C- &f
e. g
fff-fpjfipEp^
l^ffljfjjt
IS
U! is
fl3ffl
'J|||[i|||i:}j'.4 J
:T t-H-j-[_i || r [jTj^1 H~1~Hr1 1
'- ^^-fflf^Plijl t-\ H Bjjf^
hi SB
^rftTitlitfli'lff
T — ■■ |||||^|)|^TlMj-ffl2^r
I
flffi
t &y
a lL §
ft- IS
*ali
w H
■*7|
ttittiiUmifflm
1
fffl
<3&§§
* M
|M||mK|
0^1
^1
iplll
[iPlllllllllllj
»wp
rmfnnfffmfff
1 11
|[il
l&M
"'o
3K
*
f >-
',&
^5
-to
At.
-M
tc
-<«
3
vT3
&a
?
ISO
tBO
170
I 60
150
MO
130
(*
I
I log
0.
tOO
9<s
SO
10
60
So
4o
30
3.0
10
650
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Data Sheet 3, Chart 4
Ordinary receipts and expenditures
Year
Population
Total Federal
revenue
Total Federal
expenditures
Total Federal
revenue per
capita
Total Federal
expenditures
per capita
1900 _
Millions
76.0
77.4
79.2
. 80.7
82.3
84.0
• 85. 5
87.2
88.8
90.3
92.0
93.4
95.0
96.5
98.1
90.6
101.2
102.8
104. 3
10,-). 8
107.2
108.8
110.4
111.9
113.5
115.0
116.6
118.2
119.8
121.6
123.1
124.0
124.8
125.6
126.4
127.3
128.1
128.8
129.8
130.9
131.8
133.2
134.7
136.5
138.1
139.6
141.2
143.4
146.6
149.1
151.1
154.4
157.0
159.7
Billions
$0. 567
.588
.562
.562
.541
. 544
.595
.666
.602
.604
.676
.702
.693
.724
.735
.698
.783
1.124
4.180
4.654
6.704
5. 584
4.103
3.847
3.884
3.607
3.908
4.128
4.038
4.036
4.178
3.176
1.924
2.021
3.064
3.730
4.068
4.979
5.762
5.103
5.265
7. 227
12.696
22.201
43. 892
44. 762
40. 027
40. 043
42. 211
38. 246
37.045
48.143
i 62. 129
65. 218
Billions
$0. 521
.525
.485
.517
.584
.567
.570
.579
' . 659
.694
.694
.691
.690
.725
.735
.761
.742
2.086
13. 792
18.9o2
6.142
4.469
3.196
3.245
2.946
2.464
3.030
3.002
3.071
3.322
3.440
3.577
4.659
4,623
6.694
6.521
8.493
7.756
6.938
8.966
9.183
13. 387
34. 187
79. 622
95. 315
98. 703
60. 703
39. 289
33. 791
40.057
40. 167
44.633
66. 145
74. 607
$7. 46
7.60
7.10
6.96
6.57
6.48
6.96
7.54
6.78
6.70
7.35
7.52
7.30
7.60
7.49
7.01
7.74
11.04
40.00
46.20
62.50
51. 35
37.20
34. 35
34.20
31.35
33.50
34.90
33.70
33.20
33.90
25.60
15.40
16.10
24.25
29.30
31.71
38.63
44.40
39.00
40.00
54. 30
94.30
162. 60
317. 70
320. 60
283.50
279. 00
288.00
256. 50
245. 00
311.80
396. 00
410. 00
$6.87
1901
6.79
1902
6.12
1903
6.45
1904
7.10
1905
6.75
1906
6.66
1907
6.64
.1908 -
7.42
1909
7.69
1910 - - -
7.54
1911 - ---
1912 -
7.40
7.27
1913
7.51
1914
7.50
1915 . _-_
7.64
1916
7.33
1917
19.88
1918
132. 10
1919 _
179. 20
1920 -
57.30
1921 --
41.00
1922 -
28.95
1923 -
29.00
25.95
21.40
1926
25.84
1927 ..-
25.39
1928 -
25.33
1929
27.30
1930
27.95
1931 .
28.81
1932
37.30
1933
36.80
1934
52.90
1935 _..
51.12
1936
66.30
1937
60.20
1938 --
53.40
1939
68.50
1940 -
69.60
1941
100. 40
1942
253. 80
1943
583.50
1944 . ...
690. 00
1945
706. 80
1946
430. 00
1947 _• __
274. 00
1948
231. 00
1949
268.20
1950 .
265. 00
1951 _
289.00
421.00
1953
466. 50
1930-35 Fjconomic Almanac (1953-54) of the N. I. C. B., p. 517.
1936-52 Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1953, p. 337.
Expenditure data 1900-29 Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1930, p. 172.
1930-35 Economic Almanac (1953-54) of the N. I. C. B.
1935-52 Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1953, p. 340.
Source: Revenue data 1900-29 Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1929 p. 172,
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
651
652
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Data Sheet 4, Chart 5
Population
Federal
taxes
State and
local taxes
1929=
= 100
State and
Year
Population
index
Federal tax
index
local tax
index
1916 --
Millions
101.2
102.8
104.3
105.8
107.2
108.8
110.4
111.9
113.5
115.0
116.6
118.2
119.8
121.6
123.1
124.0
124.8
125.6
126.4
127.3
128.1
128.8
129.8
130.9
131.8
133.2
134.7
136.5
138.1
139.6
141.2
143.4
146.6
149.1
151.1
154.4
157.0
159.7
Millions
$708
1,015
3,352
4,482
5,689
4,917
3,554
3,052
3,207
2,974
3,215
3,345
3,201
3,337
3,517
2,739
1,813
1,805
2, 910
3, 557
3,856
4,771
5,452
4,813
4,921
6,889
12, 964
21, 087
40, 339
40, 989
36, 285
35, 132
37, 636
35,590
34, 955
45, 984
59, 535
62, 656
Millions
$1, 935
1,923
2,309
2,923
3,476
3,895
4,015
4,202
4,619
4,918
5,398
5,722
6,148
6,431
6,798
6,583
6,358
5,715
5,881
6.185
6, 659
7,421
7,684
7,638
7,997
8,315
8,527
8,653
8,875
9,193
10, 094
11, 554
13, 342
14, 790
15, 914
17, 554
83.2
84.6
85.8
87.0
88.2
89.5
90.8
92.0
93.4
95.0
95.9
97.2
98.5
100.0
101.2
102.2
102.7
103.4
104.0
104.8
105.4
106.0
106.9
107.6
108.5
109.5
110.9
112.4
113.6
115.0
116.3
117.9
120.7
122.1
124.4
127.0
129. 1
131.3
21.2
30.8
100.5
134.5
170.6
147.5
106.6
91.4
96.1
89.1
96.4
100.3
96.0
100.0
105.4
82.0
54.3
54.1
87.2
106.6
115.5
143. 1
163.5
144.4
147.6
206.7
389.0
632.0
1, 210.
1,228.0
1,088.0
1,054.0
1, 129.
1,086.0
1,049.0
1, 378.
1, 785.
1, 878.
30.1
1917
29.9
1918 -
35.9
1919
45.5
1920
54.0
1921 -
60.6
1922
62.4
1923
65.4
1924 -
71.8
1925
76.5
1925
83.9
1927
89.0
192S
95.6
1929
100.0
1930
105.7
1931
102. 4
1932
98.8
1933
88,9
1934 --.
91.5
1935 „
96.2
1936 -
103. 6
1937
115.5
1938
119.6
1939 -- -
118.7
1940
124.4
1941
129.3
1942
132.6
1943
134.6
1944.
138.0
1945 ---
143.0
1946
157.0
1947
179.7
1948 --
207.5
1949
230.0
1950
247.5
1951 -
273.0
Source- Tax revenue data from p. 516, Economic Almanac 1953-54, National Industrial Conference
Board Excludes social security taxes except that portion used for administration of social security system
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
65a-
IS 20 ZX. Z4 Zi, ZB 3Q « 3q -36, JS to -tt *1 16 ■*& «*> J*.
654
TAX-EXEMPT- FOUNDATIONS
Data Sheet 5, Chart 6
National income and, tax receipts
Tax receipts,
calendar years—
National
income,
billions
Total,
billions
Total per-
cent of
income
Tax receipts,
calendar years—
National
income,
billions
Total,
billions
Total per-
cent of
income
1929
$87.4
75.0
58.9
41.7
39.6
48.6
56.8
64.7
73.6
67.4
72.5
81.3
$10. 30
9.77
8.54
8.00
8.54
9.68
10.59
12.14
14.57
14.20
14.58
16.95
11.8
13.0
14.5
17.0
21.6
19.9
18.7
18.8
19.8
21.1
20.1
20.9
1941
$103. 8
137.1
169.7
183.8
182.7
180.3
198.7
223.5
216.3
240.6
278.4
291.6
$24. 36
31.95
48.51
60.59
52.52
' 50.37
56. 39
58.10
54.93
67.75
84.56
23.5
1930 -
1942
1943
23.3
1931
23. 6
1932
1944
27.5
1933
1945
1946
28.7
1934
27.9
1935
1947
28.4
1935...
1948
1949
26.0
1937
25.4
1938
1950
28.2
1939 -
1951. ___:
30 4
1940
1952
Source: National income, table G-7, Economic Report of the President, 1954.
Tax receipts, Department of Commerce via Facts and Figures on Government Finance, 1952-53, by the
Tax Foundation. Table 90, p. 116.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
655
i$
i
i
1
M
f
8
i
S
fU! [■! 111 H IIIIIHHUUUH-
i
PZC
«
m
h. '""/HlliritHtisr
w
SuBfffl
PPfi
1 e
iffl
ffijffiftft
±§
1 ■! | III Jim [HI illi Hili HIillilitE
k
tKgjg
■ Ifjil? 3o li. 34 Cd -'6 •«> -H 14 "*4 °S ■!* ■fa. JSJ
656
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Data Sheet 6, Chart 7
1900.
1910.
1920.
1929.
1B30.
1931.
1932.
1933.
1934.
1935.
1936.
1937.
1938.
1939.
1940.
1941.
1942.
1943.
1944.
1945.
1946-
1947.
1948..
1949..
1950..
1951..
1952..
1953. .
National
income,
billions
$16.2
28.2
74.2
87.4
75.0
58.9
41.7
39.6
48.6
56.8
64.7
73.6
67.4
72.5
81.3
103.8
137.1
169.7
183.8
182.7
180.3
198.7
223. 5
216.3
240.6
278.4
291.6
'306.0
Number of
families,
millions
15.96
20. 20
24.35
29.40
29.90
31.24
31.67
32.16
32.56
33.09
33.55
31. 00
34. 52
35.60
34.95
35. 85
36. 45
36.88
37.10
37. 50
38.18
39.14
40.72
42.11
43.47
44.56
45. 46
47. 50
National
income per
family
$1, 015
1,392
3,045
2,972
2,510
1,885
1,317
1,232
1,493
1,718
1,928
2,164
1,952
2,035
2,325
2,895
3,760
4,600
4,950
4,870
3,725
5,007
5,490
5,140
5,530
6,250
6, 415
6,440
Federal
debt per
family
Difference,
income over
debt
$84
$931!
57
1,335-
1,000
2, 045-
576
1, 396:
542
1,968-
538
1,347
615
702'
702
530-
831
662
868
850-
l r 006
922"
1,072
1, 0S2
1,076
875
1, 135
flOO 1
1,230
1,095
1,365
1. £30'
1,990
1, 770'
3,710
890'
5, 420
-470'
6,900
-2, 030*
7,006
-3, 281
6.600
-1, 593-
6,200
-710
6,000
-860
5,930
-400
5,750
500'
5,700
715
5,600
840
i Estimated.
Source: Income data, 1900, 1910, 1920, estimated based on NBER data in "National Productivity Since
1929-52, the Economic Report of the President, 1954, table G-7.
Number of families based on United States census data.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
657
658
TAX-EXEMPT? .FOUNDATIONS
Data Sheet 7, Chart 8
Total
debt, pri-
vate and
public,
billions
Private
debt,
billions
Number of
families,
millions
Private
debt cer
family
Total
debt per
family
National
income per
family
1929
$191. 1
191.4
182.6
175.7
169.7
172.6
17S.9
181.4
183.3
180.8
184.5
190.8
212.6
260.7
314.3
371.6
407.3
398. 8
419.5
435.3
446.7
485.8
519.2
$161. 5
160.8
148.6
137.8
128.8
126.3
125.4
127.5
127.9
121.3
125. 5
129.6
140.4
143.2
145.0
145. 7
140.8
155.5
181.8
202.6
210.0
216.4
277.2
29.40
29.90
31.21
31.67
32.16
32.56
33.09
33.55
34.00
31.52
35. 60
34.95
35.85
36.45
3S.88
37.10
37.50
38.18
39.14
40.72
42.11
43.47
44.66
$5, 500
5,380
4,760
4,350
4,000
3,880
3,790
3,800
3,760
3,600
3,530
3,700
3,915
3,930
3,935
3,930
3,755
4,070
4,650
4,975
4,985
5,670
6,230
$6,500
6,400
5,850
5,550
5,280
5,300
5,320
5,400
5,390
5,210
5,180
5,460
5,930
7,150
8,530
10.020
10, 860
10, 450
10, 720
10,690
10, 600
11, 180
11,650
$2, 972
2,510
1,88&
1,317
1,232"
1, 493:
1, 718-
1,928-
2,164
1, 952'
2, 035
2,325-
2, 895
3,760>
4,600
4,950
4,870
3,725
5,007
5,490
5,140
5,530
6,250
1930
1931
1932 . , .
1933
1931
1935
1936
1937
1938
1939
19t0
1911
1912
1913
1914
1915
1916
1947
19l8
1919
1950
1951 . .
Source: Data on debt from Economic Almanac, National Industrial Conference Board, 1953-54, p. 122.
Data on income derived from table G7, President's Economic Report, 1954, and Census Bureau data on
families.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
659
I92s jo 32. ^n 3& aa 10. « « ^ i» J6 «
•660
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Data Sheet 8, Chaet 9
Gross
national
product,
billions
Federal
debt,
billions
Gross
national
product
at 1929
consumer
price,
billions
Gross
national
product,
billions
Federal
debt,
billions
Gross
national
product
at 1929
consumer
price,
billions
1900'
$16.9
18.1
19.2
20.5
21.6
23.0
24,5
26.0
27.5
28.8
31.1
33.4
35.7
38.0
40.1
47.0
53.9
60.6
67.5
74.2
85.6
67.7
68.4
80.4
80.9
95.0
91.1
$1.26
1.22
1.18
1.16
1.14
1.13
1.14
1.15
1.18
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.19
1.23
2.98
12.24
25.48
24.30
24.00
23.00
22. 35
21.25
20.52
19.64
1927...
89.6
91.3
103.8
90.9
75.9
58 3
55.8
64 9
72.2
82 5
90 2
84.7
91.3
101.4
126 4
161.6
194.3
213.7
215.2
211. 1
2'(3. 3
259.
258.2
286 8
329 8
348
366.0
$18. 51
17 60
16 90
16 20
16 80
19 50
22 50
27.70
32.80
38 50
41.10
42 00
45.90
48.50
55 30
77.00
140 80
202 60
259. 10
269. 90
258 40
252 40
252. 80
257. 40
255 30
259. 20
266. 10
$«8.6
91 2
19011
1928 ..
19021
1929... .....
103.8
19031
1930
93. 4
19041
19051
1931
1932 . . .
£5.6
73 2
19051
1936 .
74.0
19071
1934
1935 - .
83
19081
90 2
1909
1936...
10?.
19101
1937 .
107 8
1911 i
1938 . .
102 9
19121..
1939
1940 .. ..
112 5
19131
$65.7
68.4
79.4
84.7
81.0
76. 9
73.4
73.1
65.0
70.0
80.7
81.2
83.1
88.3
124
1914
1941
1942
147 3
19151 _,.
169. 8
1916 1
1943
162 5
1917 1
1944
208 1
19181
1945
205.0
1919 . ...
1946
185 5
1920
1947
179
1921
1948
184 6
1922
1949
186
1923. ..
1950
205. 2
1924
1951
217.0
1925
1952
223 5
1926.. -
19532
234.0
i Estimated from data shown for 1899, 1904, 1909, 1914, and 1919 as indicated below.
2 Estimate based in data for 9 months and subsequent production data.
Source: Gross national product 1900-28, national product since 1869— NBER, pp. 119, 151. Federal debt.
1900-28, Statistical Abstract of United States, 1930, p. 214. Federal debt, 1929-52, Economic Indicators
■Supplement 1953. Personal Disposable Income, 1929-50, National Income, 1951 edition, table 3, p. 151.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
661
&iiu-noa =*o suon-Mg
>662
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Data Sheet 9, Chaet 10
Percent
Federal
debt
G. N. P.
Dispos-
able per-
sonal
income,
billions
Percent
D. I, P.
G. N. P.
Percent
Federal
debt
G. N. P.
Dispos-
able per-
son 1
inccre,
billions
Percent
D. I. P.
G. N. P.
1900
7.46
6.74
6.14
5.66
5.27
4.92
4,66
4.42
4.29
4.00
3.70
3.46
3.33
3.13
2.97
2.53
2.28
4.92
18.1
34.3
28.4
35.4
33.6
27.8
26.3
24.2
21.5
1927
20.7
19.3
16 3
17.8
22.1
33.5
40.3
42.7
45.5
46.7
45.6
49.6
50.3
47.8
43.8
47.6
72.4
94.9
120.5
127.8
110.8
97.5
97.9
89.8
77.5
74.5
I 72.7
1901„
1928
$82.5
73.7
63.0
47.8
45.2
51:6
58
66.1
71.1
65. 5
70.2
75.7
92.0
116.7
132 4
147.0
151.1
158.9
169 5
188.4
187.2
205.8
225
235.0
i 250.
1902 *
1929 .-
74.9
1903..
1930
81.0
1904 — ...
1931
83.0
1905
1932
82.0
11906
1933
80.8
1907
1934
79.5
1908..^
1935 -
80.4
1909
1936
80.2
1910
1937
78.8
1911
1938
77.3
1912
1939 :.___
1940
76.8
1913
74.7
1914
1941
72.8
1915
1942—..
72.2
1916
1943..
68.2
1917
1944.
1945
68.8
1918
70 2
1919...
1946
1947
75 2
1920
72.7
1921
1948
72.7
1922
1949 ....
72.7
1923
1950
70.2
1924
1951
68.5
1925...
1952 .
67.3
1926
1953
»68. 5
i Estimate based on data lor 9 months and subsequent production data.
Source: Gross national product, 1900-28, national product since 1S09, NBFR, pp. 119, 151. Federal debt
1900-28. Statistical Abstract of United States, 1930, p. 214. Federal debt 1929-52, Economic Indicators Sup-
plement, 1953. Personal Disposable Income, 1929-50, National Income, 1951 edition, table 3, p. 151.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
663
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
665
•OOl- Vl-OtSI " 53«J-NlM3d
665a
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Data Sheet 10, Chart 12
Industrial production (physical volume)
1900.
1901.
1902.
1903.
1904.
1905.
1906,
1907.
1908.
1909.
1910.
1911.
1912.
1913.
1914.
1915.
1916.
1917.
1918.
1919.
1920.
1921.
1922.
1923.
1924.
1925.
1926.
Cleveland
Trust
index,
percent
of normal
103
103
103
101
96
108
110
106
86
102
101
94
104
105
95
100
114
112
107
100
102
76
93
112
100
107
108
Normal
trend,
1935-39=
100
32.7
34.2
35.7
37.2
38.8
40.4
42.1
43.8
45.6
47.3
49.2
51.0
52.9
54.8
56.8
58.8
61.0
63.2
65.4
67.5
69.4
72.2
74.4
77.0
79.4
82.0
84.4
Total
produc-
tion,'
1935-39=
100
33.7
35.2
33.8
37.6
37.2
43.6
46.3
46.5
39.2
48.3
49.7
47.9
55.0
57.6
54.0
58.8
69.5
70.8
70,0
67.5
70.8
54,8
69.2
86.2
79.4
87.8
91.2
New
series
F. R. B.
data,
1935-39=
100
72
76
57
72
hi
82
91
94
1927.
1928.
1929.
1930.
1931.
1932.
1933.
1934.
1935.
1936.
1937.
193S.
1939.
1940.
1941.
1942.
1943.
1944.
1945.
1946.
1947.
1918.
1949.
19.50.
1951.
1952.
1953 !
Cleveland
Trust
index,
percent
of normal
104
106
110
87
73
57
68
68
77
89
93
71
88
102
127
132
138
134
123
114
126
131
115
133
139
130
138
Normal
trend,
1935-39 =
100
87.2
90.0
92.8
95.6
98.3
100.5
102.8
105.1
107.6
110.0
112.5
116.4
117.9
120.6
123.8
127.4
131.0
134.5
138.5
141.8
146.0
151.9
155. 6
161.0
165.7
172.5
177.4
Total
produc-
tion,!
1935-39=
100
90.7
95.4
102.0
83.2
71.7
57.3
70.0
71.5
82.9
97.9
104.6
82.0
103.7
123.0
157.3
168.2
180.7
180.2
170.4
161.7
184.6
199.0
179.6
214.5
230.0
225.0
» 245. 4
New
series-
P. R. B.
data,
1935-39 =
100
94
98
109>
91
74
57
69-
74
87
104
113
89*
107
124
161
196-
235
231
19S
167"
185
19*
180
207
222
23>
'248-
i Derived from monthly data published by the Cleveland Trust Co. and independently calculated normal
trend.
» Estimated.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
665b
■ ocx « ee-jeci -ivuamiziv^cL
o
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
6
SPECIAL COMMITTEE
TO
INVESTIGATE TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
H. RES. 217
STAFF REPORT NO. 4
SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES
OF
THE CARNEGIE CORPORATION OF NEW YORK
THE CARNEGIE FOUNDATION FOR THE
ADVANCEMENT OF TEACHING
THE CARNEGIE ENDOWMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL
PEACE
THE ROCKEFELLER FOUNDATION
THE ROCKEFELLER GENERAL EDUCATION BOARD
(Page numbers are from printed hearings)
Part I— June 9, 1954
Part II-^Tuly 9, 1954
Prepared by Kathryn Casey, Legal Analyst
Printed for the use of the committee
UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
54610 WASHINGTON : 1954
SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
B. CARROLL REECE, Tennessee, Ohairmtm
JESSE P. WOLCOTT, Michigan WAYNE L. HAYS, Ohio
ANGIER L. GOODWIN, Massachusetts GRACIB PFOST, Idaho
Kenb a. Wormser, General Counsel
Kathryn Casey, Legal Analyst
Norman Dodd, Research Director
Arnold Koch, Associate Counsel
John Marshall, Jr., Chic} Clerk
Thomas McNiece, Assistant Research Director
II
TAXrf^EMPT FOUNDATIONS
STAFF REPORT NO. 4
INTRODUCTION
668 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Introduction"
One of the objectives of the staff, as mentioned in Mr. Dodd's report,
was to determine whether there was a common denominator, as it were,
in relation to foundation purposes. A collateral objective was to deter-
mine ? if possible, whether the activities of foundations might fall into
certain definite classifications.
Upon examination of the material available in the Cox committee
files it was apparent that it was insufficient x to support a firm conclu-
sion on this point; as were the various reference books available on
foundations and their activities. After further study and discussion
as to both the quickest and the most efficient method of securing suffi-
cient information, it was decided to examine the activities of the
first 2 major 3 foundations, to determine whether their activities Gould
be classified, on the theory that such an examination would also serve
the dual purpose of providing a guide for study of other foundations.
With size of endowment and date organized as criteria, the selection
of the agencies created by Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller
were quite obvious choices, as will be seen by a glance at the following
chronological list :
Carnegie Institute ( of Pittsburgh ) , 1896.
Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, 1901.
Carnegie Institution of Washington, 1902.
Rockefeller General Education Board, 1903.
Carnegie Hero Fund Commission, 1904.
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 1905.
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1910.
Carnegie Corporation of New York, 1911.
The Rockefeller Foundation, 1918.
The Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial, 1918.*
As a practical matter, the Carnegie Institute of Pittsburgh, the Car-
negie Institution of Washington and the Carnegie Hero Fund Com-
mission were eliminated as objects of study in relation to their fields
of activity, because their purposes were so clearly specified and their
activities confined thereto.
On the theory that the document itself is the best evidence, the
logical source or the best information was the records of the founda-
tions themselves, as contained in their annual reports and similar pub-
lication. When it proved difficult to obtain these reports from the
Library of Congress 5 recourse was had to the foundations themselves.
In the case of the two Rockefeller agencies — the foundation and the
General Education Board — the president, Mr. Dean Rusk, upon re-
quest responded immediately and loaned to the committee copies of the
annual reports of each of these organizations.
In the case of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
a request was made to permit studies of their records from the date
of organization, to which Dr. Johnson, the president, agreed without
hesitation, and every cooperation was extended in placing the records,
minutes of meetings, and confidential reports at the committee's
disposal. In the time available, it was not possible to cover in detail
all the material available for those years, but extensive notes were made
1 Not only as to details, but also because It covered only the years 1936-51, Inclusive.
* In point of time,
s Tn sItp of Assets
* Its activities were merged with those of the Kockefeller Foundation, 1928.
6 Since only 1 copy was available for circulation, the other being for reference.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 669
and verbatim quotations extracted; Mr. Perkins, of the Carnegie Cor-
poration had equally cooperated but, subsequently on special request,
the Library of Congress permitted the reference copies of the year-
books of the Corporation, the foundation and the endowment to be
withdrawn from the Library for use at the committee's offices.
In addition to these reports, the books and articles, including bio-
graphical material, available on both Mr. Rockefeller and Mr. Carnegie
and their foundations, were consulted and studied. 6
Based on these studies, and according to the records of the founda-
tions themselves, it was concluded that their activities had been car-
ried on in a handful of major areas, namely :
I. Education.
II. International affairs, including international law.
III. Politics (in the sense that politics is the science of civil government.)
IV. Public affairs.
V. Propaganda.
VI. Economics.
While some of these fields overlapped to a certain degree, that fact
does not affect the validity of the technique of analysis, nor the state-
ment of summation.
I. Education
, GENERAL PURPOSE
Part I of this summary is devoted to answering three questions :
1. Have these foundations carried on activities in the field of edu-
cation ?
(a) At elementary level ?
(&) At secondary level ?
(c) At college and university level ?
2. What have these activities been (at each of the levels noted) ?
3. Did such activities have any evident or traceable effects in the
educational field ?
Secondly, once the answers to these questions are determined, what
is their relationship (if any) to education, in the light of the consti-
tutional and historic attitudes with regard to it in this country?
The activities relating to questions 1 and 2 will be summarized sep-
arately by foundation, for the entire period of its existence, in section
1. However, since the activities of all these organizations are paral-
lel — at least in part — the effects of all in the educational field, and
their relationship (if any) to the constitutional and historic viewpoint
will be summarized and compared in section 2.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Of the Carnegie and Rockefeller organizations only one — the Gen-
eral Education Board of Rockefeller ] — from its outset has operated
exclusively in the field of education, in the sense of a relationship to
institutions of learning, teaching, and so forth. In the sense that all
8 Bibliography : Life of Andrew Carnegie <2 vols.), V. J. Hendrick : Forty years of Carnegie
Giving, R. M. Lester ; 30 Year Catalogue of Grants, R. M. Lester ; Fruit of an Impulse,
Howard J. Savage; Philanthropic Foundations and Higher Education, Ernest Victor
Hollis ; The Story of the Rockefeller Foundation, Raymond Fosdick ; History of the Stand-
ard Oil Co., Tarbell ; American Foundations — Their Fields, 20th Century Fund ; Phi-
lanthrophy and Learning, Frederick P. Keppel ; Public Benefactions of Andrew Carnegie,
•Carnegie Corp. ; The Foundation, Frederick P. Keppel.
i Terminated operations at end of 1953.
670 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
knowledge developed pertains to education, of course, then the term
"education" becomes practically all-inclusive of every activity not
only of foundations, but of industry and government as well. How-
ever, in the former sense — which is the sense in which it is used here —
Carnegie Corp., Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teach-
ing, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and the Rocke-
feller Foundation are dedicated by their charters to purposes directly
or indirectly related to what might be called the advancement of edu-
cation.
In the case of the foundation, 2 originally intended as a means of
providing "retiring allowances" for professors, it is now its primary
purpose. The corporation 3 and the endowment 4 have it as one of a
multiplicity of purposes. Because this is particularly true of the en-
dowment, and because its activities are so closely interrelated that
agency's activities will be summarized as a unit when other categories
of foundation activities are covered.
One further fact should be noted because it is a matter which time
did not permit complete resolving. In the case of the corporation,
and the foundation, there is a considerable overlapping of funds, and
it is difficult at times to determine the extent to which the funds men-
tioned in the foundation's financial reports are duplicates of funds
mentioned in the corporation's report. To a certain extent this is
true also in regard to the endowment. Thus, while every effort will
be made in this report to differentiate clearly between the amounts of
money, it may be that sums reported in the foundation and the endow-
ment records are duplications of sums reported in the Carnegie record.
Inasmuch as the Rockefeller Foundation and the General Education
Board do not seem to have the interlocking relationships found in the
Carnegie organizations it is not believed that the same possibility of
duplication exists in regard to those two organizatons.
However, perhaps in an excess of caution, where doubt arose, the
item was not included so that whatever error has occurred has been
on the side of lower totals rather than higher.
BACKGROUND 6 MATERIAL FROM REFERENCE WORKS
Before proceeding to an analysis of information taken from the an-
nual reports of each of the foundations to be summarized, a brief
review of the activities in the field of education by these major con-
tributors may prove helpful and also serve as a basis for evaluation.
Dr. Ernest V ictor Hollis in his book Philanthropic Foundations
and Higher Education, published in 1938, covers not only the back-
ground and organization of foundations, but also the specific activities
of foundations in the field of education. While most of his references
are to higher education, portions of his work involve secondary educa-
tion indirectly, as will be seen later. Although published in 1938,
which makes many of the statistics of Dr. Hollis' book somewhat out-
dated, it is still regarded as an excellent reference.
* This term will be used throughout to designate the Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching.
8 This term ■will be used throughout to designate the Carnegie Corp.
*This term will be used throughout to designate the Carnegie Endowment for Interna-
tional Peace.
B See bibliography, p. 669.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 671
According to Dr. Ernest Victor Hollis ' "unfavorable public esti-
mate of the elder John D. Kockefeller and Andrew Carnegie made it
inexpedient in 1905 for their newly created philanthropic foundations
to attempt any direct reforms in higher education." The subject was
approached indirectly through general and noncontroversial purposes,
nearly all foundation grants made before 1920 being for such pur-
poses.
Br. Hollis writes :
Far-reaching college reform was carefully embedded in many of these non-
controversial grants. It was so skillfully done that few of the grants are directly
chargeable to the ultimate reforms they sought to effect. For instance, there is
little obvious connection between giving a pension to a college professor or giving
a sum to the general endowment of his college, and reforming the entrance re-
quirements, the financial practices, and the scholastic standards of his institu-
tion. This situation makes it necessary to present qualitative influence without
immediately showing the quantitative grant that made the influence possible.'
REMEDIES FOR EDUCATIONAL CHAOS
The first efforts of the foundations to influence the development of
higher education, according to Dr. Hollis, were directed toward a
differentiation and coordination of the levels of education, which he
stated "approached chaos" around 1902-5.
It is not proposed to discuss whether the conditions existing in the
educational system at that time were chaotic or inefficient; nor is it
intended to deny that the foundation and the General Education
Board were sincere in their belief that the system should be improved.
It is true, however, that neither of these organizations announced to
the public their intention to reform the educational system. On the
contrary, the board asserted on many occasions that it was determined
not to interfere with the institutions, nor direct their policies. 8 The
president of the foundation, in writing of the early activities of the
foundation, admitted that originally even the founder, Andrew Car-
negie, was not aware of any intention other than the commendable one
of awarding a free pension, and in 1935 Mr. Pritchett accepted the
fully responsibility for inculcating the reform idea in the pension
awards.
Moreover, it is not intended to evaluate the merits of the objective
and references are cited merely as indications of the intention and
attitude of the two foundations which first entered this educational
field. Additional references taken from the reports of the individual
foundations will be included in later sections of this part, dealing with
the individual foundation activity in education.
Dr. Hollis takes a very practical view of the manner in which
foundations approached the situation and the logical conclusion to be
drawn , when he writes :
As a condition of awarding a pension to a college professor what could be
more plausible than the necessity for defining a college? Both the logic of the
situation and the desire for the money caused colleges to seek the scrutiny
of the foundation. By this indirection the foundation was being importuned
to do what President Pritchett most wished, and what he probably could not
r '
« Philanthropic Foundations and Higher Education.
» Ibid., p. 127.
• See sections on Foundation and Board.
672 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
have accomplished by any amount of direct grants. With pensions as the induce-
ment the Carnegie plan for improving the colleges was explicit and avowed ;
the scholastic, financial, and control standards that were demanded for affili-
ation guaranteed that the institution would be a real college. Despite its pro-
testations to the contrary, the General Education Board sought to effect the
same reforms. I used grants to capital outlay and to general endowment as
the inducement and its leadership was canny enough not to print or use an
inflexible set of standards. The college seeking assistance was judged in terms
of its promise within the local area. The board "made a thorough study" of
the institutions calling themselves colleges and from this factual survey came
to a conclusion similar to that of the Carnegie Foundation as to what should
be done. Each foundation decided to organize and lead a superior system of
colleges and universities as a demonstration to the rest of the country. Their
purposes were almost identical, though their methods of work were radically
different, as were also their attitudes toward church-controlled colleges. The
actions of the Carnegie Foundation were the more open and therefore will enter
more fully into this narrative. But this circumstance should not obscure the
fact that the General Education Board program sought similar goals and waB
just as assiduously conducted.*
Dr. Hollis goes on to say that, using this as a basis [eligibility for
a Carnegie pension], the specific requirements were established as to
what constituted a "college," and these requirements were later agreed
to in principle at a conference, sponsored by the foundations of all
agencies interested in improving college entrance requirements.
Dr. Hollis, in comparing the policies of the foundation and the
General Education Board, refers to the former's standards as an "all
or none" dictum which "was happily absent in the more flexible, less
explicit plans of the General Education Board for improving
colleges." 10
Dr. Hollis referred to the setting up of means for improving col-
lege entrance requirements which grew out of the indictment of the
so-called mechanical credits which were congesting the colleges with
inadequately prepared students and again notes the contribution of
the foundation when he states :
At every stage of this complex kaleidoscopic problem, the philanthropic
foundations interested in higher education have been alined with the progres-
sive educators who are seeking such changes as those described as taking part
at the University of Chicago. * * * In addition to cash, the above organizations
and the Carnegie Foundation furnished the highly valuable services of pro-
fessional staff members.
Psychological examinations, comprehensive achievement tests, cumulative per-
manent record forms, and related admission devices had to be planned and
perfected before much actual progress could be made in improving the certifi-
cate plan of admission by units. The best professional and technical abilities of
the universities and nonteaching research agencies were given to the construc-
tion of these instruments. Columbia, Chicago, and Stanford Universities were
the centers in which most of this research was done, but other universities made
notable contributions. The American Council on Education provided the general
administrative and supervisory direction necessary to coordinate such a large
cooperative undertaking. The philanthropic foundations provided $1,212,450 of
the sum necessary for the work.
The six regional accrediting associations have jointly and severally been
granted $150,000 as a supplement to other resources, for studies looking toward
the formulation and application of qualitative standards for accrediting high
schools and colleges. The north Central Association of Colleges and Secondary
Schools has alone received foundation grants totaling $115,000. This sum has
been devoted to developing standards for judging the effectiveness of the 285
institutions of higher education in the upper Mississippi Basin. It is expected
that the research will aid in a determination and statement of the aims, pur-
poses, and general philosophy of secondary and higher education. Aided by a
foundation grant of $25,000, the Committee of Twenty-one, representing the six
• Ibid., pp. 129-130.
10 See sections on Carnegie Foundation and Kockfeller General Education Board.
TAX-EXEUNT FOUNDATIONS 673
regional accrediting associations of the United States, is conducting a study of
accrediting that is focused on the secondary school. It has undertaken the
formulation of standards for accrediting high schools, apd the outlining of pro-
cedures for their application and adaptation by the regional associations. Sev-
eral of the regional associations are individually undertaking minor studies
aimed at the solution of parts of the general problem. Educational and founda-
tion officials are united in the determination of supplement or supplant quanti-
tative accrediting with qualitative measures for admission to and progress
through high school and college. 11
According to Dr. Hollis, the method of the General Education
Board was preferable in many respects, particularly in that it was
more tolerant than the foundation of which he states : "The limita-
tion of funds, and the conception of the trust itself, as well as the
philosophy of its first president, tended to maintain a rigid pattern of
action." 12
He points out that the board, while it had a regard for high entrance
requirements, did not insist that colleges "conform to preconceived
general standards, regardless of actual local conditions." 13
It recognized that the difference in educational, financial, and social
conditions in various parts of the country made it impossible, even in
medical education, to achieve complete uniformity all at once, and that
to force the issue might merely result in changing the terms rather
than in fact raising standards. It was Dr. Hollis' opinion that the
failure to follow such a policy was "The basic cause for the early
bickering, strife, and only partial success of the foundation's college
admission efforts."
Much dissension has arisen over the use of the so-called unit and in
later years the Carnegie Foundation was to vigorously attempt to
disassociate itself from it. In that connection it should be noted for
the record that the foundation and the board did not invent the unit
as a device for measuring progress through secondary schools but they
did contribute to securing its more effective enforcement. They there-
fore share with the schools the responsibility for introducing it into
secondary education although its retention past its usefulness may be
charged to the schools through their accrediting associations.
Both the foundation and the board were in agreement that the chief
offenders against standards were the various Protestant religious
denominations, 14 and both agreed that there should be concentration
of effort in a few colleges which would have the effect of eliminating'
the weak colleges through lack of finances and other causes. However,
the methods selected by the foundation and the general education
board differed materially.
The bylaws of the foundation provided that no institution could
share in its pension fund if it remained under the control of a religious
group. The foundation also required that all affiliated institutions
have a 4-year curriculum and at least 6 full professors. (This auto-
matically established the size of the liberal arts colleges, namely, six
departments) ; 15 and required a minimum endowment or in the case
of State universities, an annual income.
« Ibid., pp. 144-146.
" Ibid., pp. 133-134.
» Ibid., p. 135.
» Ibid., p. 138.
18 After 1921 this was increased to 8.
54610 — 54 2
674 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The board approaches the problem by "systematic and helpful cor-
roboration with the religious denominations, which took the form of
direct support of the stronger of such colleges. 16
Both the foundation and the board had concluded that by withhold-
ing funds from "the' weak and tottering or superfluous colleges," as
they were referred to, these institutions would die a natural death, con-
solidate or perhaps even coordinate with institutions selected by the
foundations as pivotal institutions. However, he adds, the results
have not borne out that conclusion — the Office of Education Directory
listing some 2,000 institutions of higher education in this country.
Moreover, according to Dr. Hollis, the waste, duplication and lack
of articulation are still evident, and according to Dr. Hollis were as
bad after the first World War as those facing the foundation at the
turn of the century.
* * * Accompanying this dissatisfaction with organization was an even
greater disapproval of the traditional content of the courses and their organiza-
tion into curricula. The manner of being admitted to and guided through these
offerings was reopened for further study. In short, after 1918 there was a new
start in efforts to resolve the confusion existing in American higher education,
and the philanthropic foundations influenced most of these undertakings.
After the war the philanthropic foundations entered into a more satisfying
relation with higher education. They were no longer forced to seek change by
indirection; rather, they directly concentrated their grants and influence to
remedy some of the more glaring deficiencies that had been revealed by the war.
A more favorable public attitude toward philanthropic trusts made their new
approach possible. They now directly cooperated with the professional forces
of higher education in a new attack on the problems of organization to assure
institutional operation that would be more effective in modern life.
By 1920 about 90 percent of all college admissions were by the certification of 15
or more variously required units of the type of credit described by Learned.
Under this system inadequately prepared students were congesting the colleges.
At the same time the system hampered the effectiveness of the high school in
serving the much larger group of students who would not enter college. Those
college and foundation officials who subscribed to Learned's indictment of me-
chanical credits began to pool their money and talents to provide means for im-
proving college entrance devices, and this soon led to more fundamental studies
of the relations of secondary to higher education.
In addition to what may be termed "direct" activities, i. e., funds
granted to institutions themselves, or for projects in the teaching or
educational field all of the Carnegie and Rockefeller Foundations
. made direct contributions of funds to the following organizations :
Adult Education "
American Council on Education
Cooperative Test Service
Educational Records Bureau
Institute of International Education
London School of Economics
National Education Association
Progressive Education Association.
Because of the effect of several universities on education, founda-
tions' grants to these institutions have been tabulated. The institu-
tions are :
Columbia University
Columbia University Teachers College
University of Chicago
Lincoln School.
« Ibid., pp. 138-140.
1T Including grants to American Association for Adult Education.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 675
THE CARNEGIE CORPORATION OF NEW YORK— THE
CARNEGIE FOUNDATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT
OF TEACHING
Carnegie Corporation of New York
establishment, purposes, assets
The Carnegie Corporation of New York was the last of the philan-
thropic agencies created by Andrew Carnegie, and he served as its
president until his death 8 years later in 1919. It was established "to
promote the advancement and diffusion of knowledge and under-
standing" among the people of the United States and the British
Dominions. Of its $135,336,869 endowment, $12 million is applicable
to enterprises in the British Dominions and Colonies, at the discre-
tion of the trustees. As of 1951 the assets of the corporation were
$175,890,810. 1
The corporation is managed by a board of 15 trustees, 4 of whom
are ex officio, 3 are presidents also of other Carnegie funds, and the
president of the corporation.
GENERAL POLICY
The corporation makes grants chiefly to universities, colleges, and
other organizations which the trustees believe can contribute to "the
advancement and diffusion of knowledge and understanding," and
devotes its entire annual income (except that necessary for adminis-
trative purposes) to such grants. Its officers do not attempt to keep
in active touch with programs, nor plan nor direct projects, full
responsibility being assigned to the recipient.
Question 1. From 1911 to 1952, inclusive, the last year for which
the annual report is available, the corporation made funds available
to:
Appropriations
Universities, colleges, and schools in the United States 1 $56, 838, 274
For adult education 3 3 ? 012, 875
American Council on Education ij 012^ 875
Columbia University 1 2, 687,' 265
Cooperative Test Service, Educational Records Bureau, Graduate
Record, College Entrance Examination Board 90,924
Institute of International Education 2, 366* 326
National Citizens Commission for the Public Schools ' 750' 000
National Education Association 26l| 500
Progressive Education Association a 76' 485
Teachers College 3> 727,' 650
University of Chicago 2, 419, 450
Total 73( 243, 624
1 Does not Include Columbia University Teachers College or University of 'Chicago
2 Including grants to the American Association for Adult Education. '
8 Now called American Education Fellowship.
Funds were given to other organizations, such as the National Ad-
visory Council on Eadio in Education, whose activities were less
directly related to education, but time did not permit exploring them
in detail. A brief description of the type of activity carried on by the
* Basic Facts About Carnegie Corporation of New York and Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching, published by the corporation in August 1952.
676 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
American Council on Education, the National Education Association,
and the Progressive Education Association is given in section 2 of
this summary.
Prior to 1930 the major grants of the corporation were for library
buildings, laboratories, endowment of liberal arts colleges, develop-
ment of such colleges through endowment, endowment of medical
schools at universities, and endowment, buildings, and support of
Carnegie Institute of Technology.
Question 2. All quotations are from the annual reports, and in
order to avoid undue length, a few have been selected from many of a
similar nature. They appear in the annual reports under the head-
ing of "General Education," unless otherwise indicated.
1937 report
Page 20:
The field of general education, even within the limits of scholarly inquiry is
too broad for any single foundation to cover, and, fortunately, more than one
foundation is now active therein. The present activities of the corporation,
working in close cooperation with the Carnegie Foundation, are the following:
tests and measurements and records; comparative education, notably in the
study of examinations; professional education, particularly in its relation to
professional practice and to supply and demand in personnel; the relation of
research to professional education, especially in the graduate school; new de-
velopments of undergraduate instruction, supported chiefly by direct grants to
institutions; and the maintenance of what may be called educational clearing-
houses, as in Australia and New Zealand. * * *
Page 21 :
* * * Meanwhile, the problems of professional standards in general, the rela-
tions of the professions to one another and to other branches of education, the
needs of the public and the degree to which these are being met, have all been
comparatively neglected. The corporation has had opportunity to study these
questions rather closely in connection with training for librarianship, but its
interest includes all professions, large and small, as well as what may be called
emerging professions, that is, callings which are gradually assuming a profes-
sional status. It is the writer's belief that there is a definite need today to build
up a body of doctrine which will be based on reality and not on tradition. * * *
Pages 21, 22 :
This general situation opens opportunities to foundations for activities of the
greatest usefulness, but, unless the programs themselves are carefully organized
and rigidly limited in scope, there is a real danger lest they tend to draw the
foundation itself outside its proper sphere of action. It is essential not only
that the foundation be insured completeness of relevant data for its study, but
also that it be freed from any compulsion to press for action as a means of
justifying its conclusions. While it may advise frankly concerning changes,
when its advice is sought, it should never agitate for reforms or use its money
or influence as a means to a political end.
1938 report
Pages 31, 32, 33 : According to the report, on the basis of the general
purpose of each of the grants made in the period since 1933-34 for
educational studies, they might be divided as follows :
To understand the student $50,300
To improve teaching 83, 100
To show what is being done 129, 350
To inform as to educational policy and organization 51, 000
To find out what the students learn 191, 500
Various other purposes . 35, 600
Total 540,850
* • ■ • * » I I
TAX-EXEMPT FOIHSTDATIONS 677
The longest unbroken series of grants of this character made by the corpora-
tion has been voted to the Institute of Educational Research of Teachers College,
Columbia University, and it should be of interest to summarize the results of
cooperation with a small group of workers under distinguished leadership. In
The 16 years from July 1, 1922, the researches in psychology and education at
Teachers College under the direction of Dr. E. L. Thorndike have been supported
by grants from the Carnegie Corp., totaling approximately $325,000. The find-
ings are reported in nine books or monographs already published (without cost
to the corporation), and nearly a hundred scientific articles, doctoral disserta-
tions, and special reports.
Nor must it be overlooked that, since science advances as a whole, the work
of gathering data which others may use, repeating experiments, adding here
and there to what others have proved, may in the long run be more valuable
than even such striking direct contributions.
191$ report
Pages 14, 15 : In the 1942 report the corporation lists as its three
major grants those made to the University Center in Atlanta, the
Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, and the New York Uni-
versity in New York.
Referring to the Atlanta enterprise ($150,000), it is noted that far
greater grants had been given to it by the General Education Board.
Its purpose is stated to be :
* * * a long-planned integration of the work of the several institutions of
college grade in that area under terms which will give Atlanta the advantage of
a modern university without requiring the constituent colleges to sacrifice their
identities. * * *
The grant to New York University ($100,000) was made with the
understanding that the fund would be used for current purposes
rather than for endowment.
Pages 16, 17 — The report then continues :
Two grants totaling §65,000 were made to the Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching for continuation of cooperative work with a selected
list of graduate and undergraduate schools in developing criteria for admission
and in providing a basis for judgment as to ability of those already admitted
to candidacy for degrees. A more detailed statement on these studies will
appear in the 1942 report of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of
Teaching. Additional grants totaling $21,000 were also made to the foundation
for two programs undertaken in cooperation with the American Council on
Education. Another grant of $10,000 was voted for the formulation of special
tests to be used in selecting the persons to be trained under the defense-training
program of the United States Office of Education.
As was recorded in last year's report, one of the largest grants voted in 1940-41
made possible the establishment of the Institute of Adult Education at Teachers
College, Columbia University. It is a pleasure to report that the institute
is rapidly defining a useful role for itself, and that the American Association
for Adult Education, now maintained entirely from membership fees, increased
its dues-paying constituency during a year when most voluntary professional
associations were suffering a decline in membership.
* • * * * * *
Among the adult education programs initiated with corporation support in
prewar days, none has proved more timely than that of the Council on Foreign
Relations. The regional committees organized in 12 strategic cities across the
country have met regularly for discussion of international problems and have
joined in producing an interesting summary of these discussions under the title
of Some Regional Views on Our Foreign Policy, 1941. An appropriation of
$24,000 was voted for the continuation of this program.
In the United States it need no longer be argued that provision for the educa-
tion of adults is quite as properly a responsibility of the Government as is
education at other age levels. The war, indeed, has offered dramatic evidence
of the social cost of not affording such opportunities, and the numerous training
programs which have been improvised under pressure during the past 2 years
678 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
may be expected to continue, with suitable changes and improvements, into peace
times. * * *
Question 3. The excerpts from the annual reports given above, as
well as the quotations from Dr. Hollis' book, are pertinent to this ques-
tion also. No attempt will be made to include all the statements in the
year books of the corporation. Moreover, it is believed that 1 or 2
in addition to those already given will suffice.
According to Dr. Hollis ' the foundations are exercising the initia-
tive accorded them to spend most of their money on exploratory work
that seems only remotely connected with improving college education
on the theory that research must first be done in general education in
order to efficiently accomplish college reorganization.
198® report
Page 14:
One of the developments which has produced the most lively debate in educa-
tional circles has been the widespread movement to reinvigorate the ideals
embodied in the term "liberal education." The goal is rather widely accepted,
but there is substantial difference of opinion as to how to achieve it. The general
educationists offer a variety of curricular reforms. Advocates of the Great
Books press their claims for the wisdom of the past. Humanists decry the shift
of interest from certain disciplines to certain other disciplines. Our colleges are
literally awash with formulae for salvation ; all of which is healthy and part of
the process of getting things done in a democratic, heterogeneous, and always
vigorously assertive society.
* * * * * * *
* * * President Conant and his coworkers at Harvard have provided leader-
ship in this direction with their efforts to develop a new approach to the teaching
of science as a general education course. During the current year the corpora-
tion made a grant to Harvard for the continuation of this work.
The social sciences also have a significant role to play. Serious men cannot
accept the view of those humanists who rhapsodize over Platonic generalizations
about society but resent the efforts of the modern social scientist to test these
generalizations. * * *
* * * Developments such as the new American studies program at Barnard
College (see p. 19) and the courses in Asiatic civilization at Columbia University
(see p. 21) would be impossible without vigorous participation, indeed, vigorous
leadership, on the part of the humanistic fields. But there is nothing in the
humanistic fields which offers a guaranty of salvation. They too have turned out
narrow technicians when they might have been turning out educated men. They
too have often ignored the central concerns of liberal education.
SUMMATION
Based on the foregoing, it can be assumed :
Carnegie Corp. contributed large sums of money to projects which
can reasonably be considered "in the educational field" as shown by
their activities during the past 40 years.*
1911-20 : In millions
For library buildings, laboratories, or endowment in liberal arts
colleges , $3, 5
For development of liberal arts colleges chiefly through endownment__ 2. 8
1931^0 :
For research, study, publication ; grants-in-aid to individuals . 5
For development of women's colleges chiefly through endowment 1. 5
For development of fine arts and music in academic institutions, 2. 8
For adult education projects 4,
* Ibid., p. 150.
a Basic Facts About Carnegie Corporation of New York and Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching, p. 11.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 679
1941-50:
For area studies in universities _ _ — 8.0
For research by faculty members ; grants-in-aid ,-™_ 2. 5
For education in American citizenship and history — — r — ■ 2.
For improvement of educational testing 1.2
For training in social science 3.
For research in social sciences . 2.
For studies to improve education 4.
For graduate education in the South . , 1.2
For education in international affairs '.. — ~ 4.
Total 38.
This total does not include grants:
In millions
To Carnegie Institute of Technology $24. 3
For development of schools of medicine 10.
For support of dental research and education 1. 3
For educational projects and for development of educational institutions
outside the United States 4.
' For development of college libraries and librarianships ; library schools
or library interests- 8. 6
For free pensions for college and university professors. '. 21. 5
For others: such as Church Peace Union, Bed Cross, etc 3.
Total 72. 7
Grand total 110. 7
As mentioned previously, the corporation has contributed $1,237,711
to the work of the Rational Education Association, the Progressive
Education Association and the American Council on Education, and
their combined activities affect education at all levels.
In the early years of the activities of each of these organizations,
the amount contributed by the corporation was undoubtedly a siz-
able portion of the funds available to each of them.
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching
establishment, purposes
The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, created
by Andrew Carnegie in 1905, was the third of the philanthropic
agencies he endowed and like the others has its own funds, trustees,
administrative offices, and conducts its own affairs.
Fifteen years before when he was appointed a trustee of Cornell
University, Mr. Carnegie had been shocked to find that college teachers
were "paid only about as much as office clerks." In the summer of
1904 while on his annual visit to Scotland, he renewed an association
with Henry S. Pritchett, a member of Theodore Roosevelt's Cabinet
and president of Massachusetts Institute of Technology; and from
that meeting grew the establishment of a fund to provide pensions
for professors in American universities.
There have been two distinctily different phases of the foundation's
activities :
1. Activities designed —
to provide retiring pension without regard to race, sex, creed, or color, for the
teachers of universities, colleges, and technical schools —
within those institutions —
who, by reason of long and meritorious service, * * * shall be deemed by the
board of directors to be entitled to the assistance and aid of this corporation
680 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
or who by reason of old age or disability, may be prevented from continuing
in the active work of their profession ; to provide for the care and maintenance
of the widows and families of the said teachers ; to make benefactions to char-
itable and educational institutions, and generally to promote the cause of
science and education * * * *
2. Activities designed — •
(6) In general, to do and perform all things necessary to encourage, uphold,
and dignify the profession of the teacher and the cause of higher education
within the United States, the Dominion of Canada, and Newfoundland aforesaid,
and to promote the objects of the foundation, with full power, however, to the
trustees hereinafter appointed and their successors from time to time to modify
the conditions and regulations under which the work shall be carried on, so
as to secure the application of funds in the manner best adapted to the condi-
tions of the time. 2
Until 1913 the foundation confined its activities to the first phase,
partly at least because the attitude of the founder was somewhat
different than that of its president, Henry Pritchett. The difference
is indicated in an exchange of correspondence between the two. Mr.
Pritchett apparently was imbued with the idea of coordinating col-
leges and universities into a more cohesive group. 3 In December 1905,
he suggested as a name, "The Carnegie Foundation for Education,"
and wrote Mr. Carnegie :
While the primary purpose * * * is the formulation of a pension system, our
charter enables us to undertake any sort of educational work for colleges and
universities * * * it may well happen in the future that our activities may
cover a far greater range with respect to education.
The name did not strike the founder favorably :
The Carnegie Foundation for Education does not strike me favorably.
"Foundation" seems superfluous. "Carnegie Professional Pension Fund" or
"Carnegie Educational Pension Fund" seems to me better. It might be well,.
I think, for you to ask suggestions for the name from the (directors) * * *
I don't think that you should disguise the fact that it is first and foremost a
pension fund. The closer union it may bring about is incidental, though
important.
Dr. Pritchett, still president in 1916, indirectly confirms this : *
The. development of a pension system along sound lines is the most direct duty
of the trustees, a responsibility all the more important because the pension prob-
lem, while a living problem in every State and Province of the United States and.
Canada, is still involved in confusion.
AS THE FOUNDATION VIEWED IT 20 TEAKS LATER
The 1923 report includes the following paragraphs on page 20 :
The relation of the foundation to educational development and the studies
which it has carried on with respect to various current problems in education
have occupied a large part of the activities of the officers and of the staff of
the foundations. These studies, which have been published in 16 bulletins, have-
concerned themselves not only with special problems such as those of medical
education, of legal education, and of engineering education, but also with the
underlying fundamental questions of education which relate to gbod teaching,,
to the content of the curriculum, and to the cost of public education. The estab-
lishment of the American Law Institute during the present year, by one of the
most distinguished groups of judges, lawyers, and law teachers ever brought
together, is directly related to the studies on legal education which the founda-
1 New York State Charter, granted May 8, 1905, surrendered when congressional charter
granted.
2 Sec. 2 (b) of congressional charter, granted March 10, 1906. Sec. 2 (a) contains ia
slightly different language original provision as to pensions.
a Fruit of an Impulse, p. 56.
* 11th Annual Report, 1916, p. 17.
TJ&tfXESlfiFX FOUNDATIONS. 681
tion has carried out through its division of. educational inquiry. Experience
seems to indicate that an agency such as the foundation, standing apart from
the immediate institutional life and having no constituency of .its own, can do
its greatest service by enlisting in such studies the most able students in different
institutions, and that out of the contact brought about in such groups between
teachers, administrators, and school systems, members of the staff «f the founda-
tion, and others there is reached a degree of knowledge and of judgment with
regard to these problems which commands, a larger respect ajmi, attention than
can be had from the isolated statement of any one individual.
Outside of the direct activities involved in the study and- establishment of
pension systems and in the educational inquiries and reports that have been
made, the officers of the foundation have necessarily been involved in a number
of educational relations of a temporary character having to do with the inaugu-
ration and operation of the educational organizations of the country, such as
the College Entrance Examination Board, the Association of American Colleges,
the Association of American Universities, the American Council Oh Education,
the American Association of University Professors, and the various other organ-
izations of those involved in the work of teaching or organization of education.
It has thus come about that during the 18 years of its history, the foundation,
while pursuing in the main two specific lines of activity — the onelfeaving to do with
pensions and pension systems, the other having to do with educational studies,
has nevertheless, by the very fact of these activities, been involved in greater
or less degree with all those complex relations in education which arise by reason
of the relationships between the schools of a nation, and the various bodies that
have to do with education. The foundation has sought, during these years to
be hospitably minded toward any agency in education that cared for its co-
operation.
According to Dr. Savage, 6 Dr. Pritchetjt's "pet idea" was realized
by Carnegie's grant to. the foundation for establishment of a division
of educational inquiry, and credits "Pritchett's patient persistence."
Dr. Hollis quotes Dr. Pritchett as saying : e
I put forward the suggestion, that while the primary purpose of Mr. Carnegie's
gift was the establishment of a pension system there would be involved in the
administration of this gift a scrutiny of education which would not only be de-
sirable in the granting of pensions, but would go far to resolve the confusion that
then existed in American higher education. There was no general requirement
of admission to college. Many institutions that were colleges in name, were
really high schools, and many universities were scarcely more than modest col-
leges. I suggested the notion that in the administration of this agency, some
criterion would have to be introduced as to what constituted a college.
ASSETS
The foundation received from its founder and the corporation
$32,700,000. 7 Its affairs are managed by a board of 25 trustees and
according to the report for 1951 had assets of $12,874,718.84.
In the 1939 report of the foundation appears the following:
The cooperative arrangement between Carnegie Cooperative of New York and
the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching respecting projects
in the field of higher education has now been in effect for about 15 years. Its
success has been unqualified. A series of 148 grants totaling $1,449,393 have
been made by the corporation for 85 projects, of which 14, involving 34 grunts,
have been carried on in the offices of the foundation, and 71 projects involving
$1,087,350 in 114 grants have been carried on under the auspices of 41 other
educational institutions or bodies. To these the foundation has allocated and
transmitted the funds provided by the corporation. On account of 3 projects
which could not be carried out as planned, $25,000 was returned to Carnegie
Corporation of New York through the foundation. The total of projects effective
over the past 15 years is therefore 82.
8 Ibid., p. 109 ; Annual Report for 1913, pp. 21-22.
« Annual Report for 1935, p. 129.
* Basic Facts, p. 13.
54610 — 54 3
682 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
GENERAL POLICY
In the distribution of pensions, the foundation set up standards
which must be met by institutions in order to be eligible for pension
awards— designating those who met the requirements as "accepted"
and others as "not accepted." 8
While as outlined earlier the foundation's activities began as a
pension award system for college and university prof essors, this was
shortly used as a springboard into secondary education with the ex-
planation that:
1. It was necessary to define a college in order to grant the pension.
2. In order to define a college it was necessary to establish standards
of admission and of college work.
3. If standards of admission were to be established it was necessary
to prescribe the courses of study in secondary schools which would fit
the student for the college — as defined.
The purposes of the foundation set out in its charter 9 clearly
place this agency among those whose sole or primary purpose is of
an educational nature, as evidenced by excerpts from its annual
reports.
From 1905 to 1951, inclusive, the last year for which complete
records are available, the foundation made appropriations to:
Universities, colleges, and schools in the United States $62, 763, 560
American Council on Education , 90. 550
Cooperative Test Service, Educational Records Bureau, Graduate
Record, College Entrance Examination Board 2, 850, 000
National Education Association 10 115, 000
Progressive Education Association " — _ 92,000
Total 66, 011, 110
The foundation, like the corporation, gave funds to the organiza-
tions mentioned previously whose activities were also of an educa-
tional nature. 12
Question 1 and question 2. It would be difficult to draw a line of dis-
tinction between the quotations applicable to each of these questions,
and for that reason both questions will be covered together.
All quotations are from the foundation's annual reports unless
otherwise indicated, and are only a few of the many similar quotations
which might have been chosen, but which have been ommitted because
to include them would be merely repetitious.
Even after establishment of the division of educational inquiry in
1913 13 the greater portion of foundation funds were appropriated for
pensions, or matters directly pertaining thereto, as shown by the fol-
lowing summary of grants from 1905-51 : M
Retiring allowances and widow's pensions $59, 298, 459. 42
Support of Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association 513, 465. 37
Grants to colleges to initiate pension plans 775, 678. 79
Pension studies , 30,012.87
Total 60, 617, 616. 45
8 Later changed to "associated" and "nonassociated."
» See pp. 2&-2T.
10 Although the foundation appropriated funds to NBA (either its own or the corpora-
tion's) Mr. Pritchett himself was strongly opposed to the association's lobbying activities
for a National Department of Education (annual report for 1933).
11 See footnote 3, p. 17.
™ See p. 17.
13 By grant of $1,250,000 from corporation. Total grants of the corporation were
$32.7 millions.
« Basic Facts, Ibid., p. 14.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 683
Studies in education (by the division )'___' 2, 115, 265. 68'
Merger of testing agencies : . 750, 000. 00
Publications.- 45, 632. 18
Cooperative educational studies and research administered but
not directed by foundation 1, 161, 990. 34
Southern colleges : To stimulate undergraduate teaching : — 873, 775. 54
Total _: 4, 203, 963. 74
However, this does not mean that the foundation's activities affected
only pensions. Even as early as 1907 1B it was becoming more and
more a factor in determining not only what constituted a college, but
what type of organization was best for conducting a college, including
such matters as the size of the board of trustees, whether or not the
president of the college should also be president of the board, and the
extent to which alumni should have a government of the institution.
The report, referring to fears expressed that "a great gift like this in
the hands of a limited number of men might prove a centralized power
which would hinder rather than aid the progress of education, dis-
counted such a possibility because the trustees were "in the main college
and university presidents who have come up through the profession of
teacher, and who are not likely to lose touch with needs and aspirations
of teachers." 16
1911 report
Page 46 — The report deplored the fact that :
* * * lack of supervision, both on the part of the General Government, and to
a large extent, on the part of the State governments, has resulted not only in an
extraordinarily large number of institutions bearing the name college or uni-
versity, but it has resulted also in the fact that these institutions have become
involved in local rivalries, so they represent in very small measure national
Ideas on national purposes * • *.
The first "inquiry" of the new division, which expanded rapidly, was
into the training of teachers and the standards of medical and other
professional schools. From the first, emphasis was put on coordina-
tion between colleges and universities, between these units and second-
ary education, and between both and elementary education. The
"individualism," "class feeling," and "competition" of educational
literature was deplored as was the fact that universities were critical of
colleges, that State supported and privately endowed institutions
viewed each other with suspicion; and relations existing between col-
leges and secondary schools, and between liberal and vocational edu-
cation were referred to as "armed neutrality and open hostility."
Before long, there was to come the recommendation that since edu-
cational foundations were conspicuous illustrations of educational
cooperation, educational institutions could do no less. The school
system is referred to as :
* * * an elaborate hierarchical device that undertakes through successive
gradations of textbook makers, superintendents, principals, and supervisors
to isolate and prepare each modicum of knowledge and skill so that it may safely
be entrusted to the humble teacher at the bottom, who is drilled for a few weeks
only, if at all, in directions for administering it ultimately to the child. Mean-
while, superintendents and school boards publicly measure their success by
numbers enrolled, by buildings and material equipment added, and by multplied
kinds of schooling introduced ; and the people are taught to accept this as eduea-
16 2d annual report of the president and treasurer, 1907, pp. 54-55.
« Ibid., p. 63.
684 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS'
tion» Such perversions are ample comment on the thoughtlessness of our for-
mula. Where is the school system that by enlightened and fearless propaganda
has convinced its public that education consists first of all in the superior quality
and skill of its individual teachers, and is otherwise meaningless?
Qualitative education, as contrasted with the present dependence upon esti-
mates by bulk and housing, signifies a complete transformation in the character
and status of the teaching profession. Such a transformation once properly
accomplished, the other necessary modifications will inevitably take care of
themselves. America, with its hundred millions of people, needs upward of
three-quarters of a million men and women to represent her with the childhood
and youth of the Nation in a deliberate and thorough educative process. If wars
are to cease and democracy is permanently to hold the field, it will be a democracy
with sufficient wisdom to confide this, its most responsible task, to its most
competent citizens, and to prepare them thoroughly for its safe discharge. Gen-
uine education, in a sense consistent with any honest vision of its meaning, can
proceed only through immediate contact with keen minds fully informed and
persuaded of what the rising generation may become, and dedicated to such
achievement. Persons so equipped will in general not be had unless the dis-
tinguished rewards and opportunities of life are attainable through teaching
careers. Moreover, these careers must not be mere avenues of promotion, as in
notable cases today, but must constitute and be recognized as opportunities for
achievement in themselves. Any other course means simply to exploit the future
in the interest of the present by abandoning its control to second-rate minds.
Plato's provision that the head of the state be the director of education expresses
the unavoidable perspective in a completed democracy.
Marked changes must ensue in our present system of schooling if we undertake
to carry out an honest interpretation of our avowed aim of "universal education"
by making it not only universal but also education. In the first place our ele-
mentary and secondary school systems must be thoroughly integrated into one
homogeneous and indivisible unit— a varied but coherent 12-year career for mind
and body, whereby, as a youth, each citizen may acquire a certificate of the
health, intelligence, and character that underlie a successful society * * *
Dr. Hollis ll comments on the foundation's activities and policies
80 years later :
The foundation had had a real battle to enforce entrance standards in the rela-
tively homogeneous endowed liberal arts colleges concentrated tei the East. With
the decision to admit State universities to the benefits of the Carnegie pension
system it was faced with the problem of applying on a nationwide scale what was
in fact a regional accrediting standard for a group of superior institutions.
Educational, financial, and social conditions in this larger territory were so
uneven that many of the university officials in the South and Middle West urged
a flexibility in Carnegie standards in keeping with the realities the colleges faced.
After considerable study of the problem the foundation from considerations of
"logical consistency" (and possibly financial expediency), decided to leave the
rules a Procrustean bed for all affiliated institutions. The foundation was not
constructively interested in how a college might reach eligibility, but it did advise
the State universities not to raise their standards faster than the high school
could meet them, even if that meant delay in securing pensions. Apparently
the attitude was that growth could be stimulated by extending the hope of future
affiliation.
EliEMENTAKY EDUCATION"
Considerable attention was given to the place of both the elementary
and secondary schools in the educational picture. However, there is
indication that after 15 years of effort the foundation itself questioned
some of the results.
1983 report
Pages 78, 83 : Commenting that after the schools became free from
the hard-and-fixed curriculum and new studies intended to broaden
student opportunities were added, the report adds that the resulting
overexpansion was not entirely advantageous. As an example, it was
1T Philanthropic Foundations and Higher Education, p. 133.
'TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 685
pointed out that the organization and quantity of subjects had dis-
placed individual contact, relegating to an inferior position the fun-
damental truth that education does not consist in the amount of infor-
mation absorbed but rather in the ability to think clearly and to apply
the information accumulated to one's everyday life.
It would, therefore, seem to be fundamental that the elementary school should
accept clearly its own limitations. It should make sure that the teaching which
is common to all children is done with a sharp discipline of exact requirement,
but that a very large part of what is meant to be of cultural value shall be through
exercises not followed by examinations, but having as their spring of influence
the contact with cultivated and inspiring personalities.
Under this regime the elementary-school curriculum would be greatly
simplified. ^
In the second place, while we must in a democracy proceed upon the assumption
that every child is entitled to the fundamentals of an education in the elementary
school, we must frankly recognize that a large proportion of the children of
the Nation have neither the desire nor the intellectual ability to complete the
work of a secondary school with profit to themselves. In no nation in the
world is there a task comparable to that of the American teacher in the second-
ary schools, patiently and devotedly toiling to bring through to graduation
multitudes of pupils who have neither the desire nor the ability for intellectual
work. The high school should no longer be the refuge for mediocrity that we
have made it.
This involves no discrimination against any class or group in the body politic.
The stupid or indifferent child is just as likely to be the son of the well-to-do
as the son of the day laborer. Teachers are coerced by parents, by school direc-
tors, by all the influences that can be brought to bear, to keep in their classes
numbers of students whose happiness and usefulness are to be found elsewhere.
Again read without relation to other foundation activities, and
without linking with other organizations whose work it supported,
this, this too is a reasonable statement of a condition which might
need study in order to advance teaching. However, in view of the
results attributable to these other organizations in the installation
of "uniform standards and curriculum in the public schools," the
foundation's statements here and elsewhere in its reports cannot be
studied alone.
One of the present conditions, for example, which is undoubtedly
attributable to the philosophy reflected in this quotation is the 100-
percent promotion rule which exists in many communities, and to
which serious objections have been raised.
EUROPEAN INFLUENCE — PRUSSIAN, FRENCH, ENGLISH
At this point it should be noted that throughout the foundation's
reports the references are too numerous to mention — there are com-
parisons between education in this country and education in Europe,
always to the detriment of the United States. 18
The foundation began its exchange of secondary school teachers
with Prussia in 1908 and the report for 1909 expressed the hope that
more secondary schools and those in charge of them would begin to
appreciate the benefits to be had from this exchange. 19 This report,
and those for succeeding years, stressed the advantages of incorporat-
ing into the American secondary school, the same principles found
in Prussian schools with the object of raising the quality of teach-
es Annual reports for 1910 (pp. 35-39) ; 1911 (pp. 36-38) ; 1913 (pp. 57-59) -, 1924
(pp. Ill, 116), and others.
"Annual report for 1909, pp. 46-48.
686 -TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
ingand education in the United States to a level comparable to that
ofPrussia.
SECONDARY LEVEL
In addition to cooperation and financial assistance to the National
Education Association and the Cooperative Test Service, the founda-
tion itself carried on work in this field. Again, there are numerous
examples which might be cited from the reports, but only one or two
will be included here.
1984 report
Page 107 et seq. : Pointing out that the secondary school is the
determining factor in the educational structure, the report goes on
to state that through its entrance requirements the college dominates
the educational program of the high school, yet at the same time
there is an unsatisfactory situation as far as the colleges and pro-
fessional schools are concerned, because of :
* * * a growing army of high-school graduates who lack the qualities of
intellectual training which would fit them for fruitful college study. They
have indeed complied with the formal college requirements for admission, but
they have not learned to use their minds. A large number of the unfit are
eliminated in their freshman year, a process neither wholesome for the college
nor just to those thus summarily dismissed.
The report recommends as a remedy :
The college can take the first great step by a sweeping change in its entrance
requirements. Instead of requiring a dozen subjects and accepting a passing
mark on all of them, it must test on a few fundamental subjects on which it will
demand a very high order of performance and accept the work of the secondary
school in all other subjects. To accept a passing mark of 60 percent has proved
demoralizing alike to high school and college, to teacher, and to pupil. In
fundamental subjects a high order of performance must be secured. This con-
dition complied with, the college can leave the secondary school free to educate
in its own way.
Here again it should be noted that no evaluation is made of this
objective, the particular means taken to achieve it; nor is it pertinent
whether the results have been good or bad.
In 1928 the foundation began its study of the relations of secondary
and higher education in Pennsylvania. This study continued for
several years with funds supplied by or through 20 the foundation
($365,091.36), and formed the basis not only for studies of a similar
nature both in this country and abroad, but in the publication of a
number of pamphlets; and its recommendations have since been put
into effect. 21
1929 report
Page 85 :
To meet the need for a suitable record a new form was devised and is now
published by the American Council on Education. On this record a student's
ratings in high school and college are presented graphically and comparatively
over a period of years so that his particular mental pattern appears at a glance
together with the tendencies of his intellectual development. Space is given
for standard test and achievement ratings of whatever nature, and provision
is made for appropriate personal data on the same comparative and chrono-
logical basis, thus presenting an integrated history of a student's educational
growth with the pertinent details.
M From the corporation.
21 The most notable example is probably this suggested form which was recommended by
the Progressive Education Association for use in the schools.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 687
COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY LEVEL
There can be no doubt that the foundation carried on many activi-
ties at this level, not the least of which were those in connection with
its pension fund. One of the expressed hopes of the founder and
others was that by this method (removal of financial worries) retire-
ment would be accelerated, and new blood brought into this part of
the educational process.
Another example is the experimental program of grants-in-aid to
instructional staffs in colleges and universities of the Southeastern
States which became operative during 1946-47. The organization
of this program was based on 4 strategically located centers, each
composed of 1 university group and at least 5 neighboring under-
graduate colleges. Each center received annually $15,000 from the
foundation, which it matched with $5,000 of its own funds.
1946-47
Page 24 : The purpose of the program as stated in the report, is to
advance graduate instruction—
* * * to vitalize it ; to improve its quality ; to help focus attention in college
and university alike on the need of improving the general quality of undergradu-
ate teaching. That is the general aim. The choice of ways by which one might
seek to achieve this general aim is wide, but, as far as this experimental program
is concerned, there has been selected and agreed upon as eminently appropriate,
one single way. That particular way is the encouragement of faculty members
to carry on research and creative activities in fields in which they are interested
and competent. The underlying theory is simple: It is that a teacher actively
engaged on a scholarly research or creative project of his own choosing has more
than a fair chance of maintaining an intellectual activity which directly and in-
directly serves to raise his scholarly self-respect and to make him a more effec-
tive teacher. The primary interest of the program, then, is in the teacher and
his research, not in the instutition and its administrative and curricular prob-
lems and physical resources.
The foundation appropriated $700,000 for this program 22 for a
5-year period, 1946-51.
Graduate testing program, cooperative test service, merger-national
testing service: A related activity of the foundation has been the
graduate testing program, carried out primarily with funds from the
corporation with small additions from the foundation itself.
1944-4& report
Page 13 :
* * * In 1929, when the foundation was in the midst of an examination
study of secondary and higher education in the State of Pennsylvania, the Gen-
eral Education Board made a grant of half a million dollars to establish an or-
ganization for experimental service in the construction and use of educational
examinations. This impressive gift, routed through the American Council on
Education, was intended for the use of its committee on measurement and
guidance which had long been active in studying personnel problems under the
direction of the late Herbert E. Hawkes, then dean of Columbia College. There
was thus set up an agency known as the Cooperative Test Service which for
many years under the wise and vigorous leadership of Dr. Ben D. Wood promoted
the construction and use of excellent educational examinations in many fields.
One of its notable achievements, developed shortly before the war, was the insti-
tution of a common qualifying examination for teachers which has been spon-
sored by the superintendents of a large number of the most important American
cities. This test and the graduate record examination possess many features in
common.
'Funds furnished by the corporation.
688 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
With the outbreak and early progress of the war the active functioning of this
agency fell into abeyance although its resources continued to accumulate. Its
recent revival under a reorganized committee of control was inevitable in view
of the indispensable part which objective measurement has played in the educa-
tional preparation of the Armed Forces and appears destined to retain in postwar
institutional activities.
With the revived Cooperative Test Service the graduate record office has be-
come closely affiliated in the broader matters of policy. Since February 1945,
Dr. Kenneth W. Vaughn, the associate director of the Graduate Record Office,
has also held the corresponding position with the Cooperative Test Service.
This mutual relationship has contributed much to effect a common understand-
ing between the two organizations and to coordinate their efforts in a common
cause.
1946-47 report
Page 33 : The following year there is further reference to this sub-
ject which culminated in the merger of the testing agencies in 1947 . 2S
* * * In the main, this report directed attention to the compelling advantages
to American education of such a unification and to the principles on which a na-
tional nonprofit agency might he organized. The committee in the final para-
graph of its report indicated that its primary concern, in this phase of its work,
had been with the principles involved, and that no attention was given to the
practical problems of the several organizations whose cooperation was essen-
tial to the plan. It expressed the hope that its preliminary report would stimu-
late the fullest possible discussion of the practical means of arriving at the
objective.
In the spirit of this statement the committee recommended the establishment
of a new organization to be known as the Cooperative. Educational Testing
Commission. It recomended further that the College Entrance Examination
Board, the Educational Records Bureau, the Cooperative Test Service, and Na-
tional Committee on Teachers Examinations of the American Council and the
Graduate Record Office of the Carnegie Foundation, join in the creation of this
commission, and that in addition to assets contributed by these constituent
agencies not less than $750,000 be provided by foundation grants.
While the report mentions serious objections raised by representa-
tions of the two largest agencies concerned, namely, the American
Council on Education and the College Board, it does not state what
the objections were, but added that there was no disagreement as to the
need for a central agency, or as to its purposes.
MERGER OF TESTING SERVICES, 1947 REPORT
Page 40 :
On December 19, 1947, the Board of Regents of the University of the State
of New York granted a charter to Educational Testing Service and thus enabled
it to begin operations January 1, 1948. Besides the final grant of three-quarters
of a million dollars from Carnegie Corporation of New York, there were added
to the resources of the new Service approximately $450,000 from the College
Entrance Examination Board and the American Council on Education. The
initial capital assets of Educational Testing Service therefore reached about
$1,200,000.
Three trustees ex officio served in perpetuity : the president of the
American Council on Education, the chairman of the College- En-
trance Examination Board, and the president of the Carnegie Founda-
tion. The board consists of from 9 to 25 trustees.
THE CARNEGIE UNIT
From the beginning the reports placed increasing emphasis on the
desirability of "coordinating" all schools throughout the United
» 1947-48 report, p. 40.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 689
States, and the setting up of so-called units which became known as
Carnegie units.
Dr. Savage, 24 tracing the influence of Dr. Pritchett in the expansion
of the foundation's activities into other than pension fields refers to
it as a "useful quantitative device" ; and the earliest known reference in
the public records of the foundation is in 1906. Undoubtedly the
foundation worked assiduously for its acceptance, and was successful.
When attacks began (as far back as 1909), 25 the foundation replied
that it was not standardizing, but merely working for uniformity in
entrance examinations, and later ^ that the use of the unit as originally
conceived and early promulgated did not tend to injure the educational
process, but it was the abuse at a later date by which "the individual
student was broken on the wheel of a mechanical device." The foun-
dation's attitude was : "What it has done is to make clear the standards
of the colleges themselves, and to throw the light of publicity on the
deviations from the standards they themselves have set up. 27
1947-48 report
Page 29 : This report contains a detailed account of the origin, use,
and merits of the "unit" which Dr. Savage closes with the following
statement :
Such in outline is the history of one aspect of American higher education in
which the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching had an im-
portant part. The foundation did not invent the term "unit," nor its definition.
In a time of educational confusion such as the country was not again to see until
1945 Dr. Pritchett, for the foundation, used it as one instrument in an endeavor
to bring order out of chaos.
The fact that the Carnegie Foundation appears to have been the first philan-
thropic enterprise professedly to award grants upon carefully considered ap-
praisal of the American college, and, in connection with that appraisal, to use
the unit, as invented and defined by others, is probably what led a considerable
part of the academic world loosely to prefix to the word "unit" the name "Car-
negie." At any rate, the foundation has long considered the implications of the
phrase to be unmerited.
SUMMATION"
From 1905 to June 30, 1953, 38 the foundation spent $62,763,560 in
retiring allowances and approximately $5 million on studies and re-
search in education.
Like its sister agency, the corporation, the foundation has con-
tributed to the work of the National Education Association the
Progressive Education Association, and the American Council on
Education, as well as to such programs as the Cooperative Test Serv-
ice, the Graduate Eecord Service, and the College Entrance Examina-
tion Board. While the amounts contributed to these organizations
were not as substantial as those of the corporation, nevertheless we can
assume that their activities and the results thereof were acceptable
to the foundation. 29
»Ibid., p. 102.
25 It was asserted that the "unit" was mechanical, tended to work against a true evalua-
tion of the individual, and that In pressing for it the foundation was attempting to impose
Standards of its own making on American higher education.
* Annual report for 1947-48, p. 26.
w Annual report for 1909, p. 161.
* 48th annual report, 1952-53, p. 44.
! » See sec. 2 for a description of the activities of each of these organizations.
54610 — 54 4
690 TAX-EXEMPT FOTJNDATIONS
THE ROCKEFELLER FOUNDATION— GENERAL
EDUCATION BOARD
INTRODUCTION
The first of four philanthropic agencies created by John D. Rocke-
feller, Sr., was the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research in 1901 ;
the second was the General Education Board, limited to the promotion
of education within the United States and its Territories, established
in 1903 ; the Rockefeller Foundation, 1913 ; and the Laura Spelman
Rockefeller Memorial established in 1918 in memory of his wife. His
total gifts to each of these were : *>
The Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research $60, 673, 409. 45
General Education Board 129,209,167.10
The Rockefeller Foundation 182, 851, 480. 90
The Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial 73, 985, 313. 77
Total 446, 719, 371. 22
Note. — In 1928 the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial was consolidated with the
Rockefeller Foundation, with the exception of 1 or 2 specialized functions, which did not
fit into the foundation's program and which were transferred to a new organization called
the Spelman Fund of New York along with $10 million to carry on its work. This fund
has since been liquidated, as has the General Education Board (on Dec. 31, 1953, when
all its funds were entirely distributed).
One other agency in this field — the International Education Board,
to which he gave $20,050,947.50 — was created by John D. Rockefeller,
Jr., in 1923, because of the charter limitations of the General Educa-
tion Board. At this point it should be noted that the total of half a
billion dollars represented by the total of all Mr. Rockefeller's gifts,
is not the grand total of expenditures by his various agencies — it is
merely the principal to which must be added approximately the same
amount in income, which these agencies have also distributed, or yet
have to distribute.
REARRANGEMENT OF ACTIVITIES
The General Education Board carried on activities in the field of
education from 1902 to the end of 1953, but the Rockefeller Foundation
itself did not become active in the field of education for some years
after it was established, except to the extent that its work in the
medical, health, and agricultural fields may be considered educational.
The Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial operated only during the
decade 1918-28, and the International Education Board was in exist-
ence from 1923-38.
1928-89 report
Pages 3-6 : In the board's report that year, referring to the various
Rockefeller agencies, is stated that it was becoming evident that the
line between the activities of each was not clearly marked, resulting
in doubts on the part of the public as to the respective fields, and a
duplication of time and expense in the presentation of the same proj-
ects to two or more of the boards. A committee was appointed to study
the situation and to decide how the work might be carried on in closer
and more clearly defined cooperative relations. It recommended that
a new corporation, the Rockefeller Foundation, be created, into which
would be merged the former Rockefeller Foundation and the Laura
M Story of the Rockefeller Foundation, Raymond B. Fosdick, p. ix.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 691
Spelman Rockefeller Memorial. A further recommendation was
extension of the scope of the new foundation to embrace as a major
function—
the advancement of knowledge in—
(1) the medical sciences,
(2) the natural science (taking over the program in foreign countries of
the International Education Board ) ,
(3) the social sciences (formerly carried on hy the Laura Spelman Rocke-
feller Memorial) , and
(4) the humanities ;
and the appointment of a director and staff for each of these fields.
The final recommendation was division of the field of education in
the United States between the Rockefeller Foundation and the General
Education Board, along definitely determined lines. The net result
of this was to create two Rockefeller agencies : The Rockefeller Foun-
dation, a broad and general operation; and the General Education
Board with activities limited to the promotion of education in the
United States.
According to this, "education" would fall into the orbit of the
board and "research" into that of the foundation. In the case of an
undertaking which embraces both objectives, the deciding factor was
the principal one, if the motive was education then it was a board
activity — if research a foundation activity.
The board from that time dealt chiefly with institutions rather than
with learned societies or research agencies. Also, it did not sponsor
individual research projects after that time except in educational
psychology and the educational processes that fell within its desig-
nated fields. Thus, the exclusive activities of the board after that
related chiefly to college education, public education and the processes
of education, the application of art to industry, and aid in accounting
methods and administration.
That year also the board withdraw from the field of medical educa-
tion because it felt that its part in the endeavor had been completed.
During the period 1913 to June 20 ; 1929, the board had contributed a
total of $87,154,319.33 to universities and colleges for whites, and
$18,191,328.39 to colleges and schools for Negroes, exclusive of any
projects carried on in such institutions with board funds.
The Rockefeller General Education Board
establishment, purposes, assets
Since the board 31 was the first of the Rockefeller philanthropic
trusts in the field of education, its activities will be summarized first.
As in the case of the Carnegie agencies no attempt will be made to
evaluate the merits of this agency or the Rockefeller Foundation,
and this section of the summary like the other sections will be devoted
to ascertaining whether it is possible to fin€ answers to the questions
raised in the opening statement. <'
However, it should be noted that whe^i Mr. Rockefeller gave the
$1 million to the board in 1902, he referred to .the fact that the imme-
diate work of the board would be in studying the needs and aiding
to promote the educational interests of the people of the Southern
81 The General Education Board will be designated throughout this section as the board.
692 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
States, and during the early portion of its life, it was in these areas
that the board's activities were concentrated. It should also be noted
that the first permanent endowment, in 1905, amounting to $10 million
was expressly designed to furnish an income —
to be distributed to, or used for the benefit of, such institutions of learning at
such times, in such amounts, for such purposes, and under such conditions or
employed in such ways as the board may deem best adapted to promote a com-
prehensive system of higher education in the United States. 32
This limitation does not appear in the charter of the board 33 and it
was later removed by Mr. Rockef eller in subsequent letters of gift.
Management of the board's affairs was in the board of trustees, con-
sisting of not less than 9 nor more than 17 in number, elected for a
3-year term. In following out its purpose it gave grants toward
the support of educational institutions, agencies, and projects, as well
as individual fellowships.
Although the board was created in 1902, the first published report
was in 1914 and it contains the following introductory note: 34
This volume gives an account of the activities of the General Education Board
from its foundation in 1902 up to June 30, 1914. The board has* made annual
reports to the United States Department of the Interior and these have been
regularly printed in the reports of the Department; but no further report has
been hitherto issued, because, as the board's work was felt to be experiemental
in character, premature statements respecting the scope and outcome of its
efforts were to be avoided. After something more than a decade, tangible
results have begun to appear and to their description and consideration the
following pages are devoted. Henceforth, statements will be issued annually,
and from time to time, a more critical discussion like the present report will be
published.
In view of Mr. Rockefeller's deep interest in the South and southern
education, particularly elementary, the board at once set to work to
acquire a thorough knowledge of conditions in the Southern States
and surveys were made, State by State, culminating in a conference of
county superintendents in each State. These studies covered the
organization of the public-school system, its finances, the number and
character of school buildings, the number, training, and pay of public
schoolteachers, private and public secondary schools, institutions for
the higher education of women, schools for the training of teachers,
and schools, both public and private, for the education of Negroes.
1902-14 report
Page 13: In a section entitled "Policy of the General Education
Board," the report states :
But the studies just referred to did more than supply facts. For out of them
a conclusion of far-reaching importance soon emerged. They convinced the
board that no fund, however large, could, by direct gifts, contribute a system
of public schools ; that even if it were possible to develop a system of public
schools by private gifts, it would be a positive disservice. The best thing in
connection with public-school education is the doing of it. The public school
must represent community ideals, community initiative, and community support,
even to the point of sacrifice. The General Education Board could be helpful
only by respecting this fundamental truth. It therefore felt its way cautiously,
conscious of the difficulty, complexity, and delicacy of the situation.
As a statement of policy this language leaves nothing to be desired
and as referred to previously, in this respect the avowed intentions of
*» Letter of gift, June 30, 1905.
ss Act of Congress, January 12, 1903.
«P, XV, annual report, 1902-14.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATION® 693
the Rockefeller agencies were at variance with the avowed intentions
of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Question 1 and question 2. It is difficult, if not impossible, without
duplication to completely separate the quotations pertaining to these
two questions. For that reason and because they have equal validity
in providing answers to both questions, no attempt will be made to
distinguish between them.
Unless otherwise indicated, all quotations are from the annual
reports of the board, with the year and page as noted. Because the
activities of the board which relate to these questions are so varied
and also because they fall into certain more or less distinct topics
they have been subdivided.
ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION
1902-14 report
Pages 80, 81, 83 : There is a certain amount of overlapping between
these two levels of education, and for that reason no dogmatic dis-
tinction has been made. Because it saw deficiencies in secondary edu-
cation in the South, the board approached the problem by selecting
a person or persons whose business it was to inform, cultivate, and
guide professional, public, and legislative opinions. Believing there
was need in every State for trained specialists in the field of secondary
education, it felt this individual should also "skillfully and tactfully
marshal all available forces for the purpose of securing concerted
action calculated in time to realize a secondary school system." Aware
of the lack of funds in the hands of the State departments of educa-
tion, or the State universities themselves, the General Education Board
then entered the picture and stated its willingness —
to make appropriations to the several State universities for the salaried and
traveling expenses of a professor of secondary education whose main and prin-
cipal work shall be to ascertain where the conditions are favorable for the estab-
lishment of public high schools not in existence; to visit such places and to
endeavor to organize in such places public high schools in accordance with the
laws of the State ; to endeavor to create in such communities a public sentiment
that shall permanently sustain such high schools, and to place the high schools
under such local leadership as shall give them intelligent and wise direction, and
he and the university shall exercise a fostering care over such institutions.
While stating that the board did not attempt either to indicate or
to dictate the lines along which the individuals should exert them-
selves, it describes their activities in the following terms :
In addition, the professors of secondary education were high-school evangelists
traveling well-nigh incessantly from county to county, returning from time to
time to the State university to do their teaching, or to the State capitol to confer
with the State superintendent. Wherever they went, they addressed the people,
the local school authorities, the county court, teachers, businessmen and business
organizations, county and State conferences, etc. They sought almost any sort
of opportunity in order to score a point. Law or no law, they urged their hearers
to make voluntary efforts toward a county high school, if a start had not yet been
made ; to add a grade or a teacher to a school already started ; to repair the build-
ing or to provide a new one ; to consolidate weak district schools into a larger
one adequate to town or county needs. Nor did they merely expose defects,
tender advice, and employ exhortations; they not only urged the policy, but
nursed a situation. By correspondence they kept in touch with places already
visited; from time to time they returned, to renew pressure or to recognize
achievement. * * *
694 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
During the 10-year period the board contributed $24,862 in 12
Southern States.
1915-16 report
Page 39 : The board held meetings those years on the question of
"needed reforms in elementary and secondary education, one out-
growth of which were the Occasional Papers 2 and 3. However, the
Board was again quick to state that it was interested only in facilita-
ting the trial of "promising educational experiments under proper
conditions."
1918-19 report
Page 41 : The board continued to make sums available to the State
universities for a professor of secondary education and also made
funds available for departments of secondary education. These pro-
fessors of secondary education were urged and encouraged to work on
the high-school curriculum and organization as well as the improve-
ment of teachers in actual service and the administration and effect of
State subsidies and Federal grants, and it was around this time that
the subject of "public education" was included as a section of the
annual report.
Throughout its history the board divided its activities, devoting a
section to white colleges and universities, and a section to Negro
education.
1923-®%, report
Page 29 : The board states it was becoming increasingly clear that
the professors of secondary education had substantially achieved the
purposes for which they were originally supported.
That same report, in referring to the improvement in the State
departments of education in the Southern States, announced that it
had decided that the need was for trained men and women in the field
and with that object in mind it had appropriated in 1922, $50,000 to
provide scholarships for persons occupying important posts and
increased the sum to $80,000 during the year just closed.
The colleges most frequently selected were :
George Peabody College for Teachers
University of Chicago
Teachers College, Columbia University
Columbia University
Cornell University
University of Wisconsin
Harvard University
University of California
Hampton University
GENERAL EDUCATION INCLUDING TESTING AND ACCREDITING PROJECTS
The board began what it referred to as a general education program
in 1933 and it continued for about 5 or 6 years. It was during this
period that much of the work of the various testing and accrediting
agencies was being done, and for that reason much of the comment in
the reports is on that subject.
1933-3^. annual report
Page 4 : In this report there is the following statement :
From 1929 to 1932 the board gave its support to several projects for the im-
provement of school and college relationships and for the intensive development
TAXKEXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 695
of quality in college education * * *. Through aid to institutions and to edu-
cational commissions, there were studies: made of the accrediting, examining,
and teaching procedures in force at a number of representative institutions and
within large areas of the country. At a few places controlled experiments were
carried on by the college administrative officers and staff having the respon-
sibility of selecting students and of organizing courses of study for both schools
and colleges * * V
1933-31^ annual report
Page 5 : Referring' to the critics of educational practice and their
request for new purposes rather than for further modification in
existing routine, the report states :
It was pointed out that too little has been done to discover a form of education
universally useful to man in society today ; that by formal or informal methods
every individual should be made familiar with the forces that he will encounter
in daily living; and that apart from special preparation for earning a livelihood,
he should be made ready for continuous participation in the responsibilities and
satisfactions of life to the extent of his individual ability.
The purposes of a general education for individual and social usefulness can
be stated, they believe, in a way that will have meaning for adults as well as
for younger students; the adaptation of methods for its attainment will then
be practicable through the processes of formal and informal studies. From
such considerations the board reached the conclusion that assistance through
the further definition and development of general education through appropriate
agencies should be one of the purposes of its new program.
This is included at this time in view of the grants made later by
the board to other organizations and for types of projects.
BUILDING AMERICA
1936-36 annual report
Page 8: The report contains the following, under a subheading
"Reorganization of Subject Matter Fields — Society for Curriculum
Study 'Building America' " :
In the spring of 1935, a new monthly periodical was launched by the Society
for Curriculum Study with the assistance of funds provided by the General
Education Board. The magazine represents an attempt on the part of the
society to meet a long-felt need in secondary education for visual as well aa
factual study of contemporary problems of our social, political, and economic
life. A characteristic feature of the publication lies in its emphasis upon pictures
and graphs as a means of presenting facts and indicating problems. Housing,
Men and Machines, Transportation, Health, Power, Recreation, and Youth Faces
the World are among the issues already published. Throughout the various
types of curriculum, ranging from instruction in subject matter to the newer
types organized around basic functions or major interests of society, Building
America studies are now being used in valuable organized visual aids and aa
useful units of study. A further appropriation of $30,000 over a 3-year period
was made this year by the board with a view to developing the magazine to a
point where it will be self-supporting.
1935-36 annual report
Pages 11, 12, 13 :
The various educational accrediting associations of this country are in position
to play a significant role in the reorganization of secondary education. For
some time now, they have recognized that important modifications in standards
and procedures for accrediting are imperative and a cooperative attack on the
problem has been organized by a joint committee of 21 members representing
the several associations * * *.
$116,000 over a 2-year period has been made by the board to the
American Council on Education.
696 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
19S6S7 report
Pages 60-67 : Grants were made that year in support of work by
organizations and institutions in the following types of activities :
General planning of educational reorganization : Taking stock of the situation,
discussion, and agreement upon the purposes of general education, and planning
for such reorganization of general education as is necessary to make it attain
these purposes.
Experimentation with the curriculum and evaluation of the results of such
experimentations.
Preparation of new instructional materials and experimentation with new
methods of teaching : This includes experimentation with new instruments of
education such as film and radio.
Recruiting, selection, and education of teachers : This includes the education
of teachers already in service as well as work with prospective teachers.
Study of youth: This includes studies of the special needs of various racial
and economic groups as well as studies of the needs of all young people for
normal physical, intellectual, and personal developments.
Again the organizations selected were the Progressive Education
Association, the National Education Association Department of
Secondary School Principals, and the American Council on Education
as well as the National Council of Parent Education, the American
Youth Committee, and Teachers College of Columbia University.
1936-37 annual report
Pages 63-65 : Dr. Eobert J. Havighurst, director for general edu-
cation, made some interesting comments in this report. After
describing the evolution of the high school from the traditional func-
tion of preparing a small selective group for positions in business and
industries and another for institutions of higher learning to the educa-
tion of the mass of youth for more effective living. He states :
The kind of reorganization that the secondary schools must undergo is deter-
mined by social change in two different ways. As just indicated, social change
has brought young people of the most diverse capacities and interests into the
secondary schools which must develop a program to meet their needs. In ad-
dition, social change is making new demands upon all people for understanding
human nature and society * * * for social change has made it necessary
to discard to a large extent old ways of living, many of which could be manages
by instinct, habit, tradition, and sheer untrained power * * * While we do not
need to develop new physical organs and adapt old ones to the new life, we do-
need to develop new ways of living and to modify old ones. In this process a
reorganized program of general education can play an important part.
* * * one of the most significant things about the actions of educators and
educational organizations in this connection is their concern for making a re-
organized general education serve to help young people develop a loyalty to demo-
cratic ways of living and a confidence in democratic methods of solving social
problems.
He goes on to state that both the National Education Association
and the Progressive Education Association feel responsible for saying
in definite terms what they believe the ideals of democracy to be and
how education should be organized to lead to the realization of these
ideals.
These comments are particularly significant in the light of the ac-
tivities of the National Education Association and the Progressive
Education Association under what they term "democracy."
1937-38 annual report
Pages 66-69 : Dr. Havighurst, after pointing out some of the defi-
ciencies of the high school insofar as the mass of young people were
concerned, because the curriculum was geared to the requirements of
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 697
the minority, pointed out that while the board could not commit itself
to any one approach to these problems, it did extend assistance to a
number of responsible and representative organizations with the idea
of formulating what, in their opinion, are the underlying purposes of
a general education for young people and following that to recommend
a series of changes calculated to make "the systematic care and educa-
tion of youth serve these purposes better."
The board gave as its reasons for selecting the American Council
on Education, the National Education Association, the Progressive
Education Association, and the regents of the University of the State
of New York the fact that "no truly representative canvass of existing
knowledge and points of view on the problems of youth could have
been made without the participation of these groups."
While Dr. Havighurst felt that the unanimity of these groups in
recommending a thoroughgoing reorganization of general education
at secondary levels was remarkable such unanimity would actually
appear to be only the logical result of the close cooperation and joint
projects of these groups and others, including Columbia University
and Teachers College.
The board went on to give grants to those organizations which it
considered to be factfinding and deliberative and these were the same
groups which had done the preliminary studies.
In his report, Dr. Havighurst made the following comments on the
work of the American Historical Association, after referring to the
various deliberative committee reports which had been effective in
shaping American public education during the years roughly of the
board's operations :
The present decade has produced several committees whose reports may be
ranked with those of previous decades. Four years ago the commission on social
studies of the American Historical Association published an important series of
books dealing with the teaching of social studies in the schools. The committee
on orientation of secondary education (a committee of the Department of Second-
ary School Principals of the National Education Association) has produced two
Reports — one on the Issue of Secondary Education and othe other on the Func-
tions of Secondary Education. The Federal Government's Advisory Committee
on Education is now issuing a series of statements on its various inquiries. To
these documents may now be added reports coming from several groups which
have reecived aid from the General Education Board.
He goes on to discuss the reports of the regents' inquiry as to the
character and cost of education in New York and those of the Ameri-
can Youth Commission. 35
One of the most important results was the issuance of three major
statements on educational policy by the Educational Policies Commis-
sion of the National Education Association entitled "The Unique
Function of Education in American Democracy," Charles A. Beard ;
the "Structure of Education in American Democracy," by George D.
Strayer ; and "The Purposes of Education in American Democracy,"
by William G. Carr, secretary of the National Education Association.
1938-39 annual report
Pages 87-93 : Referring to the board's program in the fields of gen-
eral education through the American Youth Commission of the
American Council on Education, the Educational Policies Commission
15 How Fare American Youth ? Homer P. Rainey ; Secondary Education for Youth in
America. Harl Douglass ; Youth Tell Their Story, Howard M. Bell.
54610—54 5
698 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
of the National Education Association and the Commission on Sec-
ondary School Curriculum of the Progressive Education Association
and the inquiry staff of the New York State Board of Regents (report-
ing that much of the work had been completed or was nearing com-
pletion) Dr. Havighurst continues : "And is now serving not only as
a basis for changes in the curricula of many secondary schools but as
an incentive to experimentation with a variety of procedures for the
care and education of young people."
* ******
Page 93 : Dr. Havighurst, referring to the activities of the board
states:
Aid to experiments with the curricula of secondary schools and junior colleges
and evaluation of the results of such experiments has been an important part of
the board's work in general education. Grants for work in this area have included
such undertakings as the Progressive Education Association's 8-year experimental
study of the 30 schools, the American Council on Education's Cooperative College
Study, and the Michigan Secondary School Curriculum Study * * *. The inter-
est was continued by appropriations that year including a continuation of the
National Education Association civic education project, one of the major objec-
tives of which was the improvement of civic education in the United States with
particular stress on the importance of developing in young people an intelligent,
appreciative, and active loyalty to democracy.
19Jfi annual report
Page 4 : A total of some $8,500,000 had been appropriated, the effects
of which, the report states, it was too early to judge. But the report
continues:
But it can be said with considerable assurance that the studies and experi-
ments which have been aided by the board under its program in general education
have made significant contribution toward a better understanding of the problems
of youth in an age of rapid social change * * *. Undoubtedly, projects aided by
the board had stimulated a widespread interest in the development of ways for
improving the care and education of young people ; they have built up a new and
much-needed body of organized psychological, physiological, and social knowledge
about youth ; and they have set in motion systematic planning on the part of insti-
tutions and national organizations for a continuing consideration of problems
involved in the preparation of youth for the democratic way of life.
* ******
Page 76 : Dr. Havighurst once again devoted a special section of
his report to discussing the program in child growth and development
which the board had been supporting since 1933, continuing the inter-
ests evidenced by the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial. From
1933 to the close of 1940, $1,032,888 had been appropriated for studies
of adolescents; $519,543 for studies of infancy, and $1-73,000 for fel-
lowships, conferences, and special studies. In 1940 the board re-
moved the earmarkings of the various sums which prior to that time
had been segregated for different phases of the board's programs and
that year, 1940, also marked the end of the general education program
which began in 1933.
!9Jf9 report
Page 34: Referring to the National Citizens Commission for the
Public Schools, the report states :
Among the most promising projects for rehabilitating the public schools was-
that begun during the year by the National Citizens Commission for the Public
Schools, New York. This laymen's commission was established upon the advice
of a number of leading educators, and under the chairmanship of Mr. Boy E.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 699
Larsen and is arousing latent grassroots interests in the improvement of public
education. By means of studies, conferences, printed materials, addresses and
publicity the committee intends to bring about community participation in
behalf of better school administration, better instruction and more generous
support for local educational needs. In publicizing examples of good school and
community practices, the Commission hopes to assist thousands of communities
in their efforts to build stronger schools. This is the first laymen's attempt to
deal with this important educational problem. Toward expenses of its first
year, the board appropriated $50,000.
1950 annual report
Page 45 : The following year, reporting on this commission the re-
port states : "The Commission has stimulated group action by example
rather than by direction." Good practices have been publicized, con-
ferences and study groups have been encouraged, and in response 973
local citizens' committees have been set up across the country to deal
with local school problems. The report goes on to state that regional
offices have been established and subcommittees set up, and the board
appropriated $75,000 for use over the next 2 years.
COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES
1902-U report
Pages 142, 143, 148 :
The three main features of the policy of the general education board in deal-
ing with higher education may therefore be expressed as follows :
(1) Preference for centers of wealth and population as the pivots of the sys-
tem;
(2) Systematic and helpful cooperation with religious denominations;
(3) Concentration of gifts in the form of endowments.
The board tentatively decided that an efficient college should enjoy
an income from endowment covering from 40 to 60 percent of its
annual expenditures and from these and subsequent reports it would
appear that grants from the board were held out as an incentive to
institutions to put themselves in this financial position. This proce-
dure is in no wise unusual and was contingent upon the institution
itself raising matching or greater sums. And again, no criticism is
made of this approach, that such grants were in education fields, and
selected educational fields and somewhat too, selected educational in-
stitutions, is only pertinent in relation to this question.
Another item which the board refers to as safeguarding the property
of the institutions was to give special attention to the business meth-
ods of the institutions to whom grants were made and on this point
the report states : "* * * The board was indeed bound to exercise as
much care in the distribution of its income as in making investment of
its principal. For this reason, the business management of colleges
applying for contributions has been carefully scrutinized with a view
to suggesting such improvements as might be advisable." From this
it is reasonable to assume the board at least to a degree decided upon
what were efficient methods.
The board itself admits that its grants were in the nature of incen-
tive grants, and of this there can be no doubt, and at this stage in its
operations the board also freelv admitted that many years would have
to elapse before the main task in which the board was assisting could
even be approximately completed, but it felt that the board's gift
served an indispensable purpose as leverage.
700 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Until 1915 the board's activities were grouped into the following
divisions :
(1) Appropriations for colleges and universities
(2) Medical education
(3) Education in the Southern States, including white rural schools, Negro
rural schools, and secondary education.
(4) Farm demonstrations
(5) Educational research
In the following years the title selected was somewhat different,
but the fields of activity remained practically the same, with profes-
sional education becoming a section around 1920.
LINCOLN SCHOOL
1916-17 report
Pages 48-49 : This report contains the first mention of the grants
made to Lincoln School, and the board states that this is an example
of the service that can be performed in "support of educational experi-
ments." _ It goes on to state that the Teachers College of Columbia
University had requested the board to provide the funds needed to
conduct a school which endeavored "to organize a liberal curriculum
out of so-called modern subjects." The report compared this to its
work in the farm demonstrating program and added : "In addition
to its primary and essential task — that of endeavoring experimentally
to construct another type of education — the Lincoln School will, in
the judgment of its promoters, assist in developing a critical attitude
throughout the field of education."
1984,-26 report
Page 21 : The board decided that year that the Lincoln School had
a permanent function to perform and it made initial appropriation of
$500,000 to Teachers College toward endowment. Referring to its
activities later, 36 the board states: "During recent years the appro-
priations of the board to colleges and universities have been mainly
directed to the development of graduate activities." And declaring
that a fine line cannot be drawn, it continues : "The board is now look-
ing to the development of graduate instruction and research."
1925~2~6 annual report
Pages 36-37 : In reporting its appropriation of $500,000 toward the
endowment of Lincoln School, at the discretion of Teachers College,
the board quotes from the annual report of Dr. Russell, dean of
Teachers College, as follows :
Eight years ago, with the support of the general education board, we estab-
lished the Lincoln School for the purpose of experimenting with the materials
of instruction and methods of teaching suitable to a modern school. The success
of the undertaking has exceeded all expectations from the standpoint both of a
school and of an experiment station.
SUMMATION
Based on the foregoing :
1. The board contributed large sums of money to projects in the
educational field.
2. In the course of its activities the board has made grants to the
American Council on Education, National Education Association, and
*> 1927-28 annual report.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 701
the Progressive Education Association and others in the following
amounts :
Universities, colleges, and schools in the United States $257,157, 581
For adult education , 50, 000
American Council on Education 4, 841, 005
Columbia University J : (7, 607, 525)
Cooperative test service, Education Records Bureau, graduate
record, college entrance examination board 3, 483, 000
Lincoln School of Teachers College 1 (6,821,104)
National Citizens Commission for the Public Schools 150, 000
National Education Association v 978, 312
Progressive Education Association 4, 090, 796
Teachers College 1 (11, 576,012)
University of Chicago 1 (118,225,000)
Total 270, 750, 694
1 Grants to these institutions are Included in amount shown for universities, colleges,
and schools.
The Kockefeller Foundation
establishment, purposes, assets
As mentioned in the section dealing with the board, the foundation
was the last agency created by Mr. Rockefeller which is still in exist-
ence. The amounts and dates of his gifts to the foundation 3T were :
1913 $34, 430, 430, 54
1914 , 65, 569, 919. 46
1917 25, 765, 506. 00
1917 5, 500, 000. 00
1918 ( 1, 000, 000. 00
1919 , 50, 438, 768. 50
1926 37,000. 00
1927 .--,-— 109, 856. 40
Subtotal 182, 851, 480. 90
192 9 3S — 182, 851, 480. 00
Total _. » 241, 608, 359. 74
The foundation's affairs are under the direction of a board of 21
trustees, elected for 3 years, and its charter m states as its purpose "To
promote the well-being of mankind throughout the world." As of
December 31, 1952, its assets were $167,890,851.75 and its income for
that year was $16,893,519. Both principal and income may be spent.
According to the information filed with the Cox committee 41 by
the foundation, its expenditures from May 22, 1913, to December 31,
1952, 42 were:
For land, buildings, and fixed equipment $48, 232, 370
For endowment and capital funds 70, 003, 956
For current support of institutions, agencies, projects, and fellow-
ships 340, 101, 279
Total 458,337,605
For 15 years after its creation the foundation placed its major
emphasis on public health and medical education, although a division
" This term will be used in this section to refer to the Rockefeller Foundation.
88 Funds from the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial.
» Annual report for 1952 gives $316,220,394 as received from donors.
*> Incorporated, by special act of New York State Legislature, 1913.
41 And incorporated in annual report for 1952, latest available.
^Does not include expenditures of Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial prior to
consolidation.
702 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
of studies had assigned to it several miscellaneous interests, including
the training of nurses, aid to dispensaries, human aspects of biology,
and anthropology. In time its programs and those of the other Kocke-
feller agencies began to overlap, and in 1928 after an extended study
a plan was evolved whereby all programs of the four Rockefeller
boards relating to the advance of human knowledge 43 would be
concentrated in the foundation.
The expenditures of the foundation from 1913 to December 31,
1952, in fields of major interest were :
Appropriations for the social sciences, humanities, medicine and
public health, and natural sciences and agriculture have been
excluded. 44
While the foundation as mentioned has disclaimed any credit for
results, we can assume that their contributions would not have con-
tinued had there not been some measure of approval of the activities
and the results. Here again, since the foundation is an operating
agency only in the field of public health and agriculture, the results of
the agencies selected for contributions are pertinent, and particularly
insofar as there have been traceable and evident effects in the educa-
tional field as the result of the agencies' activities, they are attributable
to the foundation itself.
The work of the agencies aided by the foundation have already
been described briefly elsewhere, with the exception of the Institute
of International Education, which is quite evidently in the field of
education, and that description will not be repeated here. It is suffi-
cient to state that the results of their activities are apparent.
Public health and medical sciences $227,981,638
Natural sciences and agriculture 43,335,198
Social sciences : " 63, 775, 805
Humanities 26,816,321
Total 361,908,962
The foundation, as well as the board, 46 sought to influence higher
education largely through the universities and the associations of
learned societies, but no attempt will be made to cover the contribu-
tions of the foundation or the board to the latter group of organiza-
tions. According to Dr. Hollis, 47 the foundation profited by the
experience of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of
Teaching (whose methods in this field have been discussed earlier)
and thus avoided much of the criticism that was directed at that
agency. Perhaps another reason was that the foundation came into
being after a decade of public awareness, but it should be noted that
at its inception the foundation was subjected to severe attack when
it applied for a congressional charter, and (although the board had
been granted one in 1903) so great was the opposition that the matter
was dropped.
For whatever reason, the annual reports of the foundation are much
less outspoken in their evaluation of their activities and merely state
in narrative and statistical terms the grants made each year. How-
« Later expanded to Include the dissemination and application of knowledge.
14 Any overlapping is very slight and does not affect the validity of these figures.
« Does not include $55,339,816 disbursed by Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial prior
to consolidation in 1929.
"This term will be used throughout this section to refer to the Rockefeller General
Education Board.
a Philanthropic Foundations and Higher Education.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 703
ever, a glance at these grants over the years will substantiate the state-
ment that the foundation has been active in the field of education
throughout its existence and in some specialized aspects (such as
teacher training and the like) it has been particularly active since the
early thirties.
Moreover, this is confirmed by the extensive answers of the founda-
tion's Cox committee questionnaire (sec. E). 48 In the preliminary
comment to that section there is a statement of the policy of the
foundation which can be summed up in the last sentence: "We are
ready to state what we have done, but much of the assessment of its
worth must be left to others."
191fi annual report
Page 7 : Within recent years there has been a brief statement which
conveys the foundation's own estimates :
The chartered purpose of the foundation with its wide scope and its absence
of preconceived or specialized interests has in a quite informal and undersigned
manner caused the foundation to become one of the crossroads of the scientific,
educational, and scholarly world.
SUMMATION
In addition to its direct grants to colleges and universities, the
foundation appropriated the following sums from 1929-52 :
Universities, colleges, and schools in the United States 1 (esti-
mated) $335, 000, 000
For adult education 3, 435, 500
American Council on Education 1, 235, 600
Columbia University (1929-52) 33,300,000
Institute of International Education 1, 406, 405
London School of Economics 4, 105, 592
National Education Association 31, 900
Teachers College : 1, 750, 893
University of Chicago a 60, 087, 000
Total 440, 352, 890
'Does not include appropriations made to Chicago University, Columbia University,
Teachers College, or the London School of Economics.
1 Includes grants of ?35 million by John D. Rockefeller, Sr.
While the greater portion of its expenditures have been in the field
of university and college education, it has also contributed to the work
of the American Council on Education, the National Education Asso-
ciation, and the Progressive Education Association (as shown by the
foregoing table) , and also to adult education generally.
Question 3. It is apparent that each of the Carnegie and Rocke-
feller agencies referred to have carried on activities at all levels of
education, either as an operating agency or through its choice of
institutions and other organizations.
Among the organizations selected have been : The American Coun-
cil on Education, the National Education Association, and the Pro-
gressive Education Association, the Institute of International Edu-
cation and the National Citizens Commission for the Public Schools.
48 P. 79 of Rockefeller Answers to Questionnaires.
704 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The American Council on Education is in the nature of a coordi-
nating agency between the Government and educational institutions
and organizations, but also carried on projects which affect education
at all levels.
The National Education Association and the Progressive Educa-
tion Association concentrate on primary and secondary schools.
The Cooperative Test Service, the Educational Records Bureau, and
the Graduate Eecord and College Entrance Examination affect edu-
cation at all levels.
The Institute of International Education carries on its activities in
secondary schools and at college and university levels.
There is considerable evidence that the efforts of the first three
of these organizations, to a greater or lesser degree, have resulted in
standardization of methods, both as to teaching (including testing
and training of teachers) and administrative practices in the field
of education.
Even those not in the educational field recognize that today there is,
in effect, a national set of standards of education, curricula, and meth-
ods of teaching prevailing throughout the United States. As a prac-
tical matter, the net result of this is nothing more nor less than a
system of education which is uniform throughout the country. More-
over, in the case of the National Education Association, one of its
goals for the "united teaching profession in 1951-57," is stated on page
13 of the National Education Association Handbook for 1953-54
to be:
A strong, adequately staffed State department of education in each State and
a more adequate Federal education agency.
* * * t * * *
Equalization and expansion of educational opportunity including needed State
and national financing.
The Carnegie and Rockefeller Foundations mentioned have con-
tributed $20,249,947 to these four agencies (or almost 9 percent of the
total of all their grants in this field of activity) ; 49 and since the sup-
port has continued up to now it indicates approval and sponsorship
of the activities of these agencies and their results.
Among the institutions selected have been: Chicago University,
Columbia University (including Teachers College) and the Institute
of International Education, and the London School of Economics.
These institutions have received contributions amounting to $194,-
100,589, or approximately 22 percent of the total grants to all uni-
versities, colleges, and schools, including the amount contributed to
pension funds by the Carnegie foundations. If the pension funds
are excluded, then the contributions represent 27 percent of the funds
given universities, colleges, and schools.
19 Excluding grants to universities, colleges, and schools.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
705
In addition, with the exception of the Rockefeller Foundation, all
contributed to the various testing and accrediting agencies which were
finally merged into the Educational Testing Service (aided also by
grants from these foundations ) .
The amount and distribution of the appropriations are summarized
in the tabulation following:
[In millions of dollars]
Carnegie
Rockefeller
Total
Corporation
Foundation
Board
Foundation
Universities, colleges, and schools in the
United States .. -..
56.838
3.013
1.013
2.687
.091
2.366
.750
.262
.076
3.728
2.420
62. 764
257. 158
.050
4.841
7.608
3.483
335. 000
3.436
1.236
33.300
711. 760
Adult education
6.499
American Council on Education
,092
7.182
Columbia University
43. 595
Cooperative Test Service, Educational
Records Bureau, Graduate Record,
' College Entrance Examination Board
2.850
6.424
Institute of International Education... , .
1.406
3.872
National Citizens Commission for the
Public Schools ..
.150
.979
4.091
11. 576
118.225
6.821
1.000
National Education Association..
.115
.092
.032
1.388
Progressive Education Association
Teachers College _.
4.259
1.750
60. 087
17. 054
University of Chicago
180. 732
Lincoln School of Teachers College
6.821
London School of Economics. _
4.106
4.106
Total _..
994. 492
The quotations already given from the various reports relate also
to this question regarding the effects of foundation activities in educa-
tion, and therefore only 1 or 2 additional references will be included.
Probably the most recent self -evaluation by one of this group is that
contained in the 1952 Report of the Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching, at page 14 :
1952 report
Page 14 :
One of the developments which has produced the most lively debate in educa-
tional circles has been the widespread movement to reinvigorate the ideals
embodied in the term "liberal education." The goal is rather widely accepted,
but there is substantial difference of opinion as to how to achieve it. The gen-
eral educationists offer a variety of curricular reforms. Advocates of the great
books press their claims for the wisdom of the past. Humanists decry the shift
of interest from certain disciplines to certain other disciplines. Our colleges are
literally awash with formulae for salvation ; all of which is healthy and part of
the process of getting things done in a democratic, heterogeneous, and always
vigorously assertive society.
***** * *
* * * President Conant and his coworkers at Harvard have provided leader-
ship in this direction with their efforts to develop a new approach to the teach-
ing of science as a general education course. During the current year the corpo-
ration made a grant to Harvard for the continuation of this work.
54610 — 54-
706 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The social sciences also have a significant role to play. Serious 1 men cannot
accept the view of those humanists who rhapsodize over platonic generalizations
about society but resent the efforts of the modern social scientist to test these
generalizations * * *,
* * * Developments such as the new American studies program at Barnard
College (see p. 19) and the courses in Asiatic civilization at Columbia University
(see p. 21) would be impossible without vigorous participation, indeed, vigorous
leadership, on the part of the humanistic fields. But there is nothing in the
humanistic fields which offers a guaranty of salvation. They, too, have turned
out narrow technicians when they might have been turning out education men.
They, too, have often ignored the central concerns of liberal education.
A statement on this point made in the early years of its existence is
found on page 87 of the 1902-14 Report of the General Education
Board under the heading "Favorable Legislation" :
It can fairly be said that in framing and putting through this legislation, the
high-school representatives supported by the General Education Board have in
every instance taken a leading part. They would, however, be the first to refuse
any undue credit. The organizations already mentioned — the Peabody Board,
the Southern Education Board, and the Conference for Education in the South — •
had greatly stimulated the demand for adequate and orderly educational facil-
ities ; in every State, local bodies and organizations, State and local officials were
working along one line or another to arouse educational interest.
The section concludes with results in terms of increased schools,
buildings, and so forth, and the amounts appropriated by individual
States for new and improved buildings.
In a later report of the board (1939^10, p. 22) in a section entitled
"How Have the General Education Board's Activities Been Related
to These Happenings ?" there is the following paragraphs :
Board-aided projects have been associated with nearly all the changes de-
scribed above. It is obvious, however, that these changes have been called
forth by the broad social changes of the times, not by the educators, not by
educational foundations. If educational changes are well adapted to the broad
social changes of the times, they find a place and are incorporated in the
continuing social processes.
However, based on the records of the board itself, no other projects
which might possibly have resulted in "changes" 50 were selected
except those board-aided projects.
The board, in appraising its contributions to the American Council
on Education's Cooperative Study of Secondary School Standards
(1947-48 report, p. 113), wrote:
Under an earlier program of the General Education Board appropriations were
made to the American Council on Education for the study of standards for the
secondary schools. The regional accrediting associations for whom the study
was undertaken were interested in developing methods of evaluation that would
take account of significant qualitative factors, so that less reliance would
need to be placed on the purely quantitative criteria in the evaluation of
secondary schools. The study committee worked out and tested new criteria and
procedures and published its conclusions in four volumes: How To Evaluate a
Secondary School, Evaluative Criteria, Educational Temperatures, and a General
Report. The committee anticipated that these materials and procedures would
need review and revision about every 10 years.
*° That is, those such as the Eight- Year Study, the Study of Secondary School Curriculum,
and the Cooperative Study of General Education.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 707
Since 1938, almost 25 percent of the secondary schools of the country have
used the new procedures. In the Southern and Middlewestern States, especially,
criteria have been widely used and found helpful in raising the general level of
secondary education. Meanwhile, further educational research, experience
with war-training programs, and changing relations between secondary schools
and colleges have made a general revision of the criteria desirable. The accred-
iting associations have requested such a revision. An appropriation of $24,500
was made to the American Council on Education for use by a joint committee
of the accrediting associations toward the cost of revising the materials and
procedures developed in the earlier investigation.
While it is quite true that at the present time $1 billion is not par-
ticularly impressive when compared with endowments and Govern-
ment spending in related fields such as research and the like, two
things should be borne in mind. First, at the time the foundations
first began making grants to institutions and agencies, they were the
biggest and only contributors on that scale in the country. Second,
all have had the same policy of giving grants to inaugurate a particular
type of project or organization, withdrawing financial aid when it
has become self-supporting or aroused the financial interest of other
individuals or groups. Dr. Hollis, 51 writing about this phase of
foundation giving, states (excerpt from chapter 1, introduction, Phil-
anthropic Foundations and Higher Education, by Ernest Victor
Hollis) :
Although foundations are important for the volume of money they distribute
to cultural undertakings, the essential nature of their influence is not in the
aggregate of their contributions. Rather it lies in the fact that the grants may
be large enough to provide the essential supplement necessary for foundations
to hold the balance of power. In the 1924 fund-raising campaign of 68 leading
universities there is an illustration of the powerful influence that foundations
may exert even when the amount they contribute is only a small percentage of
the total. They contributed only 18.1 percent of the funds raised, but they were
reputed to have exerted a dominant influence on the purposes and plans of the
campaigns through being the largest single donors. The average size of grants
from foundations were $376,322.76 as compared to an average of $5,902.75 from
individuals who gave $1,000 or more. About 3.4 percent of the individual givers
contributed 59.3 percent of the total fund but because the average of their gifts
were not large enough to be considered an essential supplement, they were reputed
to have exerted a negligible influence in the policies and programs of these 68
colleges. If such vital and strategic potential powers are a possibility in
foundation activities, it should be known whether these new social institutions
are committed to a philosophy of social and cultural values in keeping with
the needs of a rapidly changing social order.
Dr. Hollis discusses the matter of foundation influence in education
at some length, and according to him foundations have influenced
higher education notably and increasingly "toward supporting social
and cultural ideas and institutions that contribute to a rapidly chang-
ing _ civilization * * * the chief contribution of the foundations
(being) in accelerating the rate of acceptance of the ideas they chose
to promote."
81 Ibid, pp. 3-4.
708 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
In his opinion the foundations had been "exercising the initiative
accorded them to spend most of their money on exploratory work that
seems only remotely connected with improving college education" * * *
"on the theory that research must first be done in general education if
valid college reorganization is to be accomplished."
He asks the question, "To what extent and in what direction has
higher education in the United States been influenced by the philos-
ophy, the administration, the activities, and the money of philan-
thropic foundations?" 52
In reply he writes :
In order to answer one must consider not only the degree of educational control
or dominance that is exercised by the foundations, but also whether their activi-
ties indicate progressive participation in a living culture that looks toward the
future, or whether they indicate a static or even reactionary tendency that
attempts to maintain the existing social order. While categorical answers
cannot be given, enough evidence has been introduced to remove discussion from
the realm of biased assertion or mere conjecture.
To the question, "To what extent and in what direction has American
higher education been influenced by philanthropic foundations?" 63
To what extent and in what direction has American higher education been
influenced by philanthropic foundations? An answer to the original question
may now be ventured. This study concludes that the extent is roughly $680
million and the direction increasingly toward supporting social and cultural
ideas and institutions that contribute to a rapidly changing civilization. Foun-
dations at the start were dissatisfied with existing higher education and they
have promoted programs that have, for the most part, been in advance of those
prevailing in the institutions with which they have worked. To a large extent
these ideas were originated by frontier thinkers within the professions ; the
chief contribution of the foundations has been in accelerating the rate of
acceptance of the ideas they chose to promote.
In contending that these ideas have been closer to the "growing edge" of Ameri-
can culture than were the university practices they proposed to supplant, no claim
is made that wiser choices could not have been made or that there has not been
occasional overemphasis of foundation-supported ideas, resulting in dislocations
and gaps in an ideally conceived pattern of progressive higher education. This
study has often been critical of individual ideas, policies, and persons, and has
illustrated the foundations' frequent lack of social awareness, their failure to
anticipate educational trends, and the presence of unavoidable human fallibility
in their official leadership.
The question then arises whether or not the activities of these foun-
dations in the field of education are in harmony with the constitutional
provisions with regard to education.
VIEWED IN RELATION TO THE CONSTITUTION
"Education" is not directly referred to in the Constitution, nor in
any of the amendments. Under the taxing power as well as the pro-
hibition against discrimination, there have been cases in which the
question of educational opportunity or facilities was involved — that
is, in decisions as to the constitutionality of State statutes.
There is a long line of cases in which the scope and effect of the
10th amendment have been precisely delineated. It is well estab-
»» Ibid., p. 282.
« Ibid., pp. 294-295.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 709
lished that the reservation contained in that amendment can only be
interpreted to mean that, in effect, the rights of sovereignty which
the respective States possessed before the adoption of the Constitution,
and which they did not specifically relinquish by that document, are
expressly reserved to the individual States. It was drafted because
the framers of the Constitution and the Bill of Eights were well aware
that under the pressure of either "emergency" or "general welfare" the-
National Government might attempt to assume powers that had not
been granted. They were determined to leave no opening for suchi
an assumption, and thus, if further powers seemed necessary in the
future, they could only be provided for by amendment in the manner
set out in the Constitution.
At times it is erroneously stated that the 10th amendment provides
for a distribution of power between the United States and the States —
actually, properly stated, it is a reservation of power of the States.
This is readily understood when one recognizes that each of the States
(Colonies) was actually an autonomous political entity, prior to the
ratification of the Constitution. As such each has all the sovereign
powers (within its territorial limits) enjoyed by any foreign nation,,
including unlimited jurisdiction over all persons and things.
Within its own borders, education, at every level of instruction, is
the sole province of each of the 48 States. This extends to the cur-
riculum, textbooks, teachers, and methods of instruction, as well as
standards of proficiency for both the student and the graduate.
The foundations, it is true, have taken the position that any stand-
ards they may have set have been in order to qualify for grants of their
funds — but, in their own words, they have had in view achieving a
uniformity and conformity of education and educational standards
throughout the country.
Each State has by statute prescribed the methods where changes
affecting its educational system shall be made, and in the case of
drastic changes the usual practice is to present the matter to the elec-
torate for its decision. From the records it is apparent that the foun-
dations did not follow the statutory provisions of the States relating
to education — and apparently it never occurred to any of them to con-
sult the authorities concerning those of their "educational" activities
which fell within the purview of State regulation. At any rate, at
no time did the individual States themselves (either through an
elected official or the electorate) have an opportunity to approve or
disapprove the changes brought about by foundation funds.
From a practical standpoint — and again it is emphasized regardless
of their merits — the changes have occurred; now it is more difficult
to determine what the decision of the individual States would have
been then had they been consulted, particularly because many of them
(invaded as it were through the back door) have been "conditioned"
to the invasion, and would probably not display the same vigorous
opposition to the intrusion as might have been expected and forth-
coming when this encroachment on State powers first began.
Kathryn Casey,
Legal Analyst.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
FRIDAY, JULY 9, 1954
House of Representatives,
Special Committee To Investigate
Tax-Exempt Foundations,
Washington, D. G.
Pursuant to resolution of the committee on July 2, 1954, at the in-
struction of the chairman, the balance of the staff report prepared by
Kathryn Casey, legal analyst, on the Carnegie and Rockefeller Foun-
dations, was incorporated in the record of proceedings.
(The report follows:)
Summary or Activities of Carnegie Corp. or New York, Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace, the Rockefeller Founda-
tion
preface
Comments made following presentation of the first part of this
summary of the activities of the Carnegie and Rockefeller philan-
thropic trusts indicate a rather widespread misconception among
foundation executives both as to the purpose of chronicling their
activities in certain fields, and also as to the requirements of House
Resolution 217— under which this and all other staff reports have
been prepared.
While varying somewhat in phraseology and manner of persen-
tation, the theme of these comments was essentially the same, namely :
Why has the staff disregarded the many "good things attributable to
the foundations ?
The best — and the only answer — is that the work of the staff, includ-
ing both research and the preparation of reports, has been carried out
in the light of the language in the enabling resolution by which the
committee
* * * authorized and directed to conduct a full and complete study of educa-
tional and philanthropic foundations * * * to determine if (they) are using
their resources for purposes other than (those) * * * for which they were
established, and especially * * * for un-American and subversive activities ; for
political purposes ; propaganda, or attempts to influence legislation.
There is no distinction here as between so-called good or bad activi-
ties of the foundations — nor is there a direction to scrutinize the
activities of foundations generally and report on them — only an
admonition pinpointed toward specified types of activities.
It has been with that in mind that reports and statements of the
Carnegie and Rockefeller organizations have been carefully studied,
as well as books written about them.
869
870 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
It has been with that in mind that the summary of their activities
has been prepared.
ii
At the same time that Carnegie and Rockefeller agencies were con-
centrating on the "chaotic condition" of education in the United States
(discussed in I), organizations bearing the same family names
were focusing attention on other types of conditions which in the opin-
ion of the trustees required improvement. While these so-called prob-
lems covered such varied fields as public health, malaria in Africa,
and exchange of profesors and students of international law, there was
an indirect relationship between them, and also between them and
education : namely, all of them were on the periphery — if not directly
in the center — of international relations and governmental activities.
That both the foundation and the endowment did carry on activities
which would directly or indirectly affect legislation is borne out by
their own statements, as found in their annual reports.
That they both engaged in propaganda — as that word is defined
in the dictionary, without regard to whether it is for good or bad
ends — is also confirmed by the same source.
That both had as a project forming public opinion and supplying
information to the United States Government to achieve certain ob-
jectives, including an internationalist point of view, there can be no
doubt.
None of these results is inherent in the purposes of either of these
organizations.
Attached to this are abstracts from the yearly reports of both
organizations (identified as Exhibit — Carnegie Endowment for Inter-
national Peace and Exhibit — Rockefeller Foundation and arranged
chronologically), to which reference will be made from time to time
in support of statements as to the type of activity carried out by the
endowment, and occasionally short material of this nature will be
incorporated into the summary. This method has been chosen because
it will materially shorten the text of the summary itself, and still
give the members of the committee the benefit of having before them
statements made by both the endowment and the foundation.
As in part I, this portion of the summary of activities is concerned
only with stating what was done by the Carnegie and Rockefeller
agencies, the time of such activity, and the results, if any.
Purposes
The endowment by its charter was created to :
* * * promote the advancement and diffusion of knowledge and understanding
among the people of the United States ; to advance the cause of peace among
nations ; to hasten the renunciation of war as an instrument of national policy ; to
encourage and promote methods for the peaceful settlement of international
differences and for the increase of international understanding and concord ; and
to aid in the development of international law, and the acceptance of all nations
of the principles underlying such law.
To accomplish its objectives the endowment had three divisions,
each having distinct fields of activity, particularly when originally
established, but as will be seen some of their operations have become
somewhat interwoven.
The primary objective of the division of international law was the
development of it, a genera] agreement — accepted by all nations — as
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 871
to its rules, accompanied by establishment of better understanding of
international rights and duties, and a better sense of international
justice.
The division of economics and history had its program outlined at a
conference at Berne which laid out a plan of investigation to reveal the
causes and results of war. Many of the topics bear a rather close
resemblance to effects now found in the national life.
The purposes for which the division of intercourse and education
was instituted were the diffusion of information, and education of
public opinion regarding, not only the causes, nature, cultivation of
friendly feelings between people of different countries and effects of
war, but also means for its prevention ; maintenance, promotion, and
assistance of organizations considered to be necessary or useful for
such purposes. It was first referred to as the division of propa-
ganda 1 — a name changed at the time it w T as formally established.
This division from the beginning expended much more money than
did the other two divisions, or the office of the secretary.
Compared with the activities of the other two divisions in these early
years those of the division of economics and history were fairly routine,
although with the outbreak of the First World War it was to start on
what developed into some 30 volumes of the economic history of that
war. While some of the economic measures which were covered in
that history and in other phases of the divisions were significant in the
light of the types of controls which were established in this country
during the Second World War, it is really with the work of the other
two divisions that this summary will primarily concern itself, since
their activities were more often in the international relations, propa-
ganda, political, and government relations areas.
The Rockefeller Foundation has a much more general and more
inclusive purpose : "To promote the well-being of mankind through-
out the world. " There is scarcely any lawful activity which would not
come within that classification, and undoubtedly some proscribed by
various statutes in this country might conceivably still be construed
as for the "well-being of mankind" elsewhere.
Before 1929, as mentioned in the earlier portion of this summary,
the Rockefeller Foundation confined its activities primarily to the
fields of medical education and public health, with some attention
being given to agriculture. Except in the sense that activities in each
of these fields were carried on outside of the United States, they had
relatively nothing to do with "international relations," but in the light
of later activities of the foundation in connection with "one-world"
theories of government and planning on a global scale there seems little
doubt that there is at least a causative connection.
The activities of the foundation are now (and have been for some
time) carried on by four divisions: Division of medicine and public
health, division of natural sciences and agriculture, division of social
sciences (including a section entitled international relations), and
division of humanities.
It is impossible to discuss the activities of the endowment and the
foundation entirely by subject headings, because one merges into the
other, and therefore they will be discussed in relation to the following :
International relations, governmental relations, political activities, and
propaganda.
1 Finch History.
54610 — 54 7
872 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
As mentioned earlier, the primary interests of these organizations
Were in divergent areas, but from 1929 the activities of both the endow-
ment and the foundation were along more or less parallel lines —
although again the descriptive phraseology of the endowment is usually
much more direct than that of the foundation as will be seen by quota-
tions from annual reports of each organization.
Because of the characteristic similarity, graphically illustrated by
the chart at the end of this summary, the activities of both organiza-
tions from 1929 on will be discussed together. However, since the
endowment's program began prior to that time, details of it will be
included first.
Endowment activities — 1911-B9
The endowment was dedicated to achieving world peace and in
doing that it utilized every method it deemed appropriate and effective.
One method chosen was international law — and it immediately set
about to establish a coordinated national system of instruction through-
out the country in that subject. The 1930 yearbook, page 108, refers
to a meeting of international law and international relations professors
who met "in conference in order to discuss and to agree upon the best
methods to reach and educate the youth— primarily of the United
States — in the principles of international law and the basis of foreign
relations."
In addition to international law, another method selected by the
endowment as a means of achieving international amity, was what
throughout the years is referred to in such terms as "education of
public opinion," "development of the international mind,"' "enlighten-
ment of public opinion," and "stimulation of public education." This
last phrase it may be noted was used by Alger Hiss in his Recom-
mendations of the President, pages 16 and 17 of the 1947 yearbook,
in which he also recommended "most earnestly" that the endowment's
program for the period ahead be constructed "primarily for the sup-
port and assistance of the United Nations." At times these phrases
were coupled with "diffusing information" or "dissemination of in-
formation" but more frequently they were not. This part of the
endowment's work was not confined to the United States — it also
selected material to be distributed abroad through various means,
and circulated foreign pamphlets on various subjects in this country.
There is little doubt that the endowment regarded its work as educa-
tional and as fostering world peace — and there is equally little doubt
that the work was in the international relations field, and consistently
of a propaganda nature. For example, as far back as June 1917 it
cooperated with the Academy of Political Science on a National Con-
ference on Foreign Relations of the United States, the stated purpose
being "to organize a campaign of education among the people of the
United States on the international situation then existing."
Again in 1926 the endowment sponsored a conference on interna-
tional problems and relations — the aim being to "create and diffuse in
the United States a wider knowledge of the facts and a broader and
more sympathetic interest in international problems and relations."
Several of the topics assume significance in the light of later events —
"International cooperation in public health and social welfare" and
"Economic adjustments."
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 873
Viewed in the light of what the endowment did then and later in
its campaign of education, and "to create and diffuse * * * a wider
knowledge" as well as the agencies it chose to carry them out, these
early ventures seem rather.significant.
Throughout the years the reports cover such subjects as inter-
national relations clubs, international mind alcoves, international re-
lations centers, international economic cooperation, exchange profes-
sors, international visits, and the like. Its relationship with the
American Association of International Conciliation continued until
1924 when its activities were merged with those of the division.
According to Dr. Finch that organization was selected by Dr. Butler
as "the chief propaganda agency of the division" (p. 446 of Finch
History).
The endowment was really just getting started when the First
World War raised serious obstacles to its work abroad. However, be-
fore that event it had selected as "agencies of propaganda" (a name
later discarded) various of the peace societies, in which Mr. Carnegie
had been intensely interested.
However, some projects of importance were underway. The divi-
sion of international law had surveyed the situation existing with re-
gard to the teaching of that subject in colleges and universities in the
United States, and by the time war broke out in 1914 compiled a tabula-
tion showing the professors, instructors, and lecturers on international
law and related subjects during the collegiate year 1911-12.
The immediate result of this was placing the subject of fostering
"the study of international law" on the agenda of the American
Society of International Law in 1914, at the request of the endowment.
From that beginning grew the great influence of the endowment in
this field's increased facilities for the study of international law, uni-
form instruction differentiation between undergraduate and graduate
instructions, and inclusion of a host of "related'' subjects. According
to the Carnegie Endowment History by Dr. Finch, a check by the divi-
sion on the effects of its efforts showed the material increase both in
number of hours and the enlargement of classes which he estimates as
45 percent from 1911 to 1922, and a still further increase by 1928. He
also mentioned that in 1928 there were six former holders of the en-
dowment's international law fellowships teaching in foreign univer-
sities (p. 319 of the Finch History) .
Fellowships in international law
At the recommendation of the American Society of International
Law (made December 1916) the endowment established fellowships
for the study of international law and related subjects. There were
5 awarded annually to graduate students holding the equivalent of a
bachelor's degree and 5 to teachers of international law or related sub-
jects with 1 year of previous teaching experience.
A total of 212 fellowships were awarded from 1917 to 1936 (about
•one-sixth being renewals) , of which 128 were to students and 84 to
teachers. Dr. Finch states that while complete records are not avail-
able, information in the files and in Who's Who as well as personal
contacts show that two-thirds entered the teaching profession and he
then continues (pp. 323 et seq.) :
As the years went by, most of these teachers improved their positions. Some
became senior professors or heads of departments. Three became university
874 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
presidents : Colgate W. Darden, Jr., is president of the University of Virginia ;
Norman A, M. MacKenzie became president of the University of New Brunswick
and later of the University of British Columbia ; Henry M. Wriston, after serving
as president of Lawrence College, is now president of Brown University;'
Bessie C. Randolph became president of Hollins College, Virginia, and Bernice
Brown (Cronkhite) is dean of Radcliffe College. Frederick S. Dunn, of Johns
Hopkins University, is now director of the Yale Institute of International Studies.
Two former fellows were elected to the United States Congress, Charles West, of
Ohio, and Colgate W. Darden, of Virginia. Mr. Darden then served as Governor
of Virginia before he accepted the presidency of the university of his State.
Leadership has been assumed by former international law fellows in the
organization and direction of community and regional centers in different areas
of the country for the promotion of international understanding and cooperation
in international organization. Keener C. Frazer, professor of political science of
the University of North Carolina, became director of the Southern Council on
International Relations. J. Eugene Harley, professor of political science at the
University of Southern California, became director for the Center for Interna-
tional Understanding at Los Angeles, and chairman of the Commission to Study
the Organization of Peace in the southern California region ; Charles E. Martin,
professor of international law and head of the department of political science
of the University of Washington, is chairman of the Institute of Public Affairs
of Seattle, and of the Northwest Commission to Study the Organization of Peace.
Brooks Emeny, of Cleveland, Ohio, was director of foreign affairs council of
that city, and then became president of the Foreign Policy Association in New
York. Another former endowment fellow, Vera Micheles (Dean) is the director
of research of the same organization.
Some 16 former fellows are now in the service of the Department of State
occupying positions of varying responsibilities. The most outstanding of this
group is Philip C. Jessup, now Ambassador-at-Large, and representing the Gov-
ernment of the United States in the United Nations and other important inter-
national conferences attempting to restore peace to the world. At least two
former endowment fellows who entered the military service were appointed to
responsible positions requiring a knowledge of international law. Hardy C.
Dillard, of the University of Virginia, was director of studies of the United States
Army's School of Military Government located at that university, and later occu-
pied the same position at the National War College in Washington. Charles
Fairman, of Stanford University, was Chief of the International Law Division of
the Office of Theater Judge Advocate in the European Theater of Operations.
Several former endowment fellows were selected by the Government to go on
cultural and educational missions to the occupied areas, and two of them served
as consultants to General MacArthur in Tokyo (Claude A. Buss of the University
of Southern California, and Kenneth W. Colegrove of Northwestern University).
A former endowment fellow, Francis 0. Wilcox, is chief of staff of the Senate
Committee on Foreign Relations, assisted by another former fellow Thorsten
Kalijarvi.
Of special interest is the career of John H. Spencer, of Harvard, after studying
under a fellowship. He was appointed legal adviser to Emperor Hailie Selassie,
of Ethiopia before World War II. He returned to the United States and served
in the State Department and United States Navy while the Italian Army occu-
pied that country, and then returned to his former post in Addis Ababa at the
urgent request of the Emperor, supported by the Department of State. John
R. Humphrey, an international law fellow from McGill University, Montreal,
became Director of the Diyision on Human Rights of the United Nations Secre-
tariat.
He concludes with this statement :
The immediate objective, namely, to provide an adequate number of teachers
competent to give instruction in international law and related subjects, and thus
to aid colleges and universities in extending and improving the teaching of these
subjects, was demonstrably achieved. T'rom this selective educational group
have emerged leaders of opinion as well as of action in the conduct of inter-
national relations directed toward the goal for which the endowment was
founded.
2 Dr. Wriston was elected a trustee of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
in 1943. He Is also a trustee of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching
and of the World Peace Foundation. He holds membership in several learned societies, is
a former president of the Association of American Colleges and president of the Association
of American Universities.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 875
At the same time, the division of intercourse and education was set-
ting out on a policy stated by Dr. Butler to be :
To lay little stress upon those aspects of peace propaganda that are primarily
rhetorical and feeling in character, but rather to organize throughout the world
centers of influence and constructive policy that may be used in the years to
come as the foundation upon which to erect a superstructure of international
confidence and good will and therefore of peace.
In view of the division's activities later in behalf of the League of
Nations and the United Nations, this has a somewhat prophetic ring.
Compared with the activities of the other divisions, the activities of
the division of intercourse and education were much more varied, and
the yearbooks contain innumerable references to its activities which
indicate that they were more concentrated in the fields covered by this
summary.
One.of the very first actions of the division in 1911 was the appoint-
ment of special correspondents throughout the world to report on con-
ditions in their respective countries and on public opinion here regard-
ing international problems between their governments and other
nations. When, in the opinion of the division, it was proper, extracts
were given to the American press. The decision of which to give and
which to withhold was entirely within the discretion of the division,
and that undoubtedly meant Dr. Butler. In view of his intense desire
to achieve peace, and his equally firm conviction that an international
organization could best accomplish that, it is entirely conceivable that
his judgment as to the material to be released might be influenced by
his own convictions and desires — and this would be equally true in the
case of any human being.
The correspondents also made the endowment's work known in their
countries through the press, interviews and speeches, and officially
represented it at undertakings of international cooperation and under-
standing.
This system was discontinued in 1930 because by that time the di-
vision had established —
such a network of worldwide connections involving continuous correspondence
as to make it no longer necessary to employ the services of special correspondents.
Just after the war started in 1914, the division engaged prominent
persons to lecture before colleges, chambers of commerce, clubs, and
similar audiences on the subject of past and present history as it related
to current international problems. Among the speakers were David
Starr Jordan, Hamilton Wright Mabie, and George W. Kirchwey.
Dr. Butler instructions as to the endowment's purpose in sponsoring
these lectures were,
This work is to educate and enlighten public opinion and not to carry on a special
propaganda in reference to the unhappy conditions which now prevail throughout
a large part of the world. It is highly important that purely contentious ques^
tions be avoided so far as possible and that attention he fixed on those underlying
principles of international conduct, of international law, and of international or-
ganization which must he agreed upon and enforced if peaceful civilization is to
continue (letter to Dean Frederick P. Keppel, May 28, 1915-16 yearbook, p. 67).
International mind alcoves
These were described in the yearbook of the endowment and typical
references are given in the exhibit. Following the entry of the United
States into World War I a systematic purchase and distribution of
books and pamphlets dealing with international relations generally
876 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
and the causes and effects of war, as well as the possible terms of peace,
was begun by the division of intercourse and education. Dr. Butler
is generally credited with coining the phrase "international mind" and
from the time the distribution to libraries was begun they were known
as "international mind alcoves" and so referred to in the annual
reports.
The endowment has described the books selected and distributed by
it as "authoritative and unbiased books of a type suitable to interest
the general reader dealing with the daily life, customs and history of
other countries." In that connection, among the books distributed to
these alcoves and to the international relations clubs (and interna-
tional relations centers) are those referred to in a memorandum which
forms an exhibit to this summary, and is entitled "Exhibit — Carnegie,
Books Distributed." The endowment has contributed $804,000 to
this activity. Dr. Colegrove's comments on some of these volumes
indicate there was only one viewpoint presented — that of the one
world internationalist — and books written from a strictly nationalist
point of view were not included.
International relations clubs and conferences
These clubs in the United States were in part, an outgrowth of
groups of European students organized by the World Peace Founda-
tion, and known as Corda Fratres. The endowment at the request
of the World Peace Foundation contributed to the Eighth Interna-
tional Congress of Students, and the following year (1914) the di-
vision of intercourse and education began to actively organize what it
described as International Polity Clubs in colleges and universities
throughout the country, for the purpose of stimulation of interest in
international problems in the United States. The name was changed
in 1919 to International Eelations Clubs, and while interest diminished
for a few years after World War I, the clubs began a steady annual
increase before too long, which has been sustained to the present time.
About 1924 the first conference was organized of a federation of
clubs in the Southern States, which became known as the Southeast
International Relations Clubs Conference. The idea quickly spread
and a dozen such regional centers were formed. (From 1921 until 1*946
the endowment contributed $450,425 toward this program.)
Here again the purpose of the endowment is stated (International
Relations Club Handbook, 1926) to be :
to educate and enlighten public opinion. It is not to support any single view
as to how best to treat the conditions which now prevail throughout the world,
but to fix the attention of students on those underlying principles of interna-
tional conduct, of international law, and of international organization which
must be agreed upon and applied if peaceful civilization is to continue.
However, mere statement of purpose as frequently pointed out by
the Bureau of Internal Revenue is not sufficient — the activities must
follow the purpose ; and those of the endowment do not bear out its
statement "not to support any single view." Throughout its reports,
by the books it has distributed, by the agencies it has used for various
projects, by the endowment graduates which have found their places
in Government- — the endowment has put forward only one side of the
question, that of an international organization for peace. It has not
sponsored projects advocating other means.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 877
The endowment's evaluation of these clubs is contained in frequent
references in its reports, only one of which is included in the Exhibit —
Carnegie, that from the yearbook for 1943, pages 37-38,
Dr. Johnson in response to a letter requesting information as to
the formation and activities of these clubs, wrote the committee on
April 29, 1954, and both the request and the reply are included in
Exhibit — Carnegie.
These clubs were formed in 1914 and have operated for 40 years in
colleges, universities, and high schools. In 1938 according to Dr.
Johnson there were 1,103 clubs : 265 in high schools and 685 in col-
leges and universities throughout the United States ; with 11 scattered
in the Philippines, Hawaii, Alaska, Canal Zone, and Puerto Rico ; 24
in the United Kingdom, 34 in 14 Latin American countries, 22 in
China, 9 in Japan, 2 in Korea; and the remaining' 51 in Canada,
Egypt, Greece, Iran, Iraq, Siam, New Zealand, Australia, South
Africa, Syria, and India.
Dr. Johnson's concluding statement that "a contribution was made
to a better understanding of the responsibilities which our country
now bears as a world power" is quite understandable under the cir-
cumstances. Some of the other aspects of these clubs will be discussed
in connection with the Foreign Policy Association.
Visiting Carnegie professors
In addition to the exchange professors of the division of interna-
tional law the division of intercourse and education in 1927 initiated
its own plan of exchange professors. It was inaugurated by sending
abroad the directors of the other two divisions as visiting professors
that year, Dr. James Scott Brown going to lecture at universities in
Latin America and Spain, and Dr. James T. Shotwell being sent to
Berlin. The other prominent Americans closely identified with this
field who went abroad to represent the endowment were Dr. David P.
Barrows, former president of the University of California, and an
elected trustee of the endowment in 19S1; and Dr. Henry Suzzalli,
former president of the University of Washington at Seattle and
chairman of the board of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advance-
ment of Teaching. The exchange professors were not restricted to
international law and political science, but included professors of
public law, history, and other subjects.
The endowment also arranged for European tours for newspaper
editors, and a reciprocal tour of the United States for a group from
Europe.
Political activities
In addition to these projects already described, the endowment quite
early in its career (1913-14) had a brush with the United States Sen-
ate regarding Senator Boot's statements on the floor of the Senate
during the controversy over exemption of American coastwise vessels
from payment of Panama Canal tolls.
The Senate Committee on Judiciary was directed to investigate
the charge that "a lobby is maintained to influence legislation pending
in the Senate." (Pt. 62, March 13, 1914, pp. 4770-4808.) Apparently,
there had been some question as to whether the exceedingly widespread
distribution of the Senator's speeches by the endowment had been at
878 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Government expense. In his history, Dr. Finch discussing the incident
says :
There was little real need for any outside investigation of the work of the
endowment. From the beginning the trustees regarded themselves as the admin-
istrators of a quasi-public trust fund. Complete accounts of all activities and of
expenditures detailed as much as practicable within reasonable printed limits,
were published annually in the yearbook beginning with 1911. In it were given
the names of the trustees, officers and membership of committees, and the full
texts of the reports of the executive committee, the Secretary, the treasurer,
and of the directors of the three divisions. Summaries were published in the
yearbook of the meetings of the board of trustees, with the texts of their
resolutions and the amount and general purposes of their appropriations. Lists
with bibliographical data were added of all endowment publications up to that
time. The yearbook was obtainable free of charge upon application. It had a
regular mailing list of 5,000 to 10,000 addresses, which included all the important
newspaper offices in the United States and many in foreign countries.
The endowment also actively advocated passage of the reciprocal
trade agreements legislation, adherence to the Anglo-American agree-
ments and carried on various other activities of a political nature, as
the extracts from their annual reports confirm.
After World War I the endowment's trustees seemed to have been
divided in their ideas on how best to begin anew their efforts to build
a peaceful world. Some members of the board were still of the opinion
that international law, arbitration treaties and the like offered the
greatest hope, while others looked to an "international organization"
of nations, as the best means to accomplish this objective.
The matter was resolved, officially at least, by the endowment putting
its strength behind the League of Nations or failing that, adherence to
the World Court. Here again, the attitude and activities of the
endowment can be readily ascertained by reference to the exhibit in
which only a few of the many such statements have been included.
Early in its career the endowment began the close working arrange-
ments with the Federal Government which have continued down to
the present time. Immediately after the United States entered World
War I the trustees passed a resolution offering to the Government "the
services of its division of international law, its personnel and equip-
ment for dealing with the pressure of international business incident
to the war."
The Secretary of State first asked that the division translate and
publish the complete text of the proceedings of the two Hague Con-
ferences and preliminary copies were made available to the American
Commission to Negotiate Peace at Paris in 1918. The division also
aided in the preparatory work for the peace conference, and the mate-
rial for the use of the American delegation was selected (at a cost of
$30,000 paid by the endowment) by a committee of three appointed by
the Secretary of State— the director of the division of international
law, the Solicitor of the Department, Lester H. Woolsey, and a special
assistant in the Department, David Hunter Miller. Much of the
material was the work of regular division personnel and all manu-
scripts were edited by it.
The director of the division of international law was one of the two
principal legal advisers of the American Commission to Negotiate
Peace, the assistant director, Dr. Finch, was assistant legal adviser, as
were the chief division assistant, Henry G. Crocker, and Prof. Amos.
S. Hershey (who was added to the professional staff to aid in the work
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 879
for the State Department) ; and George D. Gregory accompanied the
American group as secretarial-assistant translator.
The endowment also took part in the conference on the limitation of
armament and pacific relations in 1921-22, Elihu Root then president
of the endowment being one of the official "United States delegates and
James Brown Scott, director of the division of international law, one
of the legal advisers.
Here again, the endowment offered the Secretary of State its co-
operation, which was accepted and a few weeks later Secretary of
State Hughes suggested that the endowment issue a series of pam-
phlets on the principal problems coming before the Conference.
President Root reporting to the board on April 21, 1922 said :
I really do not know how the far-eastern work of the late Conference Upon
the Limitation of Armament could have been done without McMurray's book
which had just a few months before been published by the endowment. The
whole process of ranging the nine nations represented in the Conference upon
a basis of agreement for the treatment of Chinese questions so as to facilitate
the heroic efforts of the Chinese people to develop an effective and stable self-
government would have been exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, if we had not
had those two big volumes published by the endowment upon our tables for
access at any moment. We were continually referring to them and the members
could turn to such a page and find such a treaty and such an agreement and have
the real facts readily accessible.
When the Rockefeller Foundation turned to the social sciences and
the humanities as the means to advance the "well-being" of humanity,
the section entitled "Social Sciences" in the annual report was set up
under the following headings, which remained unchanged until 1935 :
General Social Science Projects: Cooperative Undertakings.
Research in Fundamental Disciplines.
Interracial and International Studies.
Current Social Studies.
Research in the Field of Public Administration.
Fundamental Research and Promotion of Certain Types of Organization.
Fellowships in the Social Sciences.
The report states that the arrangement was for the purpose of
"simplification and in order to emphasize the purpose for which ap-
propriations have been made."
In the decade 1929-38 the foundation's grants to social-science
projects amounted to $31.4 millions and grants were made to such
agencies as the Brookings Institution, the Social Science Research
Council, the National Research Council, the Foreign Policy Associa-
tion, the Council on Foreign Relations, and the Institute of Pacific
Relations in this country as well as a dozen or more in other countries,
and the Fiscal Committee of the League of Nations.
The original plunge of the foundation into the field of social science
was at the instigation of Beardsley Ruml, according to Raymond
Fosdick (The Story of the Rockefeller Foundation, p. 194), who in
1922 was appointed director of the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Me-
morial when consolidation of that organization with the foundation
was already being considered. During the 1 years, 1922-29 the me-
morial operated under Ruml's guidance it concentrated on the field of
social sciences and spent $41 million. Referring to the work of the
memorial Dr. Fosdick writes :
He (Ruml) always insisted that his job was with social scientists, rather than
with social science. The ssuins which, under his leadership, were used to stimulate
54610 — 54 8
880 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
scientific investigation were perhaps not large in comparison with aggregate
expenditures for social sciences, but they represented a new margin of re-
sources, and they were employed dramatically at a strategic moment. Chan-
cellor Hutchins of the University of Chicago, speaking in 1929, summed up the
verdict in words which a longer perspective will probably not overrule : "The
Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial, in its brief but brilliant career, did more
than any other agency to promote the social sciences in the United States-."
Dr. Ruml was the head of the memorial for all but the first 4 years
of its existence.
Since the foundation absorbed the memorial's program and carries
on all its activities relating to government and international relations
under the heading of social sciences, these comments by Dr. Fosdick
and Dr. Hutchins have equal applicability to the work of the founda-
tion in these fields.
There is ample evidence from the foundation's yearbooks that it
carried on activities in the field of government of a political and
propaganda nature, as well as in the field of international relations,
and examples of this will be found in the "Exhibit — Rockefeller."
Included in that exhibit also are the statement of Mr. Chester I.
Barnard in the Cox committee hearings, page 563, speaking of his
work as "the consultant of the State Department * * * on different
things from time to time," and quotations from Dr. Fosdick's book on
the foundation.
In 1935 the foundation's activities again were reorganized, and that
year the section "Social Sciences" begins: "In 1935 the foundation
program in the social sciences were reorganized along new lines with
emphasis upon certain definite fields of interest."
Major changes were termination of financial aid to general institu-
tional research in the social sciences here and abroad, elimination of
grants for "the promotion of basic economic research," for community
organization and planning (unless within the scope of one of the new
fields of interest) , cultural anthropology, and schools of social work.
From then on the foundation was to concentrate on three areas of
study: Social security, international relations, and public adminis-
tration.
Subsequent statements made by the foundation concerning its work
in each of these fields will be discussed in the concluding portions of
this summary.
The same year that the foundation publicly announced that its
activities in the field of social science would be confined to interna-
tional relations and relations with government, the endowment was
engaged in a project related to both which exemplifies the methods
frequently used by the endowment in attempting to achieve world
peace. This project was the calling of an unofficial conference in
March of 1935 to consider possible steps to promote trade and reduc-
tion of unemployment, stabilization of national monetary systems, and
better organization of the family of nations to give security and
strengthen the foundations on which international peace must rest.
From this grew the reorganization of the National Peace Confer-
ence, composed of 32 newly organized city and State peace councils,
with its committees of experts appointed to supply factual data and
analyses of international affairs. Among the commissions were ones
on economics and peace, national defense, the world community, and
the Far East.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 881
Of particular interest is the fact that the director of the League of
Nations Association, Clark M. Eichelberger, later to occupy the same
position with the Association for the United Nations, was placed in
charge of the endowment's educational program. Dr. Finch's com-
ment on this indicates the extensive nature of Dr. Eichelberger's
contacts through this assignment.
* * * He traveled extensively throughout the United States developing con-
tacts which resulted in the adoption of programs within numerous organizations,
some not hitherto reached hy the endowment. Among them were : United States
Department of Agriculture Extension Service through its county and home-
demonstration agents and discussion specialists in the field ; extension services
of State agricultural colleges; American Farm Bureau Federation and Asso-
ciated Women of the Federation ; National Farmers Educational and Cooperative
Union of America; Junior Farmers Union; 4r-H Clubs; National Grange; in-
formal community forums and Federal forums sponsored by the United States
Bureau of Education; classes and forums conducted by the Works Progress
Administration ; adult education ; workers' education and labor unions ; churches,
women's clubs, university groups, Rotary, and other service clubs. Leadership-
training conferences were established for the training of organizational repre-
sentatives from which the best qualified were selected for discussion leaders.
Literature was prepared by the division and supplied for use in discussion
programs. Basic pamphlet material of the Department of State was also used.
The radio played an important part. Local stations were supplied with electrical
transcriptions of addresses on world economic problems.
Dr. Finch has another comment as to the methods used in carrying
on this "educational program" :
The educational program did not necessarily start with the subject of
international relations as such, but with topics which would help the member-
ship of these groups to recognize and analyze the economic, social, and educa-
tional problems within their own organizations and communities, and to under-
stand the factors, local, national, and international which create these problems ;
to discover to what extent each economic group could contribute toward the
solution of their common problems, and to what extent solutions of local prob-
lems were dependent upon national and international relations; to know and
use the sources of information on public and international problems.
The National Peace Conference extended this "educational" work
in 1938 by undertaking "an educational campaign for world economic
cooperation," using Peaceful Change — Alternative to War, published
by the Foreign Policy Association, as the basic handbook. According
to Dr. Nicholas Murray Butler (1938 yearbook, p. 48) this campaign
was undertaken to emphasize the importance of putting into effect
the recommendations of the joint committee of the endowment and
the International Chamber of Commerce, and had two phases. The
first, from September 1937 to March 1938, was on education in the
fundamentals of world economic cooperation followed by a nation-
wide conference scheduled for March 1938 in Washington, D. C, to
appraise the campaign up to that time, "to consider recommendations
of practical policy prepared by a committee of experts under the direc-
tion of Prof. Eugene Staley, and to formulate conclusions on specific
Government policies." The second phase was another campaign of
education from March 1938 to January 1939.
It is apparent merely from reading the Rockefeller Foundation's
list of its "fields of interest" that in all probability it would frequently
contribute to the identical project and the identical organization, re-
ceiving contributions from the endowment. This is exactly what hap-
pened, and while in the amount of time available it is not possible
to itemize the projects, it is possible to select typical examples from
the agencies to which it contributed.
882 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
As a matter of fact, the endowment and the foundation concen-
trated their grants among the same agencies in practically every case.
Moreover, as it will become apparent, at times a joint activity (in the
sense that both contributed funds to a particular project or organ-
ization) was related to both Government and to international rela-
tions. Several of such organizations aided by both organizations will
be discussed separately because they are particularly pertinent to the
relations of the foundations to both Government and international
relations.
Institute of International Education
This was one of the first agencies to receive contributions from the
foundation when it enlarged its sphere of activity to include the
social sciences, and it has continued to make grants every year since
then.
The institution was authorized by the executive committee of the
endowment at Dr. Butler's instigation in 1919, as an integral part
of the Division of Intercourse and Education for the—
purpose of fostering and promoting closer international relations and under-
standing between the people of the United States and other countries, to act
as a clearinghouse of information and advice on such matters and to systematize
the exchange of visits of teachers and students between colleges and universities
of the United States and those of foreign countries.
It arranged itineraries and lecture tours for visiting professors and
circuited the visiting professors among the colleges and universities
of the United States, including visits to the International Eelations
Clubs.
In Department of State publication 2137, page 9, entitled "The
Cultural Cooperation Program, 1938-43," there is the following state-
ment as to the place the institute came to occupy in international
education :
The Institute of International Education in New York, a private organization,
began after the First World War to persuade universities in the United States
and in Europe to offer full scholarships (tuition, board, and lodging) for exchange
students. More than 100 universities in the United States and a Similar number
in Europe cooperated. The institute reported that during the period' 1920-38
approximately 2,500 foreign students were brought to the United States under
this plan, and 2,357 American students were placed in foreign universities.
The cash value of scholarships given by American universities to this group
of foreign students was $1,970,000, and the scholarships to American students
abroad were valued at $917,000. This plan is especially significant because it
won support from so large a number of private institutions, each of which was
willing to invest its own funds in the exchange of students.
The endowment also continued its contributions to this institute —
funds from both organizations amounting to approximately $5
million.
Foreign Policy Association
This organization received grants from the endowment, and, in
addition, many of its pamphlets were distributed to the International
Mind Alcoves and the International Eelations Clubs.
In that connection, one of the persons whose books were distributed
by the endowment was Vera Micheles Dean, who is referred to later in
this summary. Mrs. Dean was given an international law scholarship
by the endowment in 1925-26.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 883
The Rockefeller Foundation between 1934 and 1945 (when it made a
tapering grant of $200,000) contributed $625,000 to the research, pub-
lication and educational activities of the Foreign Policy Association,
In 1950, when it terminated aid to the association, the foundation in its
annual report indicated that its reason for doing so was that it was
operating largely on a stable and self-supporting basis. However, in
1952 the Adult Education Fund of the Ford Foundation gave $335,-
000 to the association.
The Rockefeller Foundation in addition to contributing funds to the
Foreign Policy Association has referred to the Headline Series in its
annual reports, and, while not fulsome in praise, there is no doubt that
the foundation approved of them — the 1950 annual report (exhibit —
Rockefeller) refers to these books as the "popular Headline Books,"
with details on problems of importance to Americans and to the world.
Dr. Johnson, after describing the International Relations Clubs
(exhibit — Carnegie) adds that these clubs have now become associ-
ated with the Foreign Policy Association. In that connection, the
McCarran committee hearings contain frequent references to the inter-
locking association of that organization with the Institute of Pacific
Relations, and includes, among other exhibits, No. 1247, which dis-
cussed the Headline book, Russia at War, and refers to the good job
Eerformed by the Foreign Policy Association of promoting Mrs.
>ean's pamphlet, through the regular channels.
Time has not permitted extensive inspection of the volumes pub-
lished by the Foreign Policy Association, but Vera Micheles Dean who
was the research director of the Foreign Policy Association and editor
of its research publications is referred to frequently in the McCarran
committee reports on the Institute of Pacific Relations. She is the au-
thor of Russia — Menace or Promise? one of the Headline Series, as
well as the United States and Russia (1948).
While the Association refers to itself as a nonprofit American organ-
ization founded to carry on research and educational activities to aid
in the understanding and constructive development of American for-
eign policy which does not seek to promote any one point of view to-
ward international affairs, this statement is somewhat equivocal both
in view of the nature of its publications, and also because in those re-
viewed little attention was paid to the possibility of a nationalist
point of view as opposed to an internationalist one.
Another of the Headline Series, World of Great Powers, by Max
Lerner (1947) , contains the following language :
There are undoubtedly valuable elements in the capitalist economic organi-
zations. The economic techniques of the future are likely to be an amalgam of
the techniques of American business management with those of Government
ownership, control, and regulation. For the peoples of the world, whatever their
philosophies, are moving toward similar methods of making their economic
system work.
If democracy is to survive, it too must move toward socialism — a socialism
guarded by the political controls of a State that maintains the tradition of in-
tellectual consent and the freedom of political opposition. And the imperatives
of survival are stronger than the winds of capitalist doctrine.
This is an arduous road for democracy to travel, and it may not succeed. But
it is the only principle that can organize the restless energies of the world's
peoples. * * *
884 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Lerner's attitude insofar as Russia is concerned is indicated by
this language on pages 34 and 35, after stating that both Russia and
the United States merely want world peace and security :
The successive layers of fear and suspicion on both sides can he stripped away
only when both show a creativeness in approaching each other halfway. This
would mean, for America, reopening the question of granting Russia a loan
or credits for the purchasing of machines and machine tools. These the Soviet
Union sorely needs for peacetime production and for lifting the terribly low
standards of living of the Russian people. For Russia it would mean a com-
mitment to return to the world economic and trade councils from which it with-
drew after Bretton Woods.
Moving from the economic to the political level, it would mean a willingness
on America's part to grant greater United Nations control of Japan and the
former Japanese island bases in the Pacific, and on Russia's part to be less
truculent about her sphere of influence in eastern Europe. Given such economic
and political agreements, a meeting of minds would become possible on the
international control of atomic energy, which is the central question both of
disarmament and peace.
One further illustration of the internationalist trend of the Foreign
Policy Association will be found in another Headline Series volume,
Freedom's Charter, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, by
Dr. O. Frederick Nolde, which deals with the covenants on human
rights without referring to the criticisms made of their possible effects
on the Constitution and its Bill of Rights, and the entire tone of the
pamphlet is one of praise for the universal declaration. By a tech-
nique frequently found in pamphlets which are pro-United Nations
and its activities, Dr. Nolde obliquely places those who disagree with
the universal declaration — for whatever reason — in a category with
the Soviet Union who also object to certain phases, for example : "So-
viet emphasis on state sovereignty appeared in other contexts, also.
Many delegates contended that the universal protection of man's rights
will require a measurable yielding of national sovereignty. As previ-
ously pointed out, the U. S. S. R. took radical exception to this
contention."
Up to the time this summary was written no book or pamphlet of
a contrary point of view (published by the association) has been
found — which raises the question of a comparison between the theory
expressed by the association not to seek to promote any one point of
view and of the type of books and pamphlets it sponsors and publishes.
Council on Foreign Relations
Here again the two organizations — the Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace and the Rockefeller Foimdation — have been
substantial contributors to the work of an agency in the international
field. And again, as in the case of the Foreign Policy Association, it
is evident from the publications of the council that its approach is not
an unbiased one.
The Council has published studies by the following :
Public Opinion and Foreign Policy — Lester Markel and others.
International Security — Philip C. Jessup.
World Economy in Transition and Raw Materials in Peace and War — Eugene
Staley.
The Challenge to Isolation, 1937-40 — William L,. Langer and S. T. Everett
Gleason.
Dr. Langer was later selected by the Council and the foundation to-
prepare a history of American foreign policy from 1939 to 1946, which
has been stated to be a one-sided interpretation rather than an objec-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 885
tive history of American foreign policy. No grants have since been
made (so far as can be ascertained from their records) by either the
Council or the foundation for preparation of a contrary evaluation
of this subject — and neither organization supported the volume by
Professor Tansill published a year or so ago, which gives the other side
of the picture.
It is interesting to note that shortly after World War II exploded
in September 1939, representatives of the Council visited the Depart-
ment of State to offer its assistance on the problems the conflict had
created and offered to undertake work in certain fields, without formal
assignment of responsibility on one side or restriction of independent
action on the other. A tentative outline was prepared for four groups
of experts to undertake research on : Security and Armaments Prob-
lems, Economic and Financial Problems, Political Problems, and Ter-
ritorial Problems. These came to be known as the War and Peace
Studies, and were financed by the Rockefeller Foundation under the
Council's committee on studies.
About February 1941, the informal character of the relationship
between the State Department and the Council ceased The Depart-
ment established a Division of Special Research composed of Eco-
nomic, Political, Territorial, and Security Sections, and engaged the
secretaries who had been serving with the Council groups to partici-
pate in the work of the new Division.
Following that, in 1942, a fifth group was added to the War and
Peace Studies, called the Peace Aims Group. This group had been
carrying on discussions regarding the claims of different European
nations, the relation of such claims to each other as well as to the cur-
rent foreign policy of the United States, and their relationship to
eventual postwar settlements. 3 The State Department particularly
commended the work of this last group. That same year the rela-
tionship between the council and the Department became even more
close — the Department appointed Isaiah Bowman and James T. Shot-
well as members of its newly organized "Advisory Committee on
Postwar Foreign Policies." In addition to their association with the
Council of Foreign Relations both had also been associated with
Carnegie organizations.
Particular interest attaches to this activity on the part of the coun-
cil. First of all, the action of the council in offering its services
closely parallels the action of the Carnegie endowment in both the
First and Second World Wars, and in view of Mr. Shotwell's back-
ground it seems likely that it was somewhat a case of taking a leaf
from the same book.
The second reason is because the research secretaries of the War
and Peace studies of the council progressed to other work related to
the organization of peace and the settlement of postwar problems :
Philip E. Mosely, research secretary of the Territorial group, ac-
companied Secretary Hull to Moscow in 1943, when representatives
of Great Britain, the United States, the Soviet Union, and China
issued the Moscow Declaration, the text of which had been prepared
previously in the Committee on Postwar Foreign Policies. Mr.
Mosely later became political adviser to the American member of the*
■ The endowment had conducted a similar study before World War I.
886 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
European Advisory Commission in London, and more recently has
been with the Russian Institute of Columbia University.
Walter R. Sharp, research secretary of the Political group, served
as Secretary General of the United Nations Food Conference at
Quebec in 1945.
Grayson Kirk, research secretary of the Security group, was among
the experts at the Dumbarton Oaks Conference and was executive
officer of commission III at the San Francisco Conference.
Dwight E. Lee, research secretary of the Peace Aims group, was as-
sistant secretary of committee I, commission III at the San Francisco
Conference.
The outside experts also reappeared in other work :
Dr. Isaiah Bowman was a member of the United States delegation
at the Dumbarton Oaks Conference, special adviser to the Secretary
of State, member of the Department's Policy Committee, and adviser
to the American delegation at the San Francisco Conference.
Hamilton Fish Armstrong served as adviser to the American Am-
bassador in London in 1944, with the personal rank of minister, also
as special adviser to the Secretary of State, and as adviser to the
American delegation at the San Francisco Conference.
Walter H. Mallory, secretary of the Steering Committee which
directed the War and Peace Studies, was a member of the Allied Mis-
sion to Observe the Elections in Greece, with the personal rank of
minister, a mission which grew out of the Yalta agreement to assist
liberated countries to achieve democratic regimes responsive to the
wishes of their people.
This does not include any of the several dozen members of these
council groups who were called into the Government in wartime
capacities not connected with formulation of postwar policies. Nor
is any implication intended that pressure was brought to secure
placement of any of these individuals in particular posts. It is self-
evident, however, that the research secretaries as well as the others
referred to later attained positions of influence in relation to the
foreign policy of the United States, and were instrumental in formu-
lation of the United Nations Organization.
During its operations the War and Peace Studies project held 362
meetings and prepared and sent to the State Department close to
700 documents, which were distributed to all appropriate officers, and
also reached other departments and agencies of the Government, since
representatives of many such agencies were informal members of
council groups. With a few exceptions these documents are now
in the council library and available for study.
The endowment also had direct association during this period
with the State Department, in addition to its association through
the work of the council just described, through its Division of Inter-
national Law. This association arose following Pearl Harbor in
1941, when the endowment offered and the Department accepted the
services of that Division, thus again establishing an informal basis
of cooperation.
At that time Philip Jessup, who was director of the division of inter-
national law from 1940 to 1943, resigned to devote his entire time to
Government service.
Following several exploratory conferences to determine what could
be learned from the experience of the League of Nations, the division
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 887
"established relations with many highly qualified and experienced
experts making it possible to plan and arrange for the preparation
of * * * series of studies on international organization and admin-
istration. * * *"
The first was International Law of the Future, Postulates, Prin-
ciples, and Proposals. It was followed by :
International Tribunals, Past and Future
The International Secretariat: A Great Experiment in International Admin-
istration
Guide to the Practice of International Conferences
League of Nations and National Minorities
The Economic and Financial Organization of the League of Nations
Immunities and Privileges of International Officials
International Drug Control
Mandates, Dependencies, and Trusteeship
The Customs Union Issue
The 1944 yearbook, pages 67-70 of the report of the director of the
division of international law, in a section devoted to the work program
of the division, refers to this statement of the International Law of the
Future, a second part containing "Principles," and a third part con-
taining "Proposals," and in the extract from this yearbook (complete
text is included in "Exhibit — Carnegie") there are these statements :
* * * In line with the Moscow Declaration, the Postulates envisage a "general
international organization for the maintenance of international peace and
security." The principles are offered as a draft of a declaration which might be
officially promulgated as the basis of the international law of the future. The
proposals for international organization are not offered as a draft of a treaty
hut as suggestions for implementing the principles.
The following year, 1945, the yearbook has the following statement,
page 84 :
It is apparent from a reading of the proposals for the establishment of a
general international organization adopted at Dumbarton Oaks that their
drafting was influenced to some extent by the contents of the Statement of the
International Law of the Future which was published and given widespread
distribution on March 27, 1944.
(Moreover, while the endowment makes no reference to them, there
is great similarity also to the proposals for international cooperation
•drafted many years earlier, in which the endowment participated both
financially and through its personnel.)
According to Dr. Finch these documents were published "having
in mind" the objectives Mr. Churchill expressed in February 1945^
namely, that the former League of Nations would be replaced by a far
stronger body but which —
will embody much of the structure and the characteristics of its predecessor.
All the work that was done in the past, all the experience that has been gathered
by the working of the League of Nations, will not be cast away.
Dr. Finch's further comments (p. 435) are:
Advance copies of all but the last of the studies were made available to officials
of the United States and other governments in Washington. They were in
constant use at the conference of jurists held in Washington to revise the statute
of the International Court of Justice, at the United Nations Conference on
International Organization in San Francisco, the United Nations Relief and
Rehabilitation Administration Conference, the Interim Commission of the United
Nations Conference on Food and Agriculture, the United Nations Monetary and
Financial Conference" and at the series of meetings held by the United Nations
in London, including the Preparatory Commission, the General Assembly, and
the Security Council, as well as the meeting of foreign ministers held in the
same city. The limited advance editions printed for these purposes were inade-
888 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
quate to meet the demand. The division also prepared special memoranda under
great pressure for use in connection with some of the foregoing conferences.
The portions of Dr. Finch's History quoted earlier on pages 9, 10,
and 11, tell the story of former fellowship holders who have entered
various fields, including Government service, but there were others
who went from the endowment to places in public life :
James T. Shotwell, who was director of the division of economics
and history for many years, was also chairman of the international
research committee of the American council, Institute of Pacific Re-
lations; and while attending a conference of the institute in 1929 de-
livered a number of addresses on American foreign policy and prob-
lems in international organizations. In 1930 he became director of
research in international affairs of the social science research council
and many of the publications in which his division took an interest
originated in research in Europe arranged for him by that organiza-
tion. Among these were :
International Organization in European Air Transport — Lawrence C. Tomb
Maritime Trade of Western United States— Elliott G. Mears
Turkey at the Straits — Dr. Shotwell and Francis Deak
Poland and Russia — Dr. Shotwell and Max M. Laserson
Dr. Shotwell was chairman of an unofficial national commission of
the United States to cooperate with the Committee of the League of
Nations on Intellectual Cooperation, and he later accepted member-
ship on the State Department's Advisory Committee on Cultural Re-
lations (1942-44).
Dr. Finch, referring to the invitation extended to Dr. Shotwell to
serve on the Advisory Committee on Postwar Policy, goes on :
* * * He was later appointed by the endowment its consultant to the Ameri-
can delegation to the United Nations Conference on International Organization
at San Francisco, April 25 to June 26, 1945. These official duties placed Dr.
Shotwell in a position of advantage from which to formulate the changing pro-
gram and direct with the greatest effectiveness the operations of the commis-
sion to study the organization of peace.
The associate consultant was Dr. Finch himself, then director of
the division of international law.
Professor John B. Condliffe, associate director of the division of economics
and history (Berkeley branch office) edited a series of pamphlets dealing with
tariffs and agriculture. They covered, in addition to a general study of pro-
tection for farm products, cotton, dairy products, wheat, corn, the hog industry,
and sugar; and were circulated to all county agricultural agents throughout
the country and were officially supplied by the Department of Agriculture to
every director of agricultural extension work in the United States.
Ben M. Cherrington, who was elected trustee of the endowment in
1943, was the first Chief of the Division of Cultural Relations of the
State Department, serving until 1940. Before that he was director
of the Social Science Research Council and professor of international
relations at the University of Denver.
Upon leaving the State Department he became chancellor of the
university where he remained until 1946, when he became a member of
the national committee of the United States for the United Nations
Scientific and Cultural Organization. Dr. Cherrington was an asso-
ciate consultant of the United States delegation to the United Nations
Conference in San Francisco.
Philip C. Jessup was another endowment contribution to the field of
public service. His first assignment was in the Department of State,
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 889
as Assistant Solicitor in 1 924-25, followed by his service as legal assist-
ant to Elihu Root, in 1929 at the Committee of Jurists on the Revision
of the Court Statutes, called by the League of Nations Council. Dr.
Jessup was assistant professor of international law at Columbia Uni-
versity and later became Mr. Root's biographer. He was elected a
trustee of the endowment in 1937, succeeded Dr. James Brown Scott
as director of the division of international law in 1940 and 1943
resigned because of the pressure of Government work during the war.
He was Assistant Secretary General of UNRRA and attached to
the Bretton Woods Conference in 1943-44; assistant on judicial or-
ganizations at the United Nations Conference in San Francisco, where
he helped to revise the statutes of the Permanent Court of Inter-
national Justice to the present form in the United Nations Charter.
He was also secretary of a national world court committee, organized
in New York, of which two trustees of the endowment were also
members.
The list of such individuals is long — and to include all the names
would merely lengthen this summary to no particular purpose.
Henry Wriston, Eugene Staley, Isaiah Bowman, John W. Davis,
Quincy Wright, John Foster Dulles, Robert A. Taft, and others — ■
either during their association with the endowment or at some other
time — also were in the public service.
United Nations
Both the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and the
Rockefeller Foundation aided this cause. In the case of the endow-
ment it was a natural outgrowth of its deep interest in the League of
Nations and the World Court, and its disappointment when the United
States failed to join the League, intensified its activities in connection
with the United Nations.
The close association between the endowment and the State Depart-
ment, even before World War II actually enveloped this country, has
been discussed, and it is apparent that the idea of achieving peace
through a World government arrangement was still the goal of the
endowment as indicated by the character of its representatives and
the nature of their activities.
While Dr. Jessup was director of the division of international law,
it undertook an investigation of the numerous inter- American sub-
sidiary congresses and commissions which are part of the pan- Ameri-
can system and as a result amassed a considerable amount of incidental
and extraneous information of a technical and administrative char-
acter concerning the composition and functioning of permanent inter-
national bureaus and commissions. In collaboration with the public
administration committee of the Social Science Research Council, Dr.
Jessup began a study of this subject and the project later broadened
to include not only official administrations and agencies established
by American governments, but private international organizations
operating in specialized fields, special emphasis being given to the
structural and administrative aspects of these organizations.
The work covered approximately 114 organizations, supplied the
names and addresses of each organization along with a brief account
of its history, purpose, internal administrative structure, membership,
finance, publications, and activities, and was intended primarily to
890 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
serve government officials and officers of international administration,
students, teachers, and finally the public.
At this point it is appropriate to say something about the Commis-
sion To Study the Organization of the Peace, which while not a part of
the endowment's direct program was treated as work through another
agency to which the endowment was willing to grant financial support.
The policy. of the endowment in such instances is discussed in the
concluding portion of this summary.
The commission in actuality was merely a continuation of the
National Peace Conference referred to on pages 880 and 881." It came
into being under that name in 1939, under the aegis of Dr. Shotwell
and Clark M. Eichelberger — guiding lights of the peace conference —
and immediately began organization of regional commissions and
monthly discussion meetings.
It too had an "educational program," carried to rural communities,
and furnished to press services, editors, educational writers, column-
ists, and commentators.
On June 6, 1941, the commission issued a document entitled "State-
ment of American Proposals for a New World Order."
In February 1942, this was augmented by "The Transitional Period."
A year later, 1943, the commission followed these with a statement
dealing with steps that should be taken during the war to organize
for the transition period.
Between then and 1944 these were added :
General Statement and Fundamentals
Part I — Security and World Organization
Part II — The Economic Organization of Welfare
Part III — The International Safeguard of Human Rights
A recapitulation of the principles laid down was issued after Dum-
barton Oaks, entitled: "The General International Organization —
Its Framework and Functions."
According to Dr. Finch (p. 248) :
During the following Dumbarton Oaks Conference the commission kept the
work of the conference before the public and organized an educational program
in behalf of its proposals. It also directed its studies to subjects inadequately
covered by or omitted from the proposals, such as human rights, trusteeship,
and economic and social cooperation. Separate committees were set up on each
of these subjects and their studies and conclusions were later published.
At the San Francisco Conference the commission was able to promote its objec-
tives through many of its officers and members who were connected with the
Conference in an official or consultant capacity. Following the signature and
ratification of the charter and the establishment of the United Nations, the Com-
mission To Study the Organization of Peace planned its studies and educational
program with two purposes in view : Making the United Nations more effective
by implementation and interpretation, and making it the foundation of the foreign
policy of the United States.
The commission became the research affiliate for the American Association for
the United Nations, with joint offices and interlocking, officers in New York. It
is estimated by Dr. Shotwell in his annual report of March 27, 1945, to the endow-
ment that over 600,000 copies of the commission's reports had been distributed
and distribution of over 3% million pieces of its popular material numbers.
In "Exhibit — Carnegie" statements taken from the endowment's
yearbooks trace the steps taken by the endowment to advance the cause
of the United Nations. The 1944 volume tells of the conferences
attended by former officials of the League of Nations, as well as by
government officials, and says the third "will be of interest to a much
wider group, including not only officials but educators and others
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 891
deeply concerned with the need of adequate training for the staffs of
many international agencies which are either in process of formation
or are contemplated for the postwar period." The first of these con-
ferences was held in August 1942 — less than 9 months after Pearl
Harbor — and the last was held in August 1943 — 2 years- before the
San Francisco Conference.
That same yearbook describes the activities of the endowment as
having placed it "* * * in a peculiarly strategic position to cooperate
with official agencies preparing to undertake international functions"
and states that while the Office of Foreign Relief and Rehabilitation
Operations was engaged in preparing for the organizing conference
of UNRRA it "* * * frequently called upon the division to assist by
various means in these preparations."
The endowment supplied special memoranda to the conference, as
well as copies of its various publications relating to international
organization and administration. The special memoranda covered
such subjects as International Conferences and Their Technique,
Precedents for Relations Between International Organizations and
Nonmember States, and the like.
The following year, 1945, the work of the Commission To Study the
Organization of the Peace was again referred to (pp. 112-114) and a
quotation concerning it has been included in "Exhibit — Carnegie."
The endowment had two other projects which fall into the inter-
national field — the International Economic Handbook and Commer-
cial and Tariff History and Research in International Economics by
Federal Agencies. The latter disclosed the extent to which the
Government of the United States engaged in the study of economic
questions and the resources of economic information at its disposal.
It also cooperated with the International Chamber of Commerce
and Thomas J. Watson, a trustee of the endowment, was chairman of
a committee established in 1939 by the chamber called a committee for
international economic reconstruction. Dr. Finch described one of
the first projects of the committee (p. 243) as "a program of public
adult education in this country." Later the committee was renamed
the committee on international economic policy and set about enlisting
54 leaders of national, business, industrial, education, and religious
groups. These included Mr. Winthrop W. Aldrich, President Nich-
olas Murray Butler, Mr. Thomas J. Watson, Mr. Leon Fraser, Mr.
Clark H. Minor, Mr. Robert L. Gulick, Jr., Eric A. Johnston, Robert
M. Gaylord, Paul G. Hoffman, Eliot Wadsworth, A. L. M. Wiggins,
J. Clifford Folger, E. P. Thomas, and Fred I. Kent.
According to the yearbook, a public-relations committee was organ-
ized and. professional news services were employed to reach American
grassroots, in order to secure the widest possible distribution of the
pamphlets produced by the committee, among which were:
"World Trade and Employment, by the advisory committee on economics to the
committee on international economic policy.
The International Economic Outlook, by J. B. Condliffe, associate director, divi-
sion of economics and history, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Industrial Property in Europe, by Antonin Basch, department of economics,
Columbia University.
Price Control in the Postwar Period, by Norman S. Buchanan, professor of
economics, University of California.
Economic Relations With the U. S. S. R, by Alexander Gerschenkron, Inter-
national Section, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
892 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
A Commercial Policy for the United Nations, by Percy W. Bidwell, director of
studies, Council on Foreign Relations.
International Double Taxation, by Paul Deperon, secretary of the Fiscal Com-
mittee, League of Nations.
Discriminations and Preferences in International Trade, by Howard P. Whidden,
economist, -Chamber of Commerce of the State of New York.
Principles of Exchange Stabilization, by J. B. Condliffe.
International Commodity Agreements, by Joseph S. Davis, director of the food
research institute, Stanford University.
Import Capacity of the United States, by J. B. Condliffe and R. L. Gulick.
World Production and Consumption of Food, by Karl Brandt, Stanford
University.
International Cartels, by A. Basch.
Export Policy, by Robert L. Gulick, economist, Carnegie Endowment for Inter-
national Peace.
The Relation Between International Commercial Policy and High Level lm»
ployment, by Sumner H. Slichter, Harvard University.
Thousands of copies of the committee's pamphlets on international
economic problems were distributed to business executives, agricultural
leaders, diplomatic representatives, students, Government officials,
servicemen, Members of Congress, and to congressional committees.
A special project in this field was the work done at the time the recip-
rocal trade-agreements program came before Congress for renewal,
when special literature in support of the program was prepared and
distributed by the endowment.
The Rockefeller Foundation was working shoulder to shoulder with
the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in furthering
"agencies devoted to studies, to teaching, to service to government and
to public and expert education" on the assumption that while "it is
not possible to guaranty peace * * * the way to work toward it is
to strengthen the 'infinity of threads that bind peace together.' " It
selected many of the same agencies which had been chosen by the
endowment for studies and related activities. In the international-
relations field grants went to agencies which conduct research and
education designed to strengthen the foundations for a more enlight-
ened public opinion and more consistent public policies (1946 annual
report).
This same foundation report (p. 40) mentions the appropriation to
the Institute of Pacific Relations of $233,000, much of whose work "is-
related to the training of personnel, the stimulation of language study T
and the conduct of research on problems of the Far East. It is part
of the pattern by which, from many different directions and points of
view, efforts are being made to bring the West and East into closer
understanding."
Two years earlier, the 1944 report of the foundation said : "China
is the oldest interest of the Rockefeller Foundation," and it has spent
more money in that country than in any other country except the
United States. In addition to direct grants to China and Chinese pro-
jects of various sorts, the foundation also contributed to the Institute
of Pacific Relations, including the American institute.
In that connection, it is interesting to note that 7 years before (1937
report, pp. 57-58) the foundation deplored the events of the previous
year in China which "have virtually destroyed this proud ambition,,
in which the foundation was participating." The report praised the
work accomplished up to that time by the Chinese National Govern-
ment in their attempts "to make over a medieval society in terms of
modern knowledge" but was somewhat pessimistic as to the oppoF-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 893
tunity "to pick up the pieces- of this broken program at some later
date/'
From 1937 until 1950 the grants of the foundation to the Institute
of Pacific Relations were $945,000, compared with $793,800 during
the years prior to that (from 1929 to 1936, inclusive) .
The Institute of Pacific Relations has been the subject of exhaus-
tive hearings by other congressional committees, and mention is made
of this particular comment only because as recently as 1952 (if finan-
cial contributions are one criterion) the foundation apparently con-
sidered the institute an agency "designed to strengthen the foundations
for a more enlightened public opinion and more consistent public
policies."
A section entitled "Conference on American Foreign Policy" in*
the 1916 endowment yearbook (pp. 24-25) begins: "To assist in in-
forming public opinion concerning the foreign policy of the United!
States, the endowment sponsored a conference at Washington * * *."
Some 80 national organizations sent 125 representatives to hear from
James F. Byrnes, then Secretary of State; Clair Wilcox, Director of
the Office of International Trade Policy ; Gov. Herbert Lehman ; Dean
Acheson, Under Secretary of State ; Alger Hiss, Secretary General of 7
the United Nations Conference at San Francisco ; and William Benton, .
Assistant Secretary of State in Charge of Public Affairs.
From then on the endowment bent every effort to "reach public -
opinion" and particularly people not reached by any organization*
"since they have not been interested to join, and who do not realize
that they too constitute public opinion and have to assume their re-
sponsibilities as citizens not only of the United States but of the
world." This phraseology is strikingly similar to that found in the
Handbook on International Understanding of the National Education ;
Association.
It does not appear whether the foundation contributed to the Com-
mission to Study the Organization of the Peace, but the annual re-
ports refer to studies carried on by Brookings Institution, the Rus-
sian institute of Columbia University's School of International Affairs,,
the Institute of International Studies at Yale, all "aimed at the single
target of world peace" (Dr. Fosdick's Story of the Rockefeller Foun-
dation, p. 219) .
In 1945 it aided in the publication of the reports and discussions:
of the various committees of the San Francisco United Nations Con-
ference because "with respect to many crucial issues the really signifi-
cant material is not the formal language of the articles of the charter,
but the interpretation contained in the reports and discussions * * *."'
It also contributed to the United Nations Economic Commission for
Europe which in 1949 began a study of long-run trends in European
economy, covering the period 1913-50 (1951 annual report, pp.
355-356).
This, the final part of the summary of activities of Carnegie and
Rockefeller agencies, has been devoted to substantiating the state-
ments made in its opening paragraphs; namely, that the Carnegie-
Endowment for International Peace and the Rockefeller Founda-
tion had —
Admittedly engaged in activities which would "directly or-
indirectly" affect legislation ;
894
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Admittedly engaged in "propaganda" in the sense defined by
Mr. Dodd in his preliminary report ;
Admittedly engaged in activities designed to "form public
opinion" and "supply information" to the United States Govern-
ment, calculated to achieve a certain objective, as for example,
"an international viewpoint."
Quotations on each of these points, taken from the yearbooks of the
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and from the annual
reports of the Rockefeller Foundation, as well as from other sources,
have been referred to and are attached in separate exhibits.
Because of the method of reporting used by the endowment, it is
frequently difficult to distinguish specific projects and organizations
in its financial statements — disbursements in most instances being
reported merely by divisions. In addition, the corporation worked
closely with the endowment on certain types of projects, and also
made lump-sum grants to the endowment.
An analysis of grants by these two Carnegie agencies and by the
Rockefeller Foundation is shown below.
Because it is frequently stated by these foundations as well as
others that the purpose of their grants is to serve as a catalytic force
in getting a project underway, or provide support to an organization
until it is well established, the period during which the foundation
contributed funds to a particular organization is shown under the
grants made.
Grantee organization
American Council of Learned Societies
(1924) j
American Historical Association (1884)..
Brookings Institution (1916) .,
Council on Foreign Relations (1921)
Foreign Policy Association (1918) --
Institute of International Education
(1919)
Institute of Pacific Relations (1925)
National Academies of Science,--'
National Research Council (1916)
National Bureau of Economic Research
(1920) .
New School for Social Research (1919)__,
Public Administration Clearing House
(1931)
Royal Institute of International Affairs. .
Social Science Research Council
Encyclopedia of Social Science
Carnegie
Corporation
$901, 860
(1924-52)
384, 000
(1926-35)
2, 493, 624
(1922-50)
1, 826, 824
(1921-52)
204, 000
(1938-51)
2,073,013
(1922-52)
390, 000
(1936-47)
5, 406, 500
3, 059, 180
(1920-52)
848, 503
(1924-52)
95, 000
(1940)
58, 182
(1931-52)
244, 100
(1938-51)
2, 014, 275
269, 124
Endow-
ment
$11, 500
(1940-44)
4,000
(1951-52)
12,000
(1937-12)
16. 000
(1934-40)
200, 000
(1941)
184, 000
(1927-41)
Rockefeller
Founda-
tion
Spelman
fund
($169,000 General
Education Board)
$11,069, 770 I $30,000
(1925-52)
190,830 | 55,000
(1925-3;)
1,848,500] 3,211,250
(1921^52)
1,170,700 1 150,000
(1927-52)
900,000 |-
(1933-50)
1,406,405 1 240,000
(1928-52)
1,885,400 1 165,000
(] 925-50)
110,000 I
11,555, 500 I 447,900
(1922-52)
6, 647, 500 I 125, 000
(1931-52)
208,100 |—
(1940-44)
10,740 I 8,058.000
(1931-52)
906,580 |
(1938-52)
8,470,250 4,044,000
600, 000 100, 000
Total con-
tribution
$12, 182, 120
629, 830
7,557,374
3, 159, 524
3, 189, 524
3, 847, 148
' 1, 407, 320
2, 449, 400
5,516,500
15, 062, 580
7, 621, 003
300, 100
8, 126, 922
1, 150, 680
14, 528, 525
969, 124
1 International relations clubs, regional centers, etc.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 895
The projects for which these grants were made— in addition to those
made for general support — covered such projects as :
A Handbook for Latin American Studies
Developing' a training center for far eastern studies at the Congressional Library
(both by the American Council of Learned Societies)
Study of major aspects of Government finance for defense (by the National
Bureau of Economic Research)
Study of problems relating to training of leaders among free peoples (by the
Council on Foreign Relations)
Research on American foreign policy
Foreign relations
Political implications of the economic development of industrialized areas (all
by the Council on Foreign Relations)
Support of experimental educational program, publicizing the conflicting issues
of economic nationalism and internationalism.
Program for development of community centers of international education
(Foreign Policy Association)
Another statement frequently made by foundations, including both
the endowment and the foundation — particularly when the actions
of benefiting organizations or individuals arouse criticism — is that as
a matter of policy no attempt is or should be made to supervise, direct
or control organizations or individuals to whome these tax-exempt
funds are given, because to do so would restrict the productivity of the
grantees, and (it is inferred) be an attack on academic freedom. This
attitude of objectivity, however, is at variance with other statements
also found in the records of both the endowment and foundation.
In describing the administration of his division (Intercourse and
Education) Dr. Butler's report in the 1928 year book (p. 38) states
that, in addition to other work —
a large part of the activity of the division is devoted to the carrying out of
specific, definite, and well-considered projects of demonstrated timeliness * * *
those in which the work is directed and supervised from the headquarters of the
division and those which are carried out by the organizations or individuals to
whom allotments are made from time to time. * * * It is not the policy of the
division to grant subventions continuing from year to year to organizations or
undertakings not directly responsible to the administration of the division it-
self. * * * [Italics supplied.]
This statement — included in its entirety in the exhibit of quotations
from endowment records — is susceptible to only one interpretation :
Unless a project, whether carried on by a particular organization or
by a particular individual or group of individuals is under the direct
supervision of the Division of Intercourse and Education, and reports
thereon are satisfactory to that division, continued support will not be
forthcoming from the endowment.
As mentioned earlier, the foundation does not use quite as dogmatic
language in its reports, yet from its statements the same contradictory
attitude is discerned, particularly when related to the activities and
organizations to which it has continuously granted funds.
There is nothing ambiguous about the warning on page 9 of the
1941 annual report of the foundation :
If we are to have a durable peace after the war, if out of the wreckage of the
present a new kind of cooperative life is to be built on a global scale, the part
that science and advancing knowledge will play must not be overlooked.
896 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
This statement appears in the report for the 12-month period end-
ing December 31, 1941 — not quite 4 weeks after Pearl Harbor — yet
there can be no doubt that, as far as the foundation was concerned,
only "a cooperative life * * * on a global scale" could insure a
"durable peace."
In the light of this attitude some of the individuals and organiza-
tions benefiting from foundation funds in the years since 1941 may
seem a trifle unusual to say the least, particularly when a few pages
further on, page 12, the report follows up this warning with :
A score of inviting areas for this kind of cooperation deserve exploration.
Means must be found by which the boundless abundance of the world can be
translated into a more equitable standard of living. Minimum standards of
food, clothing, and shelter should be established. The new science of nutrition,
slowly coming to maturity, should be expanded on a worldwide scale.
It is only natural to wonder about the agencies selected to work in
these inviting areas to build "a cooperative life on a global scale."
Among those to which the foundation gave funds were agencies also
selected by the endowment to be directly responsible to the administra-
tion of its divisions,and some of these are sketched briefly now in rela-
tion to these declared policies.
The Public Administration Clearinghouse, the creation and financ-
ing of which Dr. Fosdick (page 206) calls "the great contribution of
the Spelman Fund," is also a grantee of the foundation.
Composed of 21 organizations of public officials representing func-
tional operations of Government (such as welfare, finance, public
works, and personnel) the clearinghouse is designed to keep public
officials in touch with "the results of administrative experience and
research in their respective fields" which he describes as having re-
sulted in "wide consequences" which "have influenced the upgrading
of Government services at many technical points — in the improve-
ment of budgetary and personnel systems, for example, and the reform
of State and local tax structures."
The National Bureau of Economic Research, again quoting from
Dr. Fosdick's book, page 233, has brought within reach —
* * * basic, articulated, quantitative information concerning the entire econ-
omy of the Nation. This information has influenced public policy at a dozen
points. It was one of the chief tools in planning our war production programs
in the Second World War and In determining what weights our economy could
sustain. It underlies our analyses of Federal budgeting and tax proposals and
projects like the Marshall plan. This same type of research has now spread
to other countries, so that international comparison of the total net product
and distribution of the economy of individual nations is increasingly possible.
After stating with some pride that the books and other publications
of this organization "influence to an increasing degree the policies
and decisions of governmental and business bodies" — page 213 — Dr.
Fosdick in the following chapter — page 232 stresses that its — -
* * * publications do not gather dust on library shelves. Its findings are
cited in scientific and professional journals, treatises, and 'official documents.
They are used by businessmen, legislators, labor specialists, and academic econ-
omists. They have been mentioned in Supreme Court decisions. They are
constantly employed in Government agencies like the Department of Commerce
and the Bureau of the Census. Increasing use is being made of them by prac-
ticing economists in business, by editorial writers in the daily press, and by
economic journalists in this country and abroad. Practically all of the current
textbooks in either general economics or dealing with specific economic problems
draw a great deal of their material from the publications of the Bureau or from
data available in its files. It can be truly said that without the National Bureau
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 897
our society would not be nearly so well equipped as it is for dealing with the
leading economic issues of our times.
The Institute of ,Pacific Kelations has been the subject of exhaustive
hearings by other congressional committees in which its subversive
character has been thoroughly demonstrated.
The Foreign Policy Association has been discussed at length in
the narrative portions of this report and reference has been made to
Mrs. Vera Micheles Dean's citation in appendix IX. Also active in
this association have been : Roscoe Pound, Stephen P. Duggan, Max-
well Stewart and his wife, Marguarite Ann Stewart (educational
secretary in the association's department of popular education),
Lawrence K. Rosinger, writer for the headline series, Stuart Chase,
Alexander W. Allport (membership secretary of the association) ;
Anna Lord Strauss. Philip E. Mosely, and Brooks Emeny (members
of the editorial advisory committee), and Blaire Bolles and Delia
Ooetz, director and assistant director of the Washington bureau of
the association.
The Council on Foreign Relations has also been discussed in detail,
and while additional information could be included on specific activi-
ties it would be merely cumulative.
Two brief excerpts from the 1986 annual report of the foundation
are, however, of particular pertinence in relation to the question of
influencing governmental activity :
The program in social security has two central interests: (1) The improve-
ment of the statistical record of structural and cyclical change and sharper
identification of the causal factors involved; and (2) the analysis and adapta-
tion of social measures designed to mitigate individual suffering due to unem-
ployment which may be a result of economic change, or due to illness, accident,
and old age, which are ordinary hazards of human life. The underlying assump-
tion of this twofold program * is that economic and social changes are to an
appreciable extent manmade and hence controllable, and that, pending adequate
understanding of the causes of disruptive change, the individual must be pro-
jected in the interest of political and social stability. * * * The ameliorative
aspect of the program is at present concerned with questions centering upon
the social insurances and relief in the United States.
The program in public administration is designed to bridge the gap that exists
'between practical administrators in the Government service and scholars in the
universities in the field of the social sciences. Aid had been given to the Social
Science Research Council's committee on public administration, which itself
sponsors research upon key problems of public administration, * * * The foun-
dation supports a number of such research enterprises together with a variety
■of projects designed to recruit and train a higher type of personnel for career
service in the Government.
The objectives of the program in international relations are the promotion of
understanding of, and greater intelligence in regard to, world problems among
larger sections of the public, and the creation of more competent technical staffs
attached to official or nonofflcial organizations dealing with international affairs.
The greater part of foundation interest is in enterprises concerned with the
study of international problems for the purpose of informing and guiding public
opinion. Three types of organizations are receiving foundation support: (1)
Those like Chatham Hpuse in England and the Foreign Policy Association in the
United States, which carry on the two functions of study and dissemination
with almost equal emphasis; (2) those concerned primarily with research and
the creation of personnel for technical and advisory service in connection with
international problems; and, (3) those which focus upon coordinated research
undertakings and periodic conferences with international representation, as the
Institute of Pacific Relations and the International Studies Conference. (Pp.
230, 231, 232.)
* The foundation's twofold program in social security.
898 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The Social Science Research Council, which sponsored the 4-volume
Study of the American Soldier, as well as a project entitled "Study
of American Public Library." This actually deals with the public
library inquiry, a project relating to educational films and their dis-
tribution that has been received with considerable criticism.
Moreover, the council's committee on government (through a spe-
cial committee on civil rights) was selected to "encourage and aid
competent scholars to record and analyze the management of civil
liberties during the war and immediate postwar period" (Foundation
Annual Report for 1944, p. 202) . Prof .Robert E. Cushman of Cornell
was chairman of the special committee, and in the 1948 annual report
his assignment is referred to as a "factual examination of the civil-
liberties issues" caused by "the actions taken to eliminate subversive
individuals from Government service." "Rigid loyalty requirements"
and "the work of the House Committee on Un-American Activities"
are among the problems to be studied "to reconcile, if possible, the
claims of national security and civil liberty." Practically the first
official act of Dr. Cushman as chairman was to place Dr. Walter Gell-
horn in charge of the project for all practical purposes.
Based on their own records the Carnegie Corporation, the Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace, and the Rockefeller Foundation,
have —
1. Contributed substantial sums of money to some or all of the
organizations described in this and other portions of this
summary.
2. Have or should have been aware that the stated purpose of
many of the projects of these organizations has been to achieve
certain objectives in the fields of international relations, foreign
policy, and government.
There has been a singular lack of objectivity and a decided
bias toward a socialized welfare state in the proposals of these
organizations, and every effort has been made by them to advance
the philosophy of "one world" to the complete disregard of com-
parable effort on behalf of a more nationalistic viewpoint.
3. Not only made grants to these organizations for general sup-
port, but have made specific grants for projects described in the
preceding numbered paragraph.
The foundation has contributed $63,415,478 since 1929 to projects-
which it classifies as in the field of social science, while grants it con-
siders as in the field of the humanities total $33,292,842 during the
same period. 5
The endowment, since it was organized, has expended approxi-
mately $20 million, divided as follows: Division of intercourse and
education, $12.1 million; division of international law, $4.8 million;
division of economics and history, $3.1 million.
Certainly, in justice to the endowment and the foundation it would
be unfair to say that the amount of money so expended by them during
the period described did not have some effect — at some point — on
some matters. To accept the statement that there were no effects — or
only coincidental ones — from such expenditures would indicate mental
astigmatism at the very least, and would in a sense seem to accuse
these foundations and their trustees of a somewhat careless, if not
actually wasteful, attitude toward the funds entrusted to their care,
* Through 1952.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 899
when (as is undeniable) the foundations continued to select the same
or similar organizations, continued to make grants for the same or
similar projects presented by such organizations, and continued to
make grants to the same or similar individuals.
In addition, the reports of both the endowment and the foundation
contain statements indicating both felt there were definite results
from their activities as well as the activities of organizations to whom
grants were made.
The 1934 yearbook of the endowment has one of these on page 22 :
* * * A review of the activities of the endowment since the World War,
carried on separately through three main divisions, but operating as a unit in
behalf of the great ideal of its founder, seems to justify the observation that the
endowment is becoming an unofficial instrument of international policy, taking
up here and there the ends and threads of international problems and questions
which the Governments find it difficult to handle, and through private initiative
reaching conclusions which are not of a formal nature but which unofficially
find their way into the policies of governments.
Similar sentiments are expressed a decade later in the 1945 year-
book, page 28 :
A reading of this report will make it plain that every part of the United States
and every element of its population have been reached by the endowment's work.
The result may be seen in the recorded attitude of public opinion which makes
it certain that the American Government will be strongly supported in the
accomplishment of its effort to offer guidance and commanding influence to the
establishment of a world organization for protection of international peace and
preservation of resultant prosperity.
The foundation, when it reorganized in 1929 to extend its work to
include the social sciences, apparently anticipated some recognizable
results (p. 258 of its annual report) :
From research in the social sciences there should result modifications in gov-
ernmental organization, in business practices, in social activities of all kinds
which may further general well-being. As numerous functions of great signifi-
cance are being assumed by governmental bodies through Federal, State, county,
and municipal organization, the development of effective techniques becomes a
necessity. Research which is closely tied up with practical activities is expected
to furnish the basis of sound governmental policy.
There is no indication of a change of opinion in 1940, when describ-
ing its support of the National Institute of Public Affairs' "experi-
mental program of recruiting and training personnel for the Federal
services," the foundation reports (pp. 273-274 of annual report), 6 "the
program has involved the annual placement of approximately 50 grad-
uate students preparing for public-service careers, in agencies of the
Federal Government for a year of practical apprenticeship" and adds
with evident satisfaction that "60 percent of its 'interns' are now in
the Federal service ; several are in State and local or other government
services, and a number are continuing graduate study."
Two years later the section dealing with the public administration
committee begins :
The agencies through which society will seek to meet its diverse problems are
multiform, and total effort, whether for defense or for the postwar world, will
receive its primary direction through the agency of government * * *.
Referring to its support of this committee during the preceding 7
years, the report gives the major studies of the committee, and ends
with this paragraph : 7
• Entire extract included in exhibit.
1 Entire extract' included In exhibit.
900 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
•
More recently the committee has focused its resources and attention mainly
on planning and stimulating rather than on executing research. A broadening
of the program to include the field of government, with public administration as
one sector, is now contemplated. Such a program would deal less with the
mechanics of administration than with the development of sound bases for
policy determination and more effective relations in the expanding governmental
structure.
It is only commonsense, moreover, to conclude that, since the endow-
ment and the foundation as a means of accomplishing their purposes
had deliberately chosen certain organizations consistently as "agents,"
the trustees of those foundations would be entirely aware of the activ-
ities of the organizations selected, as well as the views expressed by
their executives. Assuming such awareness — no contrary attitude
being demonstrated — it could be concluded further that the results of
such activities — whatever their nature — were not only acceptable in
themselves to the trustees but were regarded by them as the proper
means to accomplish the declared purposes of the foundations.
l£is appropriate, therefore, to examine some of the results, among
which have been :
The Headline Boohs of the Foreign Policy Association
_ Many were written by persons cited to be of Communist or Commu-
nist front affiliation and are questionable in content. They have been
distributed widely and are used as reference works throughout the
educational system of this country.
The Cornell studies
This project is under the direction of two individuals (described
further on) wJio can scarcely be considered sufficiently impartial to
insure a "factual examination" or an "objective finding."
Development of a "post-imr policy 1 ' 1
The means selected was an extragovernmental committee, many of
whose members later held posts in governmental agencies concerned
with economic and other problems, as well as those concerned with
foreign policy.
The sponsorship of individuals who by their writings are of a
Socialist, if not Communist philosophy, dedicated to the idea of world
government.
Among the individuals sponsored have been :
Eugene Staley
He is the author of War and the Private Investor, in which he recom-
mended a "World Investment Commission" which along other sugges-
tions presented bears a striking resemblance to the World Bank and
present monetary policies of the world, including the United States.
He is also the author of World Economy in Transition, a report pre-
pared under the auspices of the American Co-Ordinating Committee
for International Studies," under the sponsorship of the Council on
Foreign Relations, and financed by a Carnegie grant. The book ex-
pounds the theory that modern technology requires its materials from
an international market, makes use of internationally discovered scien-
tific information, and itself is international in viewpoint. According
to Mr. Staley, we have a "planetary economy," and to reach the goal
8 Mrs. Dean was a member of this committee at the time.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 901
■of international social welfare, the international division of labor re-
quires a free flow of goods.
Vera Mickeies Dean
Reference has already been made to Mrs. Dean who, according to
the New York Times a few years ago, made a "plea for socialism" to
600 alumnae at Vassar College, saying our quarrel with communism
must not be over its ends but over its methods; "and urging a foreign
policy backing Socialist programs.
Speaking of her book Europe and the U. S. in the book review
section of the New York Herald Tribune of May 7, 1950, Harry Baehr,
an editorial writer for that paper, wrote ; "In other words, she con-
siders it possible that the world may not be divided on sharp ideo-
logical lines but that there may yet be at least economic exchanges
which will temper the world struggle and by reducing the disparity in
standards of living between Eastern and Western Europe gradually
abolish the conditions which foster communism and maintain it as
a dangerous inhumane tyranny in those nations which now profess
the Stalinist creed."
Mr. and Mrs. Maxwell Stetoart {Marguerite Ann Stewart)
According to the 1947 California Report (p. 314) both of these
people taught at the Moscow Institute in Russia. He praised "Soviet
marriage and morals," and has been connected with tourist parties
to the U. S. S. R., under Soviet auspices. He urged recognition of
the Soviet Union, was a member of the editorial board of Soviet Russia
Today, and endorsed the Hitler-Stalin pact.
Lawrence K. Bosinger
He declined to answer when asked by the McCarran committee
whether he had ever been a member of the Communist Party, after
being named as a party member by a witness before that committee.
He was a writer of the Headline Series of the Foreign Policy Asso-
ciation, among his contributions being "Forging a New China," "The
Occupation of Japan," and "The Philippines — Problems of Inde-
pendence." In February 1952 — after he had refused to answer the
question of the McCarran committee — he jointed the staff of the
Rhodes School.
Dr. Robert Cushman
Chairman of the special committee on civil rights of the Social
Science Research Council's committee on government, Dr. Cushmans
career before his association with the Cornell studies would indicate
a rather one-sided viewpoint on civil rights. Prior to 1944, when the
first Rockefeller Foundation grant was made to this project, Dr. Cush-
man had written occasional pamphlets (edited by Maxwell S. Stew-
art) for the public affairs committee, for example —
One written in 1936 suggested constitutional amendments to
limit the powers of the Supreme Court (following its adverse
decision on the New York minimum wage law), or else a dele-
gation of specific powers to Congress to obtain passage of New
Deal legislation ;
One written in 1942 favored the "modernization" at that time
achieved by the "new" Court after Roosevelt's appointees had
been added;
902 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
A third written in 1940 recommended the writings of George-
Seldes and Arthur Garfield Hays, as well as publications of the-
American Civil Liberties Union.
Between 1944 and 1947 when the second grant w T as made b3' the-
foundation, Dr. Cushman wrote another pamphlet for the public
affairs committee (in 1946), which was along the line of views ex-
pressed by the Commission on the Freedom of the Press.
In 1948, the year the foundation made a grant of $110,000 to the
project, Dr. Cushman again contributed a public affairs committee
pamphlet, New Threats to American Freedom, specifically concerned
with the anti-Communist drive. Because the abridgment of the civil
liberties of any group (apparently even those of Communists in hi&
opinion) endangers all civil liberties, Dr. Cushman argued, patriotic
and loyal Americans cannot permit such a thing to happen, par-
ticularly since the difficulty of defining "communism" menaces the
civil liberties of all liberals and progressives. He pilloried the House-
Un-American Activities Committee, and labeled the Mundt-Nixon
bill and the Smith Act as threats to civil liberty.
In January 1947, in a paper presented to the American Academy
of Political Science, Dr. Cushman characterized as "nonsense" the-
theory of guilt by association ("good boys may associate with bad
boys to do good") . Also nonsense, according to Dr. Cushman, is des-
ignating as a fellow traveler, one who —
Joined organizations in which "there turn out to be some
Communists,"
Signed petitions supporting policies "also supported by
Communists,"
Sympathized with the Spanish Kepublicans, "some of whom-
were Communists,"
Professed a strong admiration of Eussian culture and achieve-
ments.
More than a year later, in October 1948, he presented a dissertation
on the repercussions of foreign affairs on the American tradition of
civil liberties, included in the proceedings of the American Philo-
sophical Society. There is little difference between this and the
preceding paper, except that he used the technique of presenting
supposedly the opinions of others, always unnamed. He repeated
that "critics of the program" believe loyalty tests violate due process ;
requiring clearances for atomic scientists, "he has been told," impairs
the quality of their work and leads to resignations j "many have said' r
that the House Un-American Activities Committee is politically
minded — treats cases in the press — fails to define "un-American"
and "subversive."
Concluding, he stated as his own belief that there is need for "an
objective study" to avoid "heavy inroads" into traditional civil lib-
erty. As mentioned, this was the year the foundation gave the largest
grant— $110,000.
In the 1951 annals of the American Academy of Political Science^
Dr. Cushman referred to the work of congressional investigating com-
mittees as similar to a "bill of attainder," and again unhesistatingly
defined a "Communist front" as an "organization in which there turn
out to be some Communists." He "found" that social and humani-
tarian causes are weakened by guilt by association theories, because-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 903
people fear to support such causes lest later Communists also be found
supporting them; national security also is weakened because the
"ordinary citizen" is confused by the idea of guilt by association.
Non-governmental antisubversive measures were also criticized — he
referred particularly to the dismissal of Jean Muir by General Foods —
and in Dr. Cushman's opinion, "it is hard to find any evidence that
loyalty oaths of any kind serve any useful purpose beyond the purging
of the emotions of those who set them up."
Walter Gellhorn, of Columbia University
A second collaborator in the Cornell studies, Walter Gellhorn, is
apparently actually their director, and the author of a major volume in
the studies, Security, Loyalty, and Science.
Dr. Walter Gellhorn is listed in appendix IX, page 471, as a "con-
scious propagandist and fellow traveler," and is in a group including
^Fields, Barnes, Jerome Davis, and Maxwell S. Stewart.
He was a leading member of some 11 Communist fronts.
He was a national committeeman of the International Juridical
Association, whose constitution declares :
Present-day America offers the example of a country discarding the traditions
of liberty and freedom, and substituting legislative, administrative, and judicial
tyranny.
The American section's purpose is —
To help establish in this country and throughout the world social and legislative
justice.
He is cited as an "active leader" of the National Lawyers Guild.
Appearing before the House committee in 1943, he denied the
International Juridical Association and several other fronts with
which he had been associated were communistic, had extreme dif-
ficulty remembering just what documents he might have signed,
including a declaration of the National Lawyers Guild and a cable-
gram protesting Brazil's detention of an agent of the Communist inter-
national, a man named Ewert.
Dr. Gellhorn (Harvard Law Review of October 1947) prepared
a Report on a Report of the House Committee on Un-American Activ-
ities, specifically defending the Southern Conference for Human
Welfare, exposed as a Communist organization, and violently attack-
ing the House committee. His book for the Cornell studies indicates
Dr. Gellhorn had not changed his opinion either of the southern
■conference or the House committee.
The Daily Worker, March 15, 1948, under a heading "Gellhorn
Raps 'Un-American,' " quoted from an article by Dr. Gellhorn (Amer-
ican Scholar — Spring 1948), in which he likened the House Un-
American Activities Committee to a "thought control" program,
and declared, "More important than any procedural reform, however,
is conscious opposition to the House committee's bullying."
Dr. Gellhorn begins Security, Loyalty and Science, by expressing
his fear that strict security regulations "would immobilize our own
scientific resources to such an extent that future development might
be stifled while more alert nations overtook and surpassed us." In spite
of a lack of reciprocity on the part of others, Dr. Gellhorn believes that
the fruit of our work should be fully published and not restricted,
even if, as he offhandly puts it, there is "no neat balance between the
904 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
outgoing of our information and intake * * *" which in his opinion,
may "* * * be entirely irrelevant."
His theme is that security regulations and loyalty programs are use-
less and dangerous. He cites particularly category B of the Atomic
Energy Commission, covering "undesirables" — those having sym-
pathetic interests or associations with subversive ideas, friends, rela-
tives, or organizations. Like Dr. Cushman, Dr. Gellhorn found it
even "more alarming" that nongovernmental agencies are increasingly
requiring clearances ; he dismissed the House Un-American Activities
Committee as indulging in repetition and exaggeration and added that
they are responsible for scientists refusing to work for the Govern-
ment. He belittled the Attorney General's list, its designations to
him to have no pattern, and he questioned the reliability of the con-
fidential information frequently used.
He concluded that the loyalty program originated in anti-New Deal
politics (beginning with the Dies committee in 1938), that it is in-
effective against "the furtive, the corrupt, the conspiratorial," and "the
country will be stronger for discovering that the restraints of the pres-
ent loyalty program exceed the needs of national preservation."
Denial of AEC fellowships to Communists is unwarranted, in Dr.
Gellhorn's opinion, and he quoted approvingly statements of others
that deplored the atmosphere of distrust and suspicion; thought
loyalty checking brought into being a "police state" and the use of
methods "far more dangerous than the small risk of having an occa-
sional Communist on the fellowship rolls."
As evidence that security files are misleading anyway, Dr. Gellhorn
cited the fact that the Army in 1949 classified as "unemployable"
Gordon E. Clapp of TVA, Professor Counts, and Roger Baldwin.
Dr. Gellhorn is also responsible for other books in this project. He-
is coauthor of a study on States and subversion (with William B.
Prendergast, assistant professor of government at the Naval Acad-
emy), and of a study on the Tenney committee (with Edward Bar-
rett, Jr., professor of law, University of California, who stated, "I
am particularly grateful to Walter Gellhorn of Columbia University
for his constant advice and suggestions and for his careful reading
of the manuscript in two of its preliminary versions") .
These statements of Dr. Cushman and Dr. Gellhorn both prior to
and after their association with the Cornell studies cannot be con-
sidered as those of "unbiased" and "objective" individuals. Dr. Gell-
horn's appearance before the House Committee on Un-American
Activities in 1943 was a matter of record. It is difficult if not far-
fetched to believe that no inkling of these matters reached either the-
Social Science Research Council or the Rockefeller Foundation be-
fore or after the grants were made by the foundation. Yet as far as
can be ascertained neither organization has had anything but praise
for the studies, and the personnel associated with it.
These then are some of the organizations selected by the Carnegie
Corporation of New York, the Carnegie Foundation for International
Peace, and the Rockefeller Foundation :
To promote the advancement and diffusion of knowledge and understanding
among the people of the United States and the British Dominions.
To promote the advancement and diffusion of knowledge and understanding
among the people of the United States; to advance the cause of peace among
nations ; to hasten the renunciation of war as an instrument of national policy •
to encourage and promote methods for the peaceful settlement of international
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 905
differences and for the increase of international understanding and concord;
and to aid in the development of international law and the acceptance by all
nations of the principles underlying such law.
To promote the well-being of mankind throughout the world.
These then are among the individuals — directly or indirectly —
designated by these Carnegie and Rockefeller foundations as those not
only best qualified to accomplish the noble purposes set out in their
respective charters, but also those most likely to do so.
These are a few of the individuals who have gained prominence and
whose reputation has been built up by the sponsorship and employ-
ment of foundations — either directly or through organizations re-
ceiving foundation funds to carry out projects approved if not selected
by them.
No indication appears in the annual reports of these tax-exempt
organizations— certainly not in those made available to the public —
that the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the Carnegie Endow-
ment for International Peace, or the Rockefeller Foundation has
disavowed the individuals, the organizations, or the results thereof,
except in a few isolated instances reported in the Cox committee
hearings.
Nor is there any indication that any one of these tax-exempt organi-
zations has taken any measures — either before or after the Cox
committee hearings — to insure that organizations as well as individ-
uals receiving their funds in the future will use such funds to make
studies which are in fact objective, not only with regard to the
material considered, but also as to personnel ; studies w T hich will faith-
fully present facts on both sides of the issue or theory — particularly
when it is of a controversial character. Nor have any measures been
taken to prevent two equally improper uses of tax-exempt funds:
first, under the guise of "informing public opinion" — propagandizing
for a particular political philosophy or viewpoint ; and second, again
under the cloak of "supplying information to the Government" — pre-
senting only information upholding a particular philosophy, or view-
point, and which if accepted will tend to influence Government
officials more and more toward socialistic solutions of current
problems.
If any such precautions have been taken then discussion and de-
cision as to them does not appear in the published reports, nor has any
publicity been given to the fact.
Kathrxn Casey,
Legal Analyst.
July 1, 1954.
Exhibit — Paet II. Carnegie
Excerpts From the Yearbooks of the Carnegie Endowment foe International
Peace and Material Taken From Other Sources From 1911-1952
(Source: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1916 Yearbook:)
Page 33 : "* * * The publications of the endowment may be divided generally
into two classes : first, those of a propagandist nature, which the general public
is not expected to purchase but which the endowment desires to have widely
read."
***** * *
Page 34 : "* * * There are several other phases of the subject of the proper
distribution of the endowment's publications which the Secretary believes should
receive further consideration.
906 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
"The proposed charter of the endowment places upon an equal footing with its
scientific work the education of public opinion and the dissemination of informa-
tion. This is the proper light in which to view this branch of the work ; unless
the results of its efforts are read, appreciated, and utilized, the time, energy,
funds of the endowment will be wasted. The problem therefore is deserving
of the same serious thought as the problems of scientific work, which have here-
tofore received the chief consideration, but which now appear to be fairly solved.
"In speaking generally of educating public opinion and diffusing information,
the trustees no doubt had in mind two distinct classes of people :
"(1) Those who are already of their own accord interested in the sub-
jects which come within the scope of the endowment ;
"(2) Those not now interested but who may be and should be made to
take an interest in the work."
EDUCATIONAL WORK IN THE UNITED STATES
Page 71 : "That very important portion of the educational work carried on in
the United States, which is conducted through the American Association for
International Conciliation, has already been described.
"In addition to this the Division of Intercourse and Education has directly
conducted work of an educational character of three kinds — publicity through
the newspaper press, lectures, and preparation and distribution of material for
use in schools and by writers of school textbooks.
Publicity
"With a view to spreading an interest in international affairs and a new
knowledge of them among the people of the United States, articles on subjects of
international interest based on interviews with men of prominence in public
and business life have been prepared and offered to a large list of newspapers
throughout the country on a business basis. The opinion has been expressed by
a number of editors and conductors of newspapers that these articles have been
•of the highest value and have exerted a large influence on public opinion."
(Source: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1917 Yearbook.)
. DIVISION OF INTEBCOUESE AND EDUCATION
Page 53 : "The continuance of the world war which broke out on August 1, 1914,
lias caused the Division of Intercourse and Education to confine its activities to
two fields. The first includes the information and education of public opinion in
the United States as to those underlying principles of national policy and national
■conduct that are most likely to promote an international peace which rests upon a
foundation of justice and human liberty. The second includes those activities
which have as their purpose the bringing of the peoples of the several American
republics more closely together in thought and in feeling. * * *"
*******
EDUCATIONAL WORK IN THE UNITED STATES
Page 72: "In addition to the highly important educational work conducted
for the division by the American Association for International Conciliation, two
methods of reaching and instructing public opinion in the United States have
been followed: publicity on international affairs through newspapers, and the
preparation and distribution of material for schools and writers of school text-
hooks."
Publicity
"Syndicated articles mainly consisting of interviews with leaders of opinion in
both American and European countries have been furnished to the newspapers
on a commercial basis. These articles have not always been directly concerned
with questions of international peace, but have furnished unusually valuable
information on the public opinion, the political life, and the intellectual develop-
ment of many nations. Their main object has been to increase in the United
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 907
States the amount and accuracy of knowledge of other countries and of their
peoples. It is believed that the best foundation for international friendship
and international justice is to be found in a thorough knowledge of our neighbors
and a true appreciation of their institutions and their life."
CONCLUSION
Page 82 : "It is probable that the greatest war in all history is approaching its
end. At this moment no one can predict just when or how this end will come, but
there are plain signs to indicate that a crisis has been reached beyond which
human power and human resources cannot long hold out. It will be the special
privilege and the unexampled opportunity of the Carnegie Endowment for Inter-
national Peace to take active part in the work of international organization which
must closely follow on the conclusion of the war. Tor that task this division is
making itself ready by study, by conferences, and by persistent effort to prepare
public opinion to give support to those far-reaching projects based on sound
principle which if carried into effect will do all that present human power can to
prevent a recurrence of the present unprecedented calamity."
( Source : Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1918 Yearbook, p. 65 : >
DIVISION OF INTEKCOURSE AND EDUCATION
"The instruction of public opinion in this and other countries, the sympathetic
cooperation with established effective agencies for the spread of accurate knowl-
edge of international relations and international policies, and the cementing of
those personal and national friendships which the war with all its separations
has so greatly multiplied, have solely occupied the attention of the division. To
these purposes its resources have been exclusively devoted."
( Source : Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1920 Yearbook, p. 62 : >
EDUCATIONAL WORK
"A wide distribution of books, pamphlets, and periodicals has been made from
the offices of the division, with the definite aim of informing public opinion on
questions of international significance, and the educational activity of the policy
clubs, together with the limited but important work in summer schools, have
proved an effective means of developing the international mind."
( Source : Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1923 Yearbook, p. 58,.
division of intercourse and education : )
"It is the established policy of the division to try to keep important person-
alities in various lands informed as to influential expressions of opinion on
foreign affairs made in this country. With this end in view a list of the names
and addresses of over 500 persons eminent in their own countries is maintained
at the division headquarters. This year the list has been extended to include
representatives of Germany and Austria. Among the expressions of American
opinion circulated by the division during the period under review were : Shall
Our Government Cancel the "War Loans to the Allies f by Justice John H. Clarke;
The State of Our National Finances, by Edwin It. A. Seligman ; Intelligence and
Politics, by James T. Shotwell; Toward Higher Ground, by Nicholas Murray
Butler; and What of Germany, France, and England? by Herbert Bayard Swope.
That such pamphlets are carefully read and discussed in this country, it is the
judgment of the division that it is of sufficient importance to be brought to the
attention of representative personalities in other lands to be read and discussed
by them. The division assumes no responsibility for the contents of any books-
or articles so circulated save such as appear authoritatively over its own.
name * * *." [Italics supplied.]
<)08 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
( Source : Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1925 Yearbook, division
of intercourse and education, pp. 49-50 : )
"In respect of the general problem of international peace, public opinion is now
almost everywhere persistently in advance of the action of governments. Only
in rare cases do existing governments fully represent and reflect either the noblest
ambitions or the highest interests of their own people in the discussions which
■are going forward throughout the world. * * *
"Few proposals could be more futile than that merely to outlaw war. Such
outlawry would only last until human passion broke down its fragile barrier.
The neutrality of Belgium was amply protected by international law, and the
invasion of the territory of that country on August 4, 1914, was definitely and
distinctly outlawed. Nevertheless it took place. Precisely the same thing will
happen in the future, no matter what the provisions of international law may be,
if the springs of personal and national conduct remain unchanged. Forms do
not control facts. Laws must reflect, but cannot compel public opinion * * *."
If such laws are to be truly effective, they must be not enforced but obeyed.
They are only obeyed, and they only will be obeyed, when they reflect the over-
whelming public opinion of those whom they directly affect. Once more, there-
fore, the path of progress leads to the door of conduct, both personal and national.
"It is beyond the limits of practical education or practical statesmanship to
convince public opinion that there is not, and never can be, any cause for which
men should be ready to lay down their lives if need be. The history of human
liberty and the story of the making of free governments offer too many illustra-
tions to the contrary. What is practicable is so to instruct, to guide, and to form
public opinion that it will insist upon such national conduct and such public
■expressions on the part of representatives of governments as will promote inter-
national understanding and international cooperation, as well as reduce to a
minimum those incidents, those policies, and those outgivings, whether on the
platform, on the floor of parliaments, or in the press, that constantly erect such
effective and distressing obstacles to the progress of international concord and
cooperation."
* * * * * * *
Page 52 : "Underneath and behind all these undertakings there remains the task
to instruct and to enlighten public opinion so that it may not only guide but com-
pel the action of governments and public officers in the direction of constructive
progress. There must be present the moral conviction that a peace which rests
upon liberty and justice is an ideal so lofty that no effort and no sacrifice may
properly be spared in the task of securing its accomplishment. When this stage
is reached it will not be necessary formally to limit armaments ; they will atrophy
from neglect and disuse.
"It is from precisely this point of view that the work of the division of inter-
course and education has, from the beginning, dealt with the problem of inter-
national peace. The division has studiously refrained from mere sentimental
expressions, and from participation in those futile acts which repel much more
than they attract the support of right-minded men and women. The division has
devoted itself for 15 years, and it will continue to devote itself, to the develop-
ment among men and nations of the international mind. 'The international
mind is nothing else than that habit of thinking of foreign relations and business,
and that habit of dealing with them, which regard the several nations of the
civilized world as friendly and cooperating equals in aiding the progress of civili-
zation, in developing commerce and industry, and in spreading enlightenment
and culture throughout the world'." [Italic supplied.]
( Source : Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1928 Yearbook, p. 38,
division of intercourse and education : )
ADMINISTRATION OF THE DIVISION IN THE UNITED STATES
"In addition to this stated work a large part of the activity of the division is
devoted to the carrying out of specific, definite, and well-considered projects of
demonstrated timeliness, such as those to be described in the following pages.
These projects might be subdivided to include, on the one hand, those in which
the work is directed and supervised from the headquarters of the division and
those which are carried out by the organizations or individuals to whom allot-
ments are made from time to time. For instance, not only was the European trip
of editorial writers planned by and details arranged from the division offices, but
two members of the staff, the assistant to the director, and the division assistant
accompanied the party for the entire trip and were in charge of all administrative
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 909
•details. The correspondence and careful arrangements necessary in connection
with the work of the visiting Carnegie professors of international relations are
also done from the division offices. On the other hand, when an allotment is
made hy the executive committee to such organizations as the Interparliamentary
Union, the Institute of Pacific Relations, or Dunford House Association, the
work is administered by these organizations who report to the division upon the
work when completed. As has already been said, these allotments are always
made in support of definite projects. It is not the policy of the division to grant
subventions continuing from year to year to organizations or undertakings not
■directly responsible to the administration of the division itself. * * *" [Italic
supplied.]
(Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1930 Yearbook, p. 108 : )
«* * * j5 ut it is not enough to have academies of this kind. The youth of each
country should be instructed in international duties as well as in international
rights in the colleges and universities of the nations at large. Therefore it is
that the professors of international law and of international relations in the
colleges and universities of the United States have met in conference in order
to discuss and to agree upon the best methods to reach and to educate the youth — ■
primarily of the United States — in the principles of international law and the
bases of foreign relations. There have been four meetings: The first in 1914,
the second in 1925, the third in 1928, and the fourth in 1929."
< Source : Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Yearbook, 1934 : )
Page 22: "* * * The attitude of the endowment toward applications from
other organizations was fully explained in the secretary's report 2 years ago,
•where it was stated that 'The attitude of the endowment with reference to its
support of other organizations in the same field presented a difficult question
•during the first half of the endowment's existence, but its experience has resulted
in the definite policy of applying the revenue at its disposal to work carried on
with the approval of its trustees and under the direct supervision of its own
officers or agents,' What could not be undertaken during the earlier years of
the endowment's existence, because of the war and its aftermath, so soon as
the echoes of the war had died away was vigorously undertaken. A worldwide
organization has been built up at a minimum of administrative cost, through
which the endowment is in contact with the public opinion of nearly every land.
The endowment is consequently not a money-granting, but an operating, body,
and it operates through its own agencies either directly or through those which
fcecome substantially its own through their spirit and method of cooperation."
*******
Page 22 : A review of the activities of the endowment since the world
war, carried on separately through three main divisions, but operating as a unit
in behalf of the great ideal of its founder, seems to justify the observation that
the endowment is becoming an unofficial instrument of international policy,
taking up here and there the ends and threads of international problems and
questions which the governments find it difficult to handle, and through private
initiative reaching conclusions which are not of a formal nature but which
unofficially find their way into the policies of governments."
* * * * * * *
DIVISION OF INTEECOUBSE AND EDUCATION
Page 44: "* * * If the world is to return, and without delay, to the path of
progress, it must be given leadership which is not only national but international.
It must find minds and voices which can see the whole world and its problems,
and not merely those of one neighborhood since important problems which are
purely national have almost ceased to exist."
*******
BEPOBT OF DIVISION OP INTEECOUBSE AND EDUCATION
Page 47: "The work of the division during the year shows definite progress
along the path of constructive work for the education of public opinion through-
out the world. This advance could not have been accomplished had it not been
for the efficient and well ordered work of the central office where cost of over-
910 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
head is reduced to a minimum and where the staff, in full conformity with the
NRA regulations, is faithfully carrying on its tasks."
* • * * * * *
Page 53 : "While in the broadest sense all the work of the division is educa-
tional there are certain items which fall definitely under this head in making
a report on the year's work. They have all been carried on with a view to the
general enlightenment of public opinion and to encourage further study along
international lines rather than as definite and continuing projects, such as
those to be described later, which are an integral part of the work of the
division."
*******
Page 96 : "It is plain from what has been written that the year has been one
of constant study and vigorous work despite the fact that the world atmosphere
has been distinctly discouraging. That economic nationalism which is still
running riot and which is the greatest obstacle to the reestablishment of pros-
perity and genuine peace has been at its height during the past 12 months. If
it now shows signs of growing weaker it is because its huge cost is beginning to
be understood. It is only by such education of public opinion as that in which
the division of intercourse and education is so largely engaged that this violently
reactionary movement can be checked and there be substituted for it such inter-
national understanding, international cooperation, and international action as
the needs and ideals of this present-day world so imperatively demand."
(Source: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1937 Yearbook:)
Page 180 : "* * * The major portion of the present work of the division of inter-
course and education is devoted to educating public opinion in the significance of
this forward-facing and constructive program for international cooperation.
"What I want to point out to the newer trustees is that what has been going
on for 18 years is the result of most careful study and reflection, a result of
consultation with leaders of opinion in every land, and is justifying itself not
in any quick action by governments, but in the very obvious growth of public
opinion."
*******
Page 182: "As to the work of the division of international law, that is a
business of instruction, a business of education, a business not to make all
members of a democracy international lawyers, but to put everywhere possible
the material by means of which the leaders of opinion in all communities may
know what are the real rights and duties of their country, so that it may be
possible for the people who do not study and are not competent to understand,
to get a source of intelligent and dispassionate information. And that process
has been going on steadily.
"We had one very important illustration of the advantage of it during the
past year. I really do not know how the Far-Eastern work of the late Con-
ference upon the Limitation of Armament could have been done without Mac-
Murray's book which had just. a few months before been published by the
endowment. The whole process of ranging the nine nations represented in
the conference upon a basis of agreement for the treatment of Chinese ques-
tions so as to facilitate the heroic efforts of the Chinese people to develop
an effective and stable self-government would have been exceedingly difficult,
if not impossible, if we had not had those two big volumes published by the
endowment upon our tables for access at any moment. We were continually
referring to them and the members could turn to such a page and find such
a treaty and such an agreement and have the real facts readily accessible. If
the tentative arrangement towards helping the Chinese in their struggle works
out, as I think it will, the publication of those books, at the time when they
were published, will be worth to the world all the money that has been spent
on the division of international law from the beginning. There were a dozen
other books to which we continually referred."
Source : Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1941 Yearbook, Report
of the Division of Economics and History, p. 117 : )
ii* * * j^yi history shows, however, that these appeals to man's higher nature
have had no permanent effect except where substitutes for war have been found
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 911
■which could be used effectively in the settlement of disputes. The peace move-
ment of the twentieth century owed whatever real strength it might have
possessed to the fact that for the first time it concentrated upon this constructive
aspect of the problem. Unfortunately, however, this method of approach was
too new to be fully understood, with the resultant failures culminating in the
present war. The events of the last 5 years, since Japan tested the peace
machinery in the Far East, and then Italy and Germany followed its example
in Africa and Europe, have clearly shown that if civilization is to survive
somehow or other the peace machinery must be brought back into operation.
The problem which confronted the makers of the League of Nations has again
become a vital issue. The increasing awareness of this fact, not only here
but in Great Britain and in the Dominions of the Commonwealth, is evidenced
by the growth of a considerable number of bodies for research and discussion.
Of one of these, the Commission to Study the Organization of Peace, the Director
of this division was chairman, although in a purely personal capacity. Men-
tion is made here of this effort because of the light which it throws upon the
nature of the problem itself. It would be hard to find a greater contrast than
between the background of the thinking of today and that of the vague and
uncertain beginnings of similar discussions in 1917. The experiences of the
League of Nations has after all taught us much, its failures equally with its
successes. The most surprising feature, however, is the record of the Interna-
tional Labor Organization in the field of social welfare, a unique and wholly
new experiment in international legislation. It is this kind, of planning for a new
world order on a cooperative basis which furnishes the constructive program of
the peace movement at the present time. It is therefore important to ensure
the preparation of careful and thoughtful monographs in the various fields
covered by these surveys in order to prevent a recurrence of the superficiality
which marked so much of the peace movement of the 1920's. It is here that the
division of economics and history continues to offer the contribution of specific
objectives and definite studies such as those indicated below." [Italics supplied.]
( Source : Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1942 Yearbook : )
DIVISION OF INTERCOURSE AND EDUCATION
Page 27 : "The aims which the division pursues and which it urges constantly
and steadily upon public opinion in the United States, in the Latin American
democracies and in the British Commonwealth of Nations are definite and
authoritative. They are three in number.
"The first is the formal proposal for world organization to promote peace made
by the Government of the United States in 1910. This was contained in the
joint resolution passed by the Congress without a dissenting vote in either the
Senate or the House of Representatives and signed by President Taft on June
25, 1910."
Page 28 : "The second is the statement of principles adopted by the interna-
tional conference held in London at Chatham House on March 5-7, 1935. This
-conference, called by the Carnegie Endowment, remains the outstanding interna-
tional conference of recent years. "
Page 29: "The third is the important Atlantic Charter as declared by the
President of the United States and the Prime Minister of the Government of
Great Britain on August 14, 1941, which may be regarded as an endorsement
of, and a suppement to, the principles proposed by the conference held at Chat-
ham House."
Page 30: "It is these three declarations of policies and aims which are the
subject of the worldwide work of the division of intercourse and education.
They are the outgrowth of war conditions and of the threat of war. They are
constructive, simply stated and easy to understand. As rapidly as other nations
are set free to receive instruction and information in support of this three-
fold program, that instruction and information will be forthcoming. The war
jmay last for an indefinite time or it may, through economic exhaustion, come to
912 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
an end earlier than many anticipate. In either case, the division of intercourse:
and education is prepared to carry on in the spirit of Mr. Carnegie's ideal and.
of his specific counsel."
Page 91 : "The division likewise cooperates with various Government office*
and with international organizations. Thus during the past year it has aided
the Department of State in editing the many papers submitted to the ninth
section (on international law, public law, and jurisprudence) of the Eighth-
American Scientific Congress. Such cooperation is appropriate because officers
of the division served as chairman and secretary, respectively, of section IX, and
the division's staff acted as the section's secretariat. Cooperative relations are
also maintained with the Office of the Coordinator of Inter- American Affairs and
with other Government agencies. Of a somewhat similar nature are the rela-
tions maintained with such international organizations as the Pan American-
Union and the Inter-American Bar Association. The assistance thus rendered 1
to organizations official and unofficial, often requires the expenditure of much
time, but it should be added that the relationship is not infrequently of mutual
benefit since the division is often in a position, as a result thereof to obtain data
which might not otherwise be readily accessible to it."
* * * * * * *
(Source: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1943 Yearbook.)
Pages 29-30 : "The policies which were put in operation a quarter of a century
ago, with the approval of more than 200 of the leading statesmen and intellectual
leaders of the whole world, have proved to be most satisfactory and most impor-
tant. Literally millions of human beings have been led to read together and to-
discuss the facts and the forces which constitute international relations and which
make for peace of the country. Thousands of groups in the United States and 1
hundreds of groups in other lands gather regularly to discuss the books that are
provided by the endowment and to hear the lectures which are offered by visiting
Carnegie professors.
"The work of the division has carefully avoided the merely sentimental or
that sensational propaganda for peace which is all too common. It has based
its work, and will continue to do so, upon the intellectual forces which alone
can guide the world in the establishment of new and constructive policies of
international cooperation to make another war such as now rages practically
impossible."
Page 36: "Preparation of Programs for Secondary Schools: Special inquiry
into the needs of secondary schools in the field of international relations study,
under the direction of Professor Erling M. Hunt, of Teachers College, Columbia
University, was carried on in cooperation with the Commission to Study the Or-
ganisation of Peace. A group of New York City high school teachers took part
in a summer working conference for a week. They planned and drafted an 80-
page booklet which included reading and study suggestions for the use of senior
high school students entitled Toward Greater Freedom: Problems of War and
Peace- This has been published and distributed by the Commission to Study the
Organization of Peace.
"The School of Education of Stanford University, California, was assisted by
the division in bringing together, in July, a group of high school teachers and
administrators from schools in the Pacific Coast and Mountain States. The
group devoted 2 weeks to intensive analysis of war issues and postwar problems
as they affect the curriculum and the individual teacher. As a result a report,
Education for War and Peace, embodying the findings of the groups and in-
tended as a pamphlet for immediate use in schools, has been published by the
Stanford University Press." [Italics supplied.]
* * * * * * *
Page 37-38 : "Any doubts which might have been entertained as to the value of
the International Relations Club work in colleges and universities, during the long
years in which the endowment has been operating, must have been completely dis-
pelled by the magnificent response that has come from both faculty advisers and
students during this period of disruption and confusion caused by the present
worldwide catastrophe. Each of the 12 regional conference$ was carried through
during the calendar year 1942. This is the more remarkable since difficulties
have increased rather than lessened as the war progresses. Almost every letter
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 91&
received at the opening of the academic year announced that faculty advisors
were leaving their respective campuses to serve in the armed forces or to support
in advisory capacity Government defense projects, but even when called away
summarily these faculty members have found time to appoint successors and to
write a heartening letter as to the importance of carrying on. The drain upon,
the student body through induction into the Army has been overwhelming. In
many of the colleges students are using their spare time in local war industries
or in defense work if they have not actually left college, and most of the studies
have been directed along engineering and other lines closely connected with the-
war effort. But even the boys who know that within a few weeks they will be-
in a military camp have tried to learn the deeper causes of the war through con-
tinued attendance at the club meetings, and at many of the conferences uniforms-
have been in evidence, worn by ex-club members who have been granted permis-
sion to attend. In fact, the clubs have continued with more enthusiasm and
vigor than ever before.
( Source : Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1944 Yearbook, pp..
70-74:)
"Many problems of international organization and administration are confront-
ing the United Nations authorities, and problems of that nature will assume far
greater importance as the war draws to an end and postwar activities undergo
the large-scale development now anticipated. Foreseeing such a trend, the di-
vision has given much attention to this field during the past 2 years.
"There is, of course, no international civil service to evolve formal- rules, prac-
tices, and precedents for future guidance in international administration; and
although there has been encouraging progress in methods of international organi-
zation, those methods are not as yet beyond the trial-and-error stage. Moreover,,
the literature in these fields is extremely inadequate. Yet valuable experience has
been acquired in both administration and organization, especially by the Secre-
tariat of the League of Nations, the International Labor Office, and other inter-
national agencies, some of which have functioned successfully over a considerable
period of years. This experience however, is contained partly in unpublished
records and, to an even greater extent, in the memories of those who have
served in the organizations in question ; and it is therefore not available for the
guidance of the many officials and agencies now actively concerned in planning
and setting up the machinery for future international cooperation.
"With a view to making available the most important features of such expe-
rience, the division has held a series of conferences which have been attended by
officials and former officials of the League of Nations and of other international
bodies, and in some instances by government officials and others especially inter-
ested in the fields of the conferences. The first of these meetings, held in New
York on August 30, 1942, was of an exploratory nature, its chief purpose being to
determine what particular aspects of the experience of the League of Nations
Secretariat might be further studied and recorded in usable form. At the end of
the following January a second conference was held at Washington, which was
devoted specifically to a survey of experience in international administration.
And some 6 months later, on August 21-22 of last year, a third conference was
held in Washington to discuss the problem of training for international admin-
istration. The proceedings of the first two conferences were issued in confidential
mimeographed editions and given a restricted distribution, chiefly among govern-
ment agencies and their personnel. The proceedings of the third conference,
however, will be of interest to a much wider group, including not only officials
but educators and others deeply concerned with the need of adequate training for
the staffs of many international agencies which are either in process of forma-
tion or are contemplated for the postwar period. For this reason, the proceedings
of the third conference have been carefully edited and supplemented with docu-
mentary materials, and printed for a wider distribution."
* * * * * * *
"As a result of the conferences and related activities, as well as of the studies
made by its staff, the division has established useful relations with many highly
qualified and experienced experts, and this in turn has made it possible to plan
and arrange for the preparation of a series of studies by a number of these
experts on international organization and administration. The studies, more
fully described below, record both experience and precedents in the fields in
question and constitute a rich source of information which, in the main, has
hitherto been inaccessible.
914 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
"These activities of the division have placed it in a peculiarly strategic posi- :
tion to cooperate with official agencies preparing to undertake important inter-
national functions. At the outset, such agencies are, of course, confronted with
problems of organization and administration, and it is a matter of urgent neces-
sity for them to obtain materials which will assist them in meeting these prob-
lems. It is a source of great satisfaction to the director that the division has
been in a position to supply such materials. Without attempting to list these
instances of cooperation in detail, mention should be made here of a few ex-
amples by way of illustration.
"For some months, the Office of Foreign Relief and Rehabilitation Operations
(OFRRO) was engaged in preparations for the organizing conference of the
United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration (UNRRA) held at
Atlantic City, November 10 to December 1, and it frequently called upon the
division to assist by various means in these preparations. Thus, in August, the.
division was able to arrange to have several officials of the League of Nations
come to Washington to take part in discussions of plans for the administrative
budget of the new organizations. In a letter to the endowment former Gov.
Herbert H. Lehman, then director of OFRRO and recently chosen director of
UNRRA, wrote expressing his 'great appreciation for the very real contribution
which you and the Carnegie endowment made to our preparations for a United
Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Organization.'
"Members of the staff of OFRRO were early supplied by the division with
the materials assembled as the result of the several conferences on international
organization and administration above mentioned. As the date of the confer-
ence in Atlantic City approached, the division received numerous additional and
more urgent requests for assistance from OFRRO. In compliance with these
requests, several special memoranda were prepared under great pressure for use
in connection with the UNRRA conference. These dealt with the following
sublccts *
"International Conferences and Their Technique
"Precedents for Relations Between International Organizations and Nonmember
States
"Status of Observers at International Conferences
"Seconding by International Organizations and from National Services to In-
ternational Agencies
"The Creation, Composition, and Functioning of Standing Committees of UNRRA
"The appreciation with which these contributions from the division were
received can hardly be overstated.' As an illustration, mention may be made
of a personal note of November 17 received by the director from Dr. Philip C.
Jessup, a member of the endowment's board of trustees, and then serving as
Assistant Chief of the Secretariat of UNRRA. After describing one of the
documents as having proved 'most helpful in the solution of some troublesome
problems' ; and expressing amazement that it had been possible to supply 'so
thougliful and so complete a document under such enormous pressure of time,'
Dr. Jessup referred to other materials supplied by the division as being 'also
very much appreciated,' and added : 'I think the endowment is certainly entitled
to congratulate itself upon the contribution it has made to the smooth func-
tioning of international organizations which, to a large extent, must be the
mechanical means of developing international peace.'
"It should be added that, in addition to these special memoranda, the division
supplied several copies of its various publications relating to international
organization and administration to the library of the conference at Atlantic
City. Shortly after the conference met, an urgent request was received from the
American delegation at Atlantic City for additional copies of these publications,
to be sent to the conference by special courier. The division was, of course,
glad to meet this request. Of a somewhat different nature were the numerous
urgent inquiries for specific information received from officials connected with
the conference. These inquiries dealt with such topics as relations of former
enemy governments after the last war with the American Relief Commission,
diplomatic immunities of members of international organizations, and staff regu-
lations of such organizations. In each instance, the division was able either
to supply the information requested, or to indicate the best source from which
it could be obtained.
"Similarly, though to a somewhat lesser degree, the division has cooperated
with the recently created Interim Commission of the United Nations Conference
on Food and Agriculture. Copies of the endowment's publications on interna-
tional organization and administration were supplied to the Commission ; the
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 915-
director and other members of the division staff have conferred with the-
executive secretary of the Commission on problems relating to the constitution,,
organization, and staffing of the newly created body; and the division has
supplied the Secretariat with data on inter-American agencies dealing with
problems in the fields of food and agriculture.
"In addition to such special inquiries, the division receives from day to day,,
often by telephone, requests for information from government oflices on techni-
cal subjects in the international field. Although these are too numerous to list
here, it may be said that they are answered as fully as possible and as promptly
as is consistent with scrupulous accuracy. The assistance rendered by the
division has not been limited, however, to American and international agencies.
It maintains cordial and often mutually helpful relations with the diplomatic
missions in Washington and frequently supplies them with published materials-
and other data.
"These studies, mentioned on a previous page, are in fact competently written
monographs. Because of the urgent demand for such materials, they are being
issued in preliminary form in small mimeographed editions. It is the Director's:
belief, however, that they have much more than a transitory value, and that as
soon as is practicable some of them should be published in revised and permanent
form. The folowing list comprises the studies already issued in mimeographed
form:
"Memorandum on the Composition, Procedure, and Functions of the Committees
of the League of Nations
"International Conferences and Their Technique — a handbook
"International Drug Control, a Study of International Administration by and!
through the League of Nations
"The League of Nations and National Minorities, an Experiment
"The following studies are now being prepared and will be published during
the coming year :
"The Situs of International Organization
"Diplomatic Immunities and Privileges of Agents and Staff Members of the-
International Organization
"Relations Between International Organizations and Nonmember States
"The Participation of Observers in International Conferences
"The Ecoomic and Financial Organization of the League of Nations
"The League of Nations' Mandates System
"The League of -Nations' Secretariat
"Financing of International Administration
"The names of the authors of these studies are being withheld for the present-
They are all, however, present or former officials competent from actual expe-
rience to deal with the subjects involved." [Italics supplied.]
* * * * * * *
( Source : Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1945 Yearbook : )
THK IJBBARY AND INFORMATION BUREAU
Page 25 : "The work of the library has continued along the same general lines
described in previous reports. In accordance with the policy adopted in 1942,
governmental agencies were given precedence in the use of the library's mate-
rials. In addition, its resources have been used by numerous foreign embassies
and legations and by the participants of such international meetings as those
at Dumbarton Oaks. Scholars, press representatives, professors, and interna-
tional, national, and local organizations have also been served.
"The ever-increasing discussion of the peace to follow the present war has
brought renewed demands for information on the subject. The endowment's-
library is known in Washington for its wealth of material on peace and inter-
national organization and for its services in making these materials available.
As a result, library staff members have spent an increasingly large proportion of
their time in reference work with visitors. At the same time, due to the accel-
erated publication program in the Division of International Law, reference work
for the endowment staff has been tremendously increased."
Page 30: "The proposals of statesmen and of public leaders for United Na-
tions organization and the formation of general opinion on these plans have-
been the basis of growing action during the past year in the extension of the
division's work. Both by continuous contact with central groups operating pro-
grams of study in the main regions of the country and by collaboration with local'
institutes and councils, this important interest has been pursued. The announce-
916 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
ment of the Dumbarton Oaks proposals heightened its significance in the last
quarter of the year and gave immediate political reality to it as an issue facing
our people.
"The development of centers in many part of the country, for organizations
associated with the endowment, has been described in preceding reports. The
brief summary of their expanding activities which can be given here demon-
strates that, although the programs and methods of the various centers differ,
there is agreement as to their fundamental purpose : to educate public opinion
in regard to the underlying principles essential to security after the war and to
welfare throughout the world."
*******
Page 103 : "As this report goes to press, the interest of the civilized world cen-
ters upon the United Nations Conference on International Organization meeting
at San Francisco on April 25. As this event promises to be the culmination of
much in the program of planning and policy advocated repeatedly in the annual
reports of this division and in its work and that of its director in affiliated organi-
zations, it is fitting to comment upon it and the nature of the peace settlement
at the end of the Second World War, of which it is so important a part. There-
fore, without in any way attempting to anticipate what may or may not be done
at the San Francisco Conference, it seems not only valid but necessary to link
it up with the outlook and activities of the Endowment.
"During the past 5 years, both within the program of the division itself and in
connection with the research work for the International Chamber of Commerce
and the Commission To Btudy the Organization of Peace, the director has been
engaged upon a comprehensive series of studies dealing with postwar economic
policies and international organization * * *.
*******
Pages 105-106 : "The provision of the Dumbarton Oaks proposals for the erec-
tion of an Economic and Social Council under the Assembly, a provision unfortu-
nately absent from the Covenant of the League of Nations, has not yet received
anything like the attention which it deserves. Naturally the provisions for
security take the precedence in all discussions of the plan for world organization,
but in the long run the provision for the economic organization is more important,
if the security organization succeeds in the establishment of peace for even a
generation. The advancement of science will ultimately outlaw war, if it has not
already done so, but creates vast new problems in the field of economic relation-
ships.
"This inescapable "conclusion is now widely shaded by thoughtful people, but
its application in practical politics is by no means assured in the most enlightened
countries. Here, therefore, is the area of international relations in which the
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace should continue to concentrate.
The affiliation with the International Chamber of Commerce should be strength-
ened through the Committee on International Economic Policy. At the same
time the interplay of all these forces making for peace and international under-
standing is translated into concrete form by the Commission to Study the Organ-
ization of Peace with which this division of the endowment has also been closely
associated.
"It is, however, fitting and proper now to record the fact that the director of
the division was consultant in the State Department for a year and a half during
all of the earlier phases of the planning of the General International Organiza-
tion agreed upon at the Moscow Conference and finally developed in the Dumbar-
ton Oaks proposals. The plans of the small subcommittee on postwar organiza-
tion, meeting under the chairmanship of the Under Secretary, Mr. Sumner Wells,
of which the director was a member, have remained basic throughout the period
of negotiation. The director was also a member of the Security Committee, the
agenda of which covered, among other things, the problem of armaments, and
the Legal Committee, concerned with American participation in an International
Court of Justice, and other problems of international law. More important, from
the standpoint of practical politics was the political committee in which some
members of the technical committees sat in conference with some of the leading
Senators and Congressmen under the chairmanship of the Secretary of State.
These formal discussions, which were held almost every week for several months,
have borne good results in strengthening the relations between the executive
and legislative branches of the Government with reference to the postwar settle-
ment. It goes without saying that Secretary Hull, aware from long experience
of the need of cooperation between the State Department and Congress, did not
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 917
by any means limit his contacts to these formal meetings. Nevertheless, they
were of real importance in the clarification of policy.
"In the field of cultural relations, the director resigned his chairmanship of
the National Committee on International Intellectual Cooperation, an office which
he had held by virtue of his membership of the Organization of International
Intellectual Cooperation of the League of Nations. At at conference of repre-
sentatives of the various national committees of the Latin-American countries
held in Washington, he was elected member of a small international committee
created to give effect to the resolution of the Havana Conference of 1941. Prog-
ress of the war, however, has interrupted this development and the organizing
committee is happily faced with a new and much more developed plan for post-
war organization in cultural relations under the auspices of the State Depart-
ment, than the advisory committee of which the director was a member until
its dissolution."
* * * * * * *
PUBLICATIONS
Page 112: "* * * General International Organization: This is a statement
prepared by the Commission To Study the Organization of Peace which sum-
marized the conclusions of past reports and recast them with reference to the
plans then under consideration for the Dumbarton Oaks Conference. It is grati-
fying to note the many points of this statement which parallel the proposals of
that conference. Upon the conclusion of the conference, the commission issued
a statement to the press which was commented upon in a letter to the director
by Edward R. Stettinius, Jr., then Under Secretary of State, as follows: 'The
statement is another indication of the notable service in working for an objective
and scientific approach to the problems of international organization which has
marked the publications of the Commission To Study the Organization of Peace
in the past' "
*******
EDUCATION
Page 114 : "When the Dumbarton Oaks proposals were made public, the com-
mission called together the heads of 75 national organizations to discuss a wide-
spread educational program to bring the proposals before the American public.
These groups have been meeting regularly in New York City, discussing both
publications and education techniques. Representatives from the Department
of State have been attending the meetings.
"The commission has cooperated also in the regional conferences at which
representatives of the State Department have met with organizational leaders
in off-the-record discussion of the proposals. Meetings were held in Portland,
Salt Lake City, Detroit, Salina, Dallas, St. Paul, and Atlanta. Large public
conferences on the proposals were held in New York City and other key centers,
the meetings being arranged by the commission's regional offices. In addition,
the commission continued its regular educational program, working with other
national organizations, schools and colleges, labor, farm, and business groups,
and concentrating considerable attention on rural areas and small towns.
"Special institute meetings were held in cooperation with the World Alliance
for International Friendship Through the. Churches in Dallas, Tex.; LaFayette
College, Pa. ; Miami and Winter Park, Fla. ; Chicago, 111. The regional commis-
sions have held other publie conferences and institutes throughout the year."
The series of lectures which the commission has been sponsoring at the New
School for Social Research has now covered a considerable number of problems
of postwar international organization, dealing with labor, cultural relations,
mandates, plebiscites, the World Court, public health, minorities, moving of
populations, human rights, international education, and an analysis of the Dum-
barton Oaks proposals. The lecturers included Clark M. Eichelberger, Prof.
Carter Goodrich, Dr. Walter Kotschnig, Prof. Oscar I. Janowsky, Prof. Quincy
Wright, Dr. C. E. A. Winslow, Dr. Frank L. Lorimer, Mr. Beryl Harold Levy,
Dr. Hans Simons, Dr. Sarah Wambaugh, Dean Virginia C. Gildersleeve, and the
director of the division.
Over 600,000 copies of the commission's reports have been distributed and the
distribution of its popular material numbers 3% million pieces. A number of
basic pamphlets were published in 1944, including a guide to community activity
and discussion entitled, "The Peace We Want" ; a third revision of a high-school
pamphlet, Toward Greater Freedom ; a revised edition of a farm pamphlet, Win-
918 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
ning the War on the Spiritual Front ; a picture book of full-page illustrations by
the artist, Harry Sternberg, of the commission's statement of fundamentals, a
project undertaken with the cooperation of the Committee on Art in American
Education and Society ; an analysis and comment on the Dumbarton Oaks pro-
posals, prepared by Clark M. Bichelberger. In 3 months 50,000 copies of this-
pamphlet were distributed, it being used by many groups as a basic text. A
third printing is now being made.
(Source: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Yearbook 1946:)
Pages 24-25 :
UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
"The endowment was invited by the Secretary of State to send representatives-
to serve as consultants to the American delegation at the United Nations Con-
ference on International Organizations held at San Francisco, April 25-June 26,.
1945, at which the charter of the United Nations was drafted and signed. Iil
response to this invitation, the endowment was represented at the conference by
Dr. James T. Shotwell, director of the division of economics and history, who
served as a consultant, and Mr. George A. Finch, secretary of the endowment
and director of its division of international law, who served as associate con-
sultant. A number of other trustees were present at the conference in an official
or consultative capacity. Mr. John Foster Dulles was an official adviser to the
American delegation, and Mr. Philip C. Jessup was a technical expert on judicial
organization. Endowment trustees representing other organizations were-
Messrs. David P.Barrows, W, W. Ghapin, Ben M. Cherrington, and Harper Sibley*
Mr. Malcom W. Davis, associate director of the division of intercourse and educa-
tion, was the executive officer of the first commission of the conference."
CONFERENCE ON AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY
"To assist in informing public opinion concerning the foreign policy of the-
United States, the endowment sponsored a conference at Washington on No-
vember 26-27, 1945, of representatives of national organizations who took part
in a discussion program with officers of the Department of State concerning;
America's Commitments for Peace. The secretary of the endowment acted
as its representative in carrying out the details of the conference. Eighty na-
tional organizations accepted the endowment's invitation and were represented
by its 125 delegates. The conference was greeted in person by Secretary of
State James F. Byrnes. There were four sessions. The first was devoted to-
World Trade and Peace. The official statement on the subject was made by-
Mr. Clair Wilcox, director of the Office of International Trade Policy. The-
second session dealt with Relief and Rehabilitation. Governor Herbert H.
Lehman, Director General of UNRRA, laid the facts of the situation before-
the conference.
"At the third session, Hon. Dean Acheson, Under Secretary of State, ex-
plained the official policies toward Germany and Japan. At the concluding ses-
sion, Mr. Alger Hiss, Secretary General of the United Nations Conference at
San Francisco, made a progress report of the United Nations Organization.
Following the presentation of the leading address or paper at each session,.
a panel of experts from the Government offices chiefly concerned answered ques-
tions propounded by the assembled representatives of the national organizations..
At a luncheon tendered by the endowment at the close of the conference, Hon.
William Benton, Assistant Secretary of State in charge of public affairs, ex-
plained the International Information Program of the Department of State.
Letters of commendation have been received from many of the national repre-
sentatives who were in attendance, and a letter expressing appreciation of
the cooperation of the endowment was sent by Secretary of Stale Byrnes to
President Butler under date of December 7." [Italics supplied.]
• * * • * * ■ ' *
Page 45 : "As a result of the continued educational program which the Minne-
sota United Nations Committee at St. Paul has conducted for the division
throughout the year, there is reason to believe that public sentiment in Minne-
sota is favorably inclined toward the United Nations Organization and other
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 919
iorms of international cooperation. This is shown by an inspection of editorial
•comment in the State."
SURVEY OP PROGRAMS OP THE UNITED NATIONS
Pages 38-39 : "Following the ratification of the United Nations Charter by the
number of nations required to put it into effect, and in furtherance of a sug-
gestion originally made by a trustee of the endowment for a survey of peace
organizations as to their functions and effectiveness in reaching public opinion
in the United States, the division sent out inquiries to national organizations as
to what they were doing to bring to the attention of their members the commit-
ment of the United States to the United Nations. 'Peace' organizations as such
form only part of the program for reaching public opinion in the United States.
A questionnaire was forwarded to 150 organizations in October, of which 29
were 'peace' organizations, and the division was gratified to receive answers
from 100 of them.
"The report, compiled from this survey by Miss Cathrine Borger, of the divi-
sion staff, showed that practically every organization engaged in popular educa-
tion of various types, regardless of particular field — scholastic education, citi-
zenship education, religious, service clubs, women's organizations, youth, busi-
ness, farm, labor, specialized interests — is devoting some part of its programs to
making its membership aware of the commitment of the United States to the
United Nations.
"Among the suggestions received as to methods which should be emphasized
in developing popular knowledge of international organization were the need of
preparing single ilustrated booklets, more use of motion pictures and radio,
forums and discussion groups, as well as development of suitable publications for
schools and colleges. Education of young people was mentioned by a number of
organizations. Six organizations maintained that personal contacts and leader-
ship provided the most effective method, and another stressed the need for divid-
ing efforts between raising the general level of 'where people are' and working
Tvith interested groups willing to join in concerted activities. Of major impor-
tance were those stressing the necessity of developing material showing what the
United Nations Organization cannot do as well as what it can do, and of full
publicity for every activity of the United Nations, and more especially for the
-activities of the United States and its delegates.
"The greatest lack in public education with regard to the American commit-
ment concerns people who are not reached by any organization, since they have
not been interested to join, and do not realize that they too constitute public
opinion and have to assume their responsibilities as citizens not only of the
United States but of the world. The Carnegie Endowment, as an institution
seeking neither members nor maintenance by dues and contributions, is in a
position both to work with other organizations and also to respond to this need
•of primary education."
Pages 50-52:
WORK THROUGH RADIO AND MOTION PICTURES
"During the past year Beyond Victory has been presented each week under
the combined auspices of the World Wide Broadcasting Foundation and the
endowment, over nearly a hundred stations in all parts of the United States
and Canada. This nationally known series of programs, now well into its third
year, has established Itself with an audience of discriminating listeners through-
out the country as offering interest and authoritative comment or many phases
of postwar adjustment.
"In the spring of 1945 a special group of programs centered around the San
Francisco Conference of the United Nations. Two members of the American
delegation Dean Virginia C. Qildersleeve and the former Governor of Minne-
sota, Harold E. Stassen, spoke of the general issues which the conference
faced Dr James T. Shotwell and Dr. Raymond Fosdick contrasted the San
Francisco conference with the Paris Conference of 1919. The problem of
security was discussed by Dr. Quincy Wright, and colonial issues by Dr. Arthur
W. Holcombe and others. The Charter of the United Nations was discussed
by* the executive officers of the four commissions at San Francisco : Mr. Malcom
W. Davis, executive officer of the First Commission, spoke on the People Write a
920 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
World Charter; Mr. Huntington Gilchrist, executive-officer of the Second Com-
mission, on The Charter — Jobs for All ; Prof. Grayson Kirk, executive officer of
the Third Commission, on The Security Council — How It Works; and Prof.
Norman J. Pabelf ord, executive officer of the Fourth Commission, on The Charter
and International Justice. The essential purpose in this group of programs
was to clarify the development of the charter in the conference at San Francisco
and to explain the functions and powers provided by its sections, for security
and welfare.
*******
"During the past year many libraries in the United States have asked to
be put on a special list to receive copies of Beyond Victory scripts every
week. About 50 libraries in all parts of the country are now receiving this
weekly service, and many have applied for its renewal for another year. Oc-
casional Beyond Victory scripts appear on the reading tables of nearly a
hundred additional libraries which request them from time to time. They
are also sent to several leading universities and a substantial number of second-
ary schools in the United States. In addition, shipments of transcriptions of
Beyond Victory broadcasts were forwarded to Army camps and hospitals in
the United States, averaging from 10 to 12 in each shipment, and to the Mari-
anas, Saipan, and the Guadalcanal commands and the European theater. Many
letters of appreciation hve been received from officers telling how these records
were used in orientation programs and convalescent wards, and describing the
favorable reaction and resulting value. A letter from the Finney General
Hospital, Thomasville, Ga., says in part, 'Tour selection of subject matter
seems to be just what we have been looking for in our orientation program,
and I wish to compliment you on the wide selection available on postwar activi-
ties.' The transcriptions were also used by the Office of War Information up
to the time that organization was dissolved."
THE ANGLO-AMERICAN FINANCIAL AGREEMENT
Page 111 : "The executive committee concluded that many goals of the commit-
tee were at stake in the proposed Anglo-America financial agreement. It was
therefore decided to publish an objective statement concerning the British loan.
"Dr. Nicholas Murray Butler wrote the foreward to the resulting brochure,
Fifteen Facts on the Proposed, British Loan, which was edited by Robert L.
Gulick, Jr. There was a first edition of 200,000 copies, and a second of 100,000
is now being printed. Hon. W. L. Clayton, Assistant Secretary of State, has
this to say about the Fifteen Facts : "Permit me to congratulate you on an excel-
lent job which I am sure will be most helpful in placing the loan before the
public in proper perspective." Margaret A. Hickey, president of the National
Federation of Business and Professional Women's Clubs, Inc., writes in similar
vein: 'In my opinion this is excellent material, presented in a fashion which
simplifies and clarifies the principal points involved in the legislation now
pending before Congress.'
"The board of directors agreed, without dissent, to sponsor a campaign of
public education relating to the agreement. A special committee was formed
under the chairmanship of Hon. Charles S. Dewey, former Congressman from
Illinois, and a vice president of the Chase National Bank. Other members of
this committee include: Robert W. Coyne, National Field Director, War Fi-
nance Division, United States Treasury ; Ted R. Gamble, Special Assistant to the
Secretary of the Treasury ; William Green, president of the American Federa-
tion of Labor ; Eric A. Johnston, president, Chamber of Commerce of the United
States ; Philip Murray, president, Congress of Industrial Organizations ; Edward
A. O'Neal, president, American Farm Bureau Federation; Philip D. Reed,,
chairman of the United States Associates of the International Chamber of
Commerce ; Anna Lord Strauss, president, National League of Women Voters ■
and Robert L. Gulick, Jr."
(Source: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1947 Yearbook )
Pages 16-17:
RECOMMENDATION OF THE PRESIDENT
*. " ■ * * ♦ * * #
"Among the special circumstances favorable to an expansion of the endow-
ment's own direct activities, the most significant is the establishment of the
United Nations with its headquarters in New York and with the United States
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 921
as its leading and most influential members. The United States was the chief
architect of the United Nations and is its chief support. The opportunity for an
endowed American institution having the objectives, tradition, and prestige of
the endowment to support and serve the United Nations is very great. No other
agency appears to be so favorably situated as is the endowment for the under-
taking of such a program. So far as we have been able to ascertain, no other
agency is contemplating the undertaking of such a program. Consequently, I
recommend most earnestly that the endowment construct its program for the
period that lies ahead primarily for the support and assistance of the United
Nations.
"I would suggest that this program be conceived of as having two objectives.
First, it should be widely educational in order to encourage public understanding
and support of the United Nations at home and abroad. Second, it should aid
in the adoption of wise policies both by our own Government in its capacity as a
member of the United Nations and by the United Nations organization as a whole.
"The number and importance of decisions in the field of foreign relations with
which the United States will be faced during the next few years are of such
magnitude that the widest possible stimulation of public education in this field
is of major and pressing importance. In furthering its educational objectives
the endowment should utilize its existing resources, such as the International
Relations Clubs in the colleges, and International Conciliation, and should
strengthen its relationships with existing agencies interested in the field of
foreign affairs. These relationships should include close collaboration with other
organizations principally engaged in the study of foreign affairs, such as the
Council on Foreign Relations, the Foreign Policy Association, the Institute of
Pacific Relations, the developing university centers of international studies, and
local community groups interested in foreign affairs of which the Cleveland
Council on World Affairs and the projected World Affairs Council in San
Francisco are examples.
"Of particular importance is the unusual opportunity of reaching large seg-
ments of the population by establishing relations of a rather novel sort with the
large national organizations which today are desirous of supplying their members
with objective information on public affairs, including international issues. These
organizations— designed to serve, respectively, the broad interests of business,
church, women's, farm, labor, veterans', educational, and other large groups of
our citizens— are not equipped to set up foreign policy research staffs of their
own. The endowment should supply these organizations with basic information
about the United Nations and should assist them both in selecting topics of
interest to their members and in presenting those topics so as to be most readily
understood by their members. We should urge the Foreign Policy Association
and the Institute of Pacific Relations to supply similar service on other topics of
international significance.
"Exploratiou should also be made by the endowment as to the possibilities of
increasing the effectiveness of the radio and motion pictures in public education
on world affairs." [Italics supplied.]
(Source: Staley, Eugene, War and the Private Investor, Doubleday, 1935,
pt. Ill : Towards a Policy, ch. 18, Alternate Courses of Action, pp. 470-471 : )
"The search for the underlying causes of international investment friction has
revealed that capital investment is a form of contact peculiarly apt to occasion
conflict, while the existing institutions for the adjustment of these conflicts are
not only inadequate but are fundamentally ill-adapted to the task. The defec-
tiveness of the institutions of adjustment arises largely from the fact that the
areas of political loyalty and political organization on which they are based, are
smaller than the area of conflict-producing contact, which today includes prac-
tically the whole world. * * *"
* * * * * * *
"With these general considerations in mind we now turn our attention to
the appraisal of various policies which have been practiced or which may be sug-
gested in connection with the problem of reducing the political friction con-
nected with international private investment. These policies may be grouped
according to their basic characteristics under three general headings, and will be
so discussed : (1) mere anti-imperialism, (2) national supervision of investments
abroad, (3) denationalization and mondial 1 supervision of international invest-
ments. * * *"
» The meaning of this special term will be explained later.
'922 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
(Pt. Ill : Towards a Policy, ch. 19 : Specific Suggestions : )
A WORLD INVESTMENT COMMISSION
Pages 498-499 : "The functions which might be discharged by a world commis-
sion on permanent economic contracts between nations are plentiful and import-
ant enough to justify the creation of such an agency. The World Investment
-Commission, if we may give it that name, should begin the development of that
effective supervision by the world community which must gradually undermine
national diplomatic protection and render denationalization of investments
possible."
*******
Pages 500-501: "How would the World Investment Commission operate? It
•should have the following powers and duties :
"To register international loan agreements and concessions; to make their
terms public ; to regulate their terms in certain respects.
"To collect continuous and accurate information respecting international in-
vestment operations and all their ramifications and effects — social and political
as well as economic.
/'To call general conferences on a world or regional basis, or conferences of
-certain industries (e. g., concession holders, consumers, and states granting
concessions in the oil industry). These conferences would consider problems
raised by international capital migration, and out of them something akin to
world investment legislation might emerge.
"To cooperate with the Mandates Commission of the League of Nations, the
Jnternational Labor Organization, commissions on codification of international
law, and other international agencies whose work has a bearing on the setting
of standards for protection of capital-importing regions against ruthless exploi-
tation.
"To examine and report on the financial condition of borrowing states 2 and
private enterprises ; to make observations on the political and social implications
of specific capital transactions.
"To call attention to any conditions likely to intensify international investment
conflicts or to occasion political friction over investments and to make recom-
mendations with respect thereto.
"To endeavor to conciliate disputes, calling conferences of lenders and bor-
rowers for this purpose, mediating, arbitrating, seeking to work out compro-
mises, employing the services of disinterested experts to provide full social and
economic information on the basis of which equitable adjustments might be
sought.
"To make a public report of its findings where a party to a dispute before the
Commission refuses to come to an agreement which in the opinion of disinterested
conciliators is just and reasonable.
"To publicly advise, after hearings, against further provision of capital to
a state or corporation which has failed to observe a contract obligation without
just cause. This would presumably make the flotation of loans difficult any-
where in the world for such a state or corporation. Here is one of the 'sanctions'
which would enable the Commission to take over the function (now exercised by
national diplomatic protection) of protecting investors abroad — that is, of
guaranteeing minimum standards of fair treatment for the investment interests
of aliens in all countries. If organized on a worldwide basis, this sanction would
be sufficient in many cases to accomplish more in the way of protection than is
now usually accomplished by diplomatic protection. At the same time, it would
tend to remove investment protection as a pretext for national aggression and
remedy other defects of the system of national diplomatic protection.
"To refer legal questions to the Permanent Court of International Justice or to
the World Commercial Court (suggested below) for an advisory opinion or final
settlement.
"To cooperate with regional organizations like the Pan American Union in the
establishment of regional subcommissions for handling investment problems that
affect mainly one part of the world."
*******
Page 504: "This proposal would obviously involve the creation of an inter-
national corporation law, probably through an international treaty to be framed
and adopted under the auspices of the League of Nations. * * *"
s The Commission would probably deal with State loans as well as with the private
investments upon which the discussions of this volume have been focused.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 923
A WORLD INVESTMENT BANK
Page 509 : "As a means of filtering out the national interest in world capital
movements and thereby promoting the dual process of denationalization and
mondial supervision, a World Investment Bank might perform useful functions.
Such a bank would sell its bonds to governments or to private investors and in-
vest the funds so raised in long-term construction projects, such as railways in
South America and China, airways over the world, canals, harbor works, inter-
national river improvements, and the like. * * *"
* * * * * * *
Pages 512-513 : "A useful contribution to the denationalization of international
Investment (and also trade) relationships would therefore be made by the
development of a world 'consular service' for the provision of detailed economic
information and the encouragement of world commerce. Such a service could
best be built on the foundation already laid by the excellent work of the League
of Nations and the International Labor Organization in the field of economic
information. * * *"
*******
Pages 515-516 : "The League of Nations : It is worthy of note that practically
all the specific measures proposed in this chapter for dealing with the political
problems raised by international investments depend in some fashion upon the
presence of a world political organization. If the League of Nations did not exist
it would be necessary to create it, or something like it, before investment prob-
lems could be attacked with any hope of success. The League should be sup-
ported, strengthened, and developed. Its legislative powers should be increased
and its authority enlarged. Just as the loose league of sovereign States first
established under the Articles of Confederation developed into the Federal
Government of the United States of America, so the League of Nations must
be developed from a confederation of sovereign states into a federal world
government. Of course the United States, which has such a large stake in the
orderly supervision of international investment relationships, should actively en-
courage this process. An essential step is entry into the League. * * *"
Pages 517-518: "International civic training: It is all too evident that the
measures and devices proposed in this chapter can never succeed, cannot even be
tried, unless there is a sufficient sense of world citizenship among the different
peoples of the earth and among their leaders. Such a sense of world citizenship
may be stimulated by a rational appreciation of the worldwide interdependence
of economic, social, and political life, but to be politically effective the emotions
must also be touched and loyalties to new supranational symbols must be devel-
oped. Can such loyalties be achieved short of an international working-class
revolution, or can they be achieved by such a revolution? That is one of the most
fundamental questions affecting the future form of social life on this planet. The
development of international attitudes in the schools, world intellectual co-
operation, adult education on the interdependence of the modern world, celebra-
tion of the heroes common to all mankind — all these things, and many more at
first sight quite unrelated to international investments, have an important
bearing on the specific problem of investment friction. 3 * * *"
exchange of correspondence regarding international relations clubs
April 20, 1954.
Mr. Joseph E. Johnson,
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace,
New York, N. Y.
Dear Mr. Johnson : My contacts with you and the other member of the endow-
ment staff were so pleasant that it is with a keen sense of disappointment that
I now resign myself to writing for certain information instead of visiting you
in person. However, it is becoming increasingly evident that our activities
will require me to spend all my time here.
In the confidential reports, as well as the yearbooks, there are references
to "international polity clubs" which were, as I recall, established by the Car-
negie Endowment for International Peace in colleges and universities, starting
back in the early days of your organization. However, as you know time
•Consult Charles B. Merriam, The Making of Citizens (Chicago, 1931), pp. 310-318,
348, 356.
924 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
did not permit me to read all the material you made available to me, and there
are gaps in my notes on this item. Would you, therefore, have someone on your
staff answer the following questions:
1. Were these clubs an outgrowth of or connected in any way with the Ameri-
can Association for International Conciliation, the Institute of International
Education, or any other organizations? (And if so, how did this come about?)
2. Were they a development from the "international mind" alcoves?
In the back of my mind there is a vague recollection that during a conversa-
tion with Dr. Avirett he mentioned that these clubs resulted in organization of
the Foreign Policy Association or the Council on Foreign Relations. If I am
•correct, how did this develop and when ?
3. How many such clubs were there in 1938 and how many are there today,
if they still exist? If they no longer exist, is that due to positive dissolution
as an activity of the endowment, or due merely to student and faculty disinterest
or to some other factors?
4. I gather that each year books were sent by the endowment to each of
these clubs. Were these volumes sent without charge, at cost, or at a discount ?
5. Were all books selected for distribution in any 1 year sent to all the
•clubs? If not, what secondary method of selection was employed, such as the
size of the college or university, or the club membership?
6. How did these clubs come into being at the college or university — in other
words, did the endowment either by suggestion to the faculty or one of its
members, or through other methods foster the formation of such clubs?
7. Were lists of books available periodically sent to the colleges and universi-
ties, from which the club or faculty adviser made a selection? Or were books
automatically distributed at intervals throughout the year to all institutions?
I hope this will not place an undue burden on your staff — but since I cannot
foresee a time when a visit to your office might be possible I shall appreciate
Tery much your sending the information as soon as it is convenient.
With kindest regards, I am,
Sincerely yours,
Kathbtn Casey,
Legal Analyst.
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace,
Office of the President,
New York, N. X., April 29, 1954.
JMiss Kathrtn Casey,
131 Indiana Avenue NW, Washington, D. C.
Dear Miss Casey : I, too, regret that you, yourself, could not come to see us
again. In any event, here is the information on the International Relations
Clubs which you requested in your letter of April 22. For your convenience, the
numbers correspond to those of the questions asked in the letter.
1. The first student groups in colleges and universities for the serious study
and objective discussion of international affairs — known as international pol-
ity clubs — were organized in the autumn of 1914 under the direction of the
American Association for International Conciliation which, in turn derived
financial support from the Carnegie Endowment. In the fall of 1920 when di-
rection of the clubs was transferred to the Institute of International Education
(organized largely under the leadership of Dr. Nicholas Murray Butler with
substantial financial support from the endowment), the name of the clubs was
the endowment in 1924, and the clubs were taken over by the endowment which
changed to international relations clubs. The institute became independent of
the endowment in 1924, and the clubs were taken over by the endowment which
continued actively in charge of them until the spring of 1951. At this time
the Association of International Relations Clubs, established in 1948, assumed
supervision of the club program under a grant-in-aid from the endowment.
Although no longer actively directing the club work, the endowment maintained
a relationship with it through having a representative on the association's
executive board.
2. The clubs were in no way a "development" from the international mind
alcoves, which were an entirely separate phase of the endowment's program.
At no time in the past have the clubs had any organizational connection with
the Foreign Policy Association, the Council on Foreign Relations, or any other
•organization except those indicated under "1."
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 925
3. In 1938 there were 1,103 clubs as follows : 265 in high schools in the United
'.States ; 685 in colleges and universities in continental United States ; 7 in the
Philippines ; 1 each in Hawaii, Alaska, Canal Zone, and Puerto Rico ; 24 in the
"United Kingdom ; 34 in 14 Latin American countries ; 22 in China ; 9 in Japan ;
2 in Korea; and the remaining 51 in foreign countries including Canada, Egypt,
Greece, Iran, Iraq, Siam, New Zealand, Australia, South Africa, Syria, and India.
In January, 1948, the National Education Association in Washington assumed
leadership for the high school clubs. Information regarding them since then
may be obtained from the association.
In 1954 (April 26) there are 476 clubs in colleges and universities in con-
tinental United States; 1 in Hawaii, and 28 in foreign countries including
Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Egypt,
India, Japan, Pakistan, Philippine Islands, and Thailand, making a total of 505.
4. The materials sent to the International Relations clubs in high schools, col-
leges, and universities were a gift from the endowment, with the understanding
that they would be kept together as a special IRC collection, in the library or
^elsewhere, readily accessible to the club members.
5. All clubs — large or small, in universities and junior and 4-year colleges, in
the United States and foreign countries — received the same books in English
with the exception of some of the groups in Latin American countries which
were sent Spanish translations of some of the English publications or original
Spanish publications. Cooperation with the Latin American clubs was discon-
tinued during the academic year 1947-48. Pamphlets and mimeographed mate-
rials, less specialized and better suited to the age level, were sent to the high
school clubs.
6. Although the endowment never had a field worker as such to stimulate
interest in the club movement, it maintained a competent "secretariat" in its
offices which carried on correspondence with the clubs, offering encouragement
to both club members and faculty advisers in carrying on the work, as well as
advice when sought, and suggestions for vitalizing club programs. It cooperated
■closely with the host clubs in the 12 — in 1948 increased to 14 — regions through-
out the country where annual conferences were held, by helping to set up the
programs, furnishing speakers, and arranging for an endowment representative
to be in attendance at each conference. In the early 1930's letters were sent at
the beginning of the academic year to faculty members at a few selected insti-
tutions, informing them of the club work and its advantages. The clubs in-
creased to such an extent in number, however, that this procedure soon became
unnecessary. A great deal of the credit for this growth must be given to the
continued interest of students and faculty members alike, who, upon trans-
ferring to a campus without a club, proceeded to organize a new one or reactivate
a former one, and also to the establishment of clubs by students and/or faculty
people who were told about the work by enthusiastic members or advisers of
-clubs on other campuses. On receiving an inquiry about the work, the endow-
ment furnished materials descriptive of the club program and suggestions for
organizing a club. The principal requirements for affiliation with the endow-
ment were that the group would meet regularly with a faculty adviser for the
study and discussion of world affairs from an unprejudiced and objective point
of view and that the books should be kept together as a permanent collection.
Upon notification that a club had completed its organization, it was placed upon
the mailing list to receive all club materials.
7. Two installments of books were automatically distributed to the clubs each
academic year. The books were initially selected by a member of the endow-
ment staff and then submitted for approval to a committee of which Dr. Butler
was chairman. In the first semester the books were sent to clubs which notified
the endowment that they were functioning and ready to receive them, and in
the second semester only to the clubs which had formally acknowledged receipt
of the first, or fall, installment. The distribution of books was discontinued
entirely in the spring of 1947.
In this connection, you will be interested to know that the Association of
International Relations Clubs has just concluded its Seventh Annual Con-
ference. At the final business session on April 23, the association voted to
affiliate with the Foreign Policy Association, which is better equipped than the
endowment to aid them in planning their programs for objective study of inter-
national problems. At the same time the association passed a resolution thank-
ing the endowment for past services. It was with very real regret that the
endowment came to the end of a long chapter, in which we like to think that a
926 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
contribution was made to the better understanding of the responsibilities which
our country now bears as a world power.
Sincerely yours,
Joseph E. Johnson.
Memorandum
June 30, 1954.
Subject : Books distributed by Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Since it was impossible to check every volume distributed by the endowment
through the international mind alcoves or through the international relations
clubs and centers, a random sampling by year mentioned in the yearbooks was
taken. When Dr. Kenneth Oolegrove was in Washington, D. C., to attend the
hearings before the committee, he was asked to look over the books distributed
in the following years : 1918, 1926, 1928, 1931, 1932, 1933, 1938, 1989, 1941, 1943,
1944, 1947.
The authors and books for those years are given below. Those on which Dr.
Oolegrove commented are in italics.
1918 Yearbook, page 86 ("distributed principally to college libraries and Inter-
national Polity Clubs") :
C. It. Ashbee : American League To Enforce Peace
E. W. Clement: Constitutional Imperialism in Japan
Cosmos : The Basis of Durable Peace
Robert Goldsmith : A League To Enforce Peace
J. A. Hobson : The New Protectionism
Roland Hugins : The Possible Peace
Harold J, Laski: Studies in the Problem of Sovereignty — "Opposed to the
'national interest* ; inclines toward extreme left"
Ramsay Muir: Nationalism and Internationalism
Henry F. Munro, Ellery C. Stowell : International Cases
H. H. Powers : The Things Men Fight For
Bertrand Russell : Why Men Fight
Walter E. Weyl : American World Policies
1926 Yearbook, page 56 ("distributed principally to college libraries and
International Polity Clubs") :
Carlton J. H. Hayes: A Political and Social History of Modern Europe
(2 vols.)
Prof. Schille Viallate : Economic Imperialism
George Matthew Dutcher : The Political Awakening of the East
Raymond Leslie Buel: International Relations — "Qlobalist"
1931 Yearbook, page 67 :
Butler, Nicholas Murray : The Path to Peace
Eberlein, Marks, and Wallis : Down the Tiber and Up to Rome
Ellis, M. H. : Express to Hindustan
Keenleyside, Hugh L. : Canada and the United States
Larson, Frans August : Larson, Duke of Mongolia
Olden, Rudolf: Streseroann
Patrick, Mary Mills : Under Five Sultans
Phillips, Henry A. : Meet the Germans
Read, Elisabeth F.- International Law and International Relations — "Rather
leftist"
Redfleld, Robert: Tepoztlan (Mexico)
de la Rue, Sidney: Land of the Pepper Bird (Liberia)
Russell, Phillips: Red Tiger (Mexico)
Ryhd, Hanna: Land of the Sun-God (Egypt)
Sassoon, Sir Philip: The Third Route
Sheng-Cheng : A Son of China
Street, C. J. C. : Thomas Masaryk of Czechoslovakia
Waldrom, Webb: Blue Glamor (the Mediterranean)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 927
1932 Yearbook, pages 75, 80.:
Akeley, Delia J. : Jungle Portraits
Buck, Pearl S.: The Good Earth— "Slightly leftist"
Chase, Stuart : Mexico— "Mildly left"
Colum, Padraic : Cross Roads in Ireland
Forbes, Rosita : Conflict
Hindus, Maurice: Humanity Uprooted — "Marxian slant"
Ilin, M. : New Russia's Primer
McBride, Robert M. : Romantic Czechoslovakia
McMullen, Laura W.: Building the World Society — "GlobaUst"
Morton, H. V. : In Search of Scotland
Ross, Sir. E. Denison : The Persians
Strong, Anna Louise: The Road to the Grey Pamir — "Well Known Communist"
Van Dyke, John C. : In Egypt
Wagner, Ellasue : Korea
Wortham, N. E. : Mustapha Kemal of Turkey
Andrews, Fanny Fern : The Holy Land Under Mandate
Arendtz, Herman F. : The Way Out of Depression
Bratt, K. A. : That Next War?
de Madariga, Salvadore: Disarmament — "Ultra globalist and aimed at sub-
mergence of 'national interest' "
Harper, Samuel G. : Making Bolsheviks
Hudson, Manley O. : The World Court
Ilin, U. : New Russia's Primer
League of Nations : Ten Years of World Cooperation
Lefebure, Victor: Scientific Disarmament
MacNair, Harley F. : China in Revolution
Mitchell, N. P.: Land Problems and Policies in the African Mandates of the
British Commonwealth
Moulton, H. G. : Japan : An Economic and Financial Appraisal
1933 Yearbook, pages 77, 80 :
Angell, Norman: The Unseen Assassins — "GlobaUst"
Casey, Robert J. : Baghdad and Points East
Cohen-Portheim, Paul : England, the Unknown Isle
Desmond, Alice Curtis : Far Horizons
Hedin, Sven : Across the Gobi Desert
Hudson, Manley O. : Progress in International Organization
Jones, Amy Heminway : An Amiable Adventure
Mackall, Lawton : Portugal for Two
Monson, Ronald A. : Across Africa on Foot
Morton, H. V. : In Search of Ireland, In Search of Wales
Patterson, Ernest Minor: America: World Leader or World Led? — "GlobaUst"
Phillips, Henry Albert : Meet the Japanese
Raiguel and Huff : This Is Russia
Thomas, Valentine : Young Europe
Tsurumi, Yusuke : The Mother
Angell, Sir Norman: The Unseen Assassins
Clark, Grover : Economic Rivalries in China
Cory, Ellen : Compulsory Arbitration
Escher, Franklin : Modern Foreign Exchange
Morley, Felix : The Society of Nations
Morse and MacNair : Far Eastern International Relations
Moulton and Pasvolsky : War Debts and World Prosperity
Salter, Sir Arthur: Recovery, the Second Effort — "GlobaUst"
Patterson, Ernest Minor: America — World Leader or World Led?
Ware, Edith E.: Business and Politics in the Far East — "Doubtful"
1938 Yearbook, page 55 : "This material is directed in some instances only to the
trustees of the endowment, in other cases to a wider though limited circle of those
directly connected with the endowment and in still other cases to a comprehensive
list of those interested in international questions * * * Among the books so
distributed may be cited : * * *"
James T. Shotwell: On the Abyss — "GlobaUst"
William T. Stone and Clark M. Eichelberger: Peaceful Change — "GlobaUst
and leftist. Regarding W. T. Stone, see the report of the McCarran subcom*
mittee. Stone was closely associated with Edward Carter of I. P. R."
928 tax-exempt' rotrNDATiONS
1938 Yearbook, page 62 : .
Dulles, Allen W., and Armstrong, Hamilton Fish; Can We be Neutral?
Dunn, Frederick Sherwood: Peaceful Change
Florinsky, Michael T. : Fascism and National Socialism
Horrabin, J. F. : An Atlas of the Empire
Lichtenberger, Henri: The Third Reich
Miller, Spencer, Jr. : What the I. L. O. Means to America
Peers, E. Allison : The Spanish Tragedy
Staley, Eugene : Raw Miterials in Peace and War
Salter, Sir Arthur: World Trade and Its Future — "Globalist"
Vinacke, Harold M. : A History of the Far East in Modern Times
Willert, Sir Arthur and others : The Empire in the World
1939 Yearbook, page 62 :
Angell, Norman : The Defense of the Empire
Angell, Norman: Peace with the Dictators? — "Globalist"
Butler, Nicholas Murray: The ITamily of Nations
Davies, E. C. : A Wayfarer in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania
Fergusson, Erna: Venezuela
Fry, Varian : War in China
Hamilton, Alexander, and others : The Federalist
Jackson, Joseph Henry : Notes on a Drum
Lewis, Elizabeth Foreman : Portraits from a Chinese Scroll
Loewenstein, Prince Hubertus Zu : Conquest of the Past
Lyons, Eugene: Assignment in Utopia
MacManus, Seumas : The Rocky Road to Dublin
Miller, M. S. and J. L. : Cruising the Mediterranean
Parmer, Charles B. : West Indian Odyssey
Roberts, Stephen H. : The House That Hitler Built
Sterne, Emma Gelders : European Summer
Streit, Clarence K.: Union Now— "Globalist and submersion of national inter-
est. Fallacious in his_ analogy of Union of American States in 1181 with
world federation"
Strode, Hudson : South by Thunderbird
1941 Yearbook, page 54 :
Benes, Eduard : Democracy Today and Tomorrow
Bisson, T. A.: American Policy in the Far East, 1981-19 — "Pro-Communist"
Butler, Nicholas Murray: Why War?
Dulles, Allen W., and Armstrong, Hamilton Fish: Can America Stay Neutral? —
"Ultraglobalists"
Florinsky, Michael T. : Toward an Understanding of the U. S. S. R.
Ford, Guy Stanton (editor) : Dictatorship in the Modern World
Lippmann, Walter : Some Notes on War and Peace
Marriott, Sir John A. R. : Commonwealth or Anarchy?
Patterson, Ernest Minor: Economic Bases of Peace
Saerchinger, Cesar : The Way Out of War
Shotwell, James T, : What Germany Forgot
Viton, Albert : Great Britain, an Empire in Transition
1939 Yearbook, page 39 : "Among leftist speakers sent to conferences by the-
Carnegie Endowment were Vera Micheles Dean and Dr. Eugene Staley. Mrs,
Dean and Max Lerner also were included in the 1941 list"
1944 Yearbook, page 103 :
Hunt, Dr. Erling (Teachers College): Citizens for a New World, yearbook of
Commission for Organisation of Peace— r-"Ultraglobalist"
1944 Yearbook, page 48 :
Clark, Evans {editor) : Wartime Facts and Postwar Problems: A Study an&
Discussion Manual
Committee on Africa : Africa
Duffett, W. E., Hicks, A. R. and Parkin, G, R. : India Today
Hambro, C. J. : How to Win the Peace
TA3^EXi3MFT FOU^ATIOljW' 929
Hornbeck, Stanley K. : The United States and the Far East
Inman, Samuel Guy : Latin America : Its Place in World Life
Kohn, Hans : World Order in Historical Perspective
Maclver, R. M.: Toward an Abiding Peace — "Extremely globalist and careless
of the American 'national interest' "
Mowat, R. B. and Slosson, Preston : History of the English-Speaking Peoples
Pares, Sir Bernard: Russia
Peffer, Nathaniel: A Basis for Peace in the Far East
Reves, Emery : A Democratic Manifesto
Stembrwlge, Jasper H., An Atlas of the U. S. S. R.
Thomas, Elbert D. : Thomas Jefferson : World Citizen
Welles, Sumner : The world of the Four Freedoms
1944 Yearbook, page 52 ;
Broderick, Alan H. : North Africa
Chiang Kai-shek, Generalissimo : All We Are and All We Have
Chiang Kai-shek, Madame : We Chinese Women
Follett, Helen : Islands on Guard
Gatti, Allen and Attilio : Here is Africa
Goodell, Jane : They Sent Me to Iceland
Hambro, C, J. : How to Win the Peace
Henley, Constance Jordan : Grandmother Drives South
Hutchison, Bruce : The Unkonwn Country
Lanks, Herbert C. : Pan American Highway through South America
Lattimore, Owen: America and Asia — "Subtle propaganda along Communist
line. Lattimore cited in McCarrah subcommittee report as part of Commu-
nist cell in 'the Institute 'of Pacific Relations"
Maisel, Albert Q. : Africa : Facts and Forecasts
Massock, Richard G. : Italy from Within
Pares, Sir Bernard : Russia
Peffer, Nathaniel: Basis for Peace in the Far East — "Leftist. Bee McCarran.
subcommittee report"
Representatives of the United Nations : The People's Peace
Welles, Sumner : The World of the Four Freedoms
1947 Yearbook, pages 48, 51 :
The Soviet Union Today, An Outline Study: American Russian Institute —
"Favorable to U. S. S. R."
The United Nations Economic and Social Council : Herman Finer.
America and the New World : The Merrick lectures, 1945.
Perpetual Peace : Immanuel Kant.
Political Handbook of the World, 1946: Walter H. Mallory, editor.
Germany Is Our Problem : Henry Morgenthau, Jr.
The Atomic Age Opens : Editors of pocket books.
America's Stake in Britain's Future : George Soule.
Peoples Speaking to Peoples : Llewellyn White and Robert D. Leigh.
The United Nations in the Making : Basic Documents : World Peace Founda-
tion.
The Soviet Union Today: American Russian Institute
The Chrysanthemum and the Sword : Ruth Benedict
The World Today : Nicholas Murray Butler.
Sun Yat-sen : Stephen Chen and Robert Payne.
Britain: Partner for Peace: Percy E. Corbett— "Extremely globalist"
The United Nations Economic and Social Council : Herman Finer.
Brazil: An Interpretation: Gilberto Freyre.
Greece : A. W. Gomme.
Our Son, Pablo : Alvin and Darley Gordon.
France, Short History : Albert Guerard.
Iran : William S. Haas.
And the Bravest of These : Katharine Roberts.
New Zealand: Philip L. Soljak.
Peace Atlas of Europe : Samuel van Valkenburg.
The Story of the Dutch East Indies : Bernard H. M. Vlekke.
The French Canadian Outlook : Mason Wade.
Originally it had been intended to have others in addition to Dr. Colegrove
make notations on these and other books distributed by the Carnegie Endowment
930 eaxtExumft foundations
for International Peace, either through the International Mind Alcoves, the
international relations clubs and centers, or other means. However, up to this
time, it has not been possible to proceed with this particular project.
Kathryn Casey,
Legal Analyst.
Exhibit — Pakt II. Rockefeller
Excekpts From Annual Reports of the Rockefeller Foundation and Material
Taken From Other Sources From 1929 to 1952
(Source: The Rockefeller Foundation, 1932 annual report, pp. 274-275:)
economic planning and control
"Events of the past 3 years have made strikingly evident the tremendous
social losses occasioned by the ups and downs of modern business enterprise.
Much physical suffering, illness, mental disorder, family disintegration, crime,
and political and social instability trace their origin to economic causes. ,. In a
time of depression, when enterprise is halted and millions of the unemployed are
unable to command the necessities of life, the question is insistently heard, Why
does this distressing situation arise in a country where raw materials exist in
plenty, where technological equipment is of the best, and where workers are
eager to apply their productive capacities? The opportunity and need for
scientific attack on the problem of economic maladjustment are unmistable. Tha
foundation views this field as highly important and well adapted to research.
"For several years various studies and organizations concerned with economic
stabilization have been supported. It is believed that a more complete knowl-
edge of the working of our present economic system — e. g., of conditions as
revealed by realistic, statistical studies of unemployment; the characteristics,
methods, and hazards of specified industrial enterprises ; the complex forces
operating in a competitive society in a number of specific situations — must sup-
ply the necessary basis for planning an effective economic organization."
(Source: The Rockefeller Foundation, 1936 annual report, pp. 55-56:)
"* * * As one reviews the history of the men and women who, over the last
20 years, have received fellowships from the foundation, the record appears
most gratifying. Today, they are occupying positions of importance and dis-
tinction in nearly every country of the world. They are on university faculties ;
they are connected with research laboratories ; they hold strategic governmental
positions ; they are carrying on significant and productive work in wide fields
of knowledge. Some of them, indeed, have gained outstanding recognition, such
as the award of the Nobel prize. It would be idle to assume, of course, that
their leadership and their contribution to scientific thought are the results solely
of their fellowship experience. Doubtless, many of them wpuld have gained
eminence without this experience, or would have obtained the experience in
other ways. But it is a satisfaction to record the subsequent success of highly,
promising men and women, picked largely from the younger generation, to whom
the foundation is proud to have been of some assistance."
(Source: The Rockefeller Foundation, 1937 annual report, pp. 57-58:)
THE DEBACLE; IN CHINA ,
"Last year, in the Review, the following sentence appeared : 'China today
stands on the threshold of a renaissance. The Chinese National Government, to-
gether with many provincial and county authorities and private organizations,
are attempting to make over a medieval society in terms of modern knowledge.'
"This proud ambition, in which the foundation was participating, has been
virtually destroyed by the events, of the last 6 months. The program was
primarily a program of rural reconstruction and public health., It was rooted
m promising Chinese institutions like Nankai University in Tientsin, and the
National Central University and the National Agricultural Research Bureau, both
in Nanking. It was promoting studies in subjects like animal husbandry and
agriculture; it was carrying on broadly based field experimentations; and it was
training men and women for administrative posts in rural and public health
work.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 931
"Nankai University was completely destroyed last July. The universities and
institutions in Nanking, where they are not too badly damaged, are serving today
as army barracks. The field units in mass education and public health are so
completely scattered that it is practically impossible to locate them. The work,
the devotion, the resources, the strategic plans of Chinese leaders for a better
China, have disappeared in an almost unprecedented cataclysm of violence.
"At the moment there is nothing further to report. The foundation still main-
tains its office in Shanghai. Whether there will be an opportunity to pick up
the pieces of this broken program at some later date, no one can foretell."
(Source: The Rockefeller Foundation, 1940 annual report, pp. 273-277:)
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS
"The foundation continued its support of the national institute's experimental
program of recruiting and training personnel for the Federal services by a grant,
of $105,000 for the 3-year period from October 1, 1941. For the past 5 years,
the program has involved the annual placement of approximately 50 graduate
students preparing for public service careers, in agencies of the Federal Govern-
ment for a year of practical apprenticeship. The institute also serves as a clear-
inghouse of information and as a liaison agency in matters relating to this, re-
cruitment and training program. Sixty percent of its "internes" are now in the
Federal service ; several are in State and local or other government services, and
a number are continuing graduate study.
"The institute hopes to continue its program directed toward developing a
more effective means of recruitment of persons for Government service, espe-
cially for its influence in improving the relations between the Federal authorities
and the educational institutions of the country."
( Source : The Rockefeller Foundation, 1941 annual report. )
Pages 230-231 :
INSTITUTIONAL GRANTS
"Council on Foreign Relations
"Each study group consists of specialists in designated areas in the various
problems to be dealt with. The program permits the continuous examination of
events related to problems of special interests of this country, and the assembly
and interpretation of research material. Each group works under the leadership
of a rapporteur. A steering committee composed of the rapporteurs and the-
leading officers of the council is responsible for the general planning, the coordina-
tion of the activities of the groups, and the interchange of material and points of
view.
"More than 250 memoranda on special subjects had been prepared before the
end of 1941. These had been furnished to the Government services charged
with handling the various questions discussed. Many representatives of these
services had also participated in the discussion of the study groups."
"Foreign Policy Association
"The former project is concerned primarily with the organization of educational
work in relation to world problems, collaboration with colleges, schools, forums,,
women's clubs, youth groups, labor programs, agricultural clubs, etc. Its purpose
is the preparation and distribution of educational material in the field of inter-
national affairs and the encouragement of discussion of such material. A special
series of 'Headline Books,' published since 1935, is one aspect of the publication
program. At least 15 titles have been added to the list over the past 3 years.
Study materials which supplement these books are used by various groups
throughout the country. Several of the 'Headline Books' have been translated
into Spanish and distrbuted in South America.
"It is hoped to establish effective bases of cooperation with leading national
organizations serving the cause of public education in the United States, and
with Government agencies actively concerned with increasing general knowledge
and understanding of problems of American foreign policy.
"In view of the current world situation, the Foreign Policy Association will
concentrate its research during the coming year in three main fields: (1) Devel-
opments in the occupied countries of Europe; (2) political and economic trends
in Latin America; and (3) problems of postwar reconstruction.
54610—54 8
932 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
"In addition to its research activities, the association furnishes speakers to
educational public policy organizations, arranges luncheon discussions, and
conducts a series of broadcasts now distributed through 70 stations. Its Wash-
ington bureau collects firsthand information on current issues of American foreign
policy. The association also maintain a Latin American Information Service,
which published until the end of 1941 its biweekly Pan American News, furnish-
ing background material on political and economic trends in Latin American
countries."
Pages 233-234 :
INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
"Yale University
"The institute, founded in 1935, had the following objectives : To promote basic
research in international relations with particular attention to studies designed
to clarify American foreign policy ; to develop a broad and well-rounded program
of education and training in international relations on both the undergraduate
and graduate level ; to evolve procedures of coordination and integration among
the various social sciences in the analysis of international problems ; and to aid
in the postdoctoral training of younger scholars in the general field of inter-
national relations.
"The research program of the institute included many projects centering around
problems of American foreign policy, but designed also to interpret the role of
power in international affairs, and the relation of national policies to military
policies and principles of grand strategy.
"Four major studies have been published and several others are nearing com-
pletion. Certain of the projects are being carried on in conjunction with Govern-
ment departments. Among the specific subjects proposed for study are : Prob-
lems of national defense ; United States and the future order of Europe ; hemi-
spheric unity ; the geographic basis of foreign policy ; and inter- American trade
relations.
"The program of education has been closely coordinated with the research
program. The projected program for the next few years will not represent any
substantial change in policy. A combined social science approach will stress
analytical rather than historical methods."
(Source : The Rockefeller Foundation, annual report for 1942.)
Pages 179-180 :
THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
"Social Science Re&earoh Council
"Washington personnel office. Even before the United States entered the war,
a vital need was felt in Washington for an agency to promote more effective
utilization of social scientists. In the stress of the prewar emergency the Na-
tional Government had recruited many thousands of persons trained in the social
sciences ; later, of course, the demand greatly increased.
"It was foreseen that unless the recruitment policies were integrated and wisely
administered severe shortages would result and skilled talent would be squan-
dered.
"After a careful study of the problem the Social Science Research Council set up
an office in Washington to work in cooperation with Government agencies on
three tasks: (1) Consulting with Government agencies on policies and methods
of recruitment; (2) advising with individuals who wished to contribute their
talents where they could be utilized most effectively; and (3) consulting with
university officals regarding the temporary release of members of their faculties*
"The Council already had joined with other national scientific councils in
promoting the roster of scientific and specialized personnel, but responsible offi-
cials felt that this was not enough. Now, the office which has been set up in
Washington provides a place to which persons may turn for extragovernmental
advice concerning social science problems. Similar services had earlier been
provided for engineers and specialists in the various field of medical and natural
sciences."
* * * * * * *
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 933
Pages 1181-182:
"Public Administration Committee
"The agencies through which society will seek to meet its diverse problems are
multiform, and total effort, whether for defense or for the postwar world, will
receive its primary direction through the agency of Government. For the past 7
years the foundation has supported the activities of the public administration
committee, whose original objectives were to capture and record and lay the basis
for the appraisal of measures initiated in the United States for grappling with the
consequences of the worldwide social and technological changes that were taking
place. The end objective was, if possible, to add to the store of principles of
administration so that administrators who must make decisions might profit by
recent and current experience.
"The committee formulated a series of major studies of two general types:
(1) Administrative problems of new and emerging governmental activities;
and (2) appraisal and review of significant developments in administration of
the last 3 decades.
"More recently the committee has focused its resources and attention mainly
on planning and stimulating rather than on executing research. A broadening of
the program to include the field of government, with public administration
as one sector is now contemplated. Such a program would deal less with the
mechanics of administration than with the development of sound bases of policy
determination and more effective relationships in the expanding governmental
structure."
( Source : The Rockefeller Foundation, 1943 annual report, pp. 178-179 : )
INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
"Council on Foreign Relations
"The war and peace studies project of the council was organized shortly
after the outbreak of hostilities in 1939 for the purpose of furnishing such
scholarly contributions to the work of the Government as an unofficial agency
can make in wartime. Studies have centered around five main fields: strategy
and armaments, economics and finance, political questions, territorial ques-
tions, and the peace aims of European nations. Since the inception of the
project 541 memoranda have been sent to Washington dealing with subjects
selected by both the council and the Government. The research is carried
on by the study group method and the membership of these groups includes
persons especially qualified by training and experience, both in Government
service and out, as well as members of the council's research staff. The founda-
tion has appropriated $60,800 for the continuation of these studies in 19.44. The
interest which has been shown in these studies has led the council to arrange
during the coming year for a wider distribution of various memoranda based
on some of them, both inside the Government and to selected individuals in
private organizations."
* * * * * * *
Pages 186-187: "The grants in international relations were for the support
of agencies devoted to studies, to teaching, to service to Government and to pub-
lic and expert education. Collectively these grants assume that it is not possible
to guarantee peace but that the way to work toward it is to strengthen 'the
infinity of threads that bind peace together,' To that end the foundation made
grants for the support of studies and related activities of the following institu-
tions: Foreign Policy Association, Royal Institute of International Affairs
(London), Swedish Institute of International Affairs (Stockholm), and the
economic, financial, and transit department of the League of Nations. The im-
portance to peace of our relations with, and an understanding of, Russia was
reflected in two grants to Columbia University for the Russian institute of its
School of International Affairs. The sum of $60,000 was appropriated to the
Council on Foreign Relations for the continuation of its war and peace studies.
A special grant of $152,000 was made to the Royal Institute of International
Affairs for a history of the war and the peace settlement. The Institute for
Advanced Study at Princeton received $40,000 for a study of the problems of in-
ternational civil aviation. Fifteen thousand dollars was granted to the Massa-
chusetts Institute of Technology to aid in the development of a course in inter-
national relations for engineers."
934 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
(Source: The Rockefeller Foundation, 1945 annual report, pp. 188-189:)
INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
"Columbia University Sehool of International Affairs, Russian institute
"Increased efficiency and rapidity of transportation and communication hare-
ended for this country the possibility of isolation, either as a physical fact or as a
national policy. Those responsible for the management of the interests of the
United States, whether in governmental of nongovernmental capacities, will of
necessity be increasingly concerned with the institutions, mores and policies
of other nations and peoples. There must therefore be developed with the
United States a body of men and women with a broad understanding of inter-
national affairs who have in addition training as functional or regional special-
ists. Only a body of men and women so trained will provide a reservoir fromi
which experts capable of handling the increasingly complex and intricate prob-
lems of international affairs can be drawn.
"For some time Columbia University has been exploring the desirability of
establishing at the university a school of international affairs. The recom-
mendation that such a school be created was made in 1945 and included the-
proposal for establishment of six institutes designed to develop special knowl-
edge and understanding of certain of the so-called power and problem areas of
the world. It is planned to assemble in these institutes groups of outstanding:
scholars who have specialized in specific geographical areas. The university
suggests that a British Commonwealth institute, a French institute, a German
institute, a Russian institute, an East Asian institute, and an institute of Latin
American affairs be created. The Rockefeller Foundation has made a 5-year
grant of $250,000 to Columbia University toward the development of a Russian,
institute."
(Source: The Rockefeller Foundation, 1945 annual report, p. 199:)
UNITED NATIONS INFORMATION OFFICE, NEW YORK
"One of the elements vital to the future success of world cooperation is the-
immediate accessibility of the huge documentation of the United Nations confer-
ence in San Francisco, which, by an almost unprecedented action of the confer-
ence, was made available for prompt public examination and study. With respect
to many crucial issues the really significant material is not the formal language-
of the articles of the Charter, but the interpretation contained in the reports
and discussions of the various committees. The conference, however, had no-
means of publishing this material. The secretariat which staffed the conference
ceased to -exist at the closing of the conference. The new secretariat is dealing
with the future rather than with the past. The United Nations Information*
OfBee, therefore, with the consent of the authorities of the conference, is publish-
ing the official document of the conference in cooperation with the Library of
Congress."
( Source : The Rockefeller Foundation, 1946 annual report : )
Pages 8-9: "The challenge of the future is to make. this world one world— a:
world truly free to engage in common and constructive intellectual efforts that
will serve the welfare of mankind everywhere."
* * * * * * *
Pages 32-33: "International relations:
"The grants in this field went to agencies which conduct research and education-
designed to strengthen the foundations for a more enlightened public opinion and ?
more consistent public policies. * * *"
" * * * This parallels the grant of $152,000 made in 1945 to the Royal Institute-
to enable Arnold Toynbee to write a history of international relations from 1939
to 1949. An appropriation of $300,000 was made to the food research institute-
of Stanford University for the preparation, in collaboration with experts from
many countries, of a history and appraisal of the world's experience in handling
food and agriculture during World War II. Another grant was for the purpose
of assisting the United Nations information office to reproduce the documentation)
of the first General Assembly and Preparatory Commission of the United Nations.
The Brookings Institution was given a fund which will enable Dr. Leo PasvoIsky r
who was special assistant to the Secretary of State for International Organiza-
tion and Security Affairs, to analyze the background of the development of the-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 935
United Nations organization and to initiate studies and educational conferences
on the problems that are emerging in the functioning of our new international
machinery. * * *"
*******
Page 40 : "In this connection, mention might be made of the appropriations,
voted in 1946, through the foundation's division of the social sciences, of
$233,000 to the Institute of Pacific Relations, $60,000 of which went to the
American Council and $173,000 to the Pacific Council. Much of the work of
this organization is related to the training of personnel, the stimulation of lan-
guage study and the conduct of research on problems of the Far East. It is part
of the pattern by which, from many different directions and points of view,
■efforts are being made to bring the West and the East into closer understanding."
Pages 182-183:
INTEENATIONAL STUDIES
"The Brookings Institution
"The developing foreign policies of the United States as one of the major
powers sharing world leadership are to be appraised under the new international-
relations program of the Brookings Institution. Each of the studies is an integral
part of a research plan geared to those International-relations problems with
which the United States either is, or will be, concerned. This problem approach is
intended to aid in formulating enlightened public opinion in training specialists
in international affairs, and in aiding governmental agencies dealing with foreign
relations. An annual seminar will endeavor to train specialists and aid teachers
of international relations. A 1-year grant of $75,000 was made by the foundation
in support of this program.
"Two annual surveys will be published. One of these will examine American
foreign policies, but with particular attention to the problems directly ahead
And to the factors likely to determine their solution. The second survey will
consider the foreign policies of other nations, especially the major powers, and
how these are being harmonized through the United Nations and its related
agencies.
"Five major studies are in progress : The United Nations Charter and its effect
on the powers, duties, and functions of the U. N. ; the foreign policy objectives of
the five major powers; the general effectiveness of international organizations
and conferences as methods of diplomacy; present-day factors making for eco-
nomic war or for economic peace in international relations; and changes in
international security concepts resulting from technological and strategic
■developments.
"Dr. Leo Pasvolsky, who has been in Government service since 1934, has now
returned to the Brookings Institution as director of these studies."
Pages 190-191 :
"Institute of Pacific Relations
"The Institute of Pacific Relations, an unofficial international organization
-with a number of constituent national bodies or councils, aims to increase knowl-
edge of economic, social, cultural, and political problems of the Pacific area.
Training personnel, stimulating language teaching as well as curriculum attention
to the Far East in general, and publishing research studies, are the institute's
•chief means of spreading knowledge. The distribution of educational materials
to secondary schools and to the Armed Forces increased significantly during the
past several years."
Pages 192-193 :
United Nations Information Office, New York
"The importance of preventing possible serious misinterpretations of actions
of international bodies due to unavailability of actual documents on transactions
was recognized when the foundation early in 1946 appropriated $16,177 to the
United Nations Information Office, New York, toward the cost of reproducing
the documentation of the Preparatory Commission in London and of the sessions
of the First General Assembly of the United Nations Organization. Preparatory
Commission documents were microfilmed in London and the film flown daily from
the Interim Organization to the United Nations office in New York and repro-
duced here by photo-offset within 24 hours of their arrival. Fifty or sixty copies
were sent to the Department of State and to key libraries throughout the country.
936 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
One thousand other copies were distributed to interested libraries, institutions,
and societies, and an additional number provided for editorial writers, news
commentators, and others. This appropriation was an emergency measure to
permit the reproduction of these documents and their distribution as promptly
as possible."
(Source: The Rockefeller Foundation, 1947 annual report, pp. 39-41,43-44:)
APPROACHES TO PEACE
"Work which looks toward more adequate analysis and understanding of the
issues in international relations continued to hold an important place in the
grants made by the Rockefeller Foundation in 1947 in the field of the social
sciences."
* * * * * * *
"Meanwhile we cannot neglect the direct approach to the overwhelming crisis
of our generation, and for its part the foundation has contributed substantial
sums over the last decade to organizations and projects that are concerned with
the issues of international relations. This policy was, of course, continued in
1947. For example, the sum of $225,000 was given to Brookings Institution in
support of its broad program of research and education in the field of foreign
policy. This program, under the leadership of Dr. Leo Pasvolsky, involves,
among other objectives, five basic studies :
"(1) Origin and Interpretation of the United Nations Charter.
"(2) Foreign Policy Objectives of the Major Powers.
" (3) Influences Making for Economic War or Economic Peace in International
Relations,
"(4) New Concepts of International Security.
"(5) International Organizations and Conferences as New Methods of
Diplomacy.
"In addition, Brookings Institution, as part of its program in the training of
specialists, has planned an annual 2-week seminar for about 100 teachers of inter-
national relations.
*******
"Still another appropriation — in the amount of $75,000 — was given for the
creation of senior fellowships at the Russian institute of the School of Inter-
national Affairs at Columbia University. The Russian institute, toward whose
creation in 1945 the foundation contributed $250,000, is without doubt the leading
graduate school in the United States in the field of Russian studies. In addition
to the Russian language, its basic curriculum provides: (1) A broad background
and training in 5 disciplines (history, economy, law and government, international
relations, and the social and ideological aspects of literature) as applied to
Russia ; (2) an intensive research training in one of these 5 disciplines elected'
by the student; and (3) fundamental graduate training in the broader aspects
of this elected discipline,
"The senior fellowships will make it possible to bring to the institute for ad-
vanced training some of those persons who are now conducting instruction in
Russian subjects in other universities, thus enabling them to broaden their
equipment and develop their effectiveness in Russian research.
"Other grants by the foundation in 1947 in this general field of international
relations include the following :
"(1) The Royal Institute of International Affairs ($50,625) — a supplement
to an earlier grant toward Prof. Arnold J. Toynbee's study of the history of the
war and of the peace settlement.
"(2) Commission of the Churches on International Affairs ($15,000) — for
preparations for conferences on the role of churches in international relations.
"(3) Johns Hopkins University ($37,400) — for a study of the trends and forces
which affect the United States in its international relations.
"(4) Netherlands Institute of International Affairs ($25,000) — for a broadly
based European conference on the economic and cultural aspects of the German
problem.
"(5) Council on Foreign Relations ($60,000) — for general support.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 937
THE HUMANITIES IN SPACE
* * * * * * *
"The range and variety of grants of this type made during 1947 may be
briefly indicated. The American Council of Learned Societies received $12,000
for the work of its committee on Near Eastern studies, $25,000 for the trans-
lation into English of important Russian works, and $100,000 to augment the
supply of materials needed for teaching and research on Slavic studies; the
University of Pennsylvania, $60,000 for the development of studies of modern
India ; the University of Washington, $150,000 for studies of the Far East ; Yale
University, $25,000 toward the support of a group of advanced students of the
Far East ; the University of California, $30,000 to develop intensive instruction
in Slavic and Far Eastern languages, and $100,000 for the development of junior
personnel in Slavic studies; Columbia University, $25,000, likewise for Slavic
studies ; Indiana University, $27,500 for the development of studies of Eastern
Europe, principally Finland and Hungary."
Pages 189-190:
THE FUNCTIONING OF AMERICAN POLITICAL DEMOCRACY
"Pacific Coast Board of Inter->Governmental Relations
"The foundation gave its support in 1947 to a pioneering educational experi-
ment in integrovernmental relationships at the working level. On the Pacific
coast the Governors of Washington, Oregon, and California, the chairman of the
3 State Leagues of Cities and State Associations of County Commissioners, and
the coast regional chiefs of 11 Federal agencies, have created a Board of Inter-
governmental Relations. The hoard aims to improve and coordinate government
through meetings for the discussion of common problems, and acts as a nonprofit
association solely to inform its individual members, and through them the public,
of general and current problems. It takes no action, directly or indirectly, which
might be construed as carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting to Influ-
ence legislation.
"Thus far every meeting has had virtually full attendance, from the three
Governors down. Typical subjects discussed to date include Federal-State-locat
tax and fiscal relationships ; division of welfare costs ; forest development, con-
servation, and protection ; educational programs for veterans and nonveterans ;
problems of minorities in metropolitan centers ; employment and unemployment ;.
public-works planning and timing; adequate housing programs; industrial re-
conversion ; availability of materials ; and surplus property disposal."
***** * *
Pages 190-191 :
"National Institute of Public Affairs
"The National Institute of Public Affairs recruits from the immediate gradu-
ates of the colleges and universities in the country talent for administrative and
management posts in the Government of the United States and other jurisdic-
tions. Sponsored by a board of public-minded citizens and acting as a liaison unit
between the colleges and universities and the Federal departments, it has com-
pleted the 12th year of its unique public service training program, under which 30
to 50 college graduates each year have been selected and given rotating assign-
ments on a nonsalaried basis within Federal agencies. The institute provides in-
tensive orientation, supervision, and a carefully planned program of reading,
studies, and conferences with public officials.
"The foundation has supported this program since 1935. Maintenance for
about half the interns is financed by funds or followships raised by various col-
leges or their alumni. Encouraging is the competition and career interest which
the program stimulates on college campuses throughout the country; also the
rapidity with which graduates of the institute have risen to positions of responsi-
bility in public life.
"A natural complementary development, guided by the institute in its first
stages is a parallel inservice training program, for selected personnel of some
15 Federal departments or agencies, which is now in its seventh 6-month session
under a coordinator furnished by the Civil Service Commission. The departments
of State, War, Navy, Commerce, and Agriculture, are supplementing this with-
coordinated programs of their own."
938 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Page 204-205 : "There is an urgent and ever-increasing need in this country
for basic information on the economic and political structure of the world and
on the trends and forces which prevail and collide in various parts of the world
and which affect the United States in its international relations. It is not
■enough to point out these trends and forces; it is essential to measure and
weigh them.
"At Johns Hopkins University, Dr. W. S. Woytinsky has undertaken a piece
■of work which should help to answer this demand by giving an inclusive sta-
tistical picture of the different patterns of life of all nations of the globe and
of the conditions, in which they are facing the future. It will provide at least
a partial background for discussion of such problems as the future of various
races and continents ; the fate of colonial empires ; relations between industrial
and agricultural nations; growth or decline of foreign trade; competition of
raw materials, sources of energy, and means of transportation within the world
•economy ; and conditions of world prosperity and peace. The work goes beyond
the simple source book of statistics of international interest, in that these sta-
tistics are selected and organized with reference to specific problems; of inter-
national importance. The resulting volume, America in the Changing World,
should be valuable in promoting a better understanding of statistics, not as a
mathematical discipline but as quantitative thinking on human affairs. The
^Rockefeller Foundation is supporting this project with a 3-year appropriation
of $37,400."
*******
-"Council on Foreign Relations
Page 205 :
*******
"The role of conflicting ideologies in foreign affairs is under discussion in
a study group which the council has recently initiated on public opinion and
foreign policy. The central problem of the group concerns the proper func-
tion of propaganda in the conduct of foreign affairs. Progress has been
made on another study, the problem of Germany, which is financed by a spe-
cial grant from the Rockefeller Foundation. The Netherlands Institute of
International Affairs invited the Council on Foreign Relations to participate
in this study, which is being undertaken on an international basis."
( Source : The Rockefeller Foundation, 1948 annual report : )
FOUNDATION POLICIES
Pages 8-9 :
*******
"In general the policy of the foundation and, with occasional exceptions,
its practice have conformed to the following principles: (1) The support of
the foundation should be directed to purposes for which it is otherwise diffi-
cult to secure funds ; (2) the support should be of an initial or catalytic char-
acter, with the idea that what has been demonstrated to be useful should then
be carried on by other means; (3) current and palliative types of philanthropy
should accordingly be left to others, not because they are unimportant, but be-
cause the needs they encompass are more generally recognized. Furthermore,
the resources of this foundation, and indeed of all similar foundations com-
bined, are insignificant in relation to such needs."
*******
Page 243 :
"Columbia University Far Eastern Studies
"Without question east Asia will remain for a long time to come one of the
great problem areas of the world. The United States has need of specialists
wrho possess at once high technical competence in the social sciences and a
knowledge of the languages and cultures of the area. Looking toward the
establishment of a research institute in the east Asian field, the school of
international affairs at Columbia University has started a program of Far
JBastern studies through the various social-science departments. Owing to
recent expansion in the fields of Chinese and Japanees languages, literature, and
iistory, Columbia has a firm foundation for these studies. The aim at present
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 939
is .to promote a similar expansion in the social sciences, in order to provide
advanced training in economics, political science, and social analysis as related
to China and Japan. * * *"
*******
Pages 247-248 :
"United Nations Economic Commission for Europe — Training Scholarships
"The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe has received a grant
of $12,000 from the Eockefeller Foundation to provide social-science scholarships
for selected European students.
* * * * * * *
"An operational body which deals with virtually all aspects of European
recovery and development, the Commission has attracted to its staff an interna-
tional group of competent economists. These men can offer promising graduate
students an introduction to the international approach to economic problems
while they are acquiring first-hand knowledge of applied economics. The Re-
search and Planning Division, headed by Mr. Nicholas Kalder, formerly of the
London School of Economics, carries on work which is closely linked with the
technical economic problems encountered in the operational activities of the
Commission. Dr. Gunnar Myrdal, of Sweden, Executive Secretary of the Com-
mission, has established a special committee to administer the program."
(Source: The Rockefeller Foundation, 1949 annual report:)
peesident's review
*******
Page 5-7 : "The deeply disturbed political situation now prevailing in a large
part of the world has had the effect of considerably curtailing the worldwide and
International scope of foundation programs. Profound political changes have
prevented the foundation from operating in several countries in which it was
formerly active. These countries include Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and
China. During the past year the far-eastern office of the international health
division of the Rockefeller Foundation was moved from Shanghai to Macao and
then to Bangalore, India. All personnel were withdrawn from China, and a
malaria project under way in the island of Formosa was transferred to Govern-
ment auspices.
"Monetarily speaking, this is an age of huge financial operations. In the United
States large funds, chiefly governmental, are available even in the relatively
restricted field of research and fellowships. This has brought about a sharp
awareness of the discrepancy between the resources of any private]y endowed
philanthropic organization, such as the Rockefeller Foundation, and the magni-
tude of funds needed today for large-scale research or educational enterprises.
"Until recently the Rockefeller Foundation was a principal source of funds for
foreign student fellowships at the advanced level. Today, as shown by the
United Nations educational, scientific, and cultural organization handbook of
available fellowships, Study Abroad, appointments made annually by the founda-
tion constitute hardly 2 percent of the 15,070 comparable awards now offered,
62.5 percent of them by Government agencies. It has been calculated that in
1913, when there were about 900 institutions of higher education in the United
States, the appropriations of the General Education Board and of the Carnegie
Corp., the 2 principal foundations at that time, represented more than 15 percent
of the current income of all higher educational institutions. In other words,
these philanthropic resources were fairly large in relation to the activities with
which they were concerned, and they were not unsubstantial even with reference
to public primary and secondary education.
"As things stand now, the income of the Rockefeller Foundation, the General
Education Board, and the Carnegie Corp. covers less than 1 percent of the
budgetary needs of the 1,800 institutions now ministering to higher education.
Indeed, the annual expenditures of all foundations, even though roughly $100
million, are insignificant in relation to public and private funds now needed and
now available for education, scientific research, and scholarly activities.
"In the light of these changed conditions I propose to devote part of this review
to a brief discussion of Rockefeller Foundation techniques in giving and in
cooperating with other agencies and other countries. It is hoped that some
light may be shed on the comparatively modest, yet significant, role that can
940 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
still be played under present world conditions by a privately endowed philan-
thropic organization." s
*******
Pages 253-254:
INTERNATIONAL BELATIONS
"Council on Foreign Relations:
"The Rockefeller Foundation In 1949 appropriated $50,000 to the Council on
Foreign Relations, New York, for an organized study of problems of aid to Europe
in its broadest aspects. The European recovery program of the United States
lias a significance for our future prosperity and security so great as to challenge
the best efforts of private citizens as well as those in public office. The Economic
Cooperation Administration (ECA) believed that it would be of great value to the
Government and to the public at large to have an appraisal of the European
situation by a group of competent private persons free from the pressure of day-
to-day decisions and unhampered by governmental procedures or the considera-
tions of practical politics.
"Upon the invitation of the ECA, the council organized a group of leaders in
the fields of economics, politics, and military strategy under the chairmanship of
Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower. At its monthly meetings this group has carefully
•examined the aims of American foreign policy with respect to Western Europe
and has assessed the means — economic, political, and military — for achieving
those aims. Special attention has been given to the continuing interests of this
country, as opposed to urgent expediencies of today and tomorrow, and to the
relation between current measures of policy and the attainment of long-term
goals. Close liaison has been maintained with ECA and with other Federal agen-
cies and departments, but the group has functioned independently of the Govern-
jnent.
"Conclusions will be presented in the form of memoranda to responsible Gov-
ernment officials. Nonrestricted information is to be released to the general pub-
lic by means of articles or pamphlets in order to help the public understand and
judge the measures which it will be asked to endorse and carry out. In addition,
it is hoped to issue a major publication or series of publications on the operations,
-effects, shortcomings, and interrelations of United States aid to Europe under
ECA and under the provisions of military lend-lease.
"To assist the group the council has provided a full-time research staff of
■experts in the various fields of study, headed by Prof. Howard Ellis of the Uni-
versity of California. Under the guidance of the study commission the research
staff gathers facts and data for the discussion meetings and prepares memoranda
-on assigned topics. The council also furnishes library and clerical assistance.
The study group is serving on a voluntary basis. The Rockefeller Foundation's
grant is to cover salaries and expenses of the research staff."
^'Institute of Pacific Relations
*******
Page 256-257 : "The eleventh conference will convene in 1950 in India and will
-discuss recent political and economic trends in the Far East and their conse-
quences for the Western World. Preparation for the conference is a part of the
research program of the Pacific council, which is responsible for writing up the
-data papers which give the members of the conference the background informa-
tion they need for the discussions. Some of these papers, such as those on the
•Chinese Communist movement, nationalism and communism in Burma, postwar
development of Indian capitalist enterprise, the development of political parties
in Japan and the international effects of the withdrawal of western power from
the Far East, are of wide interest. In order to enable the institute to strengthen
its conference and educational activities at a critical time in Far Eastern rela-
tions, the foundation in 1949 made a supplementary grant of $25,000, available
until the end of March 1950. Of this, approximately $14,000 is to augment the
research function of the Pacific council and $11,000 toward the expenses of 1950
conference."
(Source: The Rockefeller Foundation, 1950 annual report:)
"Brookings Institution
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 941
Page 208-209: "The 10 yearly issues contain research on the immediate issues
to be faced by foreign policymakers. Additional publications put out under the
new program include a series of individual analyses on long-range problems.
Recent studies in this group have been on the International Trade Organization
as an instrument of American economic foreign policy, the United States and
peace settlements, and a history of the United Nations Charter. In order that
the values of this problem approach may be extended to Government leaders,
-educators, and businessmen, the Brookings Institution now holds an annual
U-week seminar on Problems of United States Foreign Policy. Seminars have
already been held at Dartmouth College, Stanford University, Lake Forest Col-
lege, and the University of Denver, with over a hundred persons attending
•each one."
Pages 209-210 :
"Foreign Policy Association
"The Foreign Policy Association was created in 1918 for the purpose of carry-
ing on 'research and education activities to aid in the understanding and con-
structive development of American foreign policy.' As the role of the United
states has expanded in the international sphere, the association has undertaken
to explain this role and its implications to an ever-increasing number of Amer-
icans. Thirty-two branch organizations have been organized in large cities
throughout the country. Through the activities of these branches there have
t>een organized local and national conferences, and a widespread educational
program with frequent use made of radio and television. The three publications
of the Foreign Policy Association, available to the general public, schools, organ-
izations, and Government agencies, are a weekly foreign policy bulletin, which
■covers current issues, the foreign policy reports, published twice monthly, which
discuss at some length pressing international issues and the popular Headline
Books, with details on problems of importance to Americans and to the world."
(Source: The Rockefeller Foundation, 1951 annual report:)
Pages 68, 69, 70 :
THE INTERNATIONAL SCENE
"With the enigma of Russian intentions still the top problem in world politics,
the Russian institute of Columbia University's School of International Affairs
continues to be a key center for research and training in this field. Its 2-year
course, requiring familiarity with the Russian language and providing intensive
postgraduate instruction in the history, economics, law, politics, and culture
of Russia, has in 5 years supplied the United States Army, the Department of
State, and other Government services with more than 100 trained men. Staff
members are frequently called on to lecture at the National War College, the
Air War College, and outside universities. Earlier grants for the institute,
which was established in 1946, totaled $362,000; and in 1950 the foundation
•appropriated an additional $420,000 toward support over a 5-year period.
"A postwar development of the Brookings Institution is its international
studies group, organized in 1946 for research, education, and publication on
questions of American foreign policy. Directed by Dr. Leo Pasvolsky and
using a technique which is calls 'the problem method,' the group has held 10
seminars in various parts of the United States for university teachers, advanced
.students, Government administrators, and journalists. To date some 800 uni-
versity professors have shared in foreign policy analysis through participation
in these seminars. Research activities are reflected in a number of books,
notably in the annual Major Problems of United States Foreign Policy, which
has been adopted as a textbook at West Point, Annapolis, and various universities
and colleges. A projected study which is now in the planning stage will analyze
the basic framework of international relations, including the fundamental con-
cepts and objectives of the major nations, patterns of economic behavior, polit-
ical attitudes in international relations, the channels and instrumentalities of
national action, and in general the whole pattern of internal and external factors
which condition the international scene. Since the international studies group
began 6 years ago, the foundation has appropriated $480,000 toward its program,
including $180,000 in 1950."
942 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Pages 355-356 :
"United Nations Economic Commission, for Europe
Long-run tendencies in the European economy :
"In connection with its overall program on postwar recovery, the United
Nations Economic Commission for Europe (ECE) in 1949 asked Prof. Ingvar
Svennilson, the Swedish economist, to undertake a study of long-run trends in the
European economy. Professor Svennilson and a staff of assistants at Geneva
are now nearing the end of this work. It is essentially a survey of trends in the
European economy for the years 1913-50, with emphasis on population, indus-
trialization, manpower, and production, the influence of foreign trade on produc-
tion and the important factors contributing to economic growth in Europe.
"The Bockefeller Foundation appropriated $50,000 to the Economic Commis-
sion for Europe when Professor Svennilson began this work in 1949 ; in 1951 the
foundation made a 1-year grant of $23,725 for expenses in connection with the
completion of the survey. The United Nations intends to publish the findings."
*******
Page 359 :
"Public Administration Clearing House
Consultant for Japan.
"Throughout the period of allied occupation of Japan there has been an effort
to shift the emphasis of the Japanese governmental organization from a highly
centralized bureaucratic control system to a more widely diffused pattern, with
large areas of self-determination in local matters delegated to prefectures, cities,
towns, and villages.
"One group in Japan which is sponsoring the spread of this movement is the
recently organized Japan Public Administration Clearing House. All three levels
of local government are represented in this group, which is made up of delegates
from the Tokyo Bureau of Municipal Research and the national associations of
prefectural governors, prefectural assembly chairmen, municipal mayors, city
assembly chairmen, town and village mayors, and town and village assembly
chairmen.
"Assistance was offered to the new organization by the Public Administration
Clearing House of Chicago. With a grant of $10,740 from the Rockefeller
Foundation, the Chicago Public Administration Clearing House arranged to send
a consultant to Japan and to make its official resources available to the group
in Japan."
(Source: The Story of the Rockefeller Foundation, by Raymond B. Fosdick:)
Pages 283-284 :
"As we have already seen in earlier chapters, the example of Rose and Pearce
in developing their programs on a worldwide basis was eagerly followed by the
other divisions of the foundation as they began their activities after the reorgan-
ization of 1928. The details of many of these activities have already been con-
sidered ; in all cases they were motivated by the single phrase in the charter :
'the well-being of mankind throughout the world' ; and they were predicated on
the conception that civilization and the intellectual life of men represent a co-
operative achievement, and that the experience of the race can be pooled for the-
common good. It is an ironic circumstance that this objective should have had
to run the gauntlet of two world wars with their hideous aftermaths, when behind
closed frontiers, rigidly sealed off from contact with the ideas and opinions of
other nations, vast populations have suffered from mental undernourishment and
starvation. Intellectual malnutrition can be as stunting to human life and
character as the absence of calories and vitamins. The influences that in normal
times flow freely across boundary lines, the uninhibited stream of ideas coming
from all corners of the world, are, in this modern society of ours, a corrective
and stabilizing factor in the lives of men, bringing strength and fertility to soils
that would otherwise become sterile and dry. 'Speech is civilization itself,' says-
Thomas Mann. 'The word, even the most contradictory word, preserve con-
tact — it is silence that isolates.' "
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 943
Page 297 :
"A foundation with wide and intimate contacts can perform a useful function
in serving as an unofficial clearinghouse for ideas and plans in many fields.
Certainly this has been true of the Rockefeller Foundation. Its officers are in
continual touch with promising developments and personnel around the world.
The most effective projects it has supported have been developed in the field.
These projects have come from close acquaintance with scientists and lab-
oratories, from days and weeks spent on university campuses, from hard journeys
on horseback and riverboat to discover the breeding places of disease or the
prospects for a new type of corn. The officers thus develop a point of view that
is both cumulative and comparative.
"Consequently, the foundation has become a center to which research students
and universities turn for information ; and much of the time of the officers is
spent, not on questions of financial support, but in discussing with eager inquirers
the developments in their fields in other institutions and in other countries. As
the late President Keppel of the Carnegie Corp. said : 'Much of what one uni-
versity learns about another is learned in foundation offices.' "
o
Union Calendar No. 926
83d Congress, 2d Session House Report No. 2681
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
REPORT
OP THE
SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS AND
COMPARABLE ORGANIZATIONS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
EIGHTY-THIRD CONGRESS .
SECOND SESSION
ON
H. Res. 217
December 16, 1954. — Committed to the Committee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed
UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
55647 WASHINGTON : 1954
SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE TAX-EXEMPT
FOUNDATIONS
B. CAEROLL REECE, Tennessee, Chairman
JESSE P. WOLCOTT, Michigan WAYNE L. HAYS, Ohio
ANGIER L. GOODWIN, Massachusetts GRACIE PFOST, Idaho
Rene A. Wormser, General Counsel
Aenold Koch, Associate Counsel
Nokman Dodd, Research Director
Thomas McNiece, Assistant Research Director
Karl Ettinger, was a Research Consultant
with the Committee from October 1953 to April
1, 1954
Kathryn Casey, Legal Analyst
John Marshall, Jr., Chief Clerk
Mildred Cox, Assistant Clerk, March 1, 1954,
to July 1, 1954, Acting Clerk, July 1, 1954, to
December SI, 1954
II
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART ONE. INTRODUCTORY MATERIAL
Page
I. The Creation and Functioning of the Committee 1
II. The Approach of the Committee 2
III. The Foundations and Taxes 4
The Present Basis of Federal Interest 4
The Possibility of Wider Interest 5
How Foundations Are Created 5
What Induces the Creation of Foundations 5
The Ford Foundation: An Example of the Use of a Foundation
to Retain Management Control of an Enterprise 6
The Reid Foundation: Another Example of the Use of a Foun-
dation to Retain Management Control of an Enterprise 8
The Eugene and Agnes Meyer Foundation 10
Taxes and the Increasing Foundation Birth- Rate 11
Corporate-Created Foundations 12
IV. Statistical Material < 13
PART TWO. FINDINGS OF FACT AND
SUPPORTING MATERIAL
V. Prefatory Notes and Summary of Findings 15
Summary of Committee Findings 16
VI. The Power of the Large Foundation 19
The Impact of Size 19
Public Accountability 21
Abdication of Trustees' Responsibility _-- 22
The Social Sciences 30
Patronage and Control 33
The Foundation Bureaucrats - 37
Criticism and Defense 38
VII. The Concentration of Power — the Interlocks 39
The Hazards to Society in an Interlock 39
Does a Concentration of Power Exist? 39
The Cartel and Its Operations 41
What Makes up the Interlock 45
The Social Science Research Council 47
The American Council on Education 52
Other Interlocks and Further Dangers 53
Politics— Power Flow — Planning 57
VIII. The Foundations and Research in the Social Sciences 60
The Predominance of Empiricism 60
The "Fact-Finding Mania" 62
Limitations and Dangers 66
Dr. Kinsey Counts Noses 67
More "Scientism" 72
Scientism and Causality . 73
"The American Soldier" 73
Some Results of Excessive Empiricism _ _ ■ 75
Moral Relativity 76
Social Science Research in the Universities and Colleges 78
"The Social Sciences at Mid-Century" 82
The Slant to the Left 85
"An American Dilemma" 89
The Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences _ 91
"Experiment," "Risk Capital," and the Colleges 94
ni
IV TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART TWO. FINDINGS OF FACT AND
SUPPORTING MATERIAL— Continued
Page
IX. The Political Activities of Foundations 95
The Quantitative Test 95
The Qualitative Test 96
The League for Industrial Democracy 96
Another Specific Instance of Clear Political Use: The American
Labor Education Service 106
The Twentieth Century Fund 109
The Fund for the Republic 110
Other"Civil Liberties" Projects 114
The Slant of the Concentration H6
A Carnegie Corporation Example 117
Another Example of Slant: The Citizenship Education Project. 120
The General Problem 122
Social Engineering 123
The "Elite" 126
The "Engineers," "Planning," and Socialism 129
The International Press Institute 133
The University of Chicago Roundtable Broadcasts 133
Facts Forum . 133
The Public Affairs Pamphlets '_ 134
X. Foundations and Education , 134
Carnegie and Rockefeller Reform the Colleges 134
The Carnegie Corporation Finances Socialism 137
"Social Engineering" and Education 142
The Foundation-Supported Collectivist Text-Books — The
Background 146
The Rugg Textbooks 149
Dr. Counts and Others 151
The Building America Textbooks 154
The Moscow University Summer Session 157
The Ford Fund for the Advancement of Education 161
Inter- University Labor Education Committee 162
Good Books Discussion Groups; Another Ford Fund for Adult
Education project 164
An Inevitable Conclusion 167
XL "Internationalism" and the Effect of Foundation Power on
Foreign Policy 168
The New "Internationalism" 168
The Interlock in "Internationalism" 170
Carnegie's Money for Peace-- 170
The Endowment's "Mind Alcoves" 173
A Carnegie Endowment-Created International Relations Club_ 174
The Foreign Policy Association' 175
The Council on Foreign Relations 176
The Historical Blackout "_ 178
The Institute of Pacific Relations 179
The Foundations, the State Department and Foreign Policy _ 181
The United Nations and UNESCO 182
Carnegie Endowment and the Bar Association 184
An International Social Science Research Council. 185
Ford Enters the Field . 186
American Friends Service Committee „ 186
Intercultural Publications, Inc 188
Globalistic Economics, __■ 190
The National Education Association Goes "International" 191
Expenditures Abroad . 194
The Basic, Foundation-Supported Propaganda re Foreign
Affairs ; 194
XII. Communism and Subversion 196
The Communist Penetration 196
How Do They Do It? 198
The Extent of Subversive Grants 199
Subversives Fed to Government 200
The Basic Problem of Subversion 201
Foundations and Subversion 205
TABLE OF CONTENTS V
PART THREE. CONCLUDING OBSERVATIONS
Page
XIII. Some Supplemental Comments 207
The Problem of Foundation Survival : 207
The Proposed Continued Inquiry 208
The Attitude of the Foundations 210
XIV. Special Recommendations Not Fully Covered by the Previous
Text 212
The Jurisdiction of Ways and Means 212
Reform From Within the Foundations 212
Limitations on Operating Costs 212
"Collecting" Foundations 213
Waste in General 213
Defining Foundations 213
Internal Revenue Service Manpower 213
Full Public Access to Form 990A 214
A "Rule Against Perpetuities" 214
Ac cumulations 214
Capital Gains 214
Restrictions on Corporate-Created Foundations 215
National Incorporation 215
Retroactive Loss of Exemption 215
Removal of Trustees 215
Public Directors 215
Revolving Directorates 216
Selection of Working Trustees 216
Relief for the Alert Citizen , 216
Prohibited Abuses 216
Foundations Used To Control Enterprises 216
Area Exclusions and Restrictions 217
Type Exclusions 218
Protection Against Interlock 218
Greater Use of Colleges and Universities 219
The Excess of Empiricism 219
Political Use and Propaganda 219
Lobbying : 220
Subversion 220
Foreign Use of Foundation Funds 220
Further Areas of Investigation 220
Statement of B. Carroll Reece, supplementary to the Report _-__ 223
Appendix to the Report 227
Minority Views 417
Union Calendar No. 926
83d Congress ) HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ( Report
U Session \ 1 No. 2681
{
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
December 16, 1954. — Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. Reece of Tennessee, from the Special Committee To Investigate
Tax-Exempt Foundations and Comparable Foundations, submitted
the following
REPORT
[Pursuant to H. Res. 217, 83d Cong., 2d sess.]
VII
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
PART ONE
INTRODUCTORY MATERIAL
I. The Ceeation and Functioning of the Committee
This Committee was created by House Resolution 217, 83rd Con-
gress, first session, adopted July 27, 1953. The resolution authorized
an investigation as follows:
The Committee is authorized and directed to conduct a full and complete
investigation and study of educational and philanthropic foundations and other
comparable organizations which are exempt from Federal income taxation to
determine if any foundations and organizations are using their resources for
purposes other than the purposes for which they were established, and especially
to determine which such foundations and organizations are using their resources
for un-American and subversive activities; for political purposes; propaganda, or
attempts to influence legislation.
The resolution directed a report to be filed by January 3, 1955.
House Resolution 373, 83rd Congress, first session, adopted on
August 1, 1953, appropriated the sum of $50,000, with the expectation
of the Committee that further funds would be granted after the first
of the following year. Counsel was engaged as of September 1, 1953;
the building of a staff commenced about September 15, 1953.
It was decided to engage in an intensive period of assembling and
study of material, after which public hearings were planned to be held
starting at the end of February or the beginning of March. After
the first of the year, an additional appropriation was requested in the
sum of $125,000 to carry the Committee through until January, 1955.
After considerable delay, a sub-committee of the Committee on House
Administration decided to recommend the reduced sum of $100,000
as an additional appropriation; later the full Committee on Adminis-
tration reduced this sum further to $65,000, which appropriation was
granted by House Resolution 433 on April 6, 1954.
This additional appropriation was patently inadequate to enable
this Committee to do the work for which it had been created. More-
over, there were moments when considerable doubt existed whether
any additional appropriation would be granted. This doubt, the long
delay while its funds were being exhausted, and other harassments
to which the Committee and its employees were subjected, made it
impossible for the Committee to schedule any hearings until it had
funds at hand. The Easter recess then faced the Committee. Thus
the first hearing could not be scheduled until May 10, 1954. Moreover,
radical revisions in the Committee's plans had to be made. It was
decided to hold such hearings as might be possible in May, June
and early July and then to report. It was obvious that the appropria-
tion which had finally been granted could not possibly support
continued studies for the remainder of the Committee's permitted
life.
A committee had been created by the previous Congress to investi-
gate the same field. We shall refer to it as the "Cox Committee."
l
2 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
It had sent out questionnaires to about 1500 foundations, and about
two-thirds of the foundations solicited had filed answers to them.
The material in these answers was found to be of considerable value.
However, our staff was distressed to find that much of the data col-
lected and memoranda prepared by the previous staff were missing
from the files. (Hearings, p. 14, et seq.)
A request was made on November 16, 1953 for an executive order
to examine the forms known as 990A filed by foundations with the
Internal Revenue Service. This order was not granted until Febru-
ary 11, 1954, and actual access to these reports, containing much
valuable information which otherwise would have had to be obtained
by individual solicitation from the foundations or by subpoena, was
not granted by the Service until April 8, 1954. When access was
finally obtained, the Committee was informed that it could not
photostat these reports nor borrow them from the Service. This, in
the light of their volume, limited their usefulness. Moreover, all the
forms requested had not been brought into Washington from field
offices.
Sixteen public hearings were held, the last on June 17th. Further
public hearings were discontinued by a resolution passed at an execu-
tive meeting of the Committee on July 1, 1954. The Committee dis-
continued hearings with deep regret and only through necessity. It
understood that depriving foundation spokesmen of an opportunity
to state positions orally might affect its public relations; it concluded,
nevertheless, that the circumstances permitted no other course.
Moreover, the discontinuance of the hearings resulted in no serious
loss to the inquiry, for oral testimony in an investigation of this nature
is of far less importance than research.
Nor did the foundations lose any opportunity either to present their
points of view or to receive attendant publicity. Written statements
were solicited from them, which gave them the opportunity to answer
the material already presented to the Committee and to add freely
such further comments as they might choose. These statements
were carefully considered and added in full to the record. The state-
ments were given full publicity and were widely reported in the news-
papers, appearing in a most favorable manner in view of the fact that
no critical comments by the Committee were simultaneously publi-
cized. The foundations touched by the hearings were thus given a
fair opportunity to put their best foot forward at the same time that
they escaped the embarrassment of cross examination.
The Committee's work by no means ended with the discontinuance
of public hearings. An investigation of this type is, after all, primarily
a matter of laborious research ; the research continued industriously,
hampered only by a gradual reduction in the staff which the Com-
mittee's limited finances necessitated.
In the following text we have used italics in conventional manner,
but also to designate foundations and tax-free organizations other
than universities, colleges, and schools, and to identify certain indi-
viduals, special reference to whose records is made in appendices.
II. The Approach op the Committee
The Cox Committee admittedly had been allotted insufficient time
within which to do a complete study or even adequately to outline
the full scope of inquiry. The present committee deemed its mandate
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 3
to be virtually a continuation of the investigation of its predecessor.
It considered itself authorized to make a study not only of specific
abuses which might come to light but also of the general orientation
of foundations in our society. It has deemed itself primarily a
fact-finding body, intending to make recommendations to the House
only where such seemed clearly wise. Principally, its function was
considered to be to bring into clear relief any grave criticisms which
appeared to be reasonably warranted in order that the House itself
could have a basis for considering whether further action should be
taken by way of additional study or the application of means of
correction or control.
The Committee was and is well aware of the many magnificent services
which foundations have rendered ■ to the people of the United States in
many fields and areas, 'particularly in medicine, public health and science.
Nothing has occurred to change its initial conviction that the foundation,
as an institution, is desirable and should be encouraged. If little time
is spent in this report reciting the good which the foundations have done,
it is not because this Committee is unaware of it or in any way reluctant
to acknowledge it. Rather, this Committee considers that it is necessarily
concerned with the evaluation of criticisms. A fair judgment of the
work and the position of foundations in our society must obviously take
into account the great measure of benefit for which they have been re-
sponsible. At the same time, the power of these foundations is so great
that a proper evaluation must give great weight to the dangers which have
appeared in their operations in certain areas of activity.
We wish, therefore, to make clear that not even an inferential con-
clusion is to be drawn from this report that foundations are undesir-
able. Our conclusion is the opposite. It is our intention to present
critical material for the very purpose of increasing the usefulness of
foundations and of making their place in our society firmer and safer.
We hope that such material will induce the foundations themselves
to "clean house," if that is necessary. This Committee is opposed
to any unnecessary government regulation; and would recommend
Congressional action only in so far as the seriousness of certain
abuses might be accompanied by any unwillingness of the foundations
to reform themselves, or in the event that it were concluded that
certain dangers could be guarded against only through regulation.
It was our hope, to begin with, that no remedial action by the
Congress might be necessary. But foundations play a part in our
society the importance of which can hardly be exaggerated; and, in
the course of our investigation, evidence of very grave abuses accumu-
lated to the point of indicating that intervention by Congress to pro-
tect our society is badly needed. Some remedies can be instituted at
once. Others should perhaps be considered only after that continued
and more intensive study of foundation activities which the facts
already disclosed have proved to be utterly necessary. Even with
an adequate appropriation, this Committee could probably not have
done the full study of the subject which the circumstances warrant.
It has been variously estimated that this would take a period of three
to seven years, by a full staff amply financed.
Our own studies soon disclosed the measure of this problem.
Accordingly, it was decided to limit the work by confining it to
"foundations" included under Section 501 (c) (3), [formerly Section
101 (6)] of the Internal Revenue Code; and, within that category, to
4 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
eliminate (except where direct reference seemed necessary for other
reasons) consideration of (a) religious institutions, (b) operating
academic institutions and (c) certain other sub-divisions of the
501 (c) (3) [formerly 101 (6)] class, as well as (d) the small founda-
tions which are mere media for distributing the annual charitable
income tax deductions of individuals and (e) other minor distributing
or collecting foundations.
The term "foundation" is a. broad one. In this report it is intended
to denote "foundations" as the term is ordinarily used by the lay-
man — indicating such foundations as The Rockefeller Foundation,
The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, The Ford Foundation,
The Twentieth Century Fund, etc. We shall also, sometimes, include
certain types of organizations which are "foundations" within the
term but are not generally so recognized by the public. These are
the intermediary organizations, used by foundations, such as The
Social Science Research Council.
For reasons to be explained later, we decided, moreover, to confine
our inquiry chiefly to the activities of the foundations in what are
known as the "social sciences."
This report is based upon the testimony at hearings; the state-
ments filed by foundations and others; the other material included
in the record; data and information secured by personal conferences,
correspondence and telephone conferences; and materials assembled
by a reading, study and analysis of books and literature relating to
foundations and to the social sciences.
III. The Foundations and Taxes
The Present Basis of Federal Interest.
With an occasional but rare exception, foundations are created under
state law. Their activities are, therefore, under state control, for the
most part. The Federal government acquires its immediate interest
through the tax laws. It has never sought directly to regulate founda-
tions, deeming this to be the province of the respective states in which
the foundations are created and operate. But the Federal government
extends to foundations certain exemptions from Federal taxation.
Their income is exempt from Federal income tax; contributions to
them are free of gift tax and estate tax; and the donor is permitted a
deduction for income tax purposes to the extent of 20% of the income
of an individual donor and 5% of that of a corporate donor. 1 These
exemptions are acts of grace by the Federal government. In so far
as they relieve foundations and their creators and supporters from
taxation, they impose a greater tax burden upon the generality of the
people of the country. Thus the Federal government permits the
equivalent of public money to be used by these foundations. Accord-
ingly, it is justified in applying certain restrictions on the right to the
various exemptions granted to foundations.
The theory behind such restrictions is simply that, as exemptions
are acts of grace, the government may clearly impose such conditions
on the exemptions as may be calculated to prevent abuse of the privi-
lege and to prevent the use of the exempted funds against the public
interest.
1 Under the 1954 amendments to the tax law an individual is granted a 30% deduction for charitable dona -
tions but only 20% of this may go to foundations.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 5
The Possibility of Wider Interest.
Whether a Constitutional basis for a more extended Federal control
of foundation activities can be found, other than that which the tax
laws offer, is a matter which warrants careful study. The tax laws
can control foundations only in limited fashion. If greater control
becomes necessary or advisable, and a movement should come into
being in some degree to supplant or amplify the control now resting
with the states, a basis for legislative action might conceivably be
found in the general welfare clauses of the Constitution or elsewhere
in it; but this would require a careful study of constitutional law.
The problem is not easy.
Many suggestions have been made in the "there ought to be a law"
area. This Committee repeats, however, that it does not favor any
unnecessary extension of Federal jurisdiction. It hopes that whatever
errors in foundation operation and management now exist may be
corrected within the Federal tax laws, by state law and by the willing-
ness of foundations to maintain more vigilant safeguards against
abuses which have existed in the past.
How Foundations Are Created.
They may be created by act of Congress, but few have been.
The usual methods are two: by the creation of a trust under state
law, having "charitable" purposes; and by the creation of a corpo-
ration under the state law (generally what is known as a "membership
corporation") having exclusively "charitable" purposes. The trust is
managed by trustees who usually are authorized to fill their own ranks
as vacancies appear. The corporation is managed by a board of
trustees or directors, elected and replaced by the members. The
members are usually small in number and it is not uncommon for the
members to make themselves the directors.
What Induces the Creation of Foundations.
Mr. Leo Eagan, in an article on foundations in the New York
Times of March 1, 1954, called attention to the "enormous growth
that has taken place in the number and assets of foundations over the
last fifteen years.", saying later:
"All authorities agree that the number has risen rapidly since 1939 and is still
on the increase. It is likewise agreed that extremely high income and inheri-
tance taxes on big incomes and estates have been a major factor in promoting
this growth."
A very common use of smaller foundations is as a means for dis-
tributing at leisure the charitable donations which are deductible
under the income tax law. This applies both to individual and
corporate donors. Instead of rushing at the end of the year to make
the necessary charitable payments to get within the full income tax
deduction allowance, one single contribution is made to a foundation,
which then may take its time to distribute the fund in detail. But
these contributions are not always distributed. Technically, they
constitute capital in the hands of the foundation, and not income.
As the tax law proscribes the unreasonable accumulation of income,
the distinction is important; the foundation may aggregate the
donations received, paying out merely the income which this aggre-
gation earns and holding the capital intact for some special purpose,
perhaps to buy assets from the donor's estate at his death.
6 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
In this era, the larger foundations are sometimes created because
the donor, anticipating that part of his estate may be taxed at an
almost confiscatory" rate, prefers to set this part of his estate aside,
tax free, for a public benefit rather than to have the greater part of it
pass to the Government.
But perhaps the most frequent motivation in the creation of large
foundations today is that the proprietor of a substantial enterprise,
who wishes to have it continued after his death in the hands of his
family, has insufficient liquid means available to satisfy his estate
tax obligations at death. There are other ways of solving the estate-
liquidation problem, such as buy-and-sell agreements with other
stockholders; the carrying of sufficient life insurance; the use of
Section 303 [formerly Section 115 (g) (3)] of the Internal Revenue
Code, which permits the corporation under certain circumstances to
purchase enough stock from the deceased, without tax penalty to the
estate, to pay the tax bill, etc. But there are many instances in which,
no other means seeming practicable, a foundation is resorted to.
The usual procedure then is to transfer (or arrange to transfer at
death) to a foundation created for the purpose enough of the owner-
ship of a corporation to reduce the estate tax impact to a point where
the liquid assets of the proprietor (and other means he may have
devised to solve the problem) are sufficient to meet the death taxes.
Such donations are usually in the form of preferred or non-voting
stock. Combinations of these advantages result:
1. The family may remain in full voting control;
2. The family has a pleasant partner, managed by gentle
hands;
3. The family may reap the benefit of any increase in the value
of the equity;
4. If further inflation should come, it is the family which can
become entitled to receive the benefit of the increase in monetary
value of the company;
5. No working capital is lost by the venture; and
6. The foundation may even be used as a vehicle for the em-
ployment of associates and relatives.
It is not always, however, non-voting stock which is transferred to
a foundation. Where a foundation is to be guided by friendly hands,
the donor may be willing to let it become a partner in management by
giving it voting stock. That was the case, for example, with the Duke
Foundation, the assets of which include voting stock of the Duke
Power companies. As the charter provides that this stock cannot be
sold without the consent of all of the trustees, a sale is unlikely and the
voting stock is rather sure to remain in friendly hands.
The Ford Foundation: An Example of the Use of a Foundation
to Retain Management Control of an Enterprise.
The Ford Foundation affords a good example of the use of a founda-
tion to solve the death tax problem and, at the same time, the problem
of how to retain control of a great enterprise in the hands of the family.
90% of the ownership of the Ford Motor Company was transferred
to The Ford Foundation, created for the purpose. Had it not been,
it is almost certain that the family would have lost control. The
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 7
only practical alternative might have been to sell a large part of the
stock to the public or to bankers, or to sell the entire Company. The
huge taxes payable by the Ford estates could not have been paid with-
out liquidating a considerable part — possibly a controlling part — of
the family business. The solution selected was to give away 90% of
the Company to "charity", so that the greater part of the estates
would be free of death taxation.
The "charitable" transfers, could have been made, of course, direct
to universities, churches, hospitals and other institutions. But this
would have put the donated stock of the Ford Company into the
hands of strangers. For this reason, we assume, a foundation was
created, and to make doubly certain that there would be no inter-
ference with the Company's management, the donated stock was in
the form of non-voting shares. Not only did the family thus retain
100% voting control, but the Ford Company lost no working capital
whatsoever. Moreover, even non-voting stock can be something of
a nuisance in the hands of strangers but, held by an amiable creature,
operated by friendly nominees of the family, it would not be likely to
bring any pressure to bear on the management of the Company of
the kind which might be expected of an alert general stockholder.
There is nothing illegal about such a plan. It is entirely proper as
the law now stands and it is a mechanism frequently used to reach
just the results which the Ford family anticipated. But in the
case of a large company such as Ford, it is subject to considerable
social or economic criticism on the ground of its unfair business
impact. The April 1954 issue of The Corporate Director contained a
study of The Ford Foundation. It was referred to in detail by Mr.
Aaron Sargent, a witness before the Committee (in full, Hearings,
p. 373 et seq.). The article points out that members of the Ford
family, as officers of the Ford Company, are able to draw salaries
and are thus in a position, being assured of their own income, to
allow the Company to operate on a cost basis, without having to
pay dividends. By that means, they could bring destructive economic
power to bear upon competitors of the Ford Company which must
pay dividends to stockholders and maintain a credit position. No
other automobile manufacturing company is in a position to ignore
stability of earnings or continuity of dividend payments. If General
Motors or Chrysler earned no money, the article said, the manage-
ment heads would roll; but Ford management would remain in power
regardless of its earning record.
There is no evidence that the Ford Company has taken any unfair
advantage of its competitors in the manner which the article describes
as possible. The point is discussed here merely to illustrate an abuse
which can accompany the use of a foundation in business and estate
planning.
The Ford Foundation has been criticised in another respect, however,
relating to unfair competition. The Television programs and other
enterprises conducted by the Foundation advertise the name of
"Ford." This, say some critics, because the association with the
Ford automobile is self-evident, constitutes a form of advertising with
the public's money and gives the Ford Company an undue advantage
over its competitors.
8 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The Reid Foundation: Another Example of the Use of a Foun-
dation to Retain Management Control of an Enterprise.
On August 2, 1946, Ogden M. Reid created and transferred to
The Reid Foundation, Inc. seventeen promissory, non-interest bearing
notes dated January 2, 1942, payable to him by the publishing com-
pany which owns the New York Herald- Tribune, a newspaper. The
notes were payable annually, starting April 15, 1953 and ending April
15, 1969. Further notes and open accounts -were left to the Reid
Foundation under Mr. Reid's will. The gift of the notes, and the
bequest of further notes and open accounts, were apparently cleared
as free of gift tax and estate tax respectively.
There seems to be considerable doubt whether these transfers were
truly tax-exempt, and a careful review of the facts by the Internal
Revenue Service might well be in order. The notes and open accounts
aggregated about eight and one-half million dollars in face value,
resulting in a huge saving in taxes to Mr. Reid's estate.
The deed of gift which transferred the first batch of notes
($2,473,392.05) to the Foundation was an odd instrument. The notes
bear no interest. On the other hand, the transfer authorizes the
collection of the notes by the Foundation only "for its sole use and
benefit." We assume this means that the notes apparently cannot
be transferred or sold. The Foundation thus has been given a frozen
asset, bearing no income, and with no right to sell it to produce income
from reinvestment. Is that a true "charitable" gift entitling the donor
and his estate to tax exemption? We doubt it.
It might be answered that the Foundation, even if it earns no
interest on the notes, can spend its principal. True, but its only
obligation under the tax law is to pay out its income — a payment on a
note would constitute principal and not income. Moreover, the notes
are not payable unless the New York Tribune, Inc. cares to pay them.
For the deed of gift provides that the Foundation "at the request of
New York Tribune, Inc. and from time to time, will extend or consent
to the extension of the time of payment of said indebtedness or any
part thereof on such terms and conditions as a majority of the directors
of the Donee may in their discretion decide." The only condition
put upon this right of the publishing company to get an extension of
its obligations is "Unless such action would in the opinion of a majority
of the directors of the Donee, prejudice the right of the Donee to ulti-
mate payment of the said indebtedness." We have italicized the
term, "the right", — the condition is only that nothing shall be done to
destroy the bare legal right eventually to collect — in other words, the
trustees are merely prohibited from completely abandoning the right
to collect a thousand years from now. Note also that, while the
Foundation may stage "terms and conditions" for an extension of
payment, they cannot deny the right to an extension which perpetuates
the debt. Note, finally, that the directors of the Foundation were
nominees of its creator, the donor of the notes. What is of even greater
significance is that of the seven directors of the Foundation, four are direc-
tors of the Herald- Tribune (see chart facing). The two boards are,
therefore, in relation to purposes of control, Tweedledum and Tweeledee.
There are other conditions in the deed. No action can be started
to collect the notes unless (a) a majority of the directors of the Founda-
tion agree and (b) their decision is that the action is necessary to
protect "the rights of the Donee to ultimate payment — not ultimate
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
9
Officers
Chairman
President
Executive vice president.
Vice president
Treasurer ^
2d vice president
Secretary
Directors
New York Herald-Trib-
une
Helen Rogers Reid. 1
Whitelaw Reid.)
William E. Robinson. 1
None.
A. V. Miller. 1
None.
Stanley D. Brown.
Ferdinand Eberstadt.
Oveta Culp Hobby.
Charles Seymour.
Reid Foundation, Inc.
None,
Helen Rogers Reid. 1
None.
Whitelaw Reid.i
Whitelaw Reid. 1
William E. Robinson. 1
William E. Robinson. 1
Goeffrey Parsons. 2
Roy Gasser.
Wilbur Forrest.
George Cornish. 3
Warner R. Moore.*
James Parton. 8
Everett Walker.'
Howard Davis,'
Ogden Reid.'
Barney Cameron.'
1 Also member cf board of directors.
2 Chief editorial adviser, formerly chief editorial writer; son (Jr., was foreign editor, New York Herald-
Tribune, now with NATO, Paris).
> Executive editor, New York Herald-Tribune.
* Business manager, New York Herald-Tribune.
6 Assistant to president, New York Herald-Tribune.
6 Managing editor, New York Herald-Tribune.
7 Formerly executive vice president, now president, American Newspaper Publishers Association.
9 "President, New York Herald-Tribune, S. A. since 1953" (Volume 28, Who's Who).
* Circulation department, New York Herald-Tribune.
payment but the rights to ultimate payment. And the Foundation may
compromise the indebtedness (that is, forgive it in as large a part as
it wishes), at will, and thus virtually make a gift to the Herald- Tribune
of property dedicated to public use.
But perhaps the most interesting clauses in the deed are those which
cast grave doubt on the basic tax-exempt character of the Foundation.
The deed recites that "It is understood and agreed" * * * that the
ultimate payment of said notes may be dependent upon the continuing
operation as a going concern of New York Herald-Tribune Inc. * * *— ■
"accordingly", the deed proceeds, the Donee agrees to certain condi-
tions applying to the notes. The very first of these is:
"New York Tribune Inc. shall be given by the Donee every reasonable oppor-
tunity and the full cooperation of the Donee to work out its financial affairs."
It is the conclusion of this Committee that what was intended was
a business arrangement. We conclude that the Foundation was not
to be engaged solely in charitable work as required by the rules ex-
empting 501 (c) (3) [formerly 101 (6)] organizations. It was to
exercise charity in behalf of the New York Herald-Tribune. It was
to subordinate whatever philanthropic work had been planned to
the welfare of that newspaper and the interest of the Reid family
in it. It was a business deal. There was no free gift of the notes.
They were transferred pursuant to a contract under which the Founda-
tion agreed to assist the publishing company in its financial problem
and, by inference, but clear inference, to make this obj ective superior
to its presumed charitable function.
It was on its face, a magnificently designed arrangement. Whether
or not Ogden Reid's estate could have paid the heavy death duties,
if eight and a half million dollars had not been exempted, we do not
know. It is very likely that it might have been impossible to pay the
taxes on this additional eight and a half million and still retain in the
family control of a Herald-Tribune left financially sound. The general
•plan adopted was somewhat similar to that used by the Ford family.
55647—54 2
10 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
However, the Ford arrangement seems entirely within the scope and
intent of the exempting law, while the Keid arrangement would seem
to violate both its intent and its specific restrictions. We wonder
if Internal Revenue should not review its decision to exempt the
Foundation.
Comparatively little in the way of "charity" has been done by the
Foundation in relation to the size of its assumed capital — -and natur-
ally so. Earning no interest, it is dependent on capital payments
from the Herald-Tribune when it chooses to make payments. There
have been some principal payments, and some of these have evidently
been used to create Reid Fellowships and for other purposes. But
its performance as an eight and a half million dollar foundation has
been, in the aggregate, understandably pitiful — its first obligation
has been to support the Herald- Tribune.
It must be noted, in closing this discussion of the Reid Foundation,
that the New York Herald- Tribune leveled quite extraordinarily
savage attacks at this Committee during its work, both in that
newspaper's editorials and in what purported to be its news columns.
Eugene and Agnes E. Meyer Foundation.
Unlike the Reid Foundation the Meyer Foundation did not receive
its primary impetus because of the death of the donor; as a matter of
fact, it is typical of foundations set up by individuals in order to provide
an orderly and consistent method of making contributions to their
chosen charitable and educational institutions. No criticism is made
of this entirely legitimate use of foundations.
However, this Committee has some doubts in connection with the
close relationship of the Foundation and the Washington Post Com-
pany, which in addition to owning the Washington Post and Times-
Herald also owns all the stock of WTOP, Inc., a radio and TV station
in Washington D. C, as well as a radio and TV station in Jacksonville,
Florida. The assets of the Foundation (1953) are approximately 7.8
million dollars, of which 1.65 million dollars are invested in various
securities. The balance of 6.2 million dollars apparently represents
the value of 153,750 shares of Class B (non-voting) Common Stock
of the Washington Post Company held by the Foundation.
The net worth of the Washington Post Company cannot be obtained
from the company itself. However, there are a total of 186,750 shares
of Class B (non-voting) Common Stock outstanding, as well as 12,724
shares outstanding of Class A (voting) Common Stock. The 153,750
shares of Class B Common Stock held by the Foundation represents
82.5% of the total of such shares. None of the voting stock is held
by the Foundation, but according to limited information available
the greater portion is controlled by Mr. and Mrs. Meyer.
In view of this intimate relationship, the intensely critical attitude
of the Washington Post and Times-Herald toward the work of this
Committee appears to be something in the nature of a defense mech-
anism, rather than the unbiased reporting of facts by a newspaper.
Again, this is a subject which warrants further study — to insure
that the press will be free of undue influence by any group with an
axe to grind, whether such groups are tax exempt or other types of
corporate organizations.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 11
Taxes and the Increasing Foundation Birth-Rate.
It is the pressure of the present high rates of taxation which now
induces the creation of foundations. Some of the foundation execu-
tives who testified before the Cox Committee opined that the birth-
rate of foundations must soon decline because great fortunes can no
longer be made. This opinion seems incorrect. When Counsel asked
Mr. Andrews, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, whether the
high tax rates of recent years had not "materially increased the
incidence of foundations" largely as a means for solving the problem
of liquidating estate tax obligations, the Commissioner answered:
"There is no doubt in the world about that." (Hearings, p. 462.)
Despite high taxation, great fortunes continue to be made. Witness
the new oil fortunes of Texas, Oklahoma and elsewhere, as well as
other startling accumulations of wealth. Indeed, many existing
small foundations are deceptive. They have been created with
small capital, to be in being at the death of the donor for the pur-
pose of receiving huge testamentary bequests.
There is no reason to suppose that great fortunes will not continue
to be built, each of which will be faced with the serious problem of
preparing for the death tax impact. Moreover, it is not only the
enormously rich who create foundations today. Countless owners
of substantial business enterprises are today planning to solve then-
estate problems through the use of foundations, and there is reason
to believe that this tendency will continue and perhaps even increase.
Ingenious experts in estate and tax planning have devised many
interesting ways to use a foundation in an estate or business plan.
The use of a foundation to permit a family to control a business after
the death of the proprietor is widely promoted. For example, the
August 15, 1954 issue of the J. K. Lasser Tax Reports contains this
statement:
"Note there is nothing wrong — morally or legally — in using a foundation to
effectuate tax savings. A family can legitimately establish a foundation where
charitable motives are closely tied to reduced costs of charitable giving because of
income tax deductions allowed. Also, the owner of a business may create a
foundation so as to cut his estate tax and lea\ e his family in control of the business
after death- — he leaves non-voting stock tr the foundation with his family retaining
the voting stock. Control of the auto company was retained by the Ford family
in that way."
What is an increasing, rather than a decreasing, birth rate, and an
increasing aggregate of foundation funds, makes the problems treated
by this Committee all the more serious. In an address delivered at
the University of Chicago on November 27, 1952, General Counsel
to this Committee said:
"It seems to me that the ingenious legal creatures developed by tax experts to
solve the unusual social, economic, and legal problems of the past several genera-
tions will become Frankensteins, though perhaps benevolent ones. It is possible
that, in fifty or a hundred years, a great part of American industry will be con-
trolled by pension and profit-sharing trusts and foundations and a large part of
the balance by insurance companies and labor unions. What eventual repercus-
sions may come from such a development, one can only guess. It may be that
we will in this manner reach some form of society similar to socialism, without
consciously intending it. Or it may be, to protect ourselves against the strictures
which such concentrations of power can effect, that we might have to enact legisla-
tion analogous to the Statutes of Mortmain which, centuries ago, were deemed
necessary in order to prevent all of England's wealth from passing into the hands
of the church."
12 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
If a great increase in the aggregate of foundation funds should occur,
either foundations will have to operate in a way which the country
will be certain is to its incontrovertible benefit or else strict rules of
control may have to be enacted.
Corporate-Created Foundations.
High corporate tax rates have added to the birthrate of foundations.
Many corporations, faced with excess profits taxes, created foundations
to take advantage of their full permitted income tax deduction for
charitable gifts. By creating their own vehicles for distribution, they
are able better to organize and plan the distribution of their "chari-
ties". They can make a single contribution at the end of each year to
the foundation and then, as in the case of an individual creating one
for the same purpose, take time to plan out the individual grants.
As each year's contribution is capital in the hands of the foundation
and not income — only the income from these contributions need be
distributed. Thus there is the possibility of large funds being built
up by corporation-created foundations which can add considerably
to the aggregate mass of foundation funds.
This Committee has not wished to take time from more pressing
problems to go into the corporate area. However, corporation-created
foundations present some special problems which are worth full study.
Two groups are sometimes inclined to oppose corporation -created
foundations — labor and the stockholders of the individual corporation.
Labor's argument is: If there is any unneeded surplus, why not pay
it to us in increased wages? The stockholders' argument is: If there
is unneeded surplus, why not pay it to us in dividends? — by distribut-
ing to charity what are really our profits (for we are the proprietors
of the company) are you not forcing us to make distributions we may
not wish to make? These arguments strike, basically, at corporate
charitable donations, as such, of course, and not at foundations per se.
But there is much to be said on the other side. From a social
point of view, the advocates of corporation-created foundations say:
private support of philanthropic causes is vital to our society, and
corporations should do their part — or, corporate philanthropic giving
is now larger, in the aggregate, than individual giving and, to dry it
up, would be catastrophic for the supported "charities" — or, corporate
giving is cheaper than giving by the individual shareholder, whose
profits, if he pays them out, would first have been subjected to cor-
porate income tax.
From a practical point of view, they argue: the corporation can
designate "charities" which are directly beneficial to its employees
and to the community within which it operates and, thus, serve &
practical business purpose in bettering public relations — or, the corpo-
ration can make donations which can have a definitive benefit to
itself or to its industry — as in the case of grants to technical schools
and to universities and colleges where possible future employees can
be trained and improved methods and devices can be developed.
Aside from the problems arising out of the conflicts of interest
among the stockholders, the employees and the corporation itself,
there are philosophic problems involved which merit consideration. A
corporation is a legal entity, entitled in many respects to the same
treatment as an individual. But there is a limit to its assumption
of personality. Certain privileges given as a matter of social grace
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 13
to individuals need not necessarily be granted to the fictitious per-
sonality of a corporation. Nor has a corporation any inalienable
rights. Whether a corporation, as such, is qualified to exercise
charitable patronage, involving factors such as pity and conscience is
questionable.
The problem of limiting or controlling such foundations should be
studied carefully. We shall point out in this report how vast can be
the power of an individual foundation, and how much greater when
foundations act in combination. The potential danger should not be
overlooked that huge corporation-created foundations might play too
strong and active a part in our social structure. The answer to this
problem is not abolition but some intelligent supervision or limitation.
From a practical point of view, they argue: the corporation can
designate "charities" which are directly beneficial to its employees
and to the community within which it operates and, thus, serve a
practical business purpose in bettering public relations — or, the cor-
poration can make donations which can have a definitive benefit to
itself or to its industry — as in the case of grants to technical schools
and to universities and colleges where possible future employees can
be trained and improved methods and devices can be developed.
Aside from the problems arising out of the conflicts of interest among
the stockholders, the employees and the corporation itself, there are
philosophic problems involved which merit consideration. A cor-
poration is a legal entity, entitled in many respects to the same treat-
ment as an individual. But there is a limit to its assumption of
personality. Certain privileges given as a matter of social grace to
individuals need not necessarily be granted to the fictitious personality
of a corporation. Nor has a corporation any inalienable rights.
Whether a corporation, as such, is qualified to exercise charitable
patronage, involving factors such as pity and conscience is questionable.
The problem of limiting or controlling such foundations should be
studied carefully. We shall point out in this report how vast can be
the power of an individual foundation, and how much greater when
foundations act in combination. The potential danger should not be
overlooked that huge corporation-created foundations might play too
strong and active a part in our social structure. The answer to this
problem is not abolition but some intelligent supervision or limitation.
IV. Statistical Material
No comprehensive statistics are available. The source from which
one might expect to get them is the Internal Revenue Service. How-
ever, Section 101 (6) of the Internal Revenue Code included various
types of tax-exempt organizations in addition to foundations. More-
over, foundation bookkeeping introduced complications such as
cross-grants. Therefore, the Service would have been unable to
produce complete statistics except at prohibitive cost in labor and
money.
The staff of this Committee assembled, and commented upon, some
valuable statistics based chiefly on the answers to the questionnaires
sent out by the Cox Committee. See Hearings, page 9, et sec[. (Note
that some adjustment must be made in using these statistics in view
of the depreciation of the dollar in recent years.) Statistical studies
14 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
made by others, notably the Russell Sage Foundation, though neces-
sarily incomplete, are also useful to give some basic financial facts.
There are between six and seven thousand foundations at the
present time, probably close to the latter figure. Their aggregate
funds amount to some $7,500,000,000, and their aggregate annual
income to nearly $675,000,000. It is estimated that foundations of
$10,000,000 capital or over comprise only 7% of the total number,
but account for 56% of the total endowment and 32% of the aggre-
gate income of foundations.
PART TWO
FINDINGS OF FACT AND SUPPORTING MATERIAL
V. Prefatory Notes and Summary of Findings
The "full and complete" investigation anticipated by the creating
resolution was an impossibility under the conditions met. To some
extent, therefore, this must be regarded as a pilot study.
The creation of this Committee was greeted by some with the
question: "Why another investigation of foundations when we had
one so recently?" The answer can be found in a comparison of the
material produced by the Cox Committee and by this one. The
Cox Committee simply did not have time to do much more than it did.
A Congressional committee of this kind is chiefly dependent on its
counsel and staff for the production of research material. In its
approximately six months of theoretical, and approximately four
months of practical existence, the Cox Committee's counsel and
staff did not have time to do that preliminary research which might
have disclosed extremely important critical material. It did not
even use a considerable amount of the material it had at hand, as
much of its energies were consumed in listening to adulatory testi-
mony by foundation executives and supporters.
Hampered and limited as the current investigation has been, it has
well merited the energy given to it. It has disclosed and assembled
material never before integratedly exhibited to the Congress and the
people, and opened up lines of inquiry, the seriousness of which can-
not be overemphasized. It should act as a base for a far more
intense and extended investigation. It is the conclusion of this Com-
mittee that the subject of foundations urgently requires the continued
attention of Congress.
Should the study be resumed, we recommend that it be on a some-
what different basis. The process of investigation through public
hearings is inadequate for a subject such as that of foundations. As
we have said, an inquiry into this subject is primarily a research
undertaking. The materials of most value are to be found in
voluminous literature, reports and records. Deciding among points
of view becomes chiefly a matter of processing the mass of research
material which is available, and determining, not on the basis of
witnesses' opinions but on a judicial weighing of the factual evidence,
which are correct.
To some extent, sampling methods must be used.
Reliance on staff work and staff reports seems essential. The
Temporary National Economic Committee (TNEC) used similar
methods. It conducted hearings but leaned heavily on staff reports
published in over forty volumes. There is need for a similar thorough-
ness in approaching the foundation problems, a time-consuming use of
library sources, of questionnaires and of field studies in addition to
hearings, public or private.
15
16 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
It would thus be an injustice to arrive at generalized conclusions
except upon intense studies of wide sampling. Generalizing from a
small sample might well give a distorted picture and cause for rightful
complaint by those to whom the generalizations do not apply. We
have, ourselves, tried to be very careful not to arrive at final con-
clusions on general bases, except where the facts seemed incontrovert-
ibly to justify it. Where we have arrived at specific, in contrast to
generalized, conclusions, it has been upon specifically pertinent
material.
In some instances the experience of one particular foundation or a
sampled group may indicate a significant trend in foundation activi-
ties. It may illustrate what happens, under the system of foundation
tax exemption, to the citizens who establish foundations, to the trustees
who manage them in theory and to the executives who manage them
in fact. Foundations cannot be understood except in relation to
their acts.
Summary of Committee Findings
Subject, then, to the foregoing comments, the following is a bnei
summary of the more important findings of this Committee. It is
introduced here in introductory fashion. Further conclusions and
findings are contained in the subsequent text. Moreover, a reading
of the text is often necessary to amplify the brief statement of a finding
here given.
THE COMMITTEE FINDS AS FOLLOWS:
1. The country is faced with a rapidly increasing birth-rate of
foundations. The compelling motivation behind this rapid increase
in numbers is tax planning rather than "charity." The possibility
exists that a large part of American industry may eventually come
into the hands of foundations. This may perpetuate control of
individual enterprises in a way not contemplated by existing legisla-
tion, in the hands of closed groups, perhaps controlled in turn by
families. Because of the tax exemption granted them, and because
they must be dedicated to public purposes, the foundations are public
trusts, administering funds of which the public is the equitable owner.
However, under the present law there is little implementation of this
responsibility to the general welfare ; the foundations administer their
capital and income with the widest freedom, bordering at times on
irresponsibility. Wide freedom is highly desirable, as long as the
public dedication is faithfully followed. But as will be observed later,
the present laws do not compel such performance.
The increasing number of foundations presents another problem.
The Internal Revenue Service is not staffed to adequately scrutinize
the propriety and legality of the work of this ever-enlarging multitude
of foundations.
2. Foundations are clearly desirable when operating in the natural
sciences and when making direct donations to religious, educational,
scientific, and other institutional donees. However, when their
activities spread into the field of the so-called "social sciences" or into
other areas in which our basic moral, social, economic, and govern-
mental principles can be vitally affected, the public should be alerted
to these activities and be made aware of the impact of foundation
influence on our accepted way of life.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 17
3. The power of the individual large foundation is enormous. It
can exercise various forms of patronage which carry with them
elements of thought control. It can exert immense influence on
educational institutions, upon the educational processes, and upon
educators. It is capable of invisible coercion through the power of
its purse. It can materially predetermine the development of social
and political concepts and courses of action through the process of
granting and withholding foundation awards upon a selective basis,
and by designing and promulgating projects which propel researchers
in selected directions. It can play a powerful part in the determina-
tion of academic opinion, and, through this thought leadership,
materially influence public opinion.
4. This power to influence national policy is amplified tremendously
when foundations act in concert. There is such a concentration of
foundation power in the United States, operating in the social sciences
and education. It consists basically of a group of major foundations,
representing a gigantic aggregate of capital and income. There is
no conclusive evidence that this interlock, this concentration of power,
having some of the characteristics of an intellectual cartel, came into
being as the result of an over-all, conscious plan. Nevertheless, it
exists. It operates in part through certain intermediary organiza-
tions supported by the foundations. It has ramifications in almost
every phase of research and education, in communications and even
in government. Such a concentration of power is highly undesirable,
whether the net result of its operations is benign or not.
5. Because foundation funds are public funds, the trustees of these
organizations must conscientiously exercise the highest degree of
fiduciary responsibility. Under the system of operation common to
most large foundations this fiduciary responsibility has been largely
abdicated, and in two ways. First, in fact if not in theory, the trustees
have all too frequently passed solely upon general plans and left the
detailed administration of donations (and the consequent selection of
projects and grantees) to professional employees. Second, these
trustees have all too often delegated much of their authority and
function to intermediary organizations.
6. A professional class of administrators of foundation funds has
emerged, intent upon creating and maintaining personal prestige
and independence of action, and upon preserving its position and
emoluments. This informal "guild" has already fallen into many of
the vices of a bureaucratic system, involving vast opportunities for
selective patronage, preference and privilege. It has already come
to exercise a very extensive, practical control over most research in
the social sciences, much of our educational process, and a good part
of government administration in these and related fields. The
aggregate thought-control power of this foundation and foundation-
supported bureaucracy can hardly be exaggerated. A system has
thus arisen (without its significance being realized by foundation
trustees) which gives enormous power to a relatively small group of
individuals, having at their virtual command, huge sums in public
trust funds. It is a system which is antithetical to American
principles.
7. The far-reaching power of the large foundations and of the
interlock, has so influenced the press, the radio, and even the gov-
ernment that it has become extremely difficult for objective criticism
18 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
of foundation practices to get into news channels without having first
been distorted, slanted, discredited, and at times ridiculed. Nothing
short of an unhampered Congressional investigation could hope to
bring out the vital facts; and the pressure against Congressional
investigation has been almost incredible. As indicated by their
arrogance in dealing with this committee, the major foundations and
their associated intermediary organizations have intrenched them-
selves behind a totality of power which presumes to place them
beyond serious criticism and attack.
8. Research in the social sciences plays a key part in the evolution
of our society. Such research is now almost wholly in the control of
the professional employees of the large foundations and their obedient
satellites. Even the great sums allotted by the Federal Government
for social science research have come into the virtual control of this
professional group.
9. This power team has promoted a great excess of empirical re-
search, as contrasted with theoretical research. It has promoted
what has been called an irresponsible "fact finding mania." It is
true that a balanced empirical approach is essential to sound investi-
gation. But it is equally true that if it is not sufficiently balanced
and guided by the theoretical approach, it leads all too frequently to
what has been termed "scientism" or fake science, seriously endanger-
ing our society upon subsequent general acceptance as "scientific"
fact. It is not the part of Congress to dictate methods of research,
but an alertness by foundation trustees to the dangers of supporting
unbalanced and unscientific research is clearly indicated.
10. Associated with the excessive support of the empirical method,
the concentration of power has tended to support the dangerous
"cultural lag" theory and to promote "moral relativity", to the detri-
ment of our basic moral, religious, and governmental principles. It
has tended to support the concept of "social engineering" — that
"social scientists" and they alone are capable of guiding us into better
ways of living and improved or substituted fundamental principles of
action.
11. Accompanying these directions in research grants, the con-
centration has shown a distinct tendency to favor political opinions
to the left. These foundations and their intermediaries engage
extensively in political activity, not in the form of direct support of
political candidates or political parties, but in the conscious promotion
of carefully calculated political concepts. The qualitative and
quantitative restrictions of the Federal law are wholly inadequate to
prevent this mis-use of public trust funds.
12. The impact of foundation money upon education has been
very heavy, largely tending to promote uniformity in approach and
method, tending to induce the educator to become an agent for social
change and a propagandist for the development of our society in the
direction of some form of collectivism. Foundations have supported
text books (and books intended for inclusion in collateral reading
lists) which are destructive of our basic governmental and social
principles and highly critical of some of our cherished institutions.
13. In the international field, foundations, and an interlock among
some of them and certain intermediary organizations, have exercised
a strong effect upon our foreign policy and upon public education in
things international. This has been accomplished by vast propa-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 19
ganda, by supplying executives and advisers to government and by
controlling much research in this area through the power of the purse.
The net result of these combined efforts has been to promote "inter-
nationalism" in a particular sense — a form directed toward "world
government" and a derogation of American "nationalism." Founda-
tions have supported a conscious distortion of history, propagandized
blindly for the United Nations as the hope of the world, supported
that organization's agencies to an extent beyond general public
acceptance, and leaned toward a generally "leftist" approach to
international problems.
14. With several tragically outstanding exceptions, such as The
Institute of Pacific Relations, foundations have not directly supported
organizations which, in turn, operated to support Communism.
However, some of the larger foundations have directly supported
"subversion" in the true meaning of that term, namely, the process
of undermining some of our vitally protective concepts and principles.
They have actively supported attacks upon our social and govern-
mental system and financed the promotion of socialism and collectivist
ideas.
VI. The Power of the Large Foundation
The Impact of Size.
Several executives of large foundations in their statements at the
Cox Committee hearings expressed the opinion that some regulation of
smaller foundations might be desirable because they are so frequently
set up for tax or other personal advantages. The same executives
expressed the opinion that further regulation of the large foundations
was undesirable. We believe that the premises upon which these
conclusions were based are erroneous. Great foundations are also
set up for tax or other personal advantages. Moreover there is a
distinct danger in me £ size.
In the so-called Walsh investigation, which took place in 1917, both
Samuel Untermyer and Louis D. Brandeis concluded that the founda-
tion as a perpetuity was "inconsistent with democratic conceptions."
Granting that they might then have been in the hands of good men,
the fear was expressed that foundations might become "great powers
for evil in the hands of persons whom we cannot foresee." They
might even, it was feared, grow stronger than the Government.
This fear was based upon the conservative character and poor
public relations of the creators of the first great foundations; it was
anticipated that the power of the huge foundation funds could be
used for "reactionary" purposes. The current vice seems to be that
some of the great foundations are now permitting their funds to be
used largely in the promotion of projects politically directed to the
left. But the issue is not whether these great public trusts are being
employed in one political direction or another. The issue is whether
there should be any political direction in the use of public trust
moneys. We share the fear of men like Untermyer and Brandeis that
the power in itself constitutes a threat and a danger.
According to Raymond B. Fosdick, in his The Story of the Rocke-
feller Foundation, when Federal incorporation of the Foundation was
sought, protests were made not only on the basis of the prospective
power of such a foundation but also of its possible use as a medium for
20 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
perpetuating wealth. The following is from Dr. Fosdick's book, on
page 18:
". . . In letters which have since been published, it appears that George W.
Wickersham, the Attorney General, wrote to President Taft denouncing the
proposal. 'Never,' he declared, 'has there been submitted to Congress or to any
legislative body, such an indefinite scheme for perpetuating vast wealth as this;
and personally I believe it to be entirely inconsistent with the public interest that
any such bill should be passed.' To this Mr. Tq,ft replied : 'I agree with your . . .
characterization of the proposed act to incorporate John D. Rockefeller.' "
Some of the individual foundations have increased enormously in
size through the accumulation of income (now more carefully restricted
than before) and through accretions in capital value (wholly unre-
stricted). In spite of heavy expenditures, some of the foundations
are now far larger in capital than they were when created. Where,
as is frequently the case, the foundation portfolio contains blocks of
equity stocks in growing enterprises, the limits of capital increase
cannot be foreseen.
The power to allot or distribute substantial funds carries with it
the opportunity to exercise a substantial degree of control over the
recipients. We tolerate such risks to society in the free and uncon-
trolled use of private funds. An individual of wealth has wide free-
dom to expend his money for power or propaganda purposes; in the
process, he may obtain control of educational institutions, media of
communication and other agencies which have an important impact
on society. Distasteful though this may sometimes be, broad
freedom to do it is consonant with our general ideas of freedom and
liberty for the individual.
When we are dealing with foundations, the situation is quite
different. Problems arise in connection with granting full liberty to
foundations which increase geometrically with their size. The power
of the purse becomes something with which the public must reckon.
For these great foundations are public trusts, employing the public's
money— become so through tax exemption and dedication to public
purposes. Foundations are permitted to exist by the grace of the public,
exempted from the taxation to which private funds are subjected, and are
entitled to their privileges only because they are, and must be, dedicated
to the public welfare. The public has the right to expect of those who
operate the foundations the highest degree of fiduciary responsibility.
The fiduciary duty is not merely to administer the funds carefully from
a financial standpoint. It includes the obligation to see that the public
dedication is properly applied.
The large foundations admit this fiduciary responsibility and affirm-
atively proclaim their consciousness of it. But, the freedom of action
they insist on sometimes permits transgressing the border of license.
The trustees of the foundations are, by overwhelming preponderance,
estimable men; their errors of operation chiefly result from an apparent
misconception of their fiduciary duty. It is not that they do not
intend to act with full trust responsibility; they are perhaps too often
too busy to think their problems through in detail.
There are limits to their freedom of action as trustees. Their
financial power gives them enormous leverage in influencing public
opinion. They should thus be very chary of promoting ideas, con-
cepts and opinion-forming material which run contrary to what the
public currently wishes, approves and likes. Professor Thomas H.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 21
Briggs, 1 an eminent educator, put it this way in his testimony
(Hearings, p. 96):
But whatever the stated purpose or purposes, the public has a deep coneern
and an actual responsibility to see that the activities of each and every founda-
tion, whether its resources are large or small, not only does not harm but also
contributes to a maximum degree possible to the welfare of the Nation. This
right and this responsibility are derived from the fact that the public has chartered
the foundations and also that by remission of taxes it is furnishing a large part of
the available revenue. In the case of the Ford Foundation, which has an annual
income in excess of $30 million, the public contributes more than $27 million, or
$9 to every $1 that comes from the original donor.
In addition to the right and the responsibility of the public to insure that founda-
tion moneys are spent for the maximum good of society in general, the public is
concerned that no chartered foundation promote a program which in any way and to
any extent militates against what society has decided is for its own good. [Emphasis
ours.]
Dr. Frederick P. Keppel once said that the officers of foundations
steadily tend toward "an illusion of omniscience and omnipotence."
They thus fall easily into the error of deeming themselves a group of
the elite, entitled to use the seductive methods of educational and
research propaganda to promote what they themselves believe to be
best for the people. In this they seem to follow the thesis of Jean
Jacques Rousseau.
Rousseau was perhaps the most ardent intellectual supporter of
absolute democracy. He believed that the majority must rule with-
out hindrance, and that minority rights are nonsense. Yet he was
the intellectual father of Communism and Fascism. For, while he
believed in the absolute rights of the majority, he did say that the
people did not always know what was good for them; presumably a
group of the elite would have to tell them. Thus, in both totalitarian
systems, an elite group controls the state for the presumed benefit of
the mass. Such a system is antithetical of our own. As Prof.
Briggs said:
The principle that the public should decide what it wants in order to promote
its own welfare and happiness is unquestionably sound. An assumption that the
public does not know what is for its own good is simply contrary to the funda-
mental principles of democracy. (Hearings, p. 98.)
The fact is that the foundations have become a force in our society
second only to that of government itself. Administering about
seven and a half billion dollars, of which a very small number control
about a third, they are in a position, through the power of public
money to make their influence felt so heavily as to warrant careful
study of the line between freedom of action and license.
Public Accountability.
Annual returns are required of the foundations which give certain
information to the Federal government. Parts of these reports are
open to the public. Others are not; they may be examined only by
Executive Order of the President of the United States. Even this
Committee, as earlier described, has had difficulty in securing such
an order; the public in general has no chance of securing one. Thus
even the material which by law must now be recorded is not fully
open to the public. This Committee fails to understand why any part
of any report by a foundation should not be open to the public. Its
funds are public and its benefactions, its activities, should be public
i Professor emeritus, Columbia University.
22 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
also. In any event, the report which must be filed is wholly inade-
quate to enable either government or the public to determine whether
a foundation has fulfilled its duty to the public.
Some of the major foundations prepare and issue public reports
which are admirable as far as they go, disclosing full financial state-
ments and descriptions of their work during the period covered by the
report. But even these are inadequate fully to inform the public of
the backgrounds, the motivations, the detail of operation and the
results of the activities of the foundations.
While truly full reports would give to those interested an oppor-
tunity to be critical, such criticism would be ineffective in most in-
stances. The foundations are free to do as they please with the public
funds at their command, so long as they do not transgress certain
rules of law which are so general in their terms, and so difficult to
interpret except in a few instances, that they are virtually useless as
deterrents. Political propaganda, for example, is proscribed. But
many foundations do engage in active political propaganda, and the
present laws cannot stop them.
The testimony of Internal Kevenue Commissioner Andrews and
Assistant Commissioner Sugarman brought out clearly (1) that the
courts have construed the restrictions in the tax law very liberally,
perhaps far too liberally; (2) that the Internal Revenue Service has
great difficulty in drawing lines; and (3) that it does not have the
manpower or the machinery to act as a watchdog to make sure that
the law is not violated.
Where the organization claims exemption on the ground that it is
"educational" the law requires that it have been organized exclusively
for that purpose, yet the word "exclusively" has been weakened by
judicial interpretation. Again, the words proscribing political
activity provide that it may not use a "substantial" part of its funds
in that area. The test is thus quantitative as well as qualitative, and
the difficulty in determining the borderlines can well be imagined.
The fact is, and this seems to us of enormous importance, that the
Internal Revenue Service cannot possibly read all the literature pro-
duced or financed by foundations, or follow and check the application
of their expenditures. The Commissioner must rely chiefly on com-
plaints by indignant citizens to raise a question in his own mind.
Even then, it is difficult for the Service to carry this burden, both
from limitations of personnel and budget, and because it is here
concerned with an area which requires technical skill not normally
to be found in a tax bureau.
Our conclusion is that there is no true public accountability under
the present laws.
What is the penalty if, by chance, serious malfeasance is proved —
perhaps by substantial grants for subversive purposes or for active
political propaganda? The mere loss of the income tax exemption.
That is the sole penalty, other than the loss of the right of future
donors to take gift or estate tax exemption on their donations. The
capital of the foundation may still be used for a malevolent purpose.
The trustees are not subjected to any personal penalty. The fund
merely suffers by, thereafter, having to pay income tax on its earnings!
Abdication of Trustees' Responsibility.
The great foundations are enterprises of such magnitude that they
cannot be managed by visiting trustees. In their filed statements,
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 23
several of the foundations have denied indignantly that their trustees
neglected their work. The fact is that, as some of the large founda-
tions are organized, the trustees cannot fully perform those duties
which their fiduciary responsibility imposes.
An illustration of this was given by Professor Briggs in discussing
the Ford Fund for the Advancement of Education. He indicated that
the trustees were too busy with their own affairs and "put trust in
their elected administrative officers." In the foundation subsidiary
to which he referred he said all of these officers were "directly or
indirectly nominated by a former influential officer of The Ford
Foundation who is notoriously critical — -I may even say contemptu-
ous — of the professional education of teachers." The result in this
instance he described as follows:
These administrative officers doubtless present to the board, as they do to the
public, a program so general as to get approval and yet so indefinite as to permit
activities which in the judgment of most competent critics are either wasteful
or harmful to the education program that has been approved by the public.
(Hearings, p. 97.)
To do a truly fiduciary job, as a trustee of one of the major founda-
tions, would require virtually full time occupation.
Typically in the large foundation, there is a set of eminent and
responsible trustees at the top who may well wish to be alert to their
public duty. Most, however, are busy men with many other occupa-
tions and avocations. They may attend quarterly meetings, some-
times less often, rarely more. At such meetings they may be pre-
sented with voluminous reports and be asked to consider and give
their approval to programs and projects. However long such meetings
may last, it is impossible for such trustees to fulfill their fiduciary
responsibility adequately at the equivalent of directors' meetings.
In such infrequent attendance, they cannot give the attention to
the detail of management which the trust nature of these enterprises
requires. Perforce, they delegate their powers to professional subordi-
nates, sometimes selected for their peculiar knowledge of the field,
sometimes selected casually and without previous experience or special
knowledge.
That they are not always careful in their selection of executives
and staffs is attested by this testimony of Professor Briggs, in which
he refers to The Ford Fund for the Advancement of Education, upon
whose Advisory Committee he served until his resignation in disgust
(Hearings, pp. 96-97):
Not a single member of the staff, from the president down to the lowliest employee,
has had any experience, certainly none in recent years, that would give under-
standing of the problems that are met daily by the teachers and administrators
of our schools. It is true that they have from time to time called in for counsel
experienced educators of their own choosing, but there is little evidence that they
have been materially influenced by the advice that was proffered. As one prom-
inent educator who was invited to give advice reported, "any suggestions for
changes in the project (proposed by the fund) were glossed over without discus-
sion." As a former member of a so-called advisory committee I testify that at
no time did the administration of the fund seek from it any advice on principles
of operation nor did it hospitably receive or act in accordance with such advice
as was volunteered.
Mr. Alfred Kohlberg testified before the Cox Committee. As a
member of the Institute of Pacific Relations, he had brought up charges
of subversion apparently before The Rockefeller Foundation's trustees
had become aware that anything was wrong with their long-favored
24 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
beneficiary. He also testified to certain communications he had had
with John Foster Dulles when Alger Hiss had been made President of
The Carnegie Endowment For International Peace at Mr. Dulles'
suggestion. When Mr. Kohlberg was asked if he was critical of Mr.
Dulles for his connection with the Hiss matter, he stated that he was
critical in general of the trustees of the two large foundations con-
cerning which he had testified— The Carnegie Endowment and Rocke-
feller Foundation — on the ground that they "delegate most of their
duties to the staff." He continued: "And while we all realize that
they are very busy men, that the affairs of these foundations are vast
in scope, I criticize them for a lack of understanding of the damage
that can be done to the country when these institutions get infiltrated
or when institutions they are aiding get infiltrated with communists."
Mr. Kohlberg illustrated further:
"That has been the reaction — the trustees of the Institute of Pacific Relations,
for example, which has now been found by the Senate committee to be considered
an organ of the Communist Party of the United States, by the Communist Party,
the majority of those trustees are men of unquestioned integrity, and although
charges were brought to their attention— what is it? Eight years ago? — they
have never yet investigated it on their own."
An analogy with a commercial enterprise is not correct. Some
foundations, like the Twentieth Century Fund, engage directly in
research projects. Others are in the business of distributing funds to
still others for research and other purposes. In either case, the
operation is not a private one for profit but a public one for the public
benefit, and the obligations of the trustees extend far beyond the
limited fiduciary responsibility of a commercial director.
These obligations are comparatively easy to meet in small founda-
tions with moderate operations. The larger the foundation enterprise,
the more difficult the execution of the fiduciary duty. So complex
and intricate have some of the foundations become that a few, like
the Ford Foundation, have felt obliged to divide themselves into
subsidiaries and affiliates. The diagram set opposite this page shows
part of the intricacy of the Ford operation.
Trustees of great foundations are unable to keep their fingers
on the pulse of operations, except to very limited degree. They
cannot take time to watch that detail of operation which alone would
give them an insight into the fairness and objectivity of selections.
Nor can they see to the effect of what they have permitted to be
done. They incline generally to feel that they have done their part
when a grant has been made. They seem to have neither the time
nor the disposition to study the consequences of the grant, its impact
upon society. No other explanation of the long-continued enormous
grants by The Rockefeller Foundation and others to The Institute of
Pacific Relations, nor of the Rockefeller support of the Kinsey reports,
seems logical.
Mr. Henry Allen Moe, of the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial
Foundation put it this way in this statement before the Cox Com-
mittee:
* * * 'delegatus non potest delegare,' that is to say that no trustee can
delegate his trust function.
He proceeded to say that neither within law nor equity could trustees
delegate their judgment.
What is this judgment, the chief component of the trust function? It
is the judgment of the desirability of a grant, both as to specific purpose and
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 25
a,s to the identity of the grantee. It is this which cannot be delegated.
Yet it all too frequently is delegated to professional subordinates who
do not have the duty of trustees. Clearly enough, where a great
many grants are to be awarded, administrative assistance is unavoid-
ably necessary. But ultimate responsibility must rest on the trustees.
They may have assistance, but they cannot merely shunt off the process
of selection to others, perfunctorily accepting what these agents have
decided. If the problem is that the size of some foundations prevents
selections by the trustees themselves, the answer cannot lie in an
abandonment of responsibility by delegation but perhaps in a radical
reorganization of its processes and methods.
Some trustees seek to escape the full impact of the principle of
delegatus non potest delegare, by organizing themselves in such manner
that they are expressly excluded from the detail of selection. For
example, the Ford Foundation caused a report to be prepared called
the Report of the Study for the Ford Foundation on Policy and Program,
dated November 19,' 1949. This report contained the following
passages:
"Individual members of the Board of Trustees should not seek to decide the
technical questions involved in particular applications and projects. Nothing
would more certainly destroy the effectiveness of a foundation. On the contrary,
the Trustees will be most surely able to control the main lines of policy
of the Foundation, and the contribution it will make to human welfare, if they
give the President and the officers considerable freedom in developing the program,
while they avoid influencing (even by indirection) the conduct of projects to
which the Foundation has granted funds." (Pages 127 and 128.)
"As individuals, the Trustees should learn as much as they can by all means
possible, formal and informal, about the program of the Foundation in relation
to the affairs of the world. But the Board of Trustees, as a responsible body,
should act only according to its regular formal procedures, and usually on the
agenda, the dockets, and the recommendations presented by the President."
(Page 128.)
"The meetings of the Board should be arranged so that the discussion will not
be directed mainly at the individual grants recommended by the officers, and
institutions to receive them. Nothing could destroy the effectiveness of the Board
more certainly than to have the agenda for its meetings consist exclusively of
small appropriation items, each of which has to be judged on the basis of scientific
considerations, the academic reputation of research workers, or the standing of
institutions. If the agenda calls solely for such discussions the Board will neces-
sarily fail to discuss the main issues of policy and will inevitably interfere in mat-
ters in which it has no special competence." (Page 130.)
"A foundation may wish from time to time to make small grants, either to ex-
plore the possibilities of larger programs, or to take advantage of an isolated and
unusual opportunity. For such purposes it will be useful for the Trustees to set
up (and replenish from time to time) a discretionary fund out of which the Presi-
dent may make grants on his own authority. The Trustees should set a limit on
the aggregate amount which the President may award in discretionary grants
during a given period, rather than set a fixed limit on the size of a single grant.
* * *» (Page 132.)
"The President of The Ford Foundation, as its principal officer, should not only
serve as a member of the Board of Trustees, but should be given full authority
to administer its organization.
"He should have full responsibility for presenting recommendations on program
to the Board, and full authority to appoint and remove all other officers and em-
ployees of the Foundation. * * *" (Page 132.)
"The founders of at least two of the larger American foundations intended
their trustees to devote a major amount of their time to the active conduct of
foundation affairs. Usually this arrangement has not proved practicable. * * *"
(Page 133.)
"* * * for the program of a foundation may be determined more certainly by
the selection of its top officers than by any statement of policy or any set of direc-
tions. * * *" (Page 133.)
55647 — 54 3
26 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
We cannot escape the conclusion that the trustees of the Ford Foundation
abdicated their trust responsibility in assenting to this plan of operation
under which everything except possibly the establishment of glitterint
generalities could be left to employees.
On the subject of trustees' responsibility, Professor Kenneth Col
grove 2 testified under questioning as follows:
Mr. Wormser. Professor, I would like your comments on this subject, if yoi
will. The trustees of these foundations have a distinct fiduciary responsibility
which they recognize, in principle, at least, as the trustees of public funds. I
seems to me the most important trust function they have is to exercise judgmem
in connection with the selection of grants and grantees. Does it not seem t(
you that to a very large extent they have abandoned that trust function, thai
trust duty, and have delegated the whole thing to other organizations? That ir
certain areas thev have used these intermediate organizations to fulfill theii
judgment function for them, which they, as trustees, should exercise? Woulc
you comment on that?
Dr. Colegrove. I think that has very largely occurred. I do not quite likt
to put it this way, but the trustees are in many cases just window dressing tc
give popular confidence in the institution. In the United States we think ar
institution needs a very distinguished board of trustees; and, of course, yot
know, from college experience, a great many men are made trustees of a uni-
versity because the university expects them to make a large donation to tlu
endowment fund or build a building or something like that. And to offset 8
group of rich trustees, you put on some trustees who have large reputations ir
the literary world or in other fields than merely finance.
Many of the trustees, I am afraid, have gotten into a very bad habit. Thej
are perfectly realistic. They know why they are put on the board of trustees.
And they are not as careful as they should be in taking responsibility for tht
operation of those organizations.
' I think the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, which was set up
under Elihu Root and President Nicholas Murray Butler way back, I think,
about 1908, had a board of trustees picked by President Butler, and I think
Butler expected to get a great deal of advice from those trustees.
But I do recall many years later President Butler told me that he had to use
very extraordinary methods to get his trustees to meet even for the annua]
meeting.
Mr. Wormser. Then, in practice, they delegate their authority partly to other
organizations. Of course, where they do make their own grants directly, they
delegate enormously to their professional employees, the executives, who do not
have the same trust responsibility but are merely executives.
Dr. Colegrove. Yes, they delegate their authority in several directions.
Trustees delegate their authority to the president of the foundation. The presi-
dent in large measure even delegates his authority to the heads of departments.
A president of one of these large funds sometimes is a little hazy about what is
happening in this division or in that division. And in these heads of departments-
let's say of the Rockefeller Foundation, where you have the social sciences and
humanities — you will find a delegation of authority in the case of the social sciences
to the operating societv, The Social Science Research Council, and to The American
Council of Learned Societies in the case of the humanities. So you have a delega-
tion of authority in two directions there.
Mr. Wormser. So whether a foundation fulfills its obligation to the public
rests primarily on the selection of its employees and the association with these
intermediate groups. Is it your opinion, Professor, that these employees — I
don't mean in a derogatory sense to say "employees", the officers of these organiza-
tions — are on the same caliDer as a whole, do they compare well with university
executives or those who would administer grants under university administration?
Dr. Colegrove. Well, I think those of us in political science feel that Joe
Willits, 3 who was a professor of the University of Pennsylvania before he took the
position that he has at the present time, is an outstanding scholsr, a most com-
petent administrator, a very good judge of human nature. And yet he cannot
give all of his attention to the expenditure of these vast sums.
* Formerly Professor of Political -Science Northwestern University, where he taught for 30 years before
his automatic retirement at age 65. For eleven years, Secretary and Treasurer, American Political Science
Association.
J Vice-President, The Rockefeller Found
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 27
What applies, of course, to The Rockefeller Foundation applies even more forcibly
to The Ford Foundation, which is much larger.
Mr. Wormser. One witness, Professor Briggs, testified that in his opinion there
wasn't one single employee in the Ford Fund for the Advancement of Education,
from the top down to the bottom, who had had enough experience in the areas
in which they were operating to make proper judgments. That does not sound
very good for foundation practices, if they select men as carelessly, let us say, as
that. I am trying to make a comparison with universities, because I am interested
particularly in the possibility that a better medium for foundation largesse may
be through the universities, instead of through professional agencies.
Dr. Colegrove, Oh, quite true. I think it would require a larger number of
topnotch administrators in the foundations to exercise more critical judgment
than can be exercised at the present time. Even there, however, you would have
to choose between universities; and if you are going to the small colleges, there is a
case where you would have to have many careful surveys and studies, and an
acquaintance with the personnel and faculties of those universities. Probably
the staffs of high-grade men, let us say men serving under Dr. Willits, ought to
be a little higher caliber.
* * * * * * *
Mr. Hays. Well, now, you talked a little bit ago about the delegation of
authority. Do you have any specific ideas about what we could do to remedy
that, if that is bad? I mean how are you going to get away from it?
Dr. Colegrove. Well, you cannot avoid delegation of authority, but a good
administrator has to know how to delegate. He has to choose to whom he is
going to delegate, and choose what powers he is going to delegate, and then
finally he has to have his system of reviewing the achievements of persons to
whom power to make decisions has been delegated.
Mr. Wormser. May I interrupt to help Mr. Hays' question?
Mr. Hats. You are sure this is going to be helpful?
Mr. Wormser. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hays has said that it seemed to him a trustee should not act as a trustee
of a foundation unless he was willing to give the time to it that was necessary.
It seemed to me that that was a very apt remark. And I wonder if that is not
the answer, that these men are so busy with their own lives that although they
are eminent they are not capable of being trustees of foundations. That is no
criticism of them as persons.
Dr. Colegrove. Yes; undoubtedly many of the trustees would not serve if
they felt that they would be called upon to do much more than go to the meet-
ings, hear the reports, and sometimes not say a single word. You would not
have as brilliant, as lofty, as remarkable, a collection of men as trustees if you
required a little more responsibility on their part. I would say, on the whole,
the board of trustees is too large. There are too many remarkable men, in New
York and elsewhere, who are trustees of more than one foundation. And just
as we exercise in the American Political Science Association a "self-denying
ordinance" where no member of the association speaks more than twice in an
annual meeting, I would like to see these interlocking trusteeships more or less
abolished. You cannot abolish them by law, of course. You could abolish them
by practice. So you would reduce the size of the board of trustees and then
expect more consideration, more consultation, more advice, from the men who
had accepted this great responsibility.
Mr. Wormser, Was that not your idea, Mr. Hays, that they should be working
directly?
Mr. Hays. Oh, sure. Exactly. (Hearings, pp. 583, 584, 585, 586.)
Mr. Koch, the Associate Counsel joined in the colloquy with a
comment which seems to this Committee especially apt:
Mr. Koch. Here is something that worries me. Suppose I had a great big
motor company or a steel mill or this and that, and they picked me because they
wanted, as you say, window dressing. The first thing that puzzles me is why they
need window dressing in a foundation of this kind. If you are running a founda-
tion where you go to the people every year, like the Red Cross or the March of
Dimes, for money, then you want to impress the populace that there are big
names behind it. But here, where Mr. Ford or Mr. Carnegie or Mr. Rockefeller
plumps millions of dollars in the laps of the foundation, and they do not have to
go to the public for 1 cent more, I always wonder: why do they need big names
in that case? And would it not be better, instead of picking me, the head of a
28 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
big steel mill, pick somebody who was a little more familiar with the educational
field? Because I can see exactly what I would do if I were that fortunate head
of a big steel mill. As soon as somebody said, "Let us do something about educa-
tion, or study this," if I were honest, I would immediately say, "I do not know
anything about it, so what do the professors say?" And the professors would
immediately tell me what they thought the trend of the times was, and I would
say, "I will be safe if I follow the trend of the times."
And it seems to me the dismal part of the testimony so far is that there has
been so much unanimity among the big foundations in following the supposed
trend of the times. I would rather see one day Rockefeller in this corner slugging
it out with Ford Foundation in this corner to try to argue a particular thing.
Here we get into a depression, and we find out Professor Beard and Professor
Muzzey have said things they later veered away from, and yet all of the founda-
tions at that time may have put their money in the direction of that project,
pushing the pendulum along much farther than it probably should have been
pushed. And yet there was no foundation that said, "Well, change may be
necessary, but let us find out what is good about the old order so that, when we
decide on the change, we have at least heard both sides."
It seems to me there has not been that debate. And it may have been prob-
ably because the big name probably said, "We don't really know much about it
ourselves. We will have to see what is the fad, what the ladies are wearing in
Paris today, or what the trend is in education." I therefore wonder whether
it would not be better to suggest that where they do not need big names they get
lesser names who can spend more time and are a little bit more familiar with the
subject matter. That, unfortunately, was an awfully long speech, but that has
been worrying me.
Dr. Colegrove. I think you have given an accurate picture of the actual
situation. The large number of famous names on the list of trustees is due to
the old superstition that our institutions must be headed by a famous group of
men. And I will say frankly it is to impress Congress as well as the American
people; to impress public opinion as fully as possible. It is an old superstition.
It is not necessary at all. With a group of 7 trustees, using 7 because it is an
odd number, I imagine most of these trustees if they were trustees of only one
other organization, maybe trustees of a church, would be able to give more
attention to their duties as trustees of foundations. They could not pass on the
responsibility. (Hearings, pp. 586, 587.)
One of the dangers of delegating excessive authority to officers and
employees of a foundation is that there is a tendency for these dele-
gates to run off with the entire operation and, for all practical pur-
poses, to take it away from the trustees who bear the fiduciary duty
to the public.
Professor David N. Rowe * testified that the directors of the Insti-
tute of Pacific Relations (of whom he was one for several years) had —
very little control over the day-to-day operation. I don't know whether this is
characteristic of all boards or all organizations, but I felt, and I testified previously
to this effect, that the IPR was essentially controlled by a very small group of
people who were sometimes an official executive committee, or otherwise an
informal one, who ran things pretty much as they would and who commented to
the Foundation's own personnel and problems of the kind I was talking to Evans 5
about in exactly the opposite way. (Hearings, pp. 538, 539.)
In answer to the question why, like directors of a bank, the directors
of I. P. R. had not been able to learn the mischief which was going on
and to control it, Professor Rowe replied:
* * * I would have the greatest respect for the ability of either of you gentle-
men or others that I know to read a bank balance sheet and to tell the difference
between red ink and black ink. As you say, that is your business. You are on
the board of directors; you have to know. But I would like to know whether you
would have equal confidence in your ability at all times as a member of a board of
directors to be able to point the finger at the fellow that is putting his fingers on
* Professor of Political Science, Yale University.
5 Soger Evans, Soeial Science Director of the Rockefeller Foundation.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 29
the till. You can't do that, so you bond these people. You bond them against
losses, and you protect yourself, and the bank, and you have a system for doing
that.
You don't have a system like that in the intellectual world. You try to work
one up and I will be the first to adopt it. I will say this. You are never going to
bejable to spot such people, who operate down in the levels (of) an organization, from
away up high where the directors sit, because they don't know what the people
are doing, they can't possibly supervise them directly. This is left to the executive
people. If the executive people know what they are doing — I testified before the
McCarran committee that I was present once at a board of directors' meeting of
the IPR at which they were discussing the appointment of a new executive secre-
tary, and I had to sit there in the board and hear the executive committee members
refuse to divulge the names of the candidates they were thinking about in the
presence of the board of directors, and they got away with it.
Mr. Hays. What did you do about that?
Dr. Rowe. What could I do. I was practically a minority of one. The board
upheld their decision not to do this. It was not too long after that as I remember
it that I resigned from the board. They had a monopoly and they were bringing
people like me in for purposes of setting up a front, and I hope, giving a different
kind of coloring to the membership of the board.
Mr. Wormseh. How often did that board meet, Professor?
Dr. Rowe. I don't think I ever was called in there more than once a year, and
you would spend a couple of hours, and that is all,
Mr. Koch. Did the men come from all over the United States on that board?
Dr. Rowe. The last meeting I attended the members from California were not
present. There was a member there from Oregon.
Mr. Koch. But was the membership of the board spread over the United
States?
Dr. Rowe. Yes, it was, and those people could not always attend. (Hearings,
pp. 542, 543.)
Mr. Hays later made his apt comment that no one should remain
on the board of directors unless he could give the proper time to its
work, whereupon Professor Rowe answered:
Dr. Rowe. I would have been perfectly willing to sacrifice the time necessary
to get full information and participate in policy decisions. One of the things that
motivated me was the fact that you could spend the time — I could — but you could
not get the facts and information or get in the inside circles. I submit to you
that taking 3 years to find that out in an organization of the complexity of the
IPR was not an unconscionably long period of time. (Hearings, p. 544.)
We do not believe that public trusts are properly administered through
delegated -fiduciary authority. We question whether individuals should
act as trustees ij they are too busy or otherwise occupied to give the work
the full attention which their fiduciary duty requires. The trustees of
the Carnegie Corporation and the Rockefeller Foundation could not
have permitted continued grants to something like I. P. R. had they
been aware of what was going on. But the expenditure of sufficient
time in checking and observing would have made them conscious of
what the Institute of PaciHc Relations was doing to our country. To
expend that time seems to us the duty of a foundation trustee. To fail to
do so is to fail in the discharge of a -fiduciary duty to the public. Alertness
on the part of the Rockefeller and Carnegie trustees, and expenditure
of the time necessary to see to the use made of the public's money by
I. P. R. might have saved China from the Communists and prevented
the war in Korea.
The extent to which trustees of foundations have further delegated
their authority and abdicated their responsibility through the use of
intermediary organizations, will appear in the next section of this
report*
30 tax-exempt foundations
The Social Sciences.
Raymond B. Fosdick, in The Story of the Rockefeller Foundation, 6
quoted Mr. Gates, long-time advisor to John D. Rockefeller, Sr., in
matters of charity, as follows:
"If I have any regret, it is that the charter of The Rockefeller Foundation did
not confine its work strictly to national and international medicine, health and
its appointments * * * Insofar as the disbursements of the Rockefeller incorpor-
ated philanthropies have been rigidly confined to these two fields of philanthropy
(medicine and public health; they have been almost universally commended at
home and abroad. Where they have inadvertently transgressed these limits,
they have been widely and in some particulars perhaps not unfairly condemned."
In his article in the New York Times of March 1, 1954, Mr. Leo
Eagan attributes wide concern about foundations in part to "a belated
recognition of the great influence that foundations have exercised on
social developments and ideas", and "a fear that a changing emphasis
in foundation programs may upset many long-established social
relationships."
Foundations can play a powerful role in ushering in changes in our
form of society. As Frederick P. Keppel, himself President of the
Carnegie Corporation, put it in The Foundation; Its Place in American
Life (p. 107):
"We all know that foundation aid can increase measurably the pace of any social
tendency, but we don't know when this artificial acceleration ceases to be desirable
* * * All I can say is that here as elsewhere safety lies in the fullest available
information as to foundation affairs and the widest possible discussion regarding
them."
The dangers inherent in size, and the accompanying power which a
large purse gives, apply to some degree in all fields of foundation oper-
ation. They are most hazardous, however, in the so-called "social
sciences."
Dean Myers of the New York State College of Agriculture denned
the social sciences in the Cox Committee hearings as follows:
"The subject or the name 'social science' is intended to cover those studies which
have as their center man in his relation to other men as individuals, as groups, or
as nations.
"Perhaps the name 'social science' might be made clear by indicating its relation
to other branches of knowledge, the natural or physical sciences which relate to
the physical world, the medical sciences which are self-explanatory, the humanities
which deal with art, literature, with things of the spirit, and the social sciences
which are concerned with the studies of man as an individual, as groups, and as
nations."
Within the scope of the term "social sciencies" he named as typical:
economics; psychology; sociology; anthropology; political science or
government; demography or populations studies; history; statistics;
and various sub-divisions of these.
While mistakes in the other branches of knowledge may have serious
results, there is not in them nearly the room for damage to our society
which exists in the social sciences. Possibilities of error and mischief
are so much greater. The methods employed in the natural sciences
are not applicable to the social sciences except in limited degree.
Research is thus far more apt to be fallacious, in social than in natural
science.
Dr. L. F. Ward once said: "the knowledge how to improve human
relations can come only for the social sciences." That statement is
9 Chapter II, p. 29, quoting from The Gates Papers: A memorandum entitled "Principles of Philanthropy
as a Science and Art" 1923.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 31
subject to serious doubt by those who believe that an understanding of
3thics, morals and fundamental principles, and an application of these,
;an do a lot to help "improve human relationships." Those who be-
[ieve that the statement of Dr. Ward is correct, often risk the safety
jf our state and our society. The results of social science research
ire subject to such frequent discount or doubt, because of the possi-
bilities of error, that we can hardly afford to base changes in our forms
or principles of government upon them. As Professor A. H. Hobbs 7
has said in his Social Problems and Scientism (p. 196):
"* * * remember the fundamental differences between the physical sciences
and the social sciences. Physical science has a solid bed-rock of tested knowledge,
and the verified theories constitute reliable guideposts. Contrasted with this
situation, social science knowledge is an uncharted swamp. There is no solid
footing of coordinated knowledge to serve as a vantage point from which to survey
the terrain ahead. There is a labyrinth of paths leading everywhere— and
nowhere. The principles are not anchored but drift in currents of opinion."
This Committee has been far more interested, therefore, in the
activities of the foundations in the social sciences than elsewhere.
Here the greater danger lies. Here the most grievous acts of abuse
have occured.
Foundation history has shown a rapidly increasing interest in social
science research. More and more foundation funds have been poured
into this area until, with the creation of the largest of the founda-
tions, the Ford Foundation, we see an addition of almost all its half-
billion capital devoted to the social sciences, including education.
Since the second World War, the government itself has increasingly
entered the field of social science research, giving it direct support
through research contracts from military and civilian agencies.
Today, nearly all research in the social sciences is dependent on founda-
tion grants or government contracts. The same executives and
directors who control foundation support of social science research
have been extremely active in the formulation of research policies in
the government research programs; and a major part of the social
scientists of America are either on government payrolls or supported
by grants and contracts via universities, their research bureaus or
foundation-sponsored councils.
The foundations themselves feel that they should use their funds
within the social sciences as "risk capital", for "experiment." Experi-
ment in the natural sciences is highly desirable. Experiment with
human beings and their mode of living and being governed is, however,
quite a different matter. If by "experiment" is meant trying to find
ways in which to make existing institutions better or better working,
that too would be admirable. If by "experiment" is meant trying
to find ways in which other political and social institutions could be
devised to supplant those we live by and are satisfied with — then such
experiment is not a desirable use of public funds expended by private
individuals without public accountability.
The inherent uncertainties of research in the social sciences, the enor-
mous factor of indefiniteness, the impossibility of truly experimenting to
test a conditional hypothesis before proclaiming it as a proven conclusion,
the grave danger of fallacious results, makes it highly questionable whether
public money should be so used to promote abandonment of institutions
and ways of life which have been found satisfactory, in favor of question-
able substitutes.
' Assistant Professor of Sociology, University of Pennsylvania.
32 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Some of the social scientists are very careful to state that their
conclusions are not fixed and absolute — to recognize and admit that
their research results are, at best, tentative- that no ultimate conclu-
sions can be drawn from them. Nevertheless, it is natural and in;
evitable that others take up the results of social science research-
ignoring the uncertainty, they use the results as bases for recommend-
ing social action and even legislation. Through such a process,
fallacious conclusions (even some which the social scientists them-
selves might admit were not yet satisfactorily proven) are often
promoted for the purpose of altering the opinion of the intellectual
professions and finally the public itself. The widespread dissemina-
tion by foundations of results of social science research, among
intellectuals, teachers, writers, etc., can itself start a propulsion toward
a demand for legislation to implement a conclusion which has no basis
in scientific fact.
The following was reported in the New York Times of May 3, 1945,
referring to a speech made by Mr. Raymond Fosdick to the Women's
Action Committee for Victory and Lasting Peace:
■"Mr. Raymond Fosdick, president of the Rockefeller Foundation, warned 300
members representing 38 States that the growing distrust of Russia menaced the
future of world peace."
This was brought out in the testimony of Alfred Kohlberg before the
Cox Committee, after which Mr. Kohlberg made these apt remarks:
"Now, I am bringing these names up because these gentlemen are beyond
question in their loyalty and patriotism, you see; but somebody has twisted their
mental processes.
"They paid out millions of dollars for so-called research in foreign policy, and it
seems that the result of that research has come back and twisted their mental processes
so that Mr. Fosdick warns that 'The growing distrust of Russia menaces the future
of world peace,' prior to VE day.
"Of course, if we had had just a little distrust of Russia at that time, we might
not have turned over Eastern Europe and China to them." [Emphasis ours.]
Mr. Kohlberg, whose testimony before the Cox Committee is well
worth study, also brought out that, according to the New York Times
of December 29, 1950, Prof. Robert C. North, speaking at the opening
of the annual convention of the American Historical Society (heavily
supported by foundations) had said "that the United States has been
on the wrong side of the Asian revolution this far." That, as Mr.
Kohlberg pointed out, was after the Chinese Communists had entered
the Korean War against us.
Mr. Kohlberg also noted that Prof. North and one Harold R. Isaacs
had travelled around the United States making a survey for the Ford
Foundation, as a result of which that foundation granted "* * * I
think, $250,000 to the Council of Learned Societies to carry on the
recommendations of these two gentlemen who have this kind of
opinion. * * *."
Can we afford to take the risks involved in permitting privately
managed foundations to expend public funds in areas which could
endanger our national safety? Officers of some of the foundations
frequently assert that they must take risks to do their work effectively.
But risks with the public welfare had better be taken by the Congress
and not by private individuals, many of whom appear too busy with
their own affairs to pay close attention to what the foundation, which
they in theory manage, is doing.
tax-exempt foundations
Patronage and Control.
The power of money is obvious enough. The huge funds controlled
by the great foundations involve patronage to banks, investment
houses, law firms and others. Through their holdings of securities
and purchasing power they exercise additional influence. Appoint-
ment to the board of one of the larger foundations is considered
something of a public honor. Accordingly, by selecting strategically-
placed trustees who welcome appointment, a foundation can extend
its power and its influence. The presence of Arthur Hays Sulz-
berger, President and publisher of the New Y^rk Times, on the~BoaFd
of the RockeJellW~~Fmma r aEon " is~lm~inustration of this extension of
power and influence * We do not mean to imply that Mr. Sulz-
berger directed his editors to slant their reporting on this Committee's
work, but his very presence on the Rockefeller Foundation Board could
have been an indirect, intangible, influencing factor. At any rate, the
Times has bowed to no other newspaper in the vindictiveness of its
attacks on this Committee. In its issue of August 5, 1954, it gave
856 lines of laudatory columnar space, starting with a front-page arti-
cle, to the statement filed by the Rockefeller Foundation. The following
day, August 6, 1954, appeared one of a succession of bitter editorials
attacking this Committee.
Some of the foundations go so far as to engage high grade and
expensive "public relations counsellors" to cement their power and
influence. This strikes us as a dubious use of public money. Through
such counsellors, more than ordinary influence on the press and other
media of public communication can be exerted.
These are only some of the ramifications of the colossal power
which large foundations possess. In some instances their influence
is amplified by the power of great corporations with which they are
associated through large stock holdings or through interlocking direc-
torships. Examples of this would be the Ford Foundation and the
Rockefeller Foundations.
A great foundation can often exercise heavy influence over a college
or university, sometimes to the extent of suborning it to its own ends.
The privately-financed institutions of higher learning have had a
distressing time; the inflation of the past decade or so has increased
to the point of desperation the problem of keeping a college going.
In these circumstances, foundation grants are so important a source
of support that it is not uncommon for university or college presidents
to hang upon the wishes of the executives who distribute the largess
for foundations. Most college presidents will frankly admit that
they dislike receiving restricted or labelled grants from foundations —
that they would much prefer direct and unrestricted grants to their
institutions; or, if a purpose must be attached to the grant, that the
university be permitted to construct and direct the study as it wishes.
But they will also admit that they hesitate to turn down any grant,
however restricted, from a great foundation. After all, if they get
on the wrong side of these sources of support they may be stricken
from the list of beneficiaries.
As academic opinion today is the opinion of the intellectuals of
tomorrow and will very likely be reflected into legislation and in
public affairs thereafter, the opportunities available to the founda-
> Mr. Sulzberger is also on the boards ol several other foundations.
34 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
tions to influence the course of society through grants to institutions
of higher learning are far reaching. That such influence has been
exerted is beyond question.
In reply to the question: had the foundations been able to channel
thinking down one narrow channel?, Professor David N. Rowe of
Yale answered that "eiforts to that end had been made." He then
testified to an astounding example of a foundation attempting to
exercise control of a university function in a most radical manner.
His testimony ran:
* * * The effort to influence the content of area programs at Yale has been
made by at least one foundation that I know of, namely, the Carnegie Corporation.
I can't give you the precise date of this, but I would judge it was in about 1947. I
think that isn't too much to say that this incident is rather typical of some types
of foundation activity that are going on today. I don't pretend to know how
constant they are or how general they are around the country.
This involved an effort on the part of the Carnegie Corporation through one
of its representatives by the name of John Gardner, I believe, to influence the
administration of Yale to eliminate the work we were doing in the far-eastern
field and to concentrate our work on the southeast Asian field. This was a
rather surprising suggestion. Yale has a long tradition of interest in the Far
East. You may have heard of the organization known as Yale in China.
At the time this suggestion was made, we were spending a considerable sum
of money each year on faculty salaries for teaching and research in the far-eastern
field.
Mr. Hays. What year was this, sir?
Dr. Rowe. I think it was about 1947. I can't give you the precise date.
Mr. Hays. Just so we get some idea.
Dr. Rowe. Yes. This had to do with the desire on the part of Yale to develop
and expand its work in the southeast Asian field, where again we had important
work for a number of years. We have had some eminent people in the southeast
Asian field for years in the past.
In this connection, the visit of Mr. Gardner to the university was undertaken,
I believe, at that time the dean of Yale College was in charge of the whole
foreign area program, and I was working directly under him as director of grad-
uate and undergraduate studies as the biography indicated. We were rather
shocked at Mr. Gardner's suggestion that we drop all our work on the Far East
and concentrate on southeast Asia.
The dean questioned Mr. Gardner as to why this suggestion was being made.
In the general conversation that followed — I got this second hand from the
dean, because I was not present then — the philosophy of the foundations along
this line was brought out. They look upon their funds or tend to look upon
their funds as being expendable with the greatest possible economy. That is
natural. They look upon the resources in these fields where the people are few
and far between as scarce, which is correct, and they are interested in integrating
and coordinating the study of these subjects in this country. Therefore, the
suggestion that we cut out far-eastern studies seemed to be based on a notion
on their part that no one university should attempt to cover too many different
fields at one time.
The practical obstacles in the way of following the suggestion made by Mr.
Gardner at that time were pretty clear. There were quite a few of the members
of the staff on the far-eastern studies at that time who were already on permanent
faculty tenure at Yale and could hardly have been moved around at the volition
of the university, even if it had wanted to do it. The investment in library
resources and other fixed items of that kind was very large. The suggestion that
we just liquidate all this in order to concentrate on southeast Asian studies, even
though it was accompanied by a suggestion that if this kind of a policy was
adopted, the Carnegie Corporation would be willing to subsidize pretty heavily
the development of southeast Asian studies, was met by a flat refusal on the
part of the university administration.
Subsequently the dean asked me to write the initial memorandum for submis-
sion to the Carnegie Corporation on the basis of which, without acceding to their
suggestion that we eliminate far eastern studies from our curriculum, that we
wanted to expand our southeast Asian studies with their funds.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 35
r.
They subsequently did give us a grant for this purpose, and they have given a
second grant. I don't know precisely what the amounts were in either case.
The only reason for my giving you this incident in somewhat detail is to indicate
what I consider to be a real tendency in foundations today — in some foundations,
not all— to adopt a function of trying to rationalize higher education and research
in this country along the lines of the greatest so-called efficiency. I used the
word "so-called" there designedly, because in my view, the notion that educational
and research and scholarly efficiency can be produced this way in a democratic
society is unacceptable. It seems to me that in a democratic society we have to
strive for the greatest possible varigation and differentiation as between univer-
sities along these lines, and the suggestion that any one university should more or
less monopolize one field or any few universities monopolize one field, and give
the other fields to others to do likewise with, it is personally repugnant to me.
It does not jibe with my notion of academic freedom in the kind of democratic
society that I believe in. (Hearings, pp. 527, 528.)
This incident at Yale strikes this Committee as appalling. Any
attempts by foundations, or concentrations of foundation power, to control
research in the universities and colleges and to create conformity, uni-
formity or foundation-policed research should receive from Congress and
the public the censure it well merits.
On the subject of conformity, Professor Rowe testified as follows:
* * * * * * *
In the academic field, of course, we have what is known as academic tenure or
faculty tenure. After they get permanent tenure in a university, providing they
don't "stray off the beaten path too far from an ethical point of view, people can
say almost anything they want. I have never felt that any of my colleagues
should be afraid to express their opinions on any subject, as long as they stay
within the bounds of good taste and ordinary common decency. Nobody in the
world is going to be able to do anything to them. This is fact and not fiction.
It is not fancy. Their degree of security is put there to be exploited in this way.
Now, of course, some of the people that complain most bitterly about the
invasion of academic privilege along that line are those who indulge themselves
invading it. What, for instance, is a professor to think when people with money
come along and tell his university that what he is doing there is useless and ought
to be liquidated, because it is being done much better some place else?
We hear a lot of the use of the word "conformity" nowadays, that congressional
investigations are trying to induce conformity. The inducement of conformity
by the use of power is as old as the human race, and I doubt if it is going to be
ended in a short time. But one of the purposes of having academic institutions
which are on a private basis is tc maximize the security of individuals who will
refuse to knuckle under to the pressures of money or opinion or anything of that
kind. This problem is always going to be with us, because anybody that has
money wants to use it, and he wants to use it to advance what he considers to be
his interests. In doing so, he is bound to come up against contrary opinions of
people who don't have that much money and that much power and whose only
security lies in our system, whereby academic personnel are given security in
tenure, no matter what their opinions are within the framework of public accept-
ability and security, to say what they want and do what they please, without
being integrated by anybody.
Mr. Wormser. Professor," this committee in some of the newspapers has been
criticized in just that area. It has been said that it tended to promote conformity
and exercise thought control or censorships. That of course is far from its
intention.
I wonder if I gather from your remarks correctly you think that the foundations
to some extent have tended to do just that?
Dr. Rowe. I would say that there are examples of foundations trying to engage
in controlling the course of academic research and teaching by the use of their
funds. As to whether this is a genersl tendency in all foundations, I would be
very much surprised if that were so. But if this committee can illuminate any
and pll cases in which the power of foundations, which is immense, has been used
in such a way as to impinge upon the complete freedom of the intellectual com-
munity to do what it wants in its own area, I should think it would be rendering
a tremendous public service.
I am not prejudicing the result. I don't know whether you are going to prove
any of this or not. But the investigation of this subject is to me not only highly
36 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
justifiable, but it is highly desirable in an age when we are confronted all around
in the environment in which we live with illustrations of how great power can be
concentrated and used to prevent the normal amount of differentiation and
variation from individual to individual, university to university, and college to
college. The totalitarian societies, of course, have none of this freedom in the
intellectual field. (Hearings, pp. 532, 533.)
The control exerciseable by the great foundations through their
patronage goes far deeper than the upper level of institutional man-
agement. For most academicians the route of foundation grants is
the only one available for success in their professions. Moreover,
badly paid as most of them are, it is generally only through foundation
grants that their income can be amplified to a reasonable standard.
The pressure starts at the very bottom of the academic ladder.
Instances of it have come to our attention but we shall not specify
them for fear of injuring the reputations or hampering the careers of
those who have succumbed to the temptation put before them by
foundation funds. A foundation grant may enable a neophyte to reach
that all-important doctor's degree through support of his graduate
studies. If it seems necessary to conform to what he may think is
the point of view promoted by a foundation which might honor him
with its grace, is it unnatural that he conform? When he becomes a
teacher, a foundation grant may supplement his meager salary; will
he reject a grant because he does not like its possible objective?
Foundations may finance a study leading to a book which will advance
his standing and prestige in his medium, the bases for academic ad-
vancement. Is he likely to do a study that the foundation would find
undesirable? Is it likely, indeed, to make the grant if it is not satisfied
the recipient will comply with any predilections it may have? We do
not mean to assert that all foundations impose conditions of con-
formity on all grantees. We point out merely that the power to do so
is there, and that this power has been used. Some foundations set
up more or less elaborate machinery for the selection of grantees, such
as committees to sift the applicants. But control can be exercised as
well through such machinery, by carefully selecting the committees
or other human agencies.
A foundation may send the grantee to a foreign country to increase
his knowledge and prestige. It may even accept his research proposal
and set him up in business by making his proposal a project in one
of its favored universities. A research organization may be set up
under his direction. A foundation may recommend him to a uni-
versity for a teaching vacancy. He may even come to be recom-
mended by the foundation for the presidency of some college or
university.
Will any of these lifts come to the academician if he does not
conform to whatever predilections or prejudices the foundation bureau-
crats may have? Perhaps — but the academician cannot often afford
the risk. Just as the president of the institution, whose main job
today may well be fund-raising, cannot afford to ignore the bureau-
crats' wishes, so the academician cannot. Scholars and fund-raisers
both soon learn to study the predilections, preferences and aversions
of foundations' executives, and benefit from such knowledge by pre-
senting projects likely to please them.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 37
*
The Foundation Bureaucrats.
These executives are not generally the trustees of the foundations.
The trustees, estimable citizens though they may be, do not spend
the time necessary to engage in the intimate and frequent contact
which is necessary in the actual making of grant-decisions. The
executives, those who truly have the say, those to whom this right
is delegated by the large foundation's board of trustees, are the pro-
fessional managers of foundation enterprises. Thus, it often becomes
a matter of one foundation-employed individual impressing his
opinions and his predilections and his aversions on an institution or
an individual recipient of a grant. Whatever methods of clearing
grants may exist within a given foundation, it is frequently, in the
last analysis, the decision of one man which prevails.
In a letter of October 1, 1953 addressed to the Chairman of this
Committee, Professor Kenneth Colgrove said:
"In the aggregate, the officers of these foundations' wield a staggering sum of
influence and direction upon research, education and propaganda in the United
States and even in foreign countries."
In a letter of August 4, 1951, J. Fred Rippey, Professor of American
History at University of Chicago, writing to the late Honorable E. E,
Cox, later Chairman of the Cox Committee, said:
"At present and for years to come, scholars in our universities will not be able
to do much research on. their own because of high prices and heavy taxes. The
recipients of these tax free subsidies from the foundations will therefore have
great advantages that will be denied the rest of the university staffs. The
favored few will get the promotions and rise to prominence. The others will tend
to sink into obscurity and have little influence in the promotion of ideas and cul-
ture. Unless the power to distribute these immense foundation funds is decentral-
ized, the little controlling committees and those to whom they award grants and
other favors will practically dominate every field of higher education in the
United States. Even granting them great wisdom and patriotism, one might still
complain against this injury to the great principle of equality of opportunity.
But I have never been impressed by the superior wisdom of the foundation heads
and executive committees. The heads tend to become arrogant; the members of
the committees are, as a rule, far from the ablest scholars in this country."
The bureaucrats of the foundations have become a powerful group
indeed. Not only do they, more often than the trustees of foundations,
determine grants and grantees, but they exert an influence on academic
life second to no other group in our society. They become advisers to
government in matters of science. They are often consulted before
the selection of teachers in universities. They serve on international
bodies for the United States Government. They become virtual
symbols of prestige, responsible only to a small group of foundation
trustees who have come to follow their views. The fact is that those
who control the great foundations possess opportunities for patronage
which in some ways may exceed anything which the elected officials of
government have to distribute.
The professionals, who exert so important an influence upon thought
and public opinion in the United States, form a sort of professional
class, an elite of management of the vast public funds available to
their will. They can scarcely avoid getting an exaggerated idea of
their own importance and becoming preoccupied with holding and
enlarging their roles.
38 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
*
That this leads to arrogance was established by Prof. Briggs in
testifying regarding the Ford Fund for the Advancement of Education:
I charge that the present officers of the Fund for the Advancement of Education
have arrogated to themselves an assumption of omniscience, which responsibility
for distributing millions of donated dollars does not automatically bestow, nor
does it bestow a becoming humility and respect for the judgment of others.
*******
* * * Whenever foundation officers, subordinate as well as chief, confuse
position with ability and power with wisdom, losing the humility that would
keep ears and mind hospitably open to what others think, the welfare of the
general public is endangered.
It can hardly be wondered at that the officers of a foundation steadily tend, as
Dr. Keppel once said, toward "an illusion of omniscience or omnipotence." Even
a chauffeur feels that the powerful engine in the car that he is hired to drive
increases his importance, is in a sense his own personal power. (Hearings, p, 97.)
The place of foundations in our culture cannot be understood
without a recognition of the emergence of this special class in our
society, the professional managers of foundations. They are highly
paid; they ordinarily have job security. They acquire great prestige
through their offices and the power they wield. They disburse vast
sums of money with but moderate control, frequently with virtually
no supervision. Their hackles rise at any criticism of the system by
which they prosper. More often than not, the power of the foundation
is their power. They like things as they are.
Criticism and Defense.
In the light of the power of the foundations, it is not surprising that
the vocal critics of foundations are comparatively small in number.
Professor Briggs made the reasons clear in testifying regarding his
resignation from the Advisory Board of the Ford Fundfor the Advance-
ment of Education:
Especially disturbing in a large number of the responses to my letter of resig-
nation was the fear, often expressed and always implied, of making criticisms of
the fund lest they prejudice the chances of the institution represented by the critic
or of some project favored by him of getting financial aid from the fund at some
future time.
It is tragic in a high degree that men who have won confidence and position in
the educational world should be intimidated from expressing criticism of a founda-
tion whose administrators and policies they do not respect. (Hearings, p. 97.)
Prof. Briggs continued:
It has been stated that, unlike colleges and universities, foundations have no
alumni to defend them. But they do have influential people as members of their
boards, and these members have powerful friends, some of whom are more inclined
to oe partisanly defensive than objectively critical. Moreover, there are also
thousands who, hopeful of becoming beneficiaries of future grants, either con-
ceal their criticisms or else give expression to a defense that may not be wholly
sincere. (Hearings, pp. 101, 102.) [Emphasis ours.l
The abuse which has been heaped upon this Committee and its staff
for daring to consider serious criticisms of foundation management and
operation well illustrates that some of the foundations do, indeed, have
"influential people" on their boards and very "powerful friends" who
are "partisanly defensive,"
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 39
VII. The Concentration of Power — The Interlocks
The Hazards to Society in an Interlock.
Social scientists have been articulate in presenting the theory that
concentration of Economic Power is a threat to the American sys-
tem. The Temporary National Economic Committee during the
years 1938 to 1940 devoted a great deal of effort to the study of the
patterns of influence resulting from interlocking directorates, from
voluntary associations of business, from growth tendencies in indus-
try. The tradition of American Federal legislation is one of suspicion
against any accumulation of power which enables a group of citizens
to control economic and social aspects of our life. We have a con-
sistent record of regulatory laws meant to prevent domination of
important aspects of our social life by private powers outside of the
system of checks and balances established by our Constitution. The
anti-trust laws, the Federal Trade Commission, the Federal super-
vision of communications and of transportation serve to protect society
against concentration of power. The existence of excessive power free
from control by the administrative and judicial processes is contrary
to the principle of free competition. The American system combats
monopolism. The Supreme Court in recent decisions declared that
not only actual collusions in restraint of competition, but the very
existence of power to restrain competition, warrants remedial action.
Whatever dangers to society may exist in the great power which the
large tax exempt foundations possess as individual units are multiplied
to the point of enormous hazard if numbers of these colossi combine
together. If some of these great foundations have acted together or
are closely connected in operation, through interlocking directorates,
interchanging administrative personnel and the use of intermediary
organizations commonly supported, it may be necessary that we con-
sider protecting ourselves against such a combine in the foundation
world just as we would if it existed in the business world.
Does a Concentration of Power Exist?
It is the conclusion of this Committee that such a combine does
exist and that its impact upon our society is that of an intellectual
cartel. The statement filed with the Committee by the American
Council of Learned Societies is typical of the generality of the founda-
tions in emphatically denying the existence of a "conspiracy" among
the operating organizations and the foundations. This Committee
does not see any evidence that the concentration of power arose as the
result of a "conspiracy". It has not been created as the result of a
plot by a single group of identifiable individuals. It has not been
"created" at all, in the sense of a conscious plan having been worked
out in advance to construct and implement its essentials. It has, how-
ever, happened. Any informed observer would so conclude. Charles
S. Hyneman, for example, a Professor of Political Science at North-
western University and a firm friend of the foundations, in a letter to
Committee Counsel, dated July 22, 1954, wrote:
"I have always supposed that there is indeed a 'close interlock or a concentra-
tion of power' between the foundations on the one hand and the so-called learned
societies, such as the Social Science Research Council and the American Council of
Learned Societies, on the other hand." 9
• See Appendix to Heai ings.
40 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The concentration has happened. And it is something as definite to
reckon with as though it had, in fact, been consciously created. Its
looseness of organization, its incomplete integration, its lack of formality,
the inability to put a finger on all the exact mechanics of its' connected
operation, does not detract from its reality or from the dangers which it
potentially carries. Even were its conduct simon-pure, such a con-
centration of power would, in essence, be un-American and undesirable.
And the fact seems to be that it has not always worked to the benefit
of the Nation.
Some of the foundations have fallen into a system or habit of working
together, with each other and with the foundation-supported inter-
mediary organizations which all exhibit most clearly that an interlock
exists. It has been perhaps a convenience, and it is readily under-
standable how this could have developed without the trustees of
foundations being conscious of the dangers this system involved.
Most of them would probably be unable to recognize that a combine
actually exists: its coordination and the integration of its parts result
from executive action rather than from trustee direction.
Those who support this aggregation of power, and they are many,
assert that its personnel comprises, for the most part, the persons
most qualified in their respective fields of research, research direction,
teaching and writing. They say, further, that this close association
is both natural and desirable. But who is to judge whether this
group is the truly elite? If it has the services of most of those social
scientists who are eminent, is this because they are deservedly so or
perhaps because the group has often closed its doors to those of
contrary opinion or made it difficult for those of different approach to
rise in their metiers?
We cannot possibly determine the cause-effect relationship be-
tween influence and scientific prestige. There are some strong indi-
cations, however, that scientific prestige is frequently the result
rather than the cause of an appointment as an executive or a director
of a foundation or a scientific council. The monetary power, the
ability to supply jobs and research funds, has made many a man a
presumed authority in the social sciences, although he started out
with only modest knowledge in the area. In the last analysis, it is
these executives who are the effective "elite." And even if it should
be true that most of the "best minds" are in the group, do we wish
to permit them virtual control of intellectual direction in our country?
It smacks somewhat of the once-proposed "managerial revolution."
That the development of research and the consequent moulding of public
opinion in the United States should lie in the hands of any dominating
group seems contrary indeed to our concepts of freedom and competition.
Assuming for the sake of argument (though it is subject to con-
siderable doubt) that the presently guiding group has superiority,
how can society be sure that it will maintain this superiority? Will
it receive or open its ranks to contrary opinion? Will it permit
entry to younger men who do not agree with its thesis? Will the
group truly be the guardians of scientific objectivity, or become
propagandists for that in which they happen to believe?
The risk is great. It is so easy for such a group, wielding the power
which the support of the great foundations gives it, to become a bulwark
against freedom of inquiry and freedom of instruction. Power does corrupt.
Nor are the wielders of power always aware that their power is corroding
their judgment.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 41
There is the further risk that a few of the major foundations, those
which contribute the principal support of the intermediary organiza-
tions through which the concentration, the intellectual cartel, largely
operates, could come to exercise direct and complete control over the
combine through the power of the purse, with all the far-reaching
consequences of such control. The aggregate power, for example, of
the Ford, Rockefeller and Carnegie funds, coming into the managerial
hands of like-minded persons, might result in the complete domination
of the intellectual life of the country.
Is this far-fetched? Foundations now controlled by admirable men
of public interest could easily come into the control of others with
political axes to grind. It has happened. The Institute of Pacific
Relations was one of the "clearing house" organizations, supported
to the extent of millions of dollars by the Rockefeller and Carnegie
foundations and others. It came under the control of Communists
and their sympathizers, with the result that it had tragically much to
do with the loss of China to the Communists. This ghastly example of
how dangerous reliance on an intermediary organization can be, must not
be easily forgotten. It should be ever present in the minds of foundation
trustees to caution them against readily escaping their fiduciary obligation
to see to the proper use oj the public money they dispense, by handing it to
others to do their work for them.
An Institute of Pacific Relations could happen again! Indeed, it is a
conclusion of this Committee that the trustees of some of the major
foundations have on numerous important occasions been beguiled by
truly subversive influences. Without many of their trustees having
the remotest idea of what has happened, these foundations have fre-
quently been put substantially to uses which have adversely affected
the best interests of the United States. From the statements which
they have filed with this Committee, we cannot agree that they have
disproved this contention, nor that they have satisfied what is prob-
ably a fair affirmative burden to place upon their shoulders. That
burden is to show, to demonstrate, that they have made strong, posi-
tive contributions to offset the baleful influences which they have
sometimes underwritten through their financial power. These in-
fluences we shall discuss in some detail in subsequent sections of this
report.
It is our opinion that the concentration of power has taken away
much of the safety which independent foundation operation should
provide; that this concentration has been used to undermine many of
our most precious institutions, and to promote radical change in the
form of our government and our society.
The Cartel and Its Operations.
Numbers of professors in the social sciences have pointed out the
existence of an interlock, a cartel.
In testifying before the McCarran Committee (pp. 4023-27),
Professor Rowe of Yale was asked by Counsel:
"Do you know anything, Professor, of the general tendency, to integrate studies
and to bring about unanimity of agreement on any particular subject, with the
foundations?"
This question led to the following testimony which seems to us
important and revealing:
"Mr. Rowe. Wf 11, let's take a possible hypothetical case. Let's assume that
organization A wants to promote point of view B and they get money from founda-
55647—54 4
42 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
tion C and allocate it to a lot of people. They want to have a place for these
people to work. They want to maintain them. So they send them around to
universities like Yale, Columbia, and California, thiee I have mentioned where
this actually happened, you see. And they hold the final strings.
"Now, of course, in the interests supposedly of efficiency, integration, coordination,
and all these shibboleths of the American foundation point of view, maybe this is a
good thing. From my point of view, the foundations and these research, organizations
like the Institute of Pacific Relations have gone hog wild on the coordination of research.
They have committed themselves so thoroughly to coordination of research that in fact
instead of supporting a great variety of research projects, which would enrich the
American intellectual scene through variegation, which is a value I very basically
believe in, you have a narrowing of emphasis, a concentration of power, a concentra-
tion of authority, and an impoverishment of the American intellectual scene.
"Thtse people like organization. They likf to have a man in a university, for
example, who will take the responsibility for organizing research around a narrow
topic. This means he acquires a staff, and you go to work on a special project.
You may spend $250,000 or $500,000 working on some nanow field, which may or
may not ever yield you any results.
"If I were doing the thing, T would talk in terms of supporting individual
scholars, and not in terms of supporting these highly organization concentrated
narrow specialized leseaich projects that are supported in some of the universities.
"Now, as I said, I am off on a hobbyhorse at this point. But it is of particular
inter" st, because by exercising power over research in this way , you see, by insisting
on the integration of research activity, anybody who wants to, can control the results
of research in American universities. And I think this is a very questionable business
that the public ought to look at very, very closely, and see whether they want a few
monopolies of the money, like, for instance, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Carnegie
Corp., 'who have done immense amounts of good, to emphasize narrow concentration
to the extent that they have.
"Mr. Mobbis. Well, can you think of a particular example of how this would
be applied, Professor?
"Mr. Rowe. Well, I can cite cases in which I think this method has been over-
done, this kind of an approach has been overdone, cases in which a quarter of a
million dollars is allocated over a 10-year period for research on a narrow topic
in Chinese history, let's say, in which the graduate students who come into this
field in that university are pushed into confining their research to this narrow
field soas to contribute to it; where the personnel drawn into the university is
drawn into this framework ; and where, as a result, the broad general interest in
the whole field of Chinese history is made difficult to maintain. All this is done
in the interest of efficiency, you know, the great American shibboleth.
"I often say that if we try to become as efficient as the really efficient, sup-
posedly, people, the dictators, then we destroy American scholarship and every-
thing that it stands for. And I often wonder whether my colleagues realize
who won the last war. Intellectually speaking, this country has a great danger of
intellectually trying to imitate the totalitarian approach, in allowing people at centers
of financial power — they aren't political powers in this sense — to tell the public
what to study and what to work on, and to set up a framework.
"Now, of courses, as you know, scholars like freedom. Maybe they come up
with a lot of useless information. But in my value standard, as soon as we dimin-
ish the free exercise of unhampered curiosity, free curiosity, by channeling our
efforts along this line, we then destroy the American mentality. Because the
great feature of the American mentality is the belief in allowing people to rush
off in all kinds of different directions at once. Because we don't know what is
absolutely right. You can't tell that far in advance.
"If I may just continue one moment more, Senator, I would like to point out
to you that Adolf Hitler very effectively crippled atomic research in Germany by
telling the physicists what he wanted them to come up with. Now, this is true.
And if you can do that in atomic physics, you can do it 10 times as fast in the
so-called social sciences, which really aren't sciences at all, where really opinion,
differentiation of opinion, is the thing that matters and what we stand for in this
country.
"That is why I become very much inflamed when I even smell the first hint of a
combination in restraint of trade in the intellectual sphere.
"Now, you see what I am talking about with this interlocking directorate? That
is what bothers me about it. I don't mind if the boys go off and have a club of their
own. That is their own business. But when you get a tie-in of money, a tie-in of
the promotion of monographs, a tie-in of research, and a tie-in of publication, then
I say that the intellectuals are having the reins put on them and blinders.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 43
"Senator Watkins. Otherwise, they do not get on the team.
"Mr. Rowe. That is right. They don't get on the team, and they don't
get a chance to carry the ball.
"Now to the faculty member, this means money, income, what he lives on. It
is vital. It is not just some recreational thing, you see.
"Senator Watkins. What I wanted to ask you was this: As a matter of
practice, is it not true that in graduate schools of most of our American universities
and colleges, the head of the department usually pretty well dictates to the young
man who is working for his Ph. D. or master of arts what he is going to write
about or what field he is going to investigate?
"Mr. Rowe. No, sir, Senator, not in any department I have ever been con-
nected with. The student is in an open market, where he can go and buy the
specialty that any professor has got to offer.
"Senator Watkins. It has to be approved, though.
"Mr. Rowe. Oh, yes. It has to be approved. But remember this. At this
point, you get into the activities of the club. And this is one of the ways in
which the individual has a chance to assert himself, because, as you know, if
Mr. X doesn't approve of Mr. Y's project, then Mr. Y doesn't have to approve
his project. I mean, there is a trade back and forth business.
"Senator Watkins. There is an interlocking group.
"Mr. Rowe. In the interlocking group it is a different business. This has to
do with monopoly of funds and support for research work in the large. I am
not talking now about students and dissertations and things of that sort.
"Senator Watkins. This is more or less research when the student is taking
his work for his Ph.D. and he has to write his dissertation.
"Mr. Rowe. But you see actually, Senator, the only place I know of where
all students in the field of Chinese history are integrated into the study of one
15-year period of Chinese history, is in connection with one of these research
projects.
"That is the only case in the United States that I know of. I have never seen
it operate any place else.
"This kind of thing is supported by foundation money. And, of course, the tempta-
tion is to bring' everybody in and integrate, through a genteel process of bribery. That
is to say, you support the student, you give him a fellowship, if he will buy your subject
matter area. And if you do this for 15 years, the only Ph.D.'s you turn out will
be people who know that 12-year period or 15-year period of Chinese history.
I say this is intellectual impoverishment.
"Senator Watkins. You think that is not true, however, elsewhere?
"Mr. Rowe. It is not generally true. .
"Senator Watkins. I hope it is not, because I thought maybe it might be in
some universities I know about.
"Mr. Rowe. It is not generally true, but it is the inevitable kind of thing which
happens with this hot pursuit of efficiency, integration. And, of course, remember
this. The foundation people have to have jobs. They have to have something to
administer. They don't want to give away the money to the universities and say
'Go ahead and spend it any way you want.' They want to see that the activity pays.
That is, we have got to have a regular flow of the so-called materials of research
coming out. We want to see this flow in certain quantity. It has to have a certain
weight in the hand. And to see that this happens, we do not just give it to a university
where they are going to allow any Tom, Dick and Harry of a professor to do his own
thing. 'No, we want an integration.'
"As I warned, Mr. Morris, you see— he set me off, here.
"Senator Watkins. I take it that is a pretty good plea for the university as
against the foundation.
"Mr. Rowe. Absolutely. And, as a matter of fact, I couldn't find a better
illustration of the dangers of consistently over the years donating very large sums of
money to organizations, you see, for research purposes, than is involved in the very
Institute of Pacific Relations itself. It is a fine illustration of the fact that power
corrupts, and the more power you get the more corrupt you get.
* * * * * * *
"Mr. Robebt Mokeis (Special Counsel). Was any inducement ever made to
you in connection with your membership in the Institute of Pacific Relations that
would indicate it would be favorable to you
"Mr. Rowe. Well, I would say this. I was indoctrinated at some point m
my education with a general distaste for joining many organizations. I have a
feeling I got this from my former professor of politics at Princeton, Prof. William
Starr Myers. But wherever I got it, it is a fact. And when I first came back
44 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
from China and entered into my first academic job in Princeton in 1938, I re-
frained from joining the Institute of Pacific Relations.
"I was approached and invited, but I Refrained from joining. And I will say
that the only reason I ever didjoin was on account of a letter I got from Mr. Lock-
wood, who was then in the organization, the general tenor of which was that young
people just starting out in the far eastern field are 'well advised to become a mem-
ber of this organization.' It was a very genteel statement, but the meaning of it
was quite obvious. And I joined only because I got that letter. It is the sort
of letter that a young man beginning in a profession can hardlv afford to disregard.
Five dollars a year to protect yourself? O. K. You pay. * You join. That is
the only interest I had at the time.
"I later got involved in the organization, and as I told you this morning became
a member of the board of trustees in 1947. But in 1938, well, $5 was pretty
important to me in those days. On a salary of $2,000 a year, I didn't join more
organizations than I had to." [Emphasis ours.]
The Committee is well aware that a parade of professors in the
social sciences could be marshalled who would deny that a concentra-
tion of power exists, who would assert that the great foundations act
independently, sagely and objectively throughout their work. We
are inclined, however, to listen carefully to the voices raised by
courageous, qualified critics in the profession. Professor Rowe, for
example, had no axe to grind. He is an academician of eminence and
exceptional ability who is friendly to foundations and by his own
testimony has enjoyed grants from them. It does take courage to
critcise the foundations whose benefactions are so important to
academicians, both financially and professionally. The system is
very likely to punish its critics, as it has, in instances, certainly done.
In this letter of August 4, 1951, to Congressman Cox, previously
referred to, 10 Professor Rippy stated that he had never been impressed
with the great wisdom of foundation executives. He said they tended
to be arrogant, and that members of the distributing committees are
as a rule far from the best scholars. He recommended decentraliza-
tion of control of the use of funds, suggesting the democratic progress
of selection through faculty committees in the universities — "In
numbers there will be more wisdom and iustice." He continued:
"I believe our way of lifeps based upon the principles of local autonomy and
equality of opportunity. I strongly approve those principles and I believe you
do likewise. I should not be surprised if your proposed committee of investiga-
tion should discover that concentration of power, favoritism, and inefficient use
of funds are the worst evils that may be attributed to the Foundations."
In a second letter to the Chairman of the Cox Committee on
November 8, 1952, Professor Rippy wrote as follows (Hearings, p. 62):
Dear Congressman Cox: Since I wrote you on August 4, 1951, Dr. Abraham
Flexner, a roan who has had much experience with the foundations, has pub-
lished a book entitled "Funds and Foundations," in which he expresses views
similar to those contained in mv letter. I call your attention to the following
pages of Flexner's volume: 84, 92, 94, 124, and 125. Here Dr. Flexner denies
that the foundation staffs had the capacity to pass wisely on the numerous
projects and individuals for which and to which grants were made, and contends
that thi grants should have been made to universities as contributions to their
endowments for research and other purposes.
The problem is clearly one of the concentration of power in hands that could
not possibly be competent to perform the enormous task which the small staffs
had the presumption to undertake. This, says Flexner, was both "pretentious"
and "absurd." In my opinion, it was worse than that. The staffs were guilty
of favoritism. The small committees who passed on the grants for projects
and to individuals were dominated by small coteries connected with certain
eastern universities. A committee on Latin American studies, set up in the
10 Supra, p. 37.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 45
1940's for instance, was filled with Harvard graduates. A single professor of
history on the Harvard faculty had the decisive word regarding every request
for aid presented by historians.
By granting these subsidies to favoiite individuals and favored ideas, the
foundations contribute to inequalities in opportunity and interfere with "free
trade and ideas." They increase the power of favored groups to dominate our
colleges and universities. Men whose power exceeds their wisdom, or men who
are not guided by the principle of equality of opportunity, could become a menace.
If possible, under the terms of our Federal Constitution, these foundations should
either be taxed out of existence or compelled to make their grants to colleges
and universities, to be distributed by faculty committees of these institutions.
Evenhanded justice may not prevail even then because such justice is rarely
achieved in human relations. But a greater approximation to evenhanded jus-
tice will be made because these local committees will have more intimate knowl-
edge of recipients. This, as you know, is the fundamental justification for
decentralization of power, for the local autonomy which was so piominent in
the thinking of our Founding Fathers.
Interlocks in commercial enterprises have been studied frequently
enough, and an analogy is apt. In monograph ii Bureaucracy and
Trusteeship in Large Corporations, TNEC, the problem of interlocking
directorships is explained as follows:
"The existence of interlocking directorships is not conclusive proof that the
companies involved work in close harmony. Some directors in reality have
little to say about management, either because they are relatively inactive, or
because they are members of the minority, or, perhaps most common of all,
because the officers of the particular ccmpanies run their enterprises without
substantive assistance from their boards. Nevertheless, many directors are
influential and in any case there can be little doubt that interlockings at least con-
tribute substantially to the so-called climate of opinion, within which policies are
determined. Moreover the majority of those who hold the most directorships
among the largest corporations also have active positions in at least one of the
companies they serve. It is possible that 'such men are likely to take a respon-
sible share in the development of policy in any corporation in which they hold a
responsible position.' " [Emphasis ours.j
Among tax exempt educational and charitable organizations there
exists a pattern of relationships and interlocking activity somewhat
similar to the structure of business as presented by the Temporary
National Economic Committee.
What Makes Up The Interlock.
The component parts of the network or cartel in the social sciences
are:
(1) Certain of the major foundations, notably, the various Rocke-
feller foundations, the various Carnegie foundations, the Ford Foun-
dation (a late comer but already partially integrated), the Common-
wealth Fund, Maurice and Laura Folk Foundation, Russell Sage
Foundation, etc.
(2) What might be called intermediary, clearing house, or execu-
tive, organizations and in a way act as wholesalers, such as: The
Council of Learned Societies; The American Council on Education;
The National Academy of Sciences; The National Education Association;
The National Research Council; The National Science Foundation; The
Social Science Research Council; The American Historical Association;
The Progressive Education Association; The John Dewey Society; The
Institute of Pacific Relations; The League for Industrial Democracy;
The American Labor Education Service and others.
(3) The learned societies in the social sciences.
(4) The learned journals in the social sciences.
(5) Certain individuals in strategic positions, such as certain pro-
fessors in the institutions which receive the preference of the combine.
46 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The patterns of interlocking positions of power may take various
shapes. The following are the most frequent ones:
(1) Trustees or employed executives are successively or simul-
taneously trustees and executives of several foundations.
(2) Trustees or executives serve successively or simultaneously as
officers of other tax exempt organizations receiving grants and/or
retailing the wholesale grants from their own foundations.
(3) Trustees or executives accept appointments to positions of
power in control of education and/or charity so as to multiply their
influence beyond the budgetary powers of their foundation resources.
(4) Foundations jointly underwrite major projects, thus arriving at
a condition of coordination restraining competition.
(5) Foundations jointly create and support centralized coordinat-
ing agencies that operate as instruments of control by claiming supreme
authority in a field of education, science, the arts, etc. without any
resemblance of democratic representation of the professionals in the
management of these agencies.
(6) Kather than distribute money without strings attached, founda-
tions favor projects of their own and supply the recipient institutions
not only with the program, but also with the staff and the detailed
operations budget so that the project is actually under control of the
foundation, while professionally benefiting from the prestige of the
recipient institution. The choice of professors often is one by the
foundation and not one by the university. Foundation employees
frequently switch from work in the foundation, or in the councils
supported by the foundation, to work on sponsored projects and in
professional organizations supported by their funds. They become
most influential in the professional organizations, are elected to presi-
dencies and generally rule the research industry.
One example of interlocking directorates, officers and staff members,
out of many which could be given, is the case of The Rand Corpora-
tion, a corporation in the nature of a foundation. It plays a very
important part in the world of research for the government and would
bear careful study in connection with the extent of interlocked foun-
dation influence on government projects. Among the trustees of
The Rand Corporation are the following, shown with their foundation
connections:
Charles Dollard Carnegie Corporation
L. A. Dubridg<5 Carnegie Endowment
National Science Foundation
_H. Rowan Gaither, Jr.___ Ford Foundation —
Philip E. Mosely Ford Foundation
Rockefeller Foundation
Harvey S. Mudd Mudd Foundation
Santa Anita Foundation
American Heritage Foundation
Frederick F. Stephan Rockefeller Foundation
Clyde Williams Batelle Memorial Institute
Hans Speier... (Ford) Behavioral Science Foundation
This example is particularly interesting because the Chairman of
The Rand Corporation is also the President of The Ford Foundation,
which granted it one million dollars in 1952. The filed statement of
The Ford Foundation states that the research being conducted under
its grant is entirely "unclassified." It does not explain, however,
why the president of a foundation should be the Chairman of a semi-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 47
governmental research organization dealing not only with unclassi-
fied material but also with, we understand, highly secret material.
Apart from the interlocking of directorates, but parallel to it, we
observe a high concentration of foundation favors on a limited number
of recipient organizations. It is common knowledge that there are
favored universities and favored individuals. The practice is de-
fended on the ground that these are the most qualified institutions and
individuals. This contention is subject to reasonable doubt. And if
it were true, it is possible that the foundations have contributed to
make it so. It is hard to believe it would not be better for the country
if more institutions and more individuals were encouraged and trained
in research.
The direction of foundation policies and operations by a group of
persons influencing the actions of more than one tax exempt organiza-
tion is per se of greatest concern, for it indicates the existence of the
power to control, even if the actual control and the detailed manner in
which it restrains cultural competition were not always provable. A
condition of control calls for protection against its abuse. Founda-
tions, becoming more numerous every day, may some day control our
whole intellectual and cultural life — and with it the future of this
country. The impact of this interlock, this intellectual cartel, has
already been felt deeply in education and in the political scene.
Ihe Social Research Council.
As an example of the association of individual foundations with
one of the intermediary or executive foundations, let us take The
Social Science Research Council. -It has been supported by contribu-
tions from: The Laura Spellman Rockefeller Memorial, The Russell
Sage Foundation, The Carnegie Corporation, John D. Rockefeller, Jr.,
The Commonwealth Fund, The Julius Rosenwald Fund, Revell Mc-
Callum, The Carnegie Foundation jor the Advancement of Teaching,
1»he Maurice and, Laura Folk Foundation, The General Education Board
(Rockefeller), the Spellman Fund, Trustees of W. E. bpjohn Unem-
ployment Trustee Corporation, The Committee of Trustees on Experi-
mental Programs, The Grant Foundation, The Scripps Foundation for
Research in Population Problems, The American Philosophical Society,
Carnegie Corporation of New York, The John and Mary R. Markle
Foundation, The Ford Foundation, The Twentieth Century Fund, the
U. S. Bureau of the Census, The East European Fund, and The Rock-
efeller Brothers Fund.
The Social Science Research Council is now probably the greatest
power in the social science research field. That this organisation is
closely interlocked in an important network is affirmatively asserted by
its annual report of 1929-30 as follows:
"With our sister councils, the National Research Council, 11 the American Council
of Learned Societies, and the American Council on Education, cooperation remains
good and becomes increasingly close and significant. There are interlocking
members and much personal contact of the respective staffs." [Emphasis ours.]
Professor Colgrove testified to the tendency of the "clearing house"
organizations to move their offices to Washington and to cause their
constituent societies to make the same move. This geographical con-
11 Active in the natural sciences.
48 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
centration is in the interestsjof efficiency, but is also a way of effecting
a greater concentration. He stated that:
* * * There is more day-to-day conversation and consultation between the
officers of the professional societies and the officers of the operating societies, like
the American Council of Learned Societies, and the officers of the foundations.
I think that the officers of the professional societies are extremely good listeners
and follow pretty carefully the advice that is given them by the foundation officers.
(Hearings, p. 570.)
He also testified that there has been a conscious concentration of
research direction, mainly through the "clearing house" organiza-
tions. (Hearings, pp. 570, 571.)
In Vol. 1, No. 3 of the 1947 Items, a publication of The Social Science
Research Council, Donald Young and Paul Webbink present the role
of the SSRC in improving research. Their recitation includes this
statement:
"The particular role of the Council, however, is that of a central agency to promote
the unity of effort in attacking social problems which is required to assure maximum
returns from the work of a multitude of individual social scientists and of inde-
pendent private and public institutions." [Emphasis ours.]
While the article says that the Council does not "attempt to operate
as a coordinating agency in any compulsive sense", its very availa-
bility, well-supported by major foundations, seems to have given it a
control over social science research which is, in its effective use, un-
doubtedly compulsive.
To deny that the SSRC is an element in a concentration of power
in the social sciences is difficult in the face of this statement of The Ford
Foundation, quoted by Pendleton Herring in Vol. 4, Number 3 (Sep-
tember, 1950) of the SSRC Items:
"The Social Science Research Council has been included in this
program because it is the instrumentality most used by individual schol-
ars, universities and research organizations for interchange of information,
planning and other cooperative functions in the fields described * * *
Its grant will be used not so much for the support of independent re-
search projects but rather for any additions to staff or improvements
in facilities which would enhance the service it performs for other
organizations and scholars." [Emphasis ours.]
The SSRC may be visualized as the center of a net-work of relations
reaching into every layer of social activities related to the social
sciences. If we draw a graphic "sociogram", we will see the pattern
of its operations:
Constituent societies:
Represented at various other nationwide "councils."
Financial support:
By closely cooperating foundations, which themselves inter-
lock through directorates.
Supported scholarly activity:
Concentration on graduates of a few major institutions, which
also supply most of the directors of the Council, who since
a change of by-laws are chosen by the Council board, not
any longer freely elected by constituent associations.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 49
Influence of government spending for research:
SSRC or similar foundations-supported groups decisively in-
fluence National Science Foundation policy and Defense
Department spending on research via its officers serving
as consultants and board members.
The peculiar nature and construction of The Social Science Research
Council is worthy of examination. It is a self-perpetuating organiza-
tion, sharing this characteristic with foundations in general. It has,
however, some unique features. It purports more or less, to represent
seven of the social science disciplines through their professional
societies. Yet these societies are not, in any sense, members of the
SSRC. They elect delegates to the Board of the SSRC, but are
permitted to elect only from panels of candidates nominated by the
SSRC itself. Thus the SSRC Board is able to, and does, control its
own character. This process, rather undemocratic to say the least,
further tends toward the totalitarian by the fact that the "members"
of the SSRC are its former directors.
Some social scientists suspect that this strange system of election
of directors has been used in order to maintain a board of a character
or bent satisfactory to those in control. The fact remains, whether
the control has been used unhappily or not, that it is essentially
undemocratic and unrepresentative of the prof essions which it assumes
to represent, and could very easily be used for power purposes.
Some of the results of close cooperation of the foundations support-
ing the Council and of Council officers and chosen directors may be
illustrated by the following examples:
a.) The Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences, published in 1935
in fifteen volumes, contains many contributions of Council offi-
cers. This publication (to be discussed in more detail later),
though not sponsored by the Council, was endorsed by the iden-
tical associations which constitute the Council and carries an
imprint similar to the listing of constituent associations on present
Council stationery.
b.) We find the names of Council directors and officers on lists
of The Rand Corporation, of The Ford Behavioral Science^ Fund,
in government advisory groups, and wherever social scientists
congregate in leading positions. We find that some of these
SSRC officers have advanced into positions controlling the sources
of funds (e. g., Messrs. Young and Cotrell now at Russell Sage),
and since the start of foundation support for the Council in the
early twenties we find foundation officers participating as Council
members in running Council affairs. (Messrs. Ruml, Herring,
etc.)
The Council stationery gives the misleading impression that it is a
representation of its constituent membership. In reality, since the
change in its by-laws, the "constituent" societies have served mainly
as the prestige-lending background of the Council, creating the im-
pression that the Council is a democratically constituted mouthpiece
and representation of all social scientists in America.
Even if the Council were democratically elected and not operating
by continuing the control through a core group, it would not represent
ail or even most American social scientists. We do not know whether
50 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
the seven "constituent" associations of the Council can be considered
democratically ruled, but in response to our inquiries the seven
associations gave us their membership figures. From these it became
quite clear that they are only a part, even if in some instances a sub-
stantial part, of the total. Whatever the composition may be, the
SSRC has in the past gained leadership, among other reasons, because
it successfully created the impression of representing the majority of
all social scientists in America.
The power of the SSRC seems to be used to effect control of the
field of social sciences. The concept oj an efficient central clearing house,
available to foundations to assist them in spending their funds is attrac-
tive on its face. But this type of delegation by foundations, resulting in
the concentration of enormous power into a few executive hands, not
only violates the essential quality of foundation-trustees' -fiduciary respon-
sibility but gives to the individuals controlling the delegated mechanism,
in the interests of efficiency, a power which can be dangerous by reason of
that very fact.
There is evidence that professorial appointments all over the United
States are influenced by SSRC blessing; With great foundation
support at its command, it has the power to reach in various directions
to exercise influence and, often, control. The 1933-34 Report of the
National Planning Board (prepared, incidentally by a committee of
the SSRC) stated:
"The Council (the SSRC) has been concerned chiefly with the determination of
the groups and persons with whom special types of research should be placed."
To have this function (gained by foundation support) gives it a power
the ultimate results of which can be far-reaching.
It would be interesting in any continued investigation to study the
part played by The Social Science Research Council and the societies
associated with it in controlling book reviews and the literary pro-
duction of social scientists. In the American academic world scholars
are largely rated by their publications, and it is often on a quantita-
tive as well as a qualitative basis. Consequently, the opportunities
for securing publication of scientific papers can have much to do
with the academic career of a social scientist. Similarly, the type of
reviews given to such books as he may write can obviously have a
bearing upon his future and his standing.
Professor Rowe (Hearings, p. 549), speaking of the influence of
foundations in educational institutions, said:
«* * * you have to realize * * * that advancement and promotion and survival
in the academic field depend upon research and the results and the publication
thereof. Here you have, you see, outside organizations influencing the course of
the careers of personnel in universities through their control of funds which can
liberate these people from teaching duties, for example, and making it possible for
them to publish more than their competitors."
Thus the control over a scientific journal permits any group in
power to favor or disfavor certain scholars and to impress its
concepts and philosophy on a generation of school teachers, textbook
authors, writers and others. A careful study should be made to as-
certain whether the professional journals in the social sciences have
been truly objective in their editorial and reviewing approach.
It can be contended that there are other powerful centers of social
studies in the United States in competition with SSRC: the Ford
Behavioral Science Fund, The Twentieth Century Fund, The American
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 51
Academy of Political and Social Sciences and others; but with almost
all of them there exist personal and organizational ties and cross con-
nections via supporting foundations. Moreover, there is a strange
similarity of approach among such groups ; they all seem to fall into the
same "liberal" economic and social points of view. Is this accident
or coincidence? It suggests itself to us (and it is a matter requiring
far more investigation) that the concentration of power to which we
refer has been consciously used to foster and develop this attitude.
Charles Dollard (President of The Carnegie Corporation of New
York) contributed an article, in Items, The Social Science Research
Council Publication, The Strategy jor Advancing the Social Sciences,
in which he refers to the errors of election polls and to the statistical
mistakes of Kinsey, and says:
"The third strategic move which I would suggest is that social science initiate a
more rigorous sytem of internal policing." (Page 19.) [Emphasis ours.]
We ourselves are extremely dubious of the scientific character of
the methods used by Dr. Kinsey, as we shall discuss later. We
cannot understand why his work should have -been supported by
The Rockefeller Foundation or any other foundation. But we cheer-
fully grant to Dr. Kinsey the right, as an individual working with
other than public funds, to make any mistakes he wishes and to
select any methods or objectives he chooses. The concept of "polic-
ing" is rather terrifying. Did Mr. Dollard mean to say that The
Social Science Research Council and other "clearing house" organi-
zations should do the policing? That any such organization should
even entertain a proposal to create uniformity — even in the interests
of efficiency and better method — or to press grantees, whether indi-
vidual or institutional, into common moulds in any way, would be
deeply regrettable. Few could risk criticizing, few academicians at
least. There would emerge what has been called a "Gresham's
Law in the field of professorships in the social sciences."
We could not more strongly support the statement made by Presi-
dent Grayson Kirk of Columbia University in an address on May 31,
1954, in which he said:
"We must maintain the greatest possible opportunities for the free clash of
opinions on all subjects, trusting to the innate good judgment of men and women
to reach decisions that are beneficial to society."
The very fact that a leading foundation executive, in an America
traditionally opposing restrictions of free speech and thought, can
call for a system of internal policing indicates the chasm between a
concept of scholarly orthodoxy and the real freedom of inquiry to
which Dr. Kirk referred.
The various organizations which compose the center of the concen-
tration of power, the "clearing house" organizations, can all clearly
point to admirable and valuable work which they have done. It would
be difficult, indeed, to find a foundation which is wholly bad, and the
"clearing nouses" to which we refer have a great deal to their credit.
What concerns us at the moment is that a power exists, concentrated
in a comparatively small number of hands, a power which, though it
has been used often for much good, can be used for evil. The existence
of such a power, dealing with public trust funds, to us seems to involve at
least a potential danger or risk, however benevolently to date its relative
despotism may have acted.
52 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The American Council on Education.
Another of the "clearing houses" is The American Council on
Education, It is a council of national education associations, financed
by membership dues and government contracts, and by heavy con-
tributions from major foundations and comparable organizations, such
as The General Education Board (Rockefeller), The Carnegie Corpora-
tion of New York, The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace,
The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, The
Rockefeller Foundation, The Ford Fund for Adult Education, The
Alfred P. Sloan Fund, The Payne Fund, B'nai Brith, The National
Conference of Christians and Jews, The Edward W. Hazen Foundation,
The Grant Foundation, The Ellis L. Phillips Foundation, and others.
A pamphlet issued by The American Council on Education in July
1953 frankly calls this organization a "clearing house."
"More specifically, the Council has been a clearinghouse for the exchange of
information and opinion; it has conducted many scientific inquiries and investi-
gations into specific educational problems and has sought to enlist appropriate
agencies for the solution of such problems; it has stimulated experimental activities
by institutions and groups of institutions; it has kept in constant touch with
pending legislation affecting educational matters; it has pioneered in methodology
that has become standard practice on a national basis—* * *; it has acted as
liaison agency between the educational institutions of the country and the federal
government and has undertaken many significant projects at the request of the
Army, Navy and State Departments and other governmental agencies;
an( i * * * jt has made available to educators and the general public widely used
handbooks, informational reports, and many volumes of critical analysis of social
and educational problems."
The Council maintains imposing offices in Washington, D. C,
which may not be without significance as, among its many committees, .
some are concerned with tax, social security and other legislation as
it affects institutions of higher learning. Its committee most inter-
esting to us is that on Institutional Research Policy. A Brief
Statement of the History and Activities of the American Council on
Education, dated July 1953 describes the functions of the Research
Policy Committee as follows:
_ "Established 1952 to study the interrelationships of sponsored research from the
viewpoints of federal agencies, industries, and foundations sponsoring such research,
and the effect on institutions doing the research. This latter angle involves the dis-
tribution of grants among institutions and the concentration of research in fields at
the expense of other fields and the distortion of the institutional picture as a whole.
The magnitude of the problem is shown by the fact that 20 or more federal agencies
are currently subsidizing more than $150,000,000 worth of research a year; in-
dustrial and business concerns and private foundations also sponsor research.
The numerous 'special interest' involved may approach the same problems in
different ways and come up with different solutions. It is the aim of this Council
committee — composed of college presidents, vice-presidents for research, business
officers, and faculty members directly engaged in sponsored research projects —
to attempt to formulate a policy for the national level based on cooperative relation-
ships." [Emphasis ours.]
Note that, like The Social Science Research Council, this Council is
an interrelating agency, coordinating the work of other research
organizations and researchers, establishing policy and acting as a
distributing agent for granting-foundations along planned and inte-
grated lines. That may well create efficiency, but is it solely efficiency
we want in research in the social sciences? As Professor Rowe and
others have said: it would seem far better to lose efficiency and give
individuals of quality the opportunity to go in their own respective
directions unhampered by any group control, direction or pressure.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 53
However laudable much or most of its work may have been, the
Council has certainly been one of the media through which founda-
tion funds have been used to effect considerable control or influence
over education in the United States. Some may argue that this
control or influence has been wholly good — were this so, we would
still believe that the power of great foundations to affect educational
policies and practices is one which should concern the public. By
the same token, we believe that "clearing house" organizations, while
they may serve a purpose in the direction of efficiency, are of ques-
tionable desirability when interlocked financially or by personnel
with these foundations. The aggregate power involved in such a con-
centration gives us concern.
Other Interlocks and Further Dangers.
Opposite this page there appears a reproduction of a chart intro-
duced by the Assistant Director of Research, showing the Inter-
relationships Between Foundations, Education and Government. As
Mr. McNiece explained:
"The relationships between and among these organized intellectual groups
are far more complex than is indicated on the chart. Some of these organizations
have many constituent member groups. The American Council of Learned
Societies has twenty-four constituent societies, the Social Science Research Council,
seven, the American Council on Education seventy-nine constituent members,
64 associate members, and 954 institutional members. In numbers and inter-
locking combinations they are too numerous and complex to picture on this
chart." (Record, p. 1018.)
There are, moreover, other organizations in some number not noted
at all on the chart which fulfill some intermediary function in asso-
cation with foundations and other organizations which are indicated.
There is, in addition, a Conference Board of Associated Research
Councils, composed of The American Council of Learned Societies,
The American Council on Education, The National Research Council
and The Social Science Research Council, organized "to facilitate
action on matters of common concern." It "continued earlier informal
consultations of the executives of the Councils. Its functions are
limited to administration of joint activities authorized by the Councils
and consideration of mutual interests." (From the 1943-45 Annual
Report of the SSRC, page 16.)
The central organizations, such as The Social Science Research
Council,
"may be considered as 'clearing houses' or perhaps as 'wholesalers' of money
received from foundations inasmuch as they are frequently the recipients of rela-
tively large grants which they often distribute in subdivided amounts to member
groups and individuals." (Record, p. 1019.)
Nor does the chart show all the functions of government in which
foundations operate or to which they contribute.
"The lines connecting the various rectangles on the chart symbolize the paths
followed in the flow or interchange of money, men and ideas * * *."
But this process, highly concentrated through the intricate inter-
relationships, is both complex and ominous. A high concentration
of power is always dangerous to society. As we have said, it can be
constructed or come into being for wholly benign purposes, but it
can readily be used by those whose objectives are against the public
interest.
54 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The Cox Committee record shows that a conscious plan by the
Communists was inaugurated to infiltrate the foundations for the
purpose of appropriating their funds to Communist uses. We know
from the evidence that the Communists succeeded in the case of
seven foundations: The Marshall Field Foundation; The Garland
Fund; The John Simon Guggenheim Foundation; The Heckscher Foun-
dation; The Robert Marshall Foundation; The Rosenwald Fund; and
The Phelps Stokes Fund; and we are aware of the tragic result to our
nation and to the world of communist infiltration into The Institute
for Pacific Relations. We know also that (then undisclosed) Com-
munists and their fellow-travellers had been able to secure grants
from other foundations, including Carnegie and Rockefeller. We know,
further, what the Cox Committee report referred to as "the ugly
unalterable fact that Alger Hiss became the President of The Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace." We do not know the full extent
to which there has been penetration or use of foundations and their
resources. It is too much to assume that Communist success was
limited to the exposed instances. Indeed, where foundations are in-
volved in so high a concentration of power as the chart discloses, we
may assume that some advantage may have been taken by Com-
munists to use this interlock, directly or indirectly, for malign pur-
poses.
This Committee is not in a position to assess the extent of such use
but warns against the inherent danger that a concentration of power
constitutes a weapon at hand for such as may wish to suborn it for evil
designs. The number of grants made to Communist agents or agen-
cies is relatively tiny in comparison with the aggregate grants by
foundations. But this numerical comparison casts no light on the
degree of damage which has been done. One grant of comparatively
small amount may do frightening damage. Professor Rowe testified
(Hearings, p. 534, 535) to the effect that the test of damage is qualitative
and not quantitative. Moreover, the Communists do not always work
directly. In their desire to undermine our society they operate more
frequently than not by indirection, supporting causes which merely
tend to the left but cannot be identified as actually Communist.
The main concern of this Committee is not with Communism. We
agree with Professor Rowe in his estimate that the greater danger lies in
the undermining effect of collectivist or socialist movements. Externally,
Communism is the greater danger; internally, socialism offers far greater
menace.
In either event, whether the penetration is by outright Communists
or by some other variety of socialists or collectivists, the danger of
its occurrence is far greater when there exists a complex of interrelated
and interlocked organizations. There are more opportunities for
shifting both personnel and grants. There is much less control through
supervision by the trustees of the foundations which supply the basic
funds used by the intermediaries. After they have poured these funds
into the managerial hands of others, the detailed distribution is
beyond their control. Perhaps the Rockefeller Foundation trustees
might well have recognized a Communist penetration in their own
foundation had it existed to the extent it did in the Institute of
Pacific Relations. They did not recognize it in this intermediary to
which they granted millions. The difficulty of watching over the
disbursements of an intermediary is not the only danger in the current
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 55
system. Foundation trustees are inclined to shrug off responsibility
on the unsound theory that, having selected a recipient organization,
the granting foundation bears no responsibility for what that inter-
mediary does. The menace of extreme leftist penetration of the
foundation world is thus multiplied in seriousness by the existing
system of interlock and the use of intermediary organizations.
Aside from this direct menace, the dangers of so close an interlock,
so high a degree of concentration of power in intellectual fields, tends
to violate an essential of the American system, competition. Some
unfriendly newspapers have accused this Committee of trying to establish
"thought control" in the foundation world, or to act as a "censor 7 ', or to
wish to promote "conformity". The exact opposite is the case. This
Committee is highly critical of the system of concentration under discussion
for the very reason that it promotes conformity, acts in effect as a censor of
ideas and projects, and produces a tendency toward uniformity of ideas.
In this area of discussion it becomes most important to realize that
the United States Government now expends annually on research in
the social sciences far more than all the foundations put together.
This might be a factor offsetting the concentration of power which
the foundations and their supported creatures constitute, were it not
for the fact that government-financed research in the social sciences is
virtually under the direction of the very same persons and organiza-
'tions who dominate the foundation concentration of power. Thus,
not only are great parts of the vast public funds which the foundations
represent used in largely coordinated fashion by the concentration,
but even larger sums of public money directly provided by govern-
ment are, to all practical purposes, employed by the same groups.
This situation is quite distasteful. Americans do not cherish the
concept that society should be directed by a clique. Though it may
indeed be elite, we do not wish it to direct us. Moreover, there is
considerable doubt that the presumed elite is indeed so. One of the
most important of the "clearing-houses", The American Council of
Learned Societies, an intrinsic part of the concentration of power,
presumes to represent the elite in the disciplines. To this organization,
foundations annually grant large sums of public money. Through it a
great amount of research in the social sciences is done or directed.
Yet its executive secretary for a long period has been Mortimer
Graves. In the Cox Committee Record at page 544, Mr. Keele,
its Counsel, read from a long list of Communist-front organizations
of which Mr. Graves was a member, and Mr. Keele did not exhaust
the list.
We do not accuse Mr. Graves of being a Communist. But it
amazes us that one with so evident a lack of political and social
discernment, with such apparent lack of objectivity, should be re-
tained as a directing officer in what purports to be the representative
organization for all the social sciences and humanities. Mr. Graves-
still holds his position, though the Cox Committee hearings brought
out his extensive record of Communist-front affiliations. This leads
us to conclude one of two things ; either his personal power is astound-
ing or the extreme political slant of an executive is deemed of no
moment by that tax-exempt agency of the foundations.
Under date of August 23, 1954, General Counsel to this Committee
addressed a letter to Mr. Graves, a copy of which is attached to
56 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
this report as an appendix. 12 A reply was received stating that Mr.
Graves was abroad and would not return until early in September.
A reply was finally received from Mr. Graves in November. In the
letter addressed to him, fifteen detailed questions were asked concern-
ing his reported Communist-front affiliations, 13 his sponsorship of
known extreme leftists, recommendations made by him (on behalf
of The Council of Learned Societies) to government agencies (the lists
reputedly containing some Communists or fellow-travellers), and con-
cerning other matters important to this investigation.
Mr. Graves' reply (Hearings, page — ) gave the Committee certain
responsive material but failed to disclose the recommendations made
by him to government agencies. The Committee cannot understand
his failure to do so unless it was by intention. Mr. Graves' reply
seeks to explain away his Communist-front associations, but the aggre-
gate number of those with which he has been charged by other inves-
tigations raises a grave question as to his capacity or willingness to
act without bias as a foundation executive.
Mr. Graves is one of the leading characters in the dramatis personae
of the foundation world, a major executive of a powerful intermediary
organization which is an intrinsic part of the foundation-supported
concentration of power, a key figure in academic circles, an adviser to
government. The foundation world continues to accept him as one
of its leading lights.
So, we ask again, are these officers and directors of the foundations
and clearing houses and those whom they favor with their benefac-
tions "elite?" The specialists in the social science fields are obviously
better informed in their specialties than is the general public. This
does not, however, establish that their judgment regarding the appli-
cation of their knowledge is sound. We have had plenty of examples
of brilliance in a specialty, accompanied by a social judgment so
deficient as to be tragic. No one can doubt the genius of Klaus
Fuchs, for example, nor his sincerity; neither offered him any basis
for sound social judgments.
There is the further danger that an elite group tends to perpetuate
itself, both as to personnel and as to opinion and direction. It is only
through competition in the intellectual fields, just as in business, that
progress can safely be accomplished. Anything which tends to pre-
vent or restrict competition seems to this Committee frought with
frightening danger to our society.
Public opinion is greatly determined, in the long run, by the influence
of intellectuals. Therefore, it seems essential to this Committee that
intellectual life _ be as unhampered and freely competitive as possible.
Any concentration of intellectual effort, any mechanism tending to con-
formity, is essentially undesirable, even if, for the moment,, directed solely
to desirable ends. A political dictatorship may be benevolent, but we
want none of it. Similarly, an intellectual-group-dictatorship may
be benevolent, but we want none of it.
"We urge a detailed reading of the testimony of Mr. McNiece,
beginning at page 465 of the Hearings, in which he explains
the extent and working of the interlocking concentration of power
which has been financed by foundations and has taken over much of
government function in the social science areas. "We are dealing here
12 See p. — .
» See p. — for list of affiliations.
tl
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 57
tvith vast sums of money, the impact of which can be and has been
terrific. Mr. McNiece noted that six foundations alone have made
grants aggregating over $60,000,000 to some of the intermediate or
clearing-house organizations. Significant also, incidentally, were
aggregate grants of over $4,000,000 to The London School of Economics,
at a time when it was a fountain-head of Fabian socialism. (Hearings,
p. 475.)
Politics — Power Flow — Planning.
Mr. McNiece described a "central or main stream of influence"
running from the foundations and their centralized agencies into
government. (Hearings, p. 601, et seq.) There was considerable
evidence to show that the government has come to rely upon the
"clearing houses" for lists of men who can assist as specialists in the
social sciences." On its face this practice seems desirable enough,
but closer inspection discloses severe dangers. As Mr. Reece, the
Chairman of the Committee, remarked:
The Chairman. We have in the United States the colleges and universities
which, while large in number, are very accessible to be advised about the require-
ments of Government. While there is nothing wrong in asking one of the societies
to furnish a list of names, as I see it, do we not know from practical experience
that when a council such as the Council of Learned Societies is put in the posi-
tion of furnishing a list of scholars to advise the Government, that list will be
pretty much the recommendation of the man who happens to be administrative
officer of the council that makes up and supplies the list. Insofar as that is the
case, that puts in the hands of one man a tremendous influence. If he happens
to be a man that has certain inclinations, he is in a position to give very wide
effect in those inclinations, if he is put in a position where he furnishes the list
of the experts the Government calls into the service as advisers. That is the
angle that I see that becomes, to my mind, Mr. Hays, very important.
It is the concentration not only in one organization, but ultimately largely in
the hands of one man. (Hearings, pp. 602, 603.)
We discuss elsewhere the power which executives of foundations
and "clearing houses" exercise. Professor Colgrove gave important
testimony in this area. He said that academicians are reluctant to
criticize foundations. He testified to the "fawning" over those who
distribute foundation funds, giving as an example the attitude of
professional associates toward Professor Merriam, long a power in
the social-science-foundation world. Professor Merriam himself had
said:
"Money is power, and for the last few years I have been dealing with more
power than any professor should ever have in his hands." (Hearings, p. 565.)
In the last analysis it is frequently individuals, or small groups of
individuals who perform the act of recommendation and virtual ap-
pointment of "scientific" personnel to the government. The political
slant of these individuals may thus seriously affect the character of
government operations. We have seen many Communists and
fellow-travellers recommended by foundation executives for gov-
ernment posts. In the case of the recommendations to the government
made by the Institute of Pacific Relations and the American Council of
Learned Societies for experts to be used by our occupation forces in Ger-
many and Japan, the lists were heavily salted with Communists and their
supporters. (Hearings, pp. 559, 560.)
The Chairman seriously questioned the process of the government
relying on the existing mechanism for making social-science appoint-
05647—54— — 5
58 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
ments. He said that the administrative officer of an operating society
who made such recommendations
"is a man that has no public responsibility, not like the President or a cabinet
officer, whom we know who do have public responsibility. Nor like the President
of a college who is identified in the public mind, and to a very large degree is held
responsible not only by the board of trustees, but particularly by the alumni
of the institution, and a very wide segment of the public, which is quite different
from some man that is ensconced in the office of a learned society that is in a
building downtown here. At least I see a very wide difference. In so far as there
is a disposition to concentrate into one or a few places— it probably should not be
described as authority to recommend— the privilege of recommending people for
government consultants. I would have quite a serious question in mv mind
about it." (Record, p. 1342.)
In reply to Counsel's question whether he did not think foundations
might better turn to the universities and colleges for research instead
of to intermediate organizations, Professor Rowe testified:
Dr. Rowe. Yes, sir. There has, of course, been a mixed method on the part
of IPR. You get a very interesting carrying down the line of the funds and the
projects. Foundations will give funds to organizations like IPR. Some of this
money for research purposes will be directly handled by the IPR. Young people,
scholars, will be brought into the organization to do specific jobs for the organiza-
tion. However, they will also go to universities and ask universities as they did
once in our case to provide, so to speak, hospitality for one of the men that they
want to have perform a research function under guidance and direction, subsidized
by IPR, which money came from Rockefeller Foundation in this case. Then they will
do other things. For instance, the IPR organization will give money to the univer-
sity personnel themselves directly for either research or publication purposes. So
there are all kinds of ways and manners of doing this. I would submit that in
much of this. procedure the choice of personnel, the passing on their qualifications,
the framing of projects, and the guidance of the researchers in the process of carry-
ing out projects, is not adequately provided for by these organizations, such as
the Institute of Pacific Relations was and still is today.
In the case of universities, where appointments are made, the universities'
faculties are people of long standing, they may be good, bad, or indifferent, but
the organization and the procedures of appointment and approval thereof are
sufficiently complex and involve sufficient safeguards to cut the errors down con-
siderably below the errors that are possible and probable without these forms of.
supervision and sanction.
It seems to me that the foundations in giving funds to organizations such as the
Institute of Pacific Relations are in general on rather weaker ground than if they
give funds to established organizations for research purposes in which the criteria
for the appointment of people, for their promotions^ for their advancements and
things of that kind have been worked out over a long period of time.
The informality of the arrangements in the IPR was one of the things that
I have always wondered at. To make it possible for so few people to have so
much power and influence in determining who got funds for what purpose and
determining what kind of projects they worked on and how these projects were
supervised seemed to me to be very lax. Of course, toward the end the money
that IPR got, was heavily given to publications. They would subsidize the
publication of works that were produced by research workers in universities and
other such organizations, as well as their own people. This seemed to me to be
getting away a little bit from the evils of the previous system in which they were
directly involved in the research function. But it still put a tremendous lot of
power in the hands of a very few people, since they went all over the United
States, looking over the products of research in the far eastern field, and deciding
which of these they would subsidize and which they would not.
This is not to say for a moment that the foundations have not given funds
diredtly to universities. Of course they have. I suppose they have given far
more funds for research purposes directly to universities than to organizations
such as the IPR. But it seems to me, and you can, of course, consider the source
here — I am a member of a university community — it seems to me logical to say
that in those communities you get better safeguards as to quality and personnel
than you can get in any such organization as the Institute of the Pacific Relations,
set up to a heavy extent for research purposes outside of academic communities.
(Hearings, pp. 544, 545.)
TAX-EXEMPT ; FOUNDATIONS 59
Later the following colloquy took place:
Mr. Wormser. * * * I would like to get on another subject, which one of
your previous remarks, introduced. We were discussing the undesirability per-
haps of using intermediate organizations like IPR. Would your comments apply
also, and perhaps you might discuss this general area, to what we have referred
to at times as clearing house organizations? We have talked about a certain
interlocking or close relationship between the foundations and intermediate
organizations, like The Social Science Research Council, and The American Council
of Learned Societies. I would like you to comment on that, Professor, as well as
whether you think the resulting concentration of power through this interlock
is a desirable thing or not.
Dr. Rowe. I suppose the proof of it is in what comes out of it. My feeling is
that here is another very clear evidence of the difficulty for the foundations in
making policy regarding the expenditure of their funds. The Social Science Re-
search Council handles social science matters. They will give a large lump sum of
money to these people. Then The Social Science Research Council has to set up
the operations of screening of applications, screening of candidates, supervision of
operations and evaluation of results and all that. This costs the foundations some-
thing, because part of the money they put in has to go for these administrative
purposes. But the foundation doesn't want to do it itself. The Social Science
Research Council being supposedly a specialized agency simply, it seems to me,
relieves the foundation of this to the extent that the foundation gives large sums
of money to The Social Science Research Council.
What the Council does is the responsibility of the foundation, it seems to me,
to a very great extent. There is no use trying to blink at that fact in any way,
shape, or form. I suppose there is no ideal solution to the problem of the applica-
tion of expertness to the supervision of the expenditure of money by big founda-
tions. This is why some foundations go in for rather narrow kinds of specializa-
tion. They will do one kind of thing and not another. The General Education
Board is, an example of what I am talking about, because their work has been
rather narrowly oriented, certainly during the last decade or two. But the big
foundations in general spread themselves over the landscape.
The Ford Foundation is the latest and greatest. The Ford Foundation is even
going in for general public education, although I understand this emphasis is
decreasing some in the last year or two. But when they first began they were
very much interested in general adult education through all kinds of media, radio;
conferences, great book seminars all over the country. We had 2 or 3 of them in
our immediate area in Connecticut, all financed by The Ford Foundation.
The job of running an extension course for universities is a big job. When you
start doing this all over the United States, I should think it would be almost im-
possible to supervise it adequately. If I am right about the tendency in recent
years, it might be that this is a conclusion they have reached on the matter, if
they are cutting down. I would not know what has guided their policy along
this line.
There is inevitably going to be this problem, that as knowledge and as research
become more specialized and more technical, and the problem of deciding what
you want to do reseafchwise becomes more difficult, the foundations that have
big money to spend are just up against a tremendous policy; problem. How do
they operate, and how ean they possibly, guarantee the maximum effectiveness
and efficiency in their operations in the light of the objectives which they profess
and which underlie their whole activity?
Mr. Wormser. Does it impress you as socially desirable that the large founda-
tions should concentrate a certain large part of their operations in the social
sciences in one group or association of groups,, like The Social Science Research
Council, The American Council of Learned, Societies, and others?
Dr. Rowe. I suppose the theory behind this is that these organizations, like
The Social Science Research Council, are truly representative of social science all
over the United States. I suppose that is the only possible theoretical justifica^
tion for this kind of policy. I don't know. . ,
Mr. Wormser. The question we have, Professor, in that connection is whether
that type of concentration, even though it might be efficient mechanically, is de-
sirable insofar as it militates against the competitive factor, which is sort of in-
trinsic in our society. ■ . .
Dr. Rowe. There is no question but what an organization like The Social
Science Research Council has a tremendous amount of power. This power which
it exerts, it exerts very heavily on educational institutions and their personnel*
60 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
because when you get down to it, who is it that does research in social science?
It is educational institutions, because they have the faculties in the various fields,
like political science, economics, anthropology, sociology, geography and so on.
That is 'where the people are. To understand the importance of this function,
all you have to realize is that advancement and promotion and survival in the
academic field depend upon research and the results and the publication thereof.
Here you have, you see, outside organizations influencing the course of the careers
of personnel in universities through their control of funds which can liberate these
people from teaching duties, for example, and making it possible for them to pub-
lish more than their competitors.
This, therefore, means that there is a tremendous responsibility here to
apportion their awards in a just way — in such a way as takes into account the
differences of approach and the differences of opinion in these fields; the theoretical
differences from one school to another. The possibility exists that at all times in
any of these organizations that the people in charge thereof become convinced that
there is one way to do a job in the social science field, and that only this way will get
their support.
If and when that time comes- — / don't know whether it is here or ever will come —
then you will have a combination in restraint of trade within the limits of public
acceptability that may have very deleterious effects upon our intellectual community.
[Emphasis ours.] (Hearings, pp. 548, 549, 550.)
Let us see whether in the field of social science research such a
movement "in restraint of trade" has not, in effect, come about.
VIII. The Foundations and Research in the Social Sciences
The Predominance of Empiricism.
There has been frequent and severe criticism of foundations on the
ground that, in their support of research in the social sciences in
association with the concentration of power described in the previous
chapter, they have promoted an excess of empirical research.
The normal scientific process employs both theoretical and em-
pirical research. The theoretical is deductive reasoning from accepted
premises. The empirical is inductive reasoning from observed data.
The usual process is to set up a hypothesis, derived from some form
of reasoning, or selected by accident or arbitrarily. This hypothesis is
then generally tested by various means, including both deductive
and inductive approaches. Empirical research can produce material
of usefulness by way of the collection of data; but it is rare indeed
when such research, without relation to or counter-check by theoret-
ical research, can produce a result upon which any new course for
society can safely be recommended. Empiricism by the very nature
of its approach, ignores moral precepts, principles and established or
accepted norms of behavior, and seeks to base conclusions solely upon
what the senses will take in by means of observation.
These critics, therefore, say that empirical research is obviously a
necessary component of the general investigatory method but,
unless combined with the theoretical approach, it can lead into serious
and often tragic error. They urge that the foundations are mis-
directing their funds in social science research areas if they do not
see to it that empirical research is balanced by theoretical. It seems
impossible to deny the validity of the comment made by Professor
Hobbs in his testimony (Hearings, p. 167):
I would feel very definitely that so-called empirical findings must be fitted into
a framework of the legal precepts, the traditions, the history, the moral codes,
the military principles of the area in which they are applied. That in and of
themselves, by their very nature, they exclude the intangibles which may be not
only important but may be crucial in a final decision.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 61
It is difficult to decide which is the cart and which the horse;
whether a predominance of empirical interest started in the universi-
ties and took over the foundations, or whether the foundations have
been the controlling factor in filling the universities (and thus research)
with empiricists. It seems to this Committee that it makes little
difference. If the controlling thought in the universities and in the
foundations is in the direction of empiricism, to the virtual exclusion
of theory, a situation exists which, in its imbalance, may be very
dangerous.
Predominant opinions tend to perpetuate themselves. If a univer-
sity department is predominantly empiricist, it is likely, through
what might be called "intellectual nepotism", to exclude the entrance
of teachers of the opposite research persuasion. If a foundation,
particularly when associated with the concentration of power which
has been referred to, tends predominantly to the empirical, it is likely
to promote this approach to the exclusion of the opposite school.
Thus, in the course of time, and this seems often to have happened,
the whole field is dominated by persons of one persuasion.
A numerical Gallup Poll of "authorities" in the social sciences would
undoubtedly show that most of the "best people" in the field would
support the predominant empirical approach. That does not prove
that they are right. It is quite possible, as the critics suggest, that
theorists have not had an equal opportunity to get into the ranks and
to rise in them. It might well be as though a group of Republicans,
having obtained control of foundation management and of university
departments, had steadily increased their control by excluding
Democrats and now claim that most people who are prominent in
the trade are against Democratic research. This might then be true,
but does it prove that the Republicans were right in excluding the
Democrats?
If the public money which goes into research in the social sciences
through the operation of foundations has been and is being directed
consciously and overwhelmingly into one theory of research, to the
virtual exclusion of another theory held necessary to be integrated by
many men of competence and stature, the Committee would conclude
that this favoritism for one theory is against the public interest.
There is considerable evidence to show that this favoritism and
exclusion does exist, and to a marked degree.
The Social Science Research Council, the most important of the
"clearing house" organizations in the social sciences, apparently
maintains a program for the development of researchers in these fields.
The funds are supplied by major foundations, in substantial amounts;
but the SSRC seems to be the chief executive of what is apparently a
program widely supported by the foundations to produce more re-
searchers. On the face of it, this seems a most admirable enterprise.
However, the conclusion is inevitable that its program is directed
overwhelmingly toward the production of empirical research. Pam-
phlets issued by SSRC announcing "Fellowships and Grants" describe
the fellowships as of two classes. The first is "Those designed ex-
clusively to further the training of research workers in social science."
The second is "Those designed to aid scholars of established compe-
tence in the execution of their research," namely, the Travel Grants for
Area Research, Grants-in-Aid of Research, and Faculty Research
Fellowships.
62 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
In a letter to a member of the Committee staff, the President of
SSRC says:
"In the case of the faculty research fellowship program it was agreed that the
recipients would be chosen in terms of their competence 'in formulating and testing
hypotheses concerning social behavior by empirical, and if possible quantitative
methods.' " [Emphasis ours.]
The pamphlets, on the other hand, referring to the other group of
fellowships — those intended to train researchers — says:
"These fellowships may be granted for programs that will afford either experience
in the conduct of research and first hand analysis of empirical data under the
guidance of mature investigators, or further formal training, or both." [Emphasis
ours.]
Thus all the neophytes who are to become "social scientists" must
operate empirically to get any help through these fellowships. Simi-
larly, having attained positions on a faculty, it seems they cannot
have one of. these faculty fellowships except for empirical studies.
That leaves only part of the second class, namely, "Travel Grants for
Area Research", and "Grants-in-Aid of Research." Perhaps empiricism
is not demanded for a Travel Grant, but it would seem clear that it is
again a prerequisite to a Grant-in-Aid of Research. The pamphlets
recite that "Grants will not be given to subsidize the preparation of
textbooks or the publication of books or articles, or to provide income
in lieu of salary." Therefore, and because much theoretical research
requires little equipment and merely financial support while the time
is taken to do thinking, reading and analysis which almost always
results in the production of a book or an article, theorists, as against
empiricists, seem to be given short shrift.
In Fellows of the Social Science Research Council 1925-1961, the
Council writes, describing the Research Training Fellowships begun
in 1935, as follows:
"There has been no arbitrary assignment of quotas by disciplines, but a constant
effort to encourage training by rigorous empirical research in all fields." [Em-
phasis ours.l
The "Fact-finding Mania". ..
No laboring of this point is needed. The executives of the major
"clearing house" organizations on the whole would not only admit
that they overwhelmingly support empirical research; they would
acclaim it as highly desirable. They maintain that, whatever the
weaknesses of data-collection, an accumulation of empirical results
adds to the great body of knowledge and forms additional bases for
further research. Moreover, it is probable that an opinion census of
social science professors would show that most of them believe (1)
there is an adequate balance of theoretical with, empirical research
and (2) that, in any event, there cannot be too much empirical col-
lection of data. A letter to Counsel from Professor of Sociology C.
Arnold Anderson, of the University of Kentucky, for example, ex-
presses what is certainly the majority point of view of the present
social scientists. He says: "* * * we must recognize that it is im-
possible to have too many empirical facts." He adds: "The answer
to inadequate facts is more facts." He concludes emphatically that
"There has not been an unfair or undesirable preponderance of em-
pirical research. What the social sciences need is enormously more
money for the collection of facts, and for the testing of theories by
facts."
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 63
There are eminent professors and social science technicians, how-
ever, who insist that empirical research has unfairly predominated.
They point out that the mere collection of "facts" unrelated to theory
and untested, or unchecked and uncheckable in many instances, adds
nothing of any consequence to the sum total of human knowledge.
Indeed, Professor Anderson himself says in his letter that "Fact and
theory are constantly at play, one upon the other. Every reputable
social scientist strives constantly to balance and integrate those two
facets of scientific work." Those of the critical point of view believe
that great numbers of foundation-supported social scientists, in their
anxiety to use the factual approach to research, have failed to do
that very integration between "fact" and theory which Professor
Anderson indicates is essential to sound work.
In a paper, New Concepts in Education, delivered before the Ameri-
can Association j or the Advancement of Science at Cleveland on Decem-
ber 27, 1950, Stuart A. Courtis commented on one aspect of fact-find-
ing as follows:
"As a result we are today in possession of mountains of quantitative data whose
interpretation is not furthered by our experiments, and we have discovered no
laws as the exact sciences know law. We possess only large masses of quantita-
tive conclusions nearly worthless for purposes of prediction."
For a full presentation of the absurdity of accumulating facts
merely as facts, and also for an analysis of what constitutes a "scien-
tific" fact, we refer the reader to Professor Hobbs' notable book,
Social Problems and Scientism, In it, Professor Hobbs attacks the
excessive and uncontrolled use of empiricism, and points out that the
result is often what he refers to as "scientism", or what a layman would
call "fake science." He states that many books and articles have been
written which purport to give "the facts" regarding some phase of
human behavior — the "facts" about marriage, the "facts" about sex,
the "facts" about crime, etc. In all too many instances he says, we
are not then presented with scientific data but with a collection of
scientifically meaningless material (pp. 211-2),
This mania for "fact-finding" bas reached a stage which has been
sometimes referred to as the "comptometer compulsion." Morton
Clurman, in How Discriminatory are College Admissions?, in Com-
mentary of June, 1953, calls it the "IBM fallacy." He says (p. 622) :
"Every trade in every age has its special delusions, and a major application of
social science might be called the IBM fallacy. This delusion reflects the endemic
conviction of 20th-century man that machines can do everything for him —
including thinking. In the case of the social scientist it takes the form of a cer-
tainty that if you feed enough data through enough electric circuits what you are
looking for is bound to come out. The corrollary of this hypothesis is the convic-
tion that only a minimum, of human cerebration need be combined with a maximum
of electronics to produce miraculous results.
"* * * The laboratory experiment, or natural observation, which are analagous
to the collection and processing of data in the social sciences, are simply ways of
verifying the scientist's hypothesis. They cannot create a hypothesis, only con-
firm one. Where that hypothesis com.es from, God may know, but certainly no
one else does. Where it doesn't come from, however, is a machine or any specific
body of data. If it did, scientific creation would be possible for almost any high
school boy."
Professor Hobbs calls the mania the "fetish of statistics." He
writes (Social Problems and Scientism, p. 212):
"An over-emphasis on facts as facts is one of the characteristics of what is
sometimes called the empirical approach. Ideally, empiricism could mean that
64 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
the investigators relied solely upon controlled observation and experimental
evidence. Actually, much of the empiricism in social science involves no rigid
experimentation, and the facts are questionable, fragmentary, and slanted.
Empiricism in social science seems to owe its extreme popularity more nearly to
desperation rather than plan. Philosophic and scientific justification for the
type of empiricism generally employed in social science is extremely tenuous.
It seems to spring more from a frantic effort to acquire the external appearance
of science and the accolade of 'practicality' than to grow out of any carefully
thought out system of either philosophy or science. * * * A belief appears to
exist that somehow empiricism is more advanced, more modern, than reliance on
reason and logic, such as rationalism involves."
We quote heavily, throughout this report, from the testimony and
writings of Professor Hobbs because his testimony before us was so
lucid, impressive and seemingly incontrovertible. Lest it be thought
that Professor Hobbs is alone in his observations and opinions, we
shall quote, in support, letters to Counsel from three of the most
eminent and erudite sociologists in the United States. Each has done
extensive research in a variety of fields. Each has published scores
of books and articles of a professional nature. It is unlikely that any
other three sociologists living have such a wide background or such
extensive publications to their credit as these three senior scholars.
They are Professor Pitirim A. Sorokin of Harvard, Professor Carle C.
Zimmerman of Harvard and Professor James H. S. Bossard of
Pennsylvania.
Professor Pitirim A. Sorokin, in a letter to Committee Counsel, said:
"* * * J can state that so far as social sciences are concerned, most of the
foundations certainly favor to an excessive degree empirical research and greatly
discriminate against theoretical, historical, and other forms of nonempirical
research. This one-sidedness by itself would not be objectionable, if (a) empirical
research were not still more narrowed and reduced to either statistical research
or research along the line of the mathematical and mechanical models, or other
imitative varieties of so-called natural science sociology ; (b) if the topics investi-
gated were of some theoretical or practical importance; and, (c) if most of the
favored researchers were competent social scientists. Unfortunately, in cases of
overwhelming bulk of granted financial help, these three conditions were absent."
Similarly, Professor Carle C. Zimmerman:
"The tax exempt foundations in the United States have unfairly and undesirably
emphasized empirical research to such an extent that the whole meaning of social
science research has come to be ridden with sham and dubious practices."
Professor Bossard:
"For some years, I have regarded with increasing apprehension the develop-
ment of what I have called the comptometer school of research in social sciences.
By this I mean the gathering of detailed social data and their manipulation by all
the available statistical techniques. Not that I am objecting to such methods —
my reluctance rather lies in an unwillingness to accept these as the core of research
in human behavior.
"My own interest lies more in the development of qualitative insights. This
accords with my judgment of the life process, that it cannot be reduced to statis-
tical formulae but that it is a richly diversified complex of relationships. The
chief purpose of research for university people, most of whom are limited to work-
ing with small groups, should be weighted heavily in the direction of research in
qualitative insights rather than manipulation of mass data.
"I am particularly concerned with the impression which the recent emphasis
upon the comptometer approach has created among younger sociologists as to
what constitutes eocial research. The monies and influences of the large founda-
tions naturally do a great deal to set the norms of professional acceptance in a
given field, and it is in this respect, difficult to measure statistically but possibly
of very great importance, that a distinct disservice may be done to sociological
research by an undue emphasis upon any particular emphasis or methodology."
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 65
In his letter, Professor Bossard disqualifies himself as an unpreju-
diced observer, saying:
"* * * I am indicating the reasonable suspicion that I may be prejudiced in
that I have never been able to obtain a single grant from any research foundation
or organization."
He adds, however, that he has had no difficulty in getting research
grants from his University or from people of means who are familiar
with his work. The conclusion is reasonable that this eminent professor
cannot obtain foundation grants because his interests in research are quali-
tative and not empirical, a rather sad commentary on the objectivity of the
foundations. Nor is he alone in being discriminated against because of
his research theories. This Committee is confident that an analysis would
show that it is far from easy for academicians of Professor Bossard' s re-
search persuasions to obtain grants from the major foundations.
The following discussion, by Professor Rowe in his testimony, of
research as promoted by foundations is illuminating:
Dr. Rowe. That is one of the most difficult things to get agreement on, as to
what the objectives of research should be. The easiest, quickest way to get
massive results is to engage in fact-finding for fact-finding's sake, or the mass
accumulation of facts for the sake of accumulating facts. This produces stuff
that is big and heavy in your hand, but I don't think it is any more valuable, to
put it mildly, than the kind of research that allows a scholar the time for reflection
and contemplation, out of which come many of the ideas and thoughts which alone
can make valid framework for analyzing the great masses of data that may be
accumulated, many times by people who don't have much capacity for effective
thinking or for theory or don't have much inclination for that kind of thing.
(Hearings, p. 528.)
Asked later if he thought there had been an over-emphasis on em-
pirical research as financed by the foundations, he testified as follows:
Dr. Rowe. It would be very difficult for me to answer that question vis-a-vis
all research sponsored by or supported by all foundations because I just don't
have the knowledge necessary to make that kind of a comment. Taking it out-
side of the field of foundation support, I do think in my own field for example,
the genera] field of political science, there has been an overemphasis upon empirical
research at the expense of theoretically oriented thinking and analysis. There is
a tremendous emphasis upon the census type of thing in political science. Sta-
tistics are coming into greater and greater importance. Whereas, this is of course
always a valid tool' for research workers, the emphasis here tends to detract from
the kind of fundamental thinking about great issues and about values which
characterize the work of earlier students of politics in the United States, such as
for instance, President Wilson, and people of that kind. Those studies, of course,
were rooted in history and rooted in law. To the extent that political scientists
have tried to divorce themselves from historical and legal study, and from historical
and legal background in their study, they have tended to become very pointed
fact-gatherers, census-takers and the business of arguing about great issues has
been played down to this extent.
Of course, it is much easier and much simpler for political scientists to justify
their existence on the basis of a mass production of factual materials than it is
for them to justify their existence as great thinkers, because fact-gatherers are a
dime a dozen and people who can think are hard to find. This is a comment on
the fallibility of human nature. After all, political scientists are human beings.
Mr. Hays. Professor, is what you are saying, in other words, that thinkers
could not get the products of their thinking across because the people would not
be able to comprehend and they can comprehend statistics?
Dr. Rowe. No; I don't mean to imply that. I mean to say that ideas and
concepts and values are far more important, it seems to me, than much of the
indisputable, completely noncontroversial factual material that political scientists
seem to occupy themselves with so much in the present day. (Hearings, pp.
531, 532.)
66 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
These words of Prof essor Rowe impress us greatly. It is the position
of this Committee that foundations should have the greatest possible
freedom of operation consonant with the protection of our society and
our institutions. But if it is true, and the evidence persuades us it is,
that the large foundations are financing researchers who are almost
exclusively empiricist, the saturation of the academic atmosphere with
this particular and narrow approach could have very serious effects
upon the colleges and secondary schools.
It may well be that we are not competent to evaluate research
methods. We are not certain that this is so, for we have the impres-
sion that the executives of the foundations and the clearing house
organizations make more of a mystery of the social sciences, and the
methodism in them, than is justified. But we do not see how Congress,
in any event, can regulate methods of research, nor should it wish to.
What we do urge is that the trustees of the large foundations make it
their business to determine reason and balance for themselves, seeking
the advice not only of their own executives and professional employees
but also of those academicians who represent the critical point of
view, those who believe, as Professor Rowe said, that "ideas, and con-
cepts and values are far more important" than mere "factual material",
however the latter may be useful as contributive material.
These trustees might well alert themselves to the dangers and limita-
tions of the empirical method as a primary approach to social problems.
They might well become more conscious also, of the necessity of a
foundation justifying its tax-exempt status through a positive demon-
stration of strong contributions to the public welfare, and not being
content merely to "experiment" with that welfare.
Limitations and Danqers.
This Committee wishes to make it clear that it has not attacked, and
does not attack, empiricism. To do so would be an absurdity. To
allege any implicit vice in empirical research as such would also be
palpably ridiculous. It is the excess and the misuse of empiricism and
empirical research which appears to this Committee to merit criticism.
Mr. Pendleton Herring in the statement which he filed with the
Committee as President of the Social Science Research Council, re-
ferred to John Locke as the philospher "who also developed the doc-
trine that knowledge is derived from experience." Surely, Locke and
philosophers like him believed in the importance of empirical think-
ing. But we are sure they believed that observations should be based
on actual conditions with all facets of a condition taken into consider-
ation. Much of the empiricism in which foundation-supported research
today indulges seems to eliminate all but quantitative, statistically manip-
ulative variables, and eliminates the qualitative factors which Locke and
any other respectable philospher would have deemed essential.
The very term "social sciences'' is misleading because it is so often
identified with the same scientific procedures employed in the natural
sciences; many, seeing the word "science" mistakenly conclude that
social science results are equally exact and accurate.
Professor Hobbs emphasized in his testimony that the social
scientists supported by the foundations have failed to alert the public
to the unscientific character of much of what is called "social science."
On the contrary, the attempt has been made "to convince the readers
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 67
of the textbook, and trade books," that what they are reading is
"science" when in fact it is not. He said (Hearings, p. 122):
I think it should be the burden and the positive responsibility of persons making
the study and publishing the study. If they call it science, it should be their posU
tive responsibility to point out the limitations, and not only point them out,. but to
emphasize them to avoid misleading the reader into the belief that it is science in
the same sense that it is used in physical science. * * *
There has been a growing movement to apply the methods used in
the natural sciences to research in the social sciences. But a complete
translation of these methods into the social sciences is impossible.
There are a number of reasons for this. Perhaps the most important
is that experiment, except in a very limited way, is not available to the
social scientist. The natural scientist, as part of the ■, procedure of
investigation, tests a hypothesis through experiment upon the materials
to which the hypothesis applies. The social scientist deals with
human beings; these he cannot easily use for experimental purposes,
He cannot use them as one would use a simple raw material or even
lower forms of life in natural science experimentation. Even under
a dictatorship which offered him human sacrifices for his experiments,
he could rarely isolate individual factors, traits and conditions, making
them independent of the complex of factors in individual and group
human life. He cannot be certain that he is dealing with one factor
at a time. He cannot exercise the controls which are used by natural
scientists, on materials simpler than human beings, in order to ehmi->
nate error in observation and conclusion when tests are to be applied.
He cannot, for example, test people to see whether they or society
would be better off if they had extra-marital sex relations.
Dti. Kinsey Counts Noses.
; The social scientist, therefore, falls easily into the , use of mere
observation (empiricism) as a substitute for experiment. Unable to
use the experimental method, he takes statistics, he "counts noses."!
This process is subject to many possibilities of error. It is a process
which is valuable in research, but it must be controlled by specific
hypotheses; even then, the results will generally be only of qualified;
contributory usefulness. Studies such as the Kinsey reports, for
example, might disclose that a certain number of people seem to
have become maladjusted because of a lack of sex experience at an
early age, or because they maintained the sanctity of the- marriage
bond. To conclude, from such limited and questionable observations,
that the general public would be better off through early sex experience
or by ignoring the sanctity of marriage, would be unwarranted.
Various errors of observation would be almost unavoidable in such a
collection of statistical material. Were the interviewed cases truly a
population cross-section? Were the cases selected at randoni, or
only by the volunteer method? Did all the cases tell the' truth?
Was there a check made (and could there be?) to take into account
the relationship between volunteering and "normality?"
To arrive at a conclusion as to advisable behavior (or as to laws
desirable in the field of sex) merely on the basis of such statistical
material, would fail to take into account many basic premises in
social reasoning, such as: the effect of tentative proposals upon our
standards of morality; their effect upon the construction of the state;
their effect upon the family and upon the rearing of children; and their
68 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
effect upon the mental and social health of individuals left free of
moral restraint.
All that a study such as a Kinsey report can prove is that "other
forms of sexual behavior, such as pre-marital intercourse, prostitution,
extra-marital intercourse, and homosexual behavior sometimes occur
among some members of some segments of the population." 14 Many
years of labor were spent, and very large amounts of the public's
money, contributed by the Rockefeller Foundation, were expended,
to produce this stupendous fact. This is perhaps as good an example
as any of the extremely limited positive value (combined with ex-
tremely grave possibilities of adverse social effect) of much of the
empirical research in the social sciences, research for which the public's
money is employed through foundation grants.
Though empiricism has its essential place in scientific investigation,
its use is dangerous except within the control of accepted social
premises. To use it alone and to base conclusions solely upon the
method of observation, is to jump to conclusions— to violate the
cardinal principle of scientific investigation that there must be cross-
checking through the alternate use of the inductive and the deductive
method and by relating to actual or apparent axioms. True, Dr.
Kinsey has claimed that he has not derived any conclusions from his
work. But the advertising of his first report stated that it "answers
and clarifies an almost innumerable number of sex behavior prob-
lems * * *." The report itself, in the use of terminology, derives
conclusions as clearly as though they were so stated. And countless
persons who should know better, among them many college professors,
have taken up these works and used them to substantiate their own
conclusions as though these were Kinsey's. Professor Llewellyn
of the Columbia University Law School went so far, in connection
with the first Kinsey report, as to recommend that pressure should
now be brought on the lawmakers to change our laws regarding sex
behavior. Professor Maclver of Columbia proclaimed that the
Kinsey report would now "prepare the way for a happier and more
enlightened program of public education."
Other writers travelled the same road. Dr. R. L. Dickinson, in a
preface to American Sexual Behavior and the Kinsey Report, said :
"Surely new programs are indicated. We need to start with parents, educat-
ing them to. educate their children. Then we can educate the educators — teach-
ers, doctors, ministers, social workers and all concerned in the sexual patterns
which Professor Kinsey finds are set so early in life. First and foremost we will
train for attitudes. Later we will teach techniques."
The danger of such loose and isolated, uncontrolled empirical
studies, particularly when given the seeming authority of support by
a major foundation, is great. As Prof. Hobbs has put it regarding
Kinsey :
"Despite the patent limitations of the study and its persistent bias, its con-
clusions regarding sexual behavior were widely believed. They were presented
to college classes; medical doctors cited them in lectures; psychiatrists applauded
them; a radio program indicated that the findings were serving as a basis for
revision of moral codes relating to sex ; and an editorial in a college student news-
paper admonished the college administration to make provision for sexual out-
lets for the students in accordance with the 'scientific realities' as established by
the book." (Social Problems and Saentism, p. 96.)
Hobbs, Social Problems and Sclentism, p. 94.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 69
Prof. Hobbs narrates many such reactions, among them the statement
in About the Kinsey Report, by Donald Porter Geddes and Enid
Curie, published as a Signet Special at 25 cents:
"It does not matter that the report is unscientific, the important thing is that
it be publicized and serve as a basis for reform of sexual behavior and of laws
which deal with violations of sexual mores."
The Committee wonders whether The Rockefeller Foundation, which
made the Kinsey study possible by the investment of substantial
funds, is proud of its work. Research of this type, of which there
is much outside the sex field, seems predicated upon the premise
that what is wrong with our society is that our moral codes are
seriously in need of re-study and revision.
These excerpts from Professor Hobbs' testimony before this Com-
mittee are illuminating (Hearings, p. 124):
The Chairman. As I understand, you are raising a question about the scientific
approach which Dr. Kinsey made in conducting this research in the first place,
and then some of his comments and conclusions whieh he wrote into his report,
which d_id not necessarily arise from the basis of his research which he had made?
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And which might have damaging effect on the psychology of
the people, particularly the young people of the country.
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And at the same time undertaking to give to the country the
overall impression that his findings and his comments were based upon a scientific
study which had been made, as the basis of a grant.
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir; a scientific study of the type by implication which you
have in physics and chemistry, and, therefore, its conclusions cannot be challenged.
The Chairman. Enumerating in the preface that it was made by a grant from
one of the foundations giving it further prestige, possibly, that it was of scientific
value, and so forth.
Dr. Hobbs. That would be correct. I have a statement to that effect to show
that very type of influence, which I will come to a little bit later.
Dr. Hobbs' detailed testimony is well worth reading. Considerable
criticism was made of Dr. Kinsey's work on the basis of statistical
theory and because the impression was left that the study made upon
a selected number of persons produced a result projected to the entire
population of the United States.
Dr. Hobbs, moreover, criticized the Kinsey reports for referring to
"socially approved patterns of sexual behavior" as "rationalization".
That is:
* * * socially approved patterns of sexual behavior are frequently referred
to as rationalization. That is, the socially approved patterns of sexual behavior
throughout the Kinsey works are referred to in terms of ridicule, as being mere
rationalization, and justifications for types of behaviour which by implication
are not the best or even the most desirable.
Socially condemned forms of sexual behavior and criminal forms of sexual
behavior are usually in the Kinsey volumes referred to as normal, or normal in the
human animal.
The presentation of moral codes, codes of sexual behavior, is such that they are
contrasted with what Kinsey calls normal mammalian behavior, which could give
the impression, and it gave the impression to a number of reviewers, that things
which conform to the socially approved codes of sexual conduct are rationaliza-
tions, not quite right, while things which deviate from it, such as homesexuality,
are normal, in a sense right. (Hearings, p. 126)
Prof. Hobbs stressed the danger that pseudo-scientific studies could
condition the conduct of the public. Statements and conclusions pro-
duced by a scientistic rather than scientific approach could even
severely impair public morality. He testified (Hearings, p. 129):
* * * But what I am trying to illustrate is the manner in which studies can
influence important aspects of human behavior. I don't mean to impugn Professor
70 TAX-EXEMPT INUNDATION'S
Kinsey's motives, nor the motives of the members of the foundations or anything
of that type. I am merely saying that this can happen and this is an illustration
of where it does happen.
For an illustration, in connection with the question of heterosexuality compared
with homosexuality, Kinsey in the first volume has this statement:
"It is only because society demands that there be a particular choice in the
matter (of heterosexuality or homosexuality) and does not so often dictate one's
choice of food or clothing."
He puts it in terms of it is just a custom which society demands.
In the second volume it is stressed, for example, that we object to adult molesters
of children primarily because we have become conditioned against such adult
molesters of children, and that the children who are molested become emotionally
upset, primarily because of tne old-fashioned attitudes of their parents about such
practices, and the parents (the implication is) are the ones who do the real damage
by making a fuss about it if a child is molested. Because the molester, and here
I quote from Kinsey, "may have contributed favorably to their later sociosexual
development." That is a molester of children may have actually, Kinsey con-
tends, not only not harmed them, but may have contributed favorably to their
later sociosexual development.
Especially emphasized in the second volume, the volume on females, is the sup-
posed beneficial effects of premarital sexual experiences. Such experiences, Kinsey
states: "provide an opportunity for the females to learn to adjust emotionally
to various types of males."
That is on page 266 of the volume on females.
In addition, on page 327 he contends that premarital sexual experience may well
contribute to the effectiveness of one's other nonsexual social relationships, and
that many females — this is on page 115 — will thus learn how to respond to socio-
sexual contacts.
On page 328, that it should contribute to the development of emotional ca-
pacities in a more effective way than if sexual experiences are acquired after
marriage.
The avoidance of premarital sexual experience by females, according to Professor
Kinsey, may lead to inhibitions which damage the capacity to respond, so much
that these inhibitions may persist after years of marriage, "if, indeed, they are
ever dissipated." That is from page 330.
So you get a continued emphasis on the desirability of females engaging in
premarital sexual behavior. In both of these volumes there is a persistent em-
phasis, a persistent questioning of the traditional codes, and the laws relating to
sexual behavior. Professor Kinsey may be correct or he may be incorrect, but
when he gives the impression that the findings are scientific in the same sense as
the findings in physical science, then the issue becomes not a matter of whether he
as a person is correct or incorrect, but of the impression which is given to the
public, which can be quite unfortunate. (Hearings, pp. 129, 130.)
It is difficult for this Committee to understand the propriety of
The Rockefeller Foundation supporting the dangerous sociological
experiment which the Kinsey reports constitute. To use the public
money to produce such socially dangerous material as a "best seller"
seems beyond all reason.
Not only is there the danger that the public itself can be directly
affected by the impact of works of this kind, but it seems to follow
that many take up pseudo-scientific results, treat them as established
scientific verities and use them for propagandizing for changes in
morals, ethics and law. Here are some further examples of this.
Anne G. Freegood in the leading article in the September 1953
Harpers, Dr. Kinsey's Second Sex, refers to Kinsey as "the American
prophet crying in the wilderness, make straight in the desert a path-
way for reform." She proceeds:
"The desert in this case is our current code of laws governing sexual activities
and the background of Puritan tradition regarding sex under which this country
still to some extent operates."
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 71
She speaks of the "torrent of reaction" that followed the publication
of the first Kinsey book. Later, she says that the second (then forth-
coming) book
"has gained momentum from the effect of its forerunner, which has already been
cited in court decisions and quoted in textbooks as well as blazoned from: one
end of the country to the other."
Dr. Hobbs referred to a book which was edited by one Albert Ellis,
and published in 1954, called Sex Life of the American Woman and
the Kinsey Report, in which an attorney writing in this volume,
says: "It may sound strange to say that the most encouraging note
about the new Kinsey Report is its indication that more and more
women are beginning to commit more and more sex crimes." (Hear-
ings, p. 130.)
Dr. Hobbs cited statements by a prominent clergyman who labeled
social science research as a form of religious devotion. Referring to
Kinsey's findings this clergyman states:
"These results are the facts with which the moralist will have to work and
build."
The same clergyman also said:
"Yet we cannot go back to the legalistic morality which has prevailed so long.
That, has really outlived its usefulness if the Kinsey books are right."
And again:
"That legalistic conformism has outlived its usefulness by about 2,000 years, if
the New Testament is right. It is an emeritus ethic, due at least for honorable
retirement." (Hearings, p. 130.)
The responsibility of The Rockefeller Foundation for financing the
Kinsey "best sellers" comes sharply home to roost in a quotation
offered by Dr. Hobbs from an article in Harpers Magazine written by
one Albert Deutsch (Hearings, p. 131):
"So startling are. its revelations, so contrary to what civilized man has been
taught for generations, that they would be unbelievable but for the impressive weight
of the scientific agencies backing the survey."
That,
said Dr. Hobbs,
is the unfortunate thing that you have involved here. I do not mean that
the foundations meant it to be that way. I do not mean even that Professor
Kinsey meant it to be that way. But unfortunately the public does get that
impression — that this is something that is final and infallible, which you cannot
and should not question. I think that is extremely unfortunate. [Empba,sis
.supplied.]
Further illustrations were given by Dr. Hobbs (and there are more
starting at page 99 of his book Social Problems and Scientism) of the
danger of others promoting pseudo-scientific material financed by
foundations and using them as a basis for propaganda. He cited a
review of the Kinsey Report in the December 1948 issue of the
Scientific Monthly in which a respected psychologist said it recorded
: " tremendous implications for scientists, legislators, physicians and
public officers." He contended that the report "shows clearly that
our current laws do not comply with the biologic facts of normal
sexual behavior."
In other words, said Dr. Hobbs:
* * * the implication is that the laws should be changed to conform with
biology. If you have a biological urge, the laws should permit you to express
that biological urge as it is demanding on you. (Hearings, p. 131.)
72 tax-exempt foundations
More "Scientism."
Professor Hobbs was asked by Mr. Hays whether he agreed with
a statement in Mr. Dodd's opening report that foundations are
willing to "support experiments in fields that defy control". This
colloquy followed (Hearings, pp. 174, 175):
Dr. Hobbs. It is true that in any study of the significant aspects of human
behavior, such as criminality, juvenile delinquency, political behavior, the studies
are such that they defy control, in the sense that there are intangibles involved
which, no matter how conscientious you are in making the study, these intangibles
still remain.
The word "control" in scientific investigation means that you are able to
control, to measure the significant variables, and that no other variables can
come into the investigation to significantly influence the results.
That is not the case with studies of human behavior.
Mr. Hays. That is right. But any field, unless it is completely comprehended—
and I don't know that there is any such field — and any research into the unknown
would probably defy control, would it not?
Dr. Hobbs. But there is a difference in the usage of the term, A physicist
can make a study which is a complete controlled study. His study may be one
which involves the weight of matter. He may and can create conditions under
which he has to all intents and purposes complete control over the conditions
of his experiment. You cannot do that in social science, unfortunately.
To quote Prof. Hobbs again, he has said that the
"zealots" of the new research in the social sciences "lead people to believe that
techniques exist in social science which provide accurate description and enable
prediction of social behavior. We are told to pattern our behavior and to change
our society on the basis of such conclusions regarding criminality, race relations,
marriage, mental health, war, divorce, sex, and other personal and social affairs.
Yet in these areas of behavior the pertinent knowledge is extremely limited and
unreliable, the rules of behavior are vague and changeable, the techniques are
crude and untested, and even the basic units required for measurement are non-
existent." " Again: "character and integrity are dissolved in the acid ridicule of
cultural determinism." 16
It seems to this Committee that there is a strong tendency on the part
of many of the social scientists whose research is favored by the major
foundations toward the concept that there are no absolutes, that everything
is indeterminate, that no standards of conduct, morals, ethics and govern-
ment are to be deemed inviolate, that everything, including basic moral
law, is subject to change, and that it is the part of the social scientists to
take no principle for granted as a premise in social or juridicial reason-
ing, however fundamental it may heretofore have been deemed to be under
our Judeo-Christian moral system.
Perhaps as good an example as any of scientism is the successive
methods which social "scientists" have given us by which to raise our
children. Each was the last word in the "science" of child psychology.
And each was detracted by the advocates of its successor. The New
York Times of August 15, 1954 reports an address by Dr. Hilde
Bruch, of the Department of Psychiatry and Pediatrics at Columbia
University's College of Physicians and Surgeons, to a session of the
International Institute of Child Psychology that "the time has come
to leave mother and child alone." She is then quoted as having said:
"One might go so far as to say that an outstanding common factor of the many
different approaches in child-care advice is the recklessness with which they are
recommended as the 'best' for the future development of a child, without an effort
having been made to verify these predictions.
h Social Problems and Scientism, pp. 248, 261.
" Ibid, p. 261.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 73
"Yet they are presented as scientific facts, often with the implied or open threat
that any neglect might injure the child and result in neurosis in the dim and
distant future." [Emphasis ours.]
That is a plain accusation that the child psychologists who have
inflicted "scientific" methods for raising children on the public have
practiced not science but scientism.
SCIENTISM AND CAUSALITY.
The principle of causality is a bog into which social scientists are
prone to fall when they attempt to translate the methods of the
natural sciences into the social sciences. Cause and effect relation-
ships are obviously infinitely easier to establish in the natural sciences
than in the social sciences. Human beings are motivated by a complex
of factors: by goals established, in turn, by complex processes; by
ethical and moral concepts; by exercises of free will. Some of the
social scientists seem to have wholly rejected the concept of free will.
It is at least debatable whether man has a free will; to reject the con-
cept outright and to base research and "scientific" conclusions on the
theory that there can be completely ascertainable causality in human
behavior is hardly in itself scientific. These pseudo-scientists excuse
their imperfection by the assertion that they are struggling along the
way — that the natural sciences have progressed much further, but
that they hope to catch up with them. Give us time, they say. We
are a young "science." Our principle is correct — it is only that we
have not yet learned how to perfect our methods.
This approach of the social scientists has behind it a wholly
materialistic concept of life and behavior. Its natural outcome is an
approach to Marxism — it is not surprising that so many of the social
scientists tend to collectivism. They believe they can satisfactorily
rearrange society; given time and an improvement of their more or
less mechanical methods, they will find all the answers. It is a
rather pitiful assumption that the springs of human behavior can be
reduced to formulae.
The American Soldi em.
Professor Hobbs used The American Soldier as an example of a
scientistic approach to an important national problem. This book
was prepared and edited under the auspices of a special committee
of the Social Science Research Council and published by the Princeton
University Press in 1949 and 1950. It illustrates "the influence of
supposed social science on military policy at a high level * * *."
(Hearings, p. 150.) The story is interesting and, in the opinion of this
Committee, tragic. ^,
A group of social scientists, against the constant venerated opposition
of the military authorities of the United States, managed to "incorporate
their own ideas in a matter of highest military significance against
the opposition of the military of the United States." (Hearings,
p. 151.) The incident concerns the methods to be used to discharge
some part of our armed forces at the termination of World War II.
A Research Branch was officially established in October 1941, within
what was known, successively, as the Morale Division, Special
Services Division, and Information and Education Division. This
division came into the control of social scientists, many or most of
them associated with foundation work, and their achievements were
55647—54 6
74 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
finally lauded in The American Soldier, a project of The Social Science
Research Council. Professor Hobbs told the story in detail (Hearings,
pp. 150, et seq.), of how these social scientists, against the reiterated
opposition of the Army, insisted upon a demobilization method deter-
mined largely by taking an opinion poll of the soldiers themselves.
Frederick Osborn, a trustee of the Carnegie Corporation, in a paper
read at the University of Minnesota in April, 1951, commended the
social engineering involved in The American Soldier project as a
"typical example of social science prediction." If this statement is
true, it utterly destroys any claim the social scientists may make to
the role of "social engineers." Mr. Osborn said that "by weighing
the different factors" whi^h "would seem to entitle a man to priority"
in discharge, "it would be possible to devise a system of points earned
by each man which apparently would decide the order of discharge
to the satisfaction of the greatest number of men, and hence with the
least injury to morale." So shallow and fractional an approach to the
problem of what men to release and when, can hardly be deemed a
scientific method. It involved the most casual and dangerous pre-
judgment, preevaluation. It assumed that no other factors of im-
portance related to the morale problem. It also assumed that no other
military or political factor was of any consequence.
Dr. Hobbs made clear that two highly unfortunate results followed.
First he held that the polling method was certain to result in the de-
cline in morale. He said (Hearings, p. 153):
* * * If you give members of the armed services the notion that they are to
be and should be consulted on vital military policy, then this fact in itself can
create dissatisfaction, unrest, of the very type of thing which the Secretary
previously had anticipated.
Moreover, Dr. Hobbs pointed out that the method of demobilization
produced by the social scientists was one which failed to take into
account the military necessities of the nation. Prof. Hobbs stated
that our military "sensed or knew that we were going to run into a
situation in Europe with one of our then allies, that is, Russia." Yet
they were forced ta demobilize men in such a manner that effective
units were disorganized and military efficiency was very sadly im-
paired.
"In other words",
said Professor Hobbs (Hearings, p. 159):
"they pressed the military group, and if they had as their reason the possibility
of Russian aggression and encroachment into European teiritories, such as actually
did happen, if the military had that in mind, they could not publicly announce
it because Russia at that time was an ally. And from a standpoint of both mili-
tary policy and from a standpoint of diplomatic policy, it was just something
that they could not do. Yet this group pushed them into a position where they
had to do it or accept this point system of discharge which, the military con-
sistently opposed."
The detail of Dr. Hobbs' testimony is this area is well worth read-
ing. For the Army to have been obliged by social scientists to go to the
enlisted man himself for his opinions before promulgating a redeploy-
ment and demobilization policy illustrates the way, according to Dr.
Hobbs, "in which social science can and does encroach on and expand
into areas not only of morality but of politics and in this instance
military policy which was of the very highest order." (Hearings, p,
161.)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 75
Had immediate use of our armed forces become necessary after
demobilization, the social scientists would have played the major role
in reducing our armed forces to a nadir of efficiency. What had
happened is of the utmost significance. The military policymakers were
defeated by the social scientists. This was another victory in the struggle
of the "social engineers" to gain control of all the throttles of control.
Assuming, from their expertness in a single field, that their judgment is
superior to that of others who are not "social scientists" (even superior in
military matters to the experts of the military arm of government), they
presumed to press upon government a social theory of their own and
managed to achieve superior iniuence over the military experts. A few
more such victories for "social engineering" might indeed be fatal.
An interesting appendix must be put to this story. When one
scholar had the temerity to question the findings of The American
Soldier he was castigated as "a young man at the periphery of the
profession and hence, perhaps, less heedful of its imperatives toward
discretion." This statement Dr. Hobbs has characterized as follows:
"If you want to get in with us, watch your step and don't criticize
our work." (Hearings, p. 162.)
Some Results of Excessive Promotion of Empiricism
Professor Carle C. Zimmerman of Harvard, in a letter to Counsel
to the Committee dated May 25, 1954, after stating that empirical
research had been unfairly emphasized by foundations, described the
results as follows:
"A. It has made research grants large and expensive and few in number.
"B. A special class of fund getters has grown up who spend all their time
getting funds, and have little time or capacity to do original work.
"C. A special class of administrators of these funds have grown up and research
is dominated by the administrators rather than the persons who pursue ideas.
"D. As a result the large institutions, or a few institutions with prestige, get
the most of the money in large grants. Smaller institutions, or professors there,
get scant encouragement in seeking out new ideas. These large grants, are to
big and unity percent wasted and equally brilliant Ph. D.'s, who graduated in
the same classes, get no support at all. In the meantime a careful analysis of
the origins of scientific men who make a mark (Ph. D.'s who finished by 1940
and were outstanding by 1945) show that they come from these smaller institu-
tions. Of course some argue that all the best men are at the big institutions with
prestige but that is not true. Finding jobs for young Ph. D.'s puts more good
over at the small institutions because there are only a very few places each year
opened at the others.
"E. Since social science is concentrated in a few urban institutions and bossed
both at the foundations and at the institutions by 'public opinion' men, prosaic
and important aspects of our life (where real social science needs exist) never get
studied. Illustrations among many possible, it is apparent that no institution
in the United States pays great attention to the problems of our Appalachian-
Ozarkian people, although institutions located in that region do get grants for
extraneous things, involving cultures far away (like South America). No insti-
tution in our arid west studies the total relations of modern man to arid or semi-
arid conditions. A biologist will turn naturally to dirty pond water, because the
'cultures' he is interested in are found there, but our human ponds do not have
public opinion prestige, and are not generally studies. (These statements are
not a reflection upon any of the provincial groups in America.)
"P. The emphasis upon false empiricism is not only a matter of the biasas of the
'bosses' or administrators, the biasas of the concentrated favored institutions, and
the neglect of the provincial and needed problems for study, but it also has lead
to a malfeasance or injury in method and has harmed the growth of social science.
"1. Social science is about 95% macroscopically, or broad-scale observa-
tional. It is not inevitably less scientific for that reason, as geology and
astronomy are not less scientific than zoology or chemistry. The extreme
76 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
methods of overluscious empiricism on a few prestige problems is as ridiculous
as trying to build a house with the use of a micrometer for each measurement.
"2. As a result we overstudy certain aspects of a few problems and nerve
touch the others. As a professor, well renowned for his own social science
researches (which have not been supported by the big tax exchange founda-
tions), remarked, 'We research ceaselessly upon getting married, but never
study what to do about the problems involved in the act over the next 40 or
50 years.'
"3. We have many persons who can work out correlation coefficients but
no one so far has told us what they mean in 'causal' analysis. Our social
science is increasingly dominated by meticulous clinical procedures and be-
coming more and more illiterate as to logic and common observation.
"4. As a result we are creating a social science merely which is the doctrine
of a 'cult', read only by a few other social scientists, abstruse to the point of
illegibility, valueless for social direction, constantly repeating itself upon
immaterial problems, and ending in an aimless existential philosophy. As a
prominent European philosopher indicated clearly within the past decade,
'modern social science is becoming an aspect of the existential philosophy of
decadence.' (This is a paraphrased quotation from Nordberto Bobbio,
Existentialism the Philosophy of Decadence, New York, 1947 (English Trans-
lation)."
Professor Zimmerman then commented on the undesirability of
excessively training researchers in the empirical approach. He said
that:
"the overemphasis upon empirical training and support led to a division in the
social scientists between those who follow abstruse theoretical 'systems' and those
who follow equally abstruse pointless research. Our abstruse theoretical systems
have become increasingly only taxonomic (classifying a society into minute details
according to one scheme or the other) and useless repetition. There is little or no
integration between theory and research, because they deal with different things.
As a result the empiricist has no theoretical foundation for valid conclusions.
"To illustrate this, without citing names, one man gathered numerous empirical
facts upon the existence and widespread use of small scale torts within our society
and came to the conclusion that torts (he did not use this word beeause he had
only empirical training) should all be classified as crimes. Another group gathered
a million facts of the same nature in regard to sex ramification and came to the
conclusion that there should be no social control of sex. Both studies were, in
the opinion of many thoughtful persons, extremely socially disadvantageous and
misinforming and both received tax exempt support in targe sums.
"As a result of this I feel that the whole emphasis in training, as dominated by
our tax exempt foundations, should be overhauled. Our research of an empirical
nature is so unrelated to theory that it becomes interpreted in extraneous surface
philosophies, socially harmful, and of no material meaning. (I can prove this but
it would involve me into polemics, and that I consider inadvisable in a public
document.)
"One of the aspects and results of this, is the general feeling that social science
should have no 'aim' no 'utility', but should be a 'study for studies sake.' 'We
might discover something which will be good fifty years from now', is a shibboleth
of this school. Now cast back to 1900, and tell me what could have been dis-
covered by such an activity then, which could have been valuable in the changed
social conditions of today? The idea is ridiculous. Yet this feeling is most preva-
lent in the groups who have the easiest access to tax exempt foundation funds.
On the other hand, it is fitting with our culture that the activities of men should
aim to do some 'good' or create some understanding. Directly or indirectly, I
imagine these foundations are created by funds from persons who are in the very
high brackets of taxation, and the public, in a large sense, supports almost entirely
these exaggerated empirical falsities. Now just why should the public contribute
to an activity which has no social aim?"
Moral Relativity.
In answer to Counsel's question whether the over-balance of em-
piricism did not result in the promotion of "moral relativity," Pro-
fessor Hobbs testified as follows:
Dr. Hobbs. In this type of empirical approach, by definition you must attempt
to reduce the things you .are studying to the type of units which I indicated yester-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 77
day, to quantitative units, which are measurable. By the very nature of the
approach, therefore, you exclude intangibles, such as sentiments, love, romance,
devotion, or other tangibles, such as patriotism, honesty, and things of that type.
So if it is strictly empirical, then the behavior involved is reduced to cold quan-
titative items which are important, perhaps, but which if presented alone give a
very distorted picture of love or sex or patriotism or whatever else the topic may
be.
Mr. Woemseb. Is it analogous, perhaps, to use a syllogism without including
all the premises? The missing premises being moral codes and basic principles
of government and so forth.
Dr. Hobbs. It would be analogous to that. I would say that in the context
of the scientific method it is using just one of the elements instead of including
all of the elements which should be involved. That is unfortunate. (Hearings,
p. 172.)
Professor Colegrove testified on moral relativity as follows:
Then I think on the philosophical side, the psychological side, Harvard went
the same way as Columbia did. One of the leaders, of course, was William James.
And his book called Varieties of Religious Experience, I think, has undermined the
religious convictions and faith of thousands of young people in the United States.
You know, Mr. Wormser, with all the attacks that have been made upon
religion by certain scientists, by the empirical school, and right at Columbia
University and Harvard University, I think that we are finding among scientists
themselves a realization that science doesn't have all the answers to reality; that
there are experiences of religion, questions of religious faith, that may, after all,
be just as much a part of reality as the study of the stars or the study of atomic
energy, or anything else.
I see, so far as science is concerned, a move away from the complete control of
empirical thinking and a return to a little more rational or a little more humanistic
consideration for religious principles, moral principles, and ethics.
Mr. Wobsmer. You do not think, then, that you social scientists are capable
of producing all the answers?
Dr. Colegbove. Oh, absolutely not. No. No, we do not have all the answers
in social science. We are rather dangerous people to trust implicitly. (Hearings,
p. 574.)
Professor Colegrove also testified to the effect that an excess of
empiricism resulted in a decline of morality.
The attitude of many social scientists toward moral codes is
evidenced by the discussion of The Promise of Sociology, by Ells-
worth Paris of the University of Chicago, published in The American
Sociological Review in 1938. Professor Paris said:
"Morals spring from the human struggle and, while every code has a certain
sacredness, yet none is sacrosanct, and all are subject to change. It was our dis-
tinguished chairman, Professor Ross, who once wrote in a book that was highly
and publicly commended by the president of the United States. 'We need an
annual supplement to the decalogue.' " [Emphasis ours.]
It is the privilege of any individual to doubt our existing moral
codes. When social scientists presume, however, to approach solu-
tions of human problems, or problems of human relationships, upon
the major premise that there is doubt concerning the validity of our
basic moral precepts, they run counter to what the public is con-
vinced is its own interests. Consequently, this Committee sees no
justification for the use of the public funds which foundation capital
and income represent to finance research with such an approach.
In the letter to which we have previously referred, Professor Sorokin
of Harvard stated that the excessive empirical research which the
foundations have promoted for roughly 30 years has had two results:
"(1) the bulk of this sort of research has been perfectly fruitless and
almost sterile from a theoretical or practical standpoint ;
"(2) some of the investigations, made especially along Freudian and
similar theories (or popularizing this sort of views), have been rather
78 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
destructive morally and mentally for this nation." He said, moreover,
that the "exceptional emphasis on training researchers along (these)
lines, with almost complete exclusion of the theoretical approach, is cer-
tainly undesirable for our society, either from a purely scientific or
from a practical standpoint."
Professor Sorokin has a book now in process and to be published
this year with the title Fads and Delusions in Modem Sociology,
Psychology, Psychiatry, and Cultural Anthropology. In it, he says, he is
"critically examining exactly all the main currents of empirical
research in the social sciences particularly favored by the founda-
tions — sometimes by colleges and regularly by the United States Navy,
Army, and Air Corps- — spending a considerable amount of funds for
this sort "of research."
One more quote from Professor Sorokin, one of our foremost
sociologists:
"The futility of excessively favoring this sort of research (the empirical) particu-
larly is well demonstrated by its sterility — in spite of the many millions of dollars,
enormous amount of time and energy expended by research staffs. Almost all of
the enormous mass of research along this line in the United States of America for
the last 25 or 30 years has not produced either any new significant social theory
or any new method, or any new technique, or any scientifically valid test, or even
any limited causal uniformity. This sterility is perhaps the most convincing
evidence of unwise policies of the foundations, colleges, and Army, Navy, and
Air Corps research directors."
Social Science Research in the Universities and Colleges.
Some interesting and critical comments were made, in the testimony
before the Committee, regarding the types of research supported by
the foundations in institutions of higher learning. Professor Hobbs,
for example, testified as follows:
Particularly where large grants are involved, the grants tend to be geared into
programs of "empiricism" — and I wish the word would be kept in quotes when-
ever it is used here— and then graduate students receive their training through
these grants. I don't mean to imply in any sense that the foundations have
organized their grants for this purpose, or that they are promoting intentionally
and purposefully the type of thing I am going to describe. I merely wish to
point it out as a situation which does arise and which I believe is quite unfortunate.
These graduate students, who, of course, will be the researchers and the teachers
of the future, are subjected by the very nature of the situation to enter in dis-
proportionate numbers into this one small area, an important area, to be sure,
but just one area of their training. They are encouraged through the situation
to embark upon study projects which are extremely narrow, and with the aid of
the grant, the persons running the research are able to employ professional
interviewers, for example. One part of graduate training should be some acquaint-
ance with people. The graduate student, I would feel, would gaiii much more if
he were to do his own interviewing, rather than merely take the results which
were collected by a professional interviewer. In failing to do his own interviewing,
he has thereby lost an important element, I would say, of what should be his
training.
Furthermore, these projects aid these students to a disproportionate degree.
Other students who, through differing interests, through a broader viewpoint of
society and behavior, who do their own work and who don't have such assistance,
are handicapped in comparison with the ones who receive the aid through founda-
tion grants.
So that there are cases where, the graduate student in his training has concen-
trated in a very small area of the statistical computations— and I wish to add
that in themselves there is nothing wrong with that, but they are a very small
part of the overall picture — but in such training they neglect studies of the
traditions of the country, the studies of the history of the country, they neglect
actual experience with people, they neglect studies of the philosophies which
have been developed in connection with human civilization, and they even
TAX-EXEMPT 1 FGtTKBATIONS 79
neglect — and this may sound extreme, but I can vouch that it does happen —
they even neglect studies of science.
One of my favorite questions when I am examining students for a graduate
degree is a question of this sort. Here you are, you are going to get a doctor of
philosophy degree. What have you read in philosophy? I appreciate that this
sounds extreme, but there are graduate students who get such degrees who have
never read a book in philosophy.
Then another question along the same lines: What have you ever read in the
philosophy of science; and some of them have read little or nothing in that area
either.
So you get this tendency to overspecialize, overconcentrate in one area which
admittedly has its merits, but which leads to a narrowness of mind, not the broader
outlook which we need in the present undeveloped conditions associated with
social science.
Another aspect of this same situation is that graduate students and faculty
members are discouraged from applying for grants unless they, too, are willing
to do this type of "empirical" investigation. (Hearings, pp. 168, 169.)
Professor Hobbs then referred to the bulletin of The Social Science
Research Council regarding the award of research fellowships, which
we have previously described. He pointed out that the bulletin —
* * *. does tend in the direction of giving the people in the field the impression
that unless research involves statistical computation, then they don't have much
chance of getting a grant. Now, perhaps that impression is incorrect. It may
well be incorrect. I just say that the impression does spread, so that if it does
occur to you to ask for a grant to make a broader study of the history of the
development of social science or something of that sort, then after having read
such things you are likely to be discouraged.
. It may bs your own fault. Perhaps if you had gone ahead and requested you
would have obtained it. I am just saying that atmosphere is created and I think
the foundations themselves would regret that this is the situation and would
probably be willing to do whatever they can to change that atmosphers to create
one which everybody appreciates bhey are interested in, broader types of research
instead of this particular empirical one. (Hearings, p. 170.)
Professor Kowe made this lucid criticism of foundation practices.
He stated that the former tendency had been to support the training
of individuals, a personnel training program. Now, he said, founda-
tions had turned to an emphasis on sponsoring research as such.
(Hearings, pp. 525, 526.) In particular, he was critical of the co-
operative or group type of research, giving as an example of this
variety of research in which foundations invest heavily, the Tai Ping
Rebellion research project. He testified:
Dr. Rowe. You are probably referring to the Rockefeller Foundation support
of a group study at the University of Washington at Seattle. I don't believe
they ever made a single grant of $200,000, but I think the sum of their grants
probably came to that much. This was a grant for the purpose of group research
on the Taiping Rebellion, which was a rebellion which took place in China
during the middle of the 19th century, about the same time as the Civil War
was raging in this country. The importance of this rebellion can be seen from
the fact that historians estimate that 20 million persons lost their lives either in
the fighting as a result of disease, epidemics, destruction, and so forth, that
raged up and down China from south to north during that period of 12 to 14
years, I think. The Taiping Rebellion has long interested historians, and it is
worthy of a great deal of study. Here we get into a rather interesting conflict,
it seems to me, between the attitudes of foundations on the scarcity of personnel
and human resources in the far eastern field on the one hand, and their willingness
to financially support a tremendously narrow focus of interest in research on the
other hand.
There are a large number of highly controversial questions of method involved
here. The question of how to conduct research. There is valid room for experi-
mentation on these matters. But the least that can be said about the University
of Washington project is that it was a rather drastic, in my view, experiment in
the use of the so-called collective-research project, in which the individuals
80 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
counted for a good deal less than the team. The team was put together and
people blocked out areas of subject-matter, as I have understood it, and areas of
data and evidence and worked on these, and their results were pooled in the
shape of card files of detailed information on this episode in Chinese history, the
idea being that out of this kind of a team pick and shovel approach, you get a
lot of facts together, and out of these facts will be brought forth a series of
monographic studies.
There is room for this kind of thing, but I always thought they went a little
bit far with it, because I understood — tad I beg to be corrected if I am wrong
on this, I have never had any official connection with this project— I understood
that they even integrated into their Taiping Rebellion studies the work of
their doctoral candidates, so that people in Chinese history, for example were
brought in there and given support to write theses on some aspect of the Tai-
ping Rebellion.
I thought that in view of the sacrcity of human resources and the need for
general training on Far Eastern matters, that this was focusing it down pretty
firm. It is a wonderful project from the point of view of research. If you believe
in gadgetry, this had all the gadgets you will ever want to find. If you believe that
the best way to promote research is to pick out highly trained and able people
and set them free in a general field, like Chinese studies, to follow their own
interests wherever they may lead them, then you see this is the very opposite of
that kind of thing. It does achieve a certain kind of mechanical efficiency, it
seems to me, at the expense of inhibiting the kind of thing that Mr. Hays was
talking about, namely, the freedom of the individual to go down any number of
blind alleys he wants to go down in the free pursuit of his curiosity, in the interests
of honestly trying to come up with important things. (Hearings, pp. 530, 531.)
There is considerable criticism of foundations for their failure to
spread their largess among the smaller colleges. Professor Colegrove
expressed this criticism several times in his testimony. For example:
Then I would like to see the foundations sprinkle more of these research projects
around the small colleges. There is a wealth of brains, a wealth of competence,
in our small colleges and universities, which does not have its share in research
grants at the present time. I would hope that the foundations would give much
more attention to what is going on in the small colleges. The tendency is to con-
centrate this in the large universities, if they use the universities, or concentrate
in the operating societies.
* * * * * * *
Mr. Wormser. Professor, two university presidents told me that they thought
in principle it would.be a good idea to distribute it among the smaller colleges,
but actually it was only in the larger universities that you found the men com-
petent to do research in these various areas.
I think one partial answer to that is that in some of these empirical studies no
talent is required. They are more or less quantitative studies, which a professor
in a smaller college might be able to do just as well as a university professor.
What is your idea as to that?
Dr. Colegrove. I would agree with that. There are many small colleges
located near the center of a State where the professor— if he is dealing with the
area situation — could quite easily do a lot of traveling just as well from a small
college as from a large university; I think the foundations have not yet explored
enough into the talent that can be found in the small colleges.
Of course, there is a tendency for a young man in a small college who gets a
grant and thereby attracts attention to himself to be pulled into a university.
Personally, I regret to see the small colleges raided in this way by the great uni-
versities taking off the faculties of these small colleges — teachers who are doing
so much good for the American people.
The Chairman. But there would be less likelihood of the so-called raiding both
of the faculty and the graduate students in the small colleges if grants were more
general and made available to the outstanding faculty members and the outstand-
ing students, don't you think?
Dr. CoLEPrRovE. Oh, yes, quite true. Quite true. We have had a number of
universities that have raided small colleges almost to their destruction. President
Harper of the University of Chicago raided Clark University, took pretty largely
all of its talent to the University of Chicago. But that was before the founda-
tions were greatly operative; and of course he did it by offering, on the one hand,
research facilities, and on the other hand, much higher salaries than they were
getting at Clark University. (Hearings, pp. 582, 583.)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 81
The Social Science Research Council, in its publication, Items, of
June, 1952, analyzed the statistics of its grants and reported that 89.1
per cent of their fellowship grants went to sixteen institutions; and
that Columbia, Harvard and Chicago universities received 47.6 per
cent of the total for the period 1925-51. An analysis of the grants
made by The American Council of Learned Societies will show a lesser
concentration but still a marked favoritism for certain institutions.
The offered explanation of such favoritism is that these schools have,
in general, the best faculties and the best student body. We are not
in a position to judge. It would, however, seem to us important for
the trustees of foundations to consider whether it might be advisable
to distribute their grants in such manner as to increase the number of
institutions which have sufficiently high standards. By a judicious
spreading of grants, it might be easy to raise the stature of some of the
smaller institutions to the standard which the foundation executives
assume is the exclusive property, now, of a few large institutions.
A glance at the list of recent recipients of favor from, and consul-
tants to, the Behavioral Sciences Division of The Ford Foundation
indicates a definite concentration among favored institutions or their
faculties. Of the committees which formulated policies for this Fund,
including a total of 88 persons with university connections, 10 seem
to have been from Harvard; 8 from Chicago; 7 from Yale; 5 from
California; 5 from Stanford; and 5 from Columbia. A total of 59
of these men (out of 88) represented 12 institutions. There is addi-
tional significance in the fact that some of these recipients and con-
sultants were on a multiplicity of committees. For example, Pro-
fessor Lazarsf eld of Columbia, was on six ; Professors Carroll of North
Carolina, Merton of Columbia, and Tyler of Chicago, on five; Pro-
fessors Lasswell of Yale, Simon of Carnegie Tech., and Stouffer of
Harvard, on four, etc. Counting the number of times each person
with a university connection appears on committees of the Fund, we
reach this representation:
University of Chicago 23
Harvard 18
Columbia 16
Yale 13
North Carolina 8
California 7
Stanford 7
Cornell 7, etc.
Note also that associates of The Band Corporation are represented 11
times. This interlock with The Rand Corporation is highly interesting.
We must add the intriguing fact that the Behaviorial Science Fund
provided a grant-in-aid program under which each of fifty persons
were to receive $5,000 to be spent at their own discretion for the
purpose of enriching their own work. The associates and consultants
distributed this largess, and included a goodly number of themselves in
their lists.
Note also that The Social Science Research Council took part in
the policy-making of the Fund and that considerable funds were made
available to it and through it.
In the Summer of 1950, $300,000 was given to each of seven univer-
sities and to The Social Science Research Council (beyond other large
grants to the SSRC). Why this money was concentrated on this
limited group of institutions, we do not know.
82 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
This Behavioral Science Fund has vast resources at its command.
Its list of objectives indicates an underlying assumption that human
behavior can be understood as an object of the natural sciences would
be, within the framework of limited numbers of cause-effect relation-
ships. This doctrine is not by any means universally accepted, and
there is the danger that the huge sum available to the Fund to promote
its underlying thesis can make this the ruling doctine in the social
sciences. A full examination of the current and intended operation
of this great fund is indicated, as well as a study of why certain
institutions have been so greatly favored by it.
"The Social Sciences At Mid-Century"
One of the most important pieces of literature which has come to
the attention of the Committee relating to the methods and accom-
plishments of the social sciences is the booklet, The Social Sciences
At Mid-Century, published for the Social Science Kesearch Center
of the Graduate School by the University of Minnesota Press. It
contains a series of papers delivered in honor of Guy Stanton Ford,
a former president of the Social Science Research Council, April 19—21,
1951. In the first of these papers, Frederick Osborn, trustee of The
Carnegie Corporation oj New York, admits that all social science is
influenced by preconceived value judgments. He says that "the
social scientist can at best gather only a few of the facts" and thus
must engage in evaluation. This certainly distinguishes the social
sciences from the natural sciences end gravely weakens the claim
that the natural science processes can be applied to the social sciences.
Mr. Osborn admits that social scientists are only at the "beginning
of knowledge."
Yet, Mr. Osborn later makes the claim that the social scientist
"can provide a careful appraisal of the facts" bearing on any "given
problem" and thus give the administrator "new and important tools."
By inference, however, he admits that this alleged contribution by
social scientists is not scientific for he says that "Experience, judg-
ment and intuition must still play a part in making decisions." The
sum. total of these various statements is that the social scientist does
not know all the facts and cannot collect all the facts but, neverthe-
less, fulfills an important function in giving softie of the facts to
administrators. It is easy to see that the emphasis produced by a
selected group of facts might be worse than producing no facts at all,
in so far as it might well imbalance logical decision.
In the same volume, Charles Dollard, president of The Carnegie
Corporation oj New York, calls attention to the "widespread suspicion
that social scientists are interested not so much in studying the behavior
of men and the social situations and problems which involve men, but
rather in planning fundamental changes in our society." However,
he does not expressly deny that this suspicion is warranted. He goes
so far, in fact, as to admit that there are "those who use the label of
social science to validate ideas and programs which are in no sense
scientifically derived." He adds that "the social sciences have suffered
an incredible amount of damage- through the rash pronouncements of
some of our number on all manner of subjects on which no real scien-
tific data are available and through predictions and forecasts which
have turned out to be lamentably wrong."
Mr. Dollard includes in his paper the rather startling suggestion,
to which we have referred, that social science should "initiate a more
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 83
rigorous system of internal policing." As he expounds his idea, he
intends that such policing should result in higher standards of re-
search. On the other hand, the concept of policing requires police.
The concept is eminently dangerous if any one group is to be granted
the right to use an intellectual nightstick.
Philip M. Hauser, professor of sociology at the University of
Chicago, points out that in the institutions which are most research-
minded, "recognition in the form of promotion, salary advancements,
etc." depends more on the quantity of research activities and publi-
cations than their quality. This is a sad inferential commentary
on the contribution of foundations to research in the colleges. El-
bridge Sibley, of The Social Science Research Council, in his paper
admits that "the average 'quality' of students specializing in the social
sciences both in undergraduate and graduate schools is indeed inferior
to that of those specializing in the 'hard' sciences * * *".
f The most interesting of the papers is that by Carl O. Sauer, pro-
fessor of geography at the University of California, entitled Folkways
oj Social Science. Professor Sauer said that he came to "admonish",
and he did indeed, severely criticising the research methods and con-
trols promoted by the great foundations and the clearing house organ-
izations which they support in what we have referred to as the "con-
centration of power." Those who may believe that freedom of inquiry
and freedom of spirit are essential to the preservation of the American
way of life will read these quotations from Professor Sauer's paper
with profit:
"In American social science it has indeed become a dominant folkway to associate
■progress with putting the job inquiry into large-scale organizations, under formally
prescribed methods, and with limited objectives. Having adopted the name 'science,'
we are impressed by the 'method of science' as inductive, quantitative, experimental.
We fire even told that such is the only proper method."
* * *
"The more we get committed to keeping counts and tests going in ever lengthening
series, and to adding suitable items as additional series, the more do the limits of
social science become denned by what may be measured. And thus the more
restricted does the range of personalities and temperaments become who are
attracted into social studies! There is further risk that we attach such merit to
quantification as to confuse means and ends, industriousness with intellectual
achievement."
* * *
"At mid-century the social sciences have moved far away from where they .
stood at the beginning of the century. In numbers of workers they have multi-
plied greatly. Thousands fill the places manned by a few score in those early
years. When memory calls the roll, however, of that elder generation, we look
up to them with respect and admit that they opened up wide horizons that we
in part have lost."
"Most of those I knew were detached observers, unconcerned about choosing
or directing their work in terms of social or political ends. (The reform element
came along somewhat later. In my Chicago days this intrusion of emotional
drive was noticeable only in some students of sociology, then already in some
numbers refugees from divinity schools, seekers for a new faith in social welfare.
In economics I saw the welfare motivation come in with the young labor
economists.)"
"We have less and less time for thinking, and again we turn to organization to
simplify and regulate that part of our activity that is left for research. We
acquire space, equipment, manpower, and budgets and put them into a table of
organization as research bureaus and institutes. Obviously, long-term projects
are favored that project an orderly series of steps in the acquisition of data and
of processes for their analysis. Workers are assigned to designated posts and
84 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
tasks. Again we have set up an assembly line for mass production, resembling
the operations of industry and government. In some cases the product is sub-
jected to scrutiny, even as to policy clearance. And often a distinction develops
between directing staff and working staff."
* * *
"I think we must admit, however, that more often the idea of an institute has
come first, thereafter the question as to who should run it, and last of all the mat-
ter as to why it was needed. Should not the questions be, Is there a problem
that has become so complex and sufficiently far advanced that an organized and
concerted effort is necessary for further advance, and is it to be under the direc-
tion of the man who has thought himself farthest into this matter? I fear that
not many institutes originate or are maintained thus. We tend to raise up career
administrators, able at finding funds, tactful, energetic operators, who at best
have been scholars too briefly and who by temperament and the course of their
lives become more and more removed from the contemplation and concentration
that are needed for creative work. Thus they may lose even the sensitiveness
and understanding by which they know who a scholar or what a piece of creative
work is."
"Of all fields, we have perhaps become most given to conferences and com-
mittees for the planning of research. We agree as to division of labor, as to pre-
venting duplication of research, as to priority of topics, as to assembling special-
ists for a cooperative project. In these and other ways unwittingly are we going
about shackling freedom of inquiry. Borrowing a term from the engineers, we
recommend 'pilot studies,' serving as models to be reproduced until another de-
sign is approved for another series of studies. Conferences require agenda, and
these have offspring that result in another conference. The common variety of
scholar is awkward, bewildered, and often bored by these uncongenial procedures,
which pass into the control of our entrepreneurial colleagues. Thus we develop
hierarchies of conference members who speak a common language, obscured from us
by its own ceremonial terms. They become an elite, fashioning increasingly the direc-
tions and limits of our work, as they become more and more removed from the
producers."
"A serious and delicate problem is posed by the growing role of the national re-
search council and foundation, the last years having seen a continually increasing
concentration of influence. Although there are more and more individual workers,
there is no such rise in diversity of interests. With the growth of central advisory,
planning, and granting agencies, perhaps simply as a matter of economy of atten-
tion, it has come about that a reduced number of directions are selected for ap-
proval and support. Thus is introduced a grave and growing disorder into the
body of our scholarship. When preferments and rewards are being posted for
doing certain things and not doing others, the pliable and imitative offer themselves
most freely, and the stubborn ones hold out. Local authority is impressed by the
objectives expressed by the distant patron. He who is not deflected from his
chosen direction to take part in the recommended enterprise is the unhappy guest
who sits out the party. Thus conforming to a behavior pattern comes to prevail.
Yet the able research 31 will always know best how he should employ his mind,
and his own inclination will be to seek his own way. The dependent and com-
plaisant ones do not matter. Paved with good intentions, the roads down which
we are being urged do not lead toward the promised land of freedom of the spirit.
No group can or should wish to be wise and farseeing enough to predetermine the
quest for knowledge."
* * *
"Research programs are set up in terms of social goals, and it is assumed thai
professional training provides the deep insight needed. Having set up schools for
the training of prophets, it gratifies us to hear that the great task of social science
is to remake the world."
* * *
"In my experience the talented, oiiginal student is the only one for whom it is
difficult to find a place. He may be as likable as another and as willing to work at
the customary tasks of his trade. But it is usually safest not to call attention to
any unfamiliar direction his mind is taking. What the market wants and gets is
persons who can fill job specifications neatly. We dislike having juniors around
who think about matters beyond our ken and reach. We build sheltering walls
against the unknown by making organizations and methods, curricula, and research
programs. And we get no more than we make room for."
* * *
"Will those who come after us say that we offered protection and encouragement
to young minds differing from our own, that we raised no barriers to seeking and
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 85
thinking, that we blocked no paths into the unknown, that we turned no one from
whatever most roused curiosity and gave delight, that we 'have loved no darkness,
sophisticated no truth ' ? "
The Slant to the Left.
The evidence leads this Committee to the conclusion that the research
in the social sciences with foundation support slants heavily to the left,
A book written by Stuart Chase called The Proper Study of Man-
kind, published in 1948 by Harpers, and written at the instance of
Donald Young of the Social Science Research Council and Charles
Dollard of the Carnegie Corporation to "run a kind of chain and com-
pass line across the whole front of the sciences devoted to human
relations", is illustrative. The book was planned and developed
according to the publisher's announcement "in consultation with
dozens of social scientists in all parts of the country, and Messrs.
Young and Dollard followed the project step by step to its completion."
The project was initially financed by the Carnegie Corporation and
may fairly be characterized as a project of The Social Science Research
Council; it is virtually an exposition of the SSRC point of view.
Mr. Hays of the Committee questioned whether the book had a
wide circulation. The publisher reported that approximately 50,000
copies had been sold. Taking into account the fact that academicians
and many other people would normally read this type of book out of
the library, its impact must have been great.
Professor Hobbs questioned why a man like Stuart Chase was
selected by foundation representatives to write this particular book
giving a survey of the social sciences. He described Chase as a man
"who has in his work definitely indicated his leanings toward collectiv-
ism and social planning and that sort of thing * * *". (Hearings,
p. 134.)
Professor Hobbs quoted from a book written by the late Congress-
man Shafer and one John Howland Snow, called The Turning of the
Tide, in which the active association of Stuart Chase with the
League for Industrial Democracy (the original name of which was
Inter-collegiate Socialist Society) was delineated. (Hearings, circa
p. 134.) Prof. Hobbs also quoted from an address by Stuart Chase
to the Department of Superintendents of the National Education
Association on February 25, 1935, in which Chase said as follows
(Hearings, p. 135):
"If we have even a trace of liberalism in our natures, we must be prepared to
see an increasing amount of collectivism, Government interference, centralization
of economic control, social planning. Here again the relevant question is not
how to get rid of government interference, but how to apply it for the greatest
good of the greatest number."
Prof. Hobbs offered a further quotation from a declaration by
Stuart Chase in the NEA Journal of May 1934, that an abundant
economy requires
"the scrapping of outworn political boundaries and of constitutional checks and
balances where the issues involved are technical, * * *." (Hearings, p. 135.)
This Committee, like Dr. Hobbs, cannot understand why a man of
Stuart Chase's obvious leanings should have been selected to
make a "chain and compass" survey of the social sciences. The book
he produced with foundation support seems replete with what might
have been expected of him, including, as Prof. Hobbs explained
(Hearings, p. 135, etseq.), a promotion of the completely false notion
86 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
that the methods of the physical sciences can be translated to the social
sciences.
In his book Mr. Chase said (Hearings, p. 137):
"I am grateful to J, Frederick Dewhurst, Charles Dollard, John Gardner,
Pendleton Herring, Ralph Linton, H. A. Murray, Talcott Parsons, Don K. Price,
and Paul Webbink for a reading of the manuscript, but I am, of course, responsible
for the final draft."
We understand that all the persons mentioned have been actively
associated with foundations or heavily supported by them. The
conclusion seems fair that they have endorsed Mr. Chase's ideas and
that they themselves lean strongly to the left or at least strongly
support that scientism which seems to produce or be an ally of leftism.
Indeed, Mr. Charles Dollard, in his statement filed with the Com-
mittee in behalf of The Carnegie Corporation of New York, of which he
is President, registered wide approval among social scientists. He
said:
"* * * competent authorities who reviewed The Proper Study of Mankind
found no lack of balance in Mb, Chase's treatment of the various social sciences."
(Hearings, p. 988.)
The approach advocated by the author and supported by founda-
tion funds derogates conventional morality. He says:
"Social science might be denned on a high level as the application of the
scientific method to the study of human relations. What do we know about
those relations that is dependable? The 'wisdom of the ages' obviously is not
good enough as the state of the post-war world bears eloquent witness."
"The scientific method does not tell us how things ought to behave but how
they do behave. Clearly, there is no reason why the method should not be
applied to the behavior of men as well as to the behavior of electrons." (Hear-
ings, p. 138.)
The author, continuing with the following statement, gives the
impression that there is no substantial difference between social
science and natural science:
"There are social experiments and physical experiments, and the scientific
method can be used most advantageously in both."
Upon which quotation Prof. Hobbs commented as follows (Hearings,
p. 139):
"I would like to interject, again, there are social experiments and there are
physical experiments, but I would like to point out in the physical experiments
you are dealing with electrons and. things of that type. With the social experi-
ments you are dealing with human beings and it makes quite a different situation."
The author also commits the error of presenting an unbalanced set
of ideas. There is, for example, testified Prof. Hobbs, a stress on
"cultural determinism", a doctrine which is subject to very serious
doubt. As Prof. Hobbs put it (Hearings, p. 139):
"Sir, it is not a matter of there being no validity whatsoever. It is a matter
of a theory of this type being presented to the public with the weight of the
foundations behind it, as though it were the scientifically proved fact. In that
context, it is not correct."
The book discusses in some detail the theory that by manipulating
society you can change not only society itself but also the people
in it. "Theoretically," says the book, "a society could be completely
made over in something like 15 years, the time it takes to inculcate
a new culture into a rising crop of youngsters." (Hearings, p. 141.)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 87
Obviously, "culture determinism" has been a weapon of both
Fascism and Communism. And it might readily be concluded that
the author thought the use of this method desirable. It is a technique,
as Prof. Hobbs pointed out, close to "brain washing".
The following quotation from the Chase book is truly disturbing
(Hearings, p. 142) :
"Prepare now for a surprising universe. Individual talent is too sporadic
and unpredictable to be allowed any important part in the organization of
society. Social systems which endure are built on the average person who can
be trained to occupy any position adequately if not brilliantly."
This, said Prof. Hobbs, is reminiscent of the Russian (Pavlov's)
experiments, on the conditioning of dogs.
During Professor Hobbs' testimony the question was raised whether
he was not perhaps discussing only isolated books, after which the
following colloquy took place between Counsel and the witness
(Hearings, p. 146) :
Mr. Wormser. Mr. Chairman, may I suggest to Dr. Hobbs that I think he
ought to make clear, which I believe is the fact, that he does not intend merely
to discuss 3 or 4 books as the only books in this area which have any unpleasant
connotation to him. What he is really doing is giving them as illustrations, per-
haps particularly sharp illustrations, of the use of what he calls scientism and its
promotion by foundations. Please answer this yourself, Dr. Hobbs, but isn't
your main thesis that what you call scientism widely promoted by foundations
and that in itself has a deleterious effect on society?
Dr. Hobbs. The thesis is not in the book in relation to the foundations specifi-
cally, but I would say that, speaking in general terms, the thing which I call
scientism is promoted in an appreciable measure by the foundations. And scien-
tism has been described as a point of view, an idea, that science can solve all of
the problems of mankind, that it can take the place of traditions, beliefs, religion,
and it is in the direction of that type of thing that so much of the material in the
social sciences is pointed. I am not saying that we have reached that, or that
many would come out blatantly and say that now that can or should be done.
But it seems to me, and I may be wrong, but it does seem to me that we are going
in that direction, and it is time that we might take a little stock of it.
Professor Hobbs criticized the discussion of the "cultural lag"
theory in Chase's book, namely that:
* * * technology has advanced very greatly, but that our ideas, our beliefs,
our traditions, have not kept pace with it. Therefore, there is a lag between
the technological advance and the culture, and the implication is that the beliefs,
ideas, sentiments and so on, about the family, the church, about government,
should be brought up to date with the technology, which superficially sounds
reasonable enough, except when you begin to analyze it it really settles down to
being in the first place, a nonscientific notion, because the two things being com-
pared are not commensurable, that is, they have not been reduced to any common
denominator by which you can measure the relative rates of change in between
them. (Hearings, p. 147.)
This "cultural lag" theory is expressed in the statement filed by
The Rockefeller Foundation:
"The experiences of World War I and the painful uncertainties of the post-war
and depression period seemed to reflect a growing and menacing gap between
man's technical and scientific capacity and his apparent inability to deal with
his own affairs on a rational basis."
The Rockefeller Foundation has long been addicted to the cultural
lag theory. As early as 1922, Beardsley Ruml recommended to the
Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial Fund that it enter the field of the
social sciences. He advanced that false analogy between the social
and the natural sciences which has led social scientists into "nose-
counting" and a mathematical approach to the solution of human
88 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
problems. He promoted the idea that the collection and tabulation
of social science data should have greater foundation support. More-
over, he strongly supported the cultural lag theory, saying (as quoted
in Raymond Fosdick's history of The Rockefeller Foundation):
"Unless means are found for meeting the complex social problems that are so
rapidly developing, our increased control of physical forces may prove increasingly
destructive of human values."
Such a statement may appear to have some validity at first reading.
Reading into it, however, what is implicit in its point of view and
approach, it proposes that the social scientist can find better ways for
human beings to live together, by reorganizing our ideas, our beliefs,
our traditions, to keep pace with advancing technology.
Professor Hobbs said that the cultural lag notion:
* * * has the implication that we should keep religion up to date, and patriotic
sentiments, ideas about marriage and the family.
Well, if you do this, of course by implication to take an extreme illustration,
then you would have to modify your religion every time there was a significant
technological change with automobiles or airplanes, things of that sort, which
would give you of course a great deal of lack of permanence.
The cultural lag theory has appeared in many if not most of the sociology text-
books with the implication that we should abandon the traditional forms of belief
about the family and religion. Inescapably that tends to be the implication.
The way Stuart Chase puts it:
"The cultural concept dissolves old ideologies and eternal verities but gives us
something more solid to stand on, or so it seems to me. Prediction takes shape,
the door to the future opens, and light comes through. Not much yet, but enough
to shrivel many intellectual quacks, oververbalized seers and theorists, whose
theories cannot be verified."
At the very time he is talking about a theory which cannot be verified. (Hear-
ings, p. 148.)
An interesting recent exampl e of the prevalence of the "cultural lag"
theory is to be found in a letter dated August 20, 1954 by Edward L.
Bernays, President of The Edward L. Bernays Foundation, to the
New York Herald- Tribune, and published in its issue of August 23,
1954. Mr. Bernays offers $2,500 on behalf of The Berna^o Foundation
for a private study centering on the four Brooklyn boys who shortly
before had shocked the public by violent and murderous acts. These
boys had apparently come from good homes and Mr. Bernays'
approach to discovering why they could have gone so wrong is dis-
closed by this quotation from his letter.
"A terrific gap exists between our ability to control the technological elements of
our society and our ability to cope with societal problems."
It is very much to be doubted that the "cultural lag" theory can
account for the behavior of the four Brooklyn lads.
Moral relativism and the cultural lag theory strike at the very roots of
the average American's traditional values. Promulgation of such unveri-
fied, pseudo-scientific theories dissolves the belief that religion gives us
certain basic verities upon which we must construct a moral and ethical
life, that certain basic and unalterable principles underlie our system
of government and should be maintained faithfully for the preservation of
our society. It is not our province to prove that such radical theories as
relativism and cultural lag are wrong. It is the responsibility of those
who advance them under the protecting cloak of "science" to prove that
they are accurate and correct. Until such verification has been produced
it is difficult to justify the use of tax-free funds for what is an unscientific
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 89
attack on the very fundamentals upon which the convictions oj the
American citizen are based.
The statement filed by Mr. Charles Dollard (Hearings, p. 945,
et seq.), as President of the Carnegie Corporation of New York,
supports the selection of Me. Chase to write The Proper Study of
Mankind, Mr. Chase is held to be, and he undoubtedly is, "an
extremely able writer." But we have stated that Mr. Chase is
far to the left and thus a strange selection to make for the job of
writing the bible of The Social Science Research Council. This Mr.
Dollard seeks to answer by stating that Mr. Chase just previously
had done a job for the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey. Mr.
Dollard 's observation in this regard is a non-seguitur applied in a
frantic attempt to obscure the real issue, which is the pattern of
Mr. Chase's intellectual background. How about Mr. Chase's
record of Communist front associations. They will be found in the
Appendix. They do not make him a Communist, but they place
him among those whose extreme leftist tendencies have led them into
the support of many dangerous organizations. What sort of judgment
may be expected from such a man! We find the answer in his adulation
of both Lauchlin Currie and Harry Dexter White whose demise the
nation need not mourn (The Proper Study of Mankind, pages 211, 205).
"An American Dilemma"
Just as we cannot understand why Mr. Chase was selected to
write the bible of the SSRC, we cannot understand why Gunnar
Myrdal was selected to make the study which resulted in An American
Dilemma. This project involved an expenditure of some $250,000 of
funds granted by The Carnegie Corporation of New York. The subject
of the study, the negro problem in the United States, was of course
highly desirable. In a preface to the book written by the President
of The Carnegie Corporation it is explained that because the subject
is charged with emotion it was felt desirable to select as a director
"someone who could approach the task with a fresh mind, uninfluenced
by traditional attitudes or by earlier conclusions." This eminently
commendable statement, however, contrasts with the fact that
Gunnar Myrdal, a Swedish social scientist, was selected. Dr. Myrdal
was and is a socialist. How an unbiased point of view could be
expected from one of Dr. Myrdal's persuasion we cannot understand.
The following quotations from the book itself indicate Dr. Myrdal's
bias. They also expound theories regarding the American people and
their government which this Committee finds most unfortunate.
'•Indeed, the new republic began its career with a reaction. Charles Beard in
'An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States' and a
group of modern historians, throwing aside the much cherished national myth-
ology which had blurred the difference in spirit between the Declaration of
Independence and the Constitution, have shown that the latter was conceived
in considerable suspicion against democracy and fear of 'the people.' It was
dominated by property consciousness and designed as a defense against the
democratic spirit let loose during the Revolution." (Page 7.)
* * * * * * $
"This conservatism, in fundamental principles, has, to a great extent, been
perverted into a nearly fetishistic cult of the Constitution. This is unfortunate
since the 150-year-old Constitution is in many respects impractical and ill-suited
for modern conditions and since, furthermore, the drafters of the document made
it technically difficult to change even if there were no popular feeling against
change." (Page 12.)
55647—54-
90 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
"Modern historical studies of how the Constitution came to be as it is reveal
that the Constitutional Convention was nearly a plot against the common people.
Until recently, the Constitution has been used to block the popular will: the
Fourteenth Amendment inserted after the Civil War to protect the civil rights
of the poor freedmen has, for instance, been used more to protect business cor-
porations against public control." (Page 13.)
''Another cultural trait of Americans is a relatively low degree of respect of
law and order. This trait, as'welT^fls the*jother one just mentioned is of paramount
importance for the Negro problem asjwejshall showlin some detail in later chapters.
There is a relation between these two traits, of high ideals in some laws and low
respect for all laws, but this relation is by no means as simple as it appears."
(Page 14.)
# $ 5(: * * * *
"Undoubtedly the idealistic concept of American law as an emanation of 'natural
law' is a force which strengthens the rule of law in America.
"But, in another way, it is at the same time most detrimental to automatic,
unreflecting law observance on the part of the citizens. Laws become disputable
on moral grounds. Each legislative statute is judged by the common citizen
in terms of his conception of the higher 'natural law'. He decides whether it
is 'just' or 'unjust' and has the dangerous attitude that, if it is unjust, he may feel
free to disobey it." (Page 16.)
$ # j * $ * $ $
"This anarchistic tendence in America's legal culture becomes even more
dangerous because of the presence of a quite different tendency: a desire to
regulate human behavior tyranically by means of formal laws. This last tendency
is a heritage from early American puritanism which was sometimes fanatical and
dogmatic and always had a strong inclination to mind other people's business.
So we find that this American, who is so proud to announce that he will not
obey laws other than those which are 'good' and 'just', as soon as the discussion
turns to something which in his opinion is bad and unjust, will emphatically
pronounce that 'there ought to be a law against . . .' To demand and legislate
all sorts of laws against this or that is just as much part of American freedom as
to disobey the laws when they are enacted. America has become a country
where exceedingly much is permitted in practice but at the same time exceedingly
much is forbidden in law." (Pages 16 and 17.)
"And many more of those unrespected laws are damaging in so far as they,
for example, prevent a rational organization of various public activities, or when
they can be used by individuals for blackmailing purposes or by the state or
municipal authorities to persecute unpopular individuals or groups." (Page 17.)
"For example, it cannot be conducive to the highest respect for the legal
system that the federal government is forced to carry out important social legis-
lation under the fiction that it is regulating 'interstate commerce/ or that federal
prosecuting agencies punish dangerous gangsters for income tax evasion rather
than for the felonies they have committed.
"So this idealistic America also became the country of legalistic formalism.
Contrary to America's basic ideology of natural law and its strong practical sense,
'the letter of the law/ as opposed to its 'spirit,' came to have an excessive im-
portance. The weak bureaucracy became tangled up in. 'red tape.' The clever
lawyer came to play a large and unsavory role in politics in business,' and in the
everyday life of the citizen. The Americans thus got a judicial order which is in
many respects contrary to all their inclinations." (Page 18.)
1* «p *js * t 4 S H' *p
"We have to conceive of all the numerous breaches of law, which an American
citizen commits or learns about in the course of ordinary living, as psychologically
a series of shocks which condition him and the entire society to a low degree of law
observance. The American nation has, further, experienced disappointments in
its attempts to legislate social change, which, with few exceptions/ have been
badly prepared and inefficiently carried out. The almost traumatic effects of
these .historical disappointments have been enhanced by America's conspicuous
success in so many fields other than legislation. One of the trauma was the
Reconstruction legislation, which attempted to give Negroes civil rights in the
South; another one was the anti-trust legislation pressed by the Western farmers
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 91
and enacted to curb the growth of monopolistic finance capitalism; a third one
was the prohibition amendment." (Page 19.)
"If in the course of time Americans are brought to be a law-abiding people, and
if they at the same time succeed in keeping alive not only their conservatism in
fundamental principles and their pride and devotion to their national political
institutions, but also some of their puritan eagerness and courage in attempting
to reform themselves and the world — redirected somewhat from the old Biblical
inclination of thinking only in terms of prescriptions and purges — this great nation
may become the master builder of a stable but progressive commonwealth."
(Pages 20 and 21.)
"The popular explanation of the disparity in America between ideals and actual
behavior is that Americans do not have the slightest intention of living up to the
ideals which they talk about and put into their Constitution and laws. Many
Americans are accustomed to talk loosely and disparagingly about adherence to
the American Creed as 'lip-service' and even 'hypocrisy'. Foreigners are even
more prone to make such a characterization." (Page 21.)
Mr. Dollard in bis statement filed as President of The Carnegie
Corporation cited other quotations from An American Dilemma which
are kinder in tone toward the American people. It is our opinion
that the sections quoted by Mr. Dollard do not offset the unpleasant
and prejudiced references we have quotedlabove. Nor are we im-
pressed with Mr. Dollard's attempt to characterize Dr. Myrdal as a
moderate sort of socialist. Professor Colgrove, who, as Secretary-
Treasurer of the American Political Science Association for eleven
years, ought to know, testified that Myrdal was a "very left wing
socialist" and "very anticonservative." He said:
Dr. Myrdal was a Socialist, prettyTfar left indeed extremely left. He was not
unprejudiced. He came over here with all the prejudices of European Socialists.
And the criticism that he makes of the American Constitution, the criticism that
he makes of the conservatives of the United States are bitter criticisms. He
didn't have any praise at all for the conservatives. He did praise what he called
the liberals. And he implied that it was the conservatives in the United States
who created the problem and who continued the difficulties of any solution. I
felt the foundations did a great disservice to American scholarship in announcing
his study as an objective nonpartisan study whose conclusions were wholly
unbiased. It was almost intellectual dishonesty. (Hearings, p. 577.)
This Committee would be far less concerned about the leftist slant-
ing of so many products financed by great foundations in the social
sciences if there were a reasonably commensurate number (and weight)
of such products slanted in the other direction. There can be no doubt
that the greatest freedom consonant with public responsibility is
desirable in the conduct of foundation work. However, we conclude
that the freedom which most of those who direct the work of the largest
foundations, and some others, insist upon is merely the freedom to
propagate leftist propaganda.
The Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences.
This work is one to which closer study should be given than this
Committee was able to give. Though somewhat out of date, it is
still the "Supreme Court" of the social sciences, the final authority to
which appeal is made in any social science field by many students and
researchers. It was estimated as late as 1952 that it was being used
at least a half million times per year. Apparently The Rockefeller
Foundation, The Carnegie Corporation of New York and The Russell
Sage Foundation financed the project or materially supported it. It
was, clearly enough, a highly desirable venture. But it does seem,
92 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
in view of its enormous importance in conditioning the thinking of
reference-users, that every means should have been used by the
foundations who made it possible to see that it was a truly objective
and representative piece of work. Was it? Let us see.
Perhaps a Communist was not so reprehensible a character in the
thirties as one would be today. But a Communist was still a Com-
munist; objectivity could hardly be expected of him, whether in 1930
or 1954. Communists have a way of bringing things political into
almost any subject. In the case of the Encyclopedia, Communists
and pro-Communists were permitted to write articles on subjects in
which their slant could obviously be heavily applied, and it was.
The key man in the creation of the Encylopedia was Dr. Alvin
Johnson, an Associate Editor. In his book, Pioneer's Progress, he
said:
"In enlisting assistant editors, I forebore all inquiry about infection with Marx.
Like a common cold, Marx was in the air, sometimes cutting editorial efficiency,
but not irremediably. * * * I had two assistant editors who asserted that they
were Socialists. That was nothing to me: they were good and faithful workers.
And one was so considerate of my reactionary bent as to inform me that a new
editor I had taken on was a Communist."
Dr. Johnson then told how he interviewed the man and told him he
would keep him on — "Your private political views are you own
business", said the good Doctor. Incidentally, his reference to him-
self as "reactionary" was humor — his own Communist-front associa-
tions have been recorded; he may certainly be judged as considerably
to the left.
The article on The Pise of Liberalism was written by Harold J.
Laski, a British socialist. He also did the articles on Bureaucracy,
Democracy, Judiciary: Liberty: Social Contract: and Ulyanov, Vladimir
Ilich.
Atheism, Modern Atheism was written by Oscar Jassi, a socialist of
Hungarian origin. Bolshevism was written by Maurice Dobb, an
English radical. Capitalism, by Werner Sombart, a socialist who be-
came affiliated with the Nazis.
Communism was written by Max Beer, a Marxian of the Uni-
versity of Frankfort, Germany. Communist Parties was written by
Lewis L. Lor win, whose views rray be gleaned from this state-
ment in the article: "The view common in the United States that the
Communists are either cranks or criminals is largely a reflection of a
conservative outlook." He also wrote the article on Exploitation.
Corporation, written by two New Dealers, Adolph A. Berle, Jr., and
Gardiner C. Means, clearly reveals their bias at that time. (Mr.
Berle has since written The 20th Century Capitalist Revolution and
repudiated some of his former views regarding corporations.) They
sav that the corporation may well equal or exceed the state in power.
"The law of corporations, accordingly, might well be considered as a
potential constitutional law for the new economic state: while business
practice assumes many of the aspects of administrative government."
Criticism, Social, was produced by Robert Morse Lovett, of
wide Communist front associations. Education, History, was pro-
duced by George S. Counts, a radical educator concerning whom
we shall have more to say in the section of this report on education.
Fabianism was written by G. D. H. Cole, a British socialist. He
also wrote the article on Industrialism. Fortunes, Private, Modern
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 93
Period, prepared by Lewis Corey, is easily recognizable as a Marxist
analysis.
Freedom of Speech and of the Press was written by Robert Eisler
of Paris who destroys the Christian ethic with this authoritative
pronouncement:
"No one today will consider the particular ethical doctrine of modern, or for
that matter of ancient, Christianity as self-evident or natural or as the morality
common to all men. The modern relativist theory of values has definitely
shattered the basis on which such artificial churches as the various ethical societies
orders rested."
Government, Soviet Russia was prepared by Otto Hoetzsch of the
University of Berlin who gives us kind thoughts about the Soviets —
for example:
"Although the elections are subject to pressure of Communist dictatorship,
this workers' democracy is not entirely a fiction." [Emphasis ours.]
The article on Labor-Capital Co-Operation is credited to J. B. S.
Hardman, whose Communist front affiliations are recorded in
Appendix, Part IX of the Dies Committee Reports, 78th Congress
(1944). He also wrote Labor Parties, General, United States, Masses
and Terrorism, Laissez-Faire is the product of the socialist, G. D. H.
Cole; his job was done with a hatchet. Large Scale Production, by.
Myron W. Watkins, is an attack on the production methods of Big
Business.
Morals is the product of Horace M. Kallen, whose extensive
Communist-front associations are a matter of record. Philosophy
was produced by Horace B. Davis, with ex-Communist-front associa-
tions (See Appendix IX). Political Offenders, by Max Lerner,
a radical, contains a diatribe against the treatment of political
offenders. Political Police, is by Roger N. Baldwin, recorded
by Appendix IX as having Communist-front associations. Power,
Industrial, by Hugh Quigley, seems to be a plea for more control of
business. Proletariat is by Alfred Meusel of Germany and seems to
admire the Soviet system in Russia.
Social Work, General Discussion, Social Case Work, is the work of a
Communist-fronter, Philip Klein. Socialism was written by a
socialist, Oscar Janski. It is not unsympathetic to Communism.
Stabilization, Economic, was written by George SoIjle, of ex-
tensive Communist-front affiliations. It expresses doubt that "stabili-
zation" can be accomplished under our present order. Strikes and
Lockouts is by John A. Fitch, of wide Communist-front affiliations.
Vested Interests is the work of Max Lerner.
One of the theses in Woman, Position in Society, by the Communist-
fronter, Bernhard J. Stern, is that we are not doing right by our
women, while the Soviets are.
This list is not inclusive. Many more instances of radical selection
could be given, plus the multitude of articles by moderately slanted
writers. What is amazingly characteristic of the Encyclopedia is the
extent to which articles on "left" subjects have been assigned to
leftists; in the case of subjects to the "right", leftists again have been
selected to describe and expound them. This is reminiscent of the
reviews in the New York Times of books on China, in which both pro-
and-con-Communist volumes were assigned to pro-Communists for
review.
94 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
"Experiment", "Risk Capital" and the Colleges.
The intense application of some of the great foundations to the
social sciences seems, by the evidence, to stem from what amounts to
a current intellectual fad having its origins in the "cultural lag"
theory to which we have referred. It runs that foundations should
not longer expend their funds in helping to create a better and healthier
physical world — it has already advanced mechanically beyond the
ability of human beings to live properly within their new environment.
Foundation funds should now be applied to human welfare in the
social sense. The social scientists are to be able to give us ways of
living together better than those which religious, educational and
political leaders have been able to devise for us in the past. We must
improve "man's relation to man." This concept, widely touted in
the foundation world, is illustrated by the underlying report upon
which the work of The Ford Foundation was based. It contains this
statement:
"In the Committee's opinion the evidence points to the fact that today's
most critical problems are those which are social rather than physical in char-
acter — those which arise in man's relation to man rather than in his relation to
nature."
How are the social scientists to accomplish this reform in our social
relations? With financial assistance by the foundations, they are to
"experiment". We have explained some of the dangers of such ex-
perimentation for which foundations are to "risk" their funds. Here
is part of Professor Hobbs' testimony about it:
Mr. Wormser. Dr. Hobbs, do I express your opinion correctly by this state-
ment? The foundations, or some of them, in the Cox hearings last year, main-
tained that the best use of their funds would be in experiment in reaching out for
new horizons, in considering their precious funds in what they call risk capital.
You would approve of experiment in the sense of trying to reach new horizons,
but you would caution, I assume, against experiment as such where it relates to the
relationship of human beings and basic factors in our society?
Dr. Hobbs. Yes, sir; a great deal of caution, I think, should be applied in those
areas. For one thing, because of the points I tried to establish yesterday, that the
mere fact that the thing is being studied can change the situation; and secondly,
because the findings of a study can affect human behavior and we should be
extremely cautious when we are entering into areas of that sort. (Hearings,
p. 167.)
This Committee strongly supports Professor Hobbs' opinion that the
utmost caution should be used when experimentation with human
relationships is involved in a foundation grant or project. We suggest,
moreover, that the trustees of foundations consider carefully whether
they have not been induced by their executive associates to "go over-
board" on the general concept of "experiment." Among the many
letters received by the Committee staff from colleges, criticising the
foundations for failure to contribute direct support, and for preferring
"new projects" is one from Barnard College (Columbia University)
which contains this:
"My only comment about foundation policies is that the foundations all seem
to have the point of view that they should contribute only to 'new projects.'
The College's largest problems are to maintain faculty salaries and scholarships at
a reasonable level, and to keep ancient buildings repaired, so that the basic work
of teaching can be continued. It is discouraging to have to add 'new projects'
in order to secure foundation support when the financial structure of the college
has not yet become adjusted to the increase in the cost of living."
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 95
The almost frantic search for something new and experimental in
which to invest foundation funds, is a phenomenon with many un-
happy repercussions. Among them is the situation of which this
college administrator complains. Would it not be better, in the long
run, for foundations to give more direct assistance of widespread nature
to sound educational institutions which are dependent on private support,
rather than to waste gigantic aggregates of money annually on the pursuit
of something "new'
."«
IX. The Political Activities of Foundations
The Quantitative Test.
Once a tax-exempt foundation has obtained its initial gift or estate
tax exemption, it may spend all its capital, perhaps hundreds of mil-
lions, in the support of any "ism" it cares to, and by active propa-
ganda. Nothing prevents it from using its capital in political activ-
ity. The only "unless" might be if the Bureau of Internal Revenue,
acting soon enough and on sufficient evidence, were able to prove that
there had been fraud at its inception.
One penalty is imposed by the tax law if a foundation engages in
politics. Its income tax exemption is lost if any "substantial part of
the activities" of the foundation is used for "carrying on propaganda,
or otherwise attempting to influence, legislation." 17 Proof that it was
violating this prohibition would mean loss of income tax exemption,
and subsequent donors to the foundation would not be given gift or
estate tax exemption for their donations. But the foundation could go
right on spending its existing principal for its selected "ism".
Let us look at the quantitative facet of the prohibition. A "sub-
stantial part of its activities" is the test. It is evident that a quanti-
tative test, particularly one so vaguely described, is futile and
impossible to administer. Take Foundation X with a capital of
$500,000,000 and Foundation Y with a capital of $50,000. Is the
measure of "substantial" to be the amount of money spent, or the
proportion of money spent? Y can do far less harm spending all of
its income for political purposes than can X, spending but one per
cent of its income. The contrast illustrates one of the difficulties of
applying a quantitative test.
Is the test, then to be the amount of energy, or time, or effort
spent on political action? How could that be measured with sufficient
accuracy? Or is it the impact of the work upon society which is to
be measured — and if so, how?
It is true that measures of "substance" are sometimes necessary in
tax and other laws. In this instance, however, it is a futility. The
tax law might better proscribe all political activity, leaving it to the
courts to make exceptions on the principle of de minimus non curat lex.
17 The 1954 Interna] Revenue Code added this further condition on tax exemption: "* * * and which
does not participate, or intervene in (including the publishing or distribution of statements), any political
campaign on behalf of any candidate for public office." The interpretation of this addition by the courts
will be watched with great interest. Among the interesting issues will be this: will attacks on a candidate
for office be construed as activity "en behalf" of his opponent? Again, where a foundation is the substantial
owner of a newspaper which actively supports candidates, will the foundation have violated this new pro-
vision? Can a foundation any longer safely hold substantial ownership in a newspaper? This Committee
has given little attention to the problems raised by the new wording because it came into the law at the
very end of its research period and because other, less blatant, types of political activity seem far more
important and more difficult to combat.
I
96 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The Qualitative Test.
A reading of the testimony of Internal Revenue Commissioner
Andrews, and his Assistant, Mr. Sugarman, will show that the quali-
tative test of political use is weak; it has been further enfeebled by
court decisions to the point where it is of use only in the most extreme
cases. Most of the foundations impinging upon the political area
get their tax exemption as "educational" institutions. Yet the
courts have so construed the term "educational" that much that is
truly political propaganda may be justified within that term. Again,
the tax law itself, in referring to "propaganda", ties it in to the
phrase "to influence legislation", so that general political propaganda,
however forceful and forthright it may be, does not deprive a founda-
tion of its exemption. Only propaganda directed at "influencing
legislation" is proscribed, and even this proscription is further
weakened by the quantitative test.
The Committee takes it as axiomatic that, whatever the dejects in the
tax law as it stands, foundation funds, constituting public money, should
not be used for political purposes or with political bias or slant. It is
admittedly extremely difficult to draw the line between what is per-
missible as "educational" and what should be avoided as "political".
Indeed, it may be impossible to find any legislative or regulatory way
to delineate the border with clarity. This Committee offers no easy
answer, but urges that the problem receive intense attention in the
light of our disclosure of political activity by foundations.
The League for Industrial Democracy.
One of the more obvious cases of political activity disclosed by the
Committee's research is that of The League for Industrial Democracy.
This very influential foundation became the subject of litigation in
1932. Its tax-free status was questioned by the Commissioner of
Internal Revenue, but in the case of Weyl v. Commissioner, 48 Fed.
(2d) 811, the tax exemption was supported on the ground that the
foundation was an "educational" organization. We suggest, under
the facts to be related, that the Bureau should revive its study of this
foundation and move against its tax exemption. To continue to grant
this foundation tax exemption would create a precedent for granting
tax exemption to all political parties and political organizations.
The witness who testified concerning the League was Mr. Ken
Earl, a lawyer formerly on the staff of two subcommittees of the
Senate Judiciary Committee — the Subcommittee on Internal Security,
and the Subcommittee on Immigration. Mr. Earl's contention was
that the LID "is an adjunct of the Socialist Party," a contention
which seems soundly concluded from the evidence he produced out of
publications of the LID itself, and accounts of its activities and
proceedings.
[Whenever in the following quotations italics appear, we have sup-
plied them.]
Quoting from a publication of an affiliate, The Inter-Collegiate
Student Council of the LID, Mr. Earl gave their statement of "what
the LID stands for":
The L. I. D. therefore works to bring a new social order; not by thinking alone,
though a high oraer of thought is required; not by outraged indignation, find-
ing an outlet in a futile banging of fists against the citadel of capitalism; but
by the combination of thought and action and an understanding of what is the weakness
of capitalism in order to bring about socialism in our own lifetime. (Hearings, p.
740.)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 97
The LID was originally The Intercollegiate Socialist Society, founded
in 1905 after a call by Upton Sinclair and George H. Strobel (Hearings,
p. 740) "for the purpose of promoting an intelligent interest in
Socialism among college men and women." In 1921 its name was
changed to the League for Industrial Democracy. There was a
mass of evidence to show that the aims were not purely socialist
education, but that action, political action, was a purpose of the organi-
zation. The following quotation from the LID publication Revolt
(the very name has significance) illustrates:
"The League for Industrial Democracy is a militant educational movement
which challenges those who would think and act for a 'new social order based on
production for use- and not for profit.' That is a revolutionary slogan. It means
that members of the L, 7. D. think and work for the elimination of capitalism, and
the substitution for it of a new order, in whose building the purposeful and pas-
sionate thinking of student and worker today will play an important part."
as well as this:
"Men and women who would change a world must blast their way through the
impenetrable rock. No stewing over drinks of tea or gin, no lofty down-from-
my-favorite cloud, thinking more radical thoughts than thou attitude makes a
student movement or a radical movement. L. I. D. students talk and write about
conditions. L. I. D. students act about them.
"* * * a staff of 6 or 8 leave the Chicago or New York offices to help coordinate
activities. They get into classrooms, they talk to classes. * * * In addition
these speakers furnish a valuable link between students and their activities later
on. After graduation the work continues unabated. In city chapters, in New
York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Detroit, Baltimore, the work of education and action
goes on.
"The L. I. D. emergency publication, the Unemployed and Disarm, have
reached a circulation of one-half million. * * * Students organized squads of
salesmen to sell these magazines, containing slashing attacks on capitalism and
the war system, at the same time it enable the unemployed to keep alive.
"In November of this year a training school for recent graduates will be opened
in New York * * * to equip students by field work to perform their tasks in
the labor movement. * * *" (Hearings, p. 744.)
As Mr. Earl observed: "This language about recruiting and train-
ing, I think, would be more appropriate in an Army field manual than
in the journal of an 'educational' association."
In the same issue of Revolt, Paul R. Poster, after using some of the
cliche phrases of Stalin and Lenin, advised workers and farmers
that "... their recourse now is to jorm a 'political party which they
themselves control, and through which they might conceivably obtain
state mastery over the owning class." (Hearings, p. 745.) He added
these paragraphs which indicate an intention to support violent
action:
"When Community Chests are more barren than Mother Hubbard's cupboard
and workers begin to help themselves to necessities in stores and warehouses,
when bankrupt municipalities stringently curtail normal services, then vigilante
committees of businessmen, abetted by selected gangsters, might quickly and
efficiently assume command of governmental functions.
"The assumption of power by vigilantes in a few key cities would quickly
spread. The President (Hoover or Roosevelt) would declare a national emer-
gency and dispatch troops to zones where vigilante rule was endangered. Prob-
ably he would create a coalition super- Cabinet composed of dominant men in
finance, transportation, industry, radio, and the press, a considerable number
of whom, would be Reserve officers." (Hearings, p. 745.)
. *F *l* 'P *r *r* t* ^K
"The bulldozing methods of the war-time Council of Defense would be employed
against protesting labor groups and some individuals might be imprisoned or shot,
though several 'cooperative' A. F. of L. officials might be given posts of minor
responsibility."
****** *
98 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
"Watch now those little flames of mass unrest * * * Great energy will be gen-
erated by those flames of mass revolt. But revolt is not revolution, and even
though new blankets of cruel repression fail to smother the fire and in the end
only add to its intensity, that energy may be lost unless it can be translated into
purposive action. Boilers in which steam can be generated — if we may work our
metaphor — need be erected over the fire, and that steam forced into engines of
reconstruction.
"Trotsky, in describing the role of the Bolsheviks in the Russian Revolution,
has hit upon a happy figure of speech which we may borrow in this instance. No
man, no group of men, created the revolution; Lenin and his associates were but
the pistons driven by the steam power of the masses. The Marxist Bolshevik
party saved that steam from aimless dissipation, directed it into the proper channels.
"To catch and to be driven by that steam is the function of the radical parties in
America today."
Hs # * * N= * #
"There are members who would pattern it (the Socialist Party of America)
after the German Social Democracy and the British Labor Party, despite the dis-
astrous experiences of two great parties of the Second International. There are
members who have lost to age and comfort their one-time fervor, and members
who would shrink from struggle in time of crisis."
****** *
"They (the Socialists) must overcome the quiescent influence of those whose
socialism has been dulled by intimacy with the bourgeois world, and they must
speak boldly and convincingly to the American working people in the workers'
language.
"If their party can rise to these tasks then perhaps capitalism can be decently
buried before it has found temporary rejuvenation in a Fascist dictatorship." (Hear-
ings, p. 747.)
Mr. Porter was an organizer and lecturer for the LID and a
missionary to thousands of college students. (Hearings, p. 747.)
The position and objectives of the LID were made clear in a,n
article in Revolt written by Felix S. Cohen, who said:
"The crucial issue of industrial civilization today is not between laissez-faire
individualism on the one hand and collectivism on the other. History is deciding
that question. The question for us is what sort of collectivism we want.
"Modern technology makes collectivism inevitable. But whether our collectivism
is to be Fascist, feudal, or Socialist will depend * * * upon the effectiveness with
which we translate those political ideals into action.
"You cannot fight on the economic front and stay neutral on the legal or political
front. Politics and economics are not two different things, and the failures of the
labor movement in this country largely arise from the assumption that they are.
Capitalism is as much a legal system as it is an economic system, and the attack
on capitalism must be framed in legal or political terms as well as in economic terms."
<<* * * a Socialist attack on the problem of government cannot be restricted to presi-
dential and congressional elections or even to general programs of legislation. We
have to widen our battlefront to include all institutions of government, corporations,
trade unionSj professional bodies, and even religious bodies, as well as legislatures and
courts. We have to frame the issues of socialism and democracy and fight the
battles of socialism and democracy in the stockholders' meetings of industrial
corporations, in our medical associations, and our bar associations, and our teachers'
associations, in labor unions, in student councils, in consumers' and producers'
cooperatives — in every social institution in which we can find a foothold * * *."
■t* t* ^P *P t* *K S|c
"But the need of fighting politically within corporations and trade associations
and professional bodies, as well as labor unions, is just as pressing if we think
that fundamental social change can be secured in this country only by uncon-
stitutional measures.
"In a revolution, when the ordinary political machinery of government breaks
down, it is absolutely essential that the revolutionary force control the remain-
ing centers of social power. In Russia the success of the Bolshevik revolution
rested with the guilds or Soviets, which were not created by the Communist
Party and which antedated the revolution. A socialist revolution in this country
will succeed only if our guilds, chief among them our engineering societies, have within
them a coherent socialist voice. (Hearings, pp. 747, 748, 749.)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 99
We leave to the reader to judge whether such pronouncements are
purely educational!
The "democratic" process was of small concern to the author of
these diatribes. He said: "We do not need a majority" to deal with
"the putrid mess of capitalism." (Hearings, p. 749.)
A full reading of Mr. Earl's testimony and of the many quotations
from LID pamphlets and puDlications which he cited is necessary
to understand the consistency with which action was urged by the
LID spokesmen. We can only give some of them here to illus-
trate. The quotations from an article by Amicus Most in the De-
cember 1932 issue of Revolt (Record, p. 1678) is one example. From
that same issue comes the following piece of "education" written by
the LID Field Secretary, Mr. Porter:
"Planned as an outgrowth of the conference will be a student delegation to
Washington soon after Congress convenes, to serve notice that hundreds of stu-
dents will reject the role of cannon fodder in another war, to request that the
State Department furnish a list of investments for which American youth may
some day be called upon to fight, and to demand that money now spent in main-
taining the ROTC and the CMTC be used providing relief for the unemployed."
(Hearings, p. 749.)
##■**#**
"Delegates are already making preparations to attend the traditional Christ-
mas holiday conferences of the LID, which will be held for the 18th successive
year in New York and for the 5th in Chicago. This year's New York theme will
be "Socialism in Our Time" and has been divided into three main categories, to
with: "How May Power Be Won," "Building a Power Winning Organization,"
and "The Morning After the Revolution." The Chicago conference will be along
similar lines."
*******
"On Armistice Day military-minded former Senator Wadsworth * * * spoke
in Ithaca on behalf of a bigger Army and Navy. Members of the Cornell Liberal
Club, the Socialist Party, and student peace groups held a rival meeting after
which they marched with banners past the high school in which Wadsworth
was speaking. Leonard Lurie, Cornell LID representative, describes their gentle
reception: 'Several of the Army officers rushed at us and tore down a few posters.
The police joined the destruction which was over very shortly. They prodded
us along the street with their stick, and Fred Berkowitz remarked, "I wonder
how much the police get for hitting people * * *." '
"Growing in frequency are those trips of economics and sociology classes to
case illustrations, such as breadlines and strikes, of this magnificent chaos called
capitalism. Pecently students from Amherst and Mount Holyoke, under the
leadership of Prof. Colston Warm , made the rounds of New York's choicest soup
kitchens, and visited Brookwood Labor College 1S and the officers of various
radical organizations." (Hearings, pp. 749, 750.)
See also the Blueprints for Action as quoted in the Hearings, p. 749.
And this, from the same issue of Revolt:
"We must look ahead four years. Local elections are in a sense more impor-
tant than national elections. To measure the success of the L. I. D. is to measure
the growth of Socialism in the comrtMnity you are in." (Hearings, p. 751.)
The title of Revolt was changed in 1933 to The Student Outlook, but
its nature was not altered one whit. In the first issue under the new
name appeared an article by Helen Fisher reporting on the 17th New
York conference of the LID:
The speeches and questions were those of participants in the building of a
power-winning organization, not spectators.
It was a conference of 'practical revolutionists.
Both Reinhold Niebuhr and Franz Daniel ruled out the possibility of our ever
attaining a Socialist commonwealth by purely parliamentary action * *
is A since dissolved Communist hot-bed!
100 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Both felt that the change would come through the general strike or some weapon
similar to it.
In the discussion of the Day After the Revolution, Paul Blanshard stressed the
necessity of presenting at least a sketch of the proposed society to those we are trying to
get to fight for it. Sociolopia, according to Mr. Blanshard^ would have an inter-
national government, some international battleships and airplanes, complete control
of munitions, an international language and socialized ownership of industry
with control by workers, technicians, and consumers. Lewis Mumford then spoke
about the need for disciplining ourselves morally and intellectually the day before the
revolution. (Hearings, pp. 751, 752.)
One Alvin Coons reported, in turn, on the Chicago LID conference:
Clabence Senior, national secretary of the Socialist Party, expressed the
belief that reforms would only further encumber the capitalistic system and that
every concession would only hasten its end.
Atjirming his faith in democracy as an instrument of social change, he advocated its
use as long as possible, not however, excluding the use of other methods should it fail.
"Radical students," he declared, "can spend their time more profitably getting
acquainted with the problems of the workers, than they can in studying chemistry to
learn how to make bombs, or in going into the ROTC to learn how to shoot. You can
hardly expect to teach the workers to shoot straight for bread if you cannot teach them
to vote for it". (Hearings, p. 755.)
Is this ancient history? Has the socialist leopard changed his
spots? Indeed, no. Mr. Earl quoted at length from Freedom and
the Welfare State, the report of a symposium held by the LID on
April 15, 1950. (Hearings, pp. 756, et seq., and 762, et seq.) These
show that even today the League "is expending more energy in
political action than in education." (Hearings, p. 756.) To repeat
all these would burden this report. Suffice it to say (which a reading
of the record will readily show) the symposium was essentially political
in character, and was attended by many eminent political characters.
On April 11, 1953, the 48th LID Annual Luncheon was held in
New York. Speakers included persons of political significance and
eminence. At this point Mr. Earl was questioned regarding the
alleged "leftist" nature of these personalities. Mr. Earl stated that
he did not characterize these persons or their political beliefs as bad ;
he introduced their identities to demonstrate "the political nature of
the LID, and the fact that it is constantly in the political arena.
"I am not here to judge the merits or the demerits of the program that the
LID has espoused, except to say that the LID has espoused socialism,
and that they are for certain things, and that being for a certain political
program, for certain legislation, I think they should be plumping for it
with dollars that remain after their income has been taxed." (Hearings,
p. 763.)
The political nature of this Luncheon Conference is indicated by
its prepared announcement:
At a time when the country is using up many of its natural resources at an
unprecedented rate; * * * when powerful lobbies are seeking to take our off-
shore oil resources out of the control of the Federal Government, to return the
TVA to private monopoly and to prevent the further public development of the
Nation's vast hydroelectric resources, and when adequate aid in the development
of resources of other lands is vital to the maintenance of world democracy, it
is most fitting that the LID should give its attention this year to this important
problem of conservation. (Hearings, p. 765.)
Dr. Harey Laidlbr, executive director of the LID made the
political nature doubly clear. This description was given in a LID
publication of Dr. Laidler's program for "democracy in action in
1953":
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 101
In presenting this program. Dr. Laidler declared that advocates of a
strengthened democracy 19 would be confronted in 1953 with powerful opponents,
well supplied with funds, and that, for the first time in 20 years, the main body
pf the Nation's press would be alined on the side of the party in control of our
national government * * *.
The description of the "program" continues. Is it educational or
political?
1. Conservation of natural resources: It urged the increase of forestland public
ownership and control; the retention of offshore oil by the Federal Government
and the use of revenues from oil resources for educational purposes; extension of
the TVA principle to other river basin developments * * *
2. Social security: The program recommended that the Nation consider the
enactment of a democratically operated national health insurance system * * *
and the strengthening of the old-age pension and unemployment insurance
system * * *
3. Labor legislation: * * * (reorganize child labor laws)
4. Economic stability: It favored the formulation of plans for the mainte-
nance of economic stability when defense tapers off, by means of credit controls,
progressive taxation, useful public works, social-security programs, and other
measures.
5. Housing: It proposed * * * Federal aid for the construction annually by
municipal housing authorities of a minimum of 135,000 apartments for low income
and middle income groups —
6. Education: * * * (Federal aid, better salaries for teachers, "freedom of
inquiry," etc.)
7. Civil rights and antidiscrimination legislation: (stressed need for Federal
and State FEPC laws, liberalization of our immigiation laws, fair hearing to all
public employees charged with un-American activities.)
8. Corruption: (Favored purge of dishonest officials.)
9. Foreign policy: The program favored, in addition to military aid, increased
economic, social, and educational assistance to developed and underdeveloped
countries * * *
10. Labor and cooperative movements: It urged * * * labor unity, the
strengthening of collective bargaining * * * in white collar trades. * * * It like-
wise urged the strengthening of the consumers' and producers' cooperative move-
ment * * * ■
* * * the league repoit viewed as antidemocratic trends the increased influence
of such public figures as Senator McCarthy on important Senate committees;
* * * the increased confusion among Americans regarding what should con-
stitute a realistic democratic foreign policy; the bitter propaganda against the
United Nations which had been witnessed on all sides during the year and the
continued threats of men like Governor Byrnes to destroy their State's public
school system rather than abolish sagregation in the public schools. (Hearings,
pp. 765, 766.)
As Mr. Earl pointed out, the relative merit of these proposals is of
no moment. The fact is undeniable that they are political in nature
and that the LID was engaging in active politics.
He gave another example from the report on a 1952 symposium
luncheon, in which August Claessen, National Chairman of the
Social Democratic Federation, referred to capitalism "now so inoffen-
sively called private enterprise' " as being "essentially immoral. It is a
source of corruption in business and politics. Private enterprise corrupts
government enterprise and the only effective steps toward the elimination
of these immoral influences are the rapid extension of collectivism and the
advance of the cooperative movement." (Hearings, p. 766.)
We pause here to wonder whether the American people wish to
grant tax exemptions to donors to this organization whose dedicated
purpose is to supplant our form of government with another. We are
referring to only a few of the quotations and incidents which cannot
'• Note the characterization of the Republican party as the foe of "strengthened democracy" (small "d")!
102
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
leave any doubt that the LID uses its tax-freed money to promote
socialism in the United States.
Many of the quotations in the record of Mr. Earl's testimony are
from pamphlets sold by the LID and widely distributed. One of
these pamphlets, authored by Mr. Laidlee, the Executive Director,
and entitled Toward Nationalization of Industry, is a plea for socializa-
tion. He says:
"Under a system where the basic industries of the country are privately owned
and run primarily for profit, therefore, much of the income of its wealthiest cit-
izens bears little or no relation to their industry, ability, or productivity.
"The development of our system of private industry, furthermore, has been
accompanied by attempts at autocratic controls of economic, political, and social
relationships by owners and managers of our giant industries.
"Many of our great leaders of industry who have constantly and bitterly opposed
the extension of Federal power and nationalization on the ground of "regimenta-
tion," for years spent much of their time in an attempt to regiment their own
labor forces and, through the use of the spy system, armed guard, police, con-
stabulary, militia, injunctiqn, and blacklists, to prevent the workers under them
from exercising their American right to organize and to bargain collectively.
Laws passed during the thirties have made illegal many of these practices, but
ruthless and undemocratic procedures in labor relations are still resorted to in
industry after industry by the possessors of economic power. These same leaders
have sought to control and regiment political organizations, the press, the platform,
the pulpit, the school, and university in the city, the State, and the Nation.
"The industrialists of the Nation have frequently kept prices high and rigid,
have kept wages down, have constantly chiseled on quality, and have run their
businesses not for the service of the many but for the profit of the few. In many
instances they have sought to involve the contry in international conflict with
a view of safeguarding their investments abroad."
"Our forests should be brought far more completely than at present under
Federal administration * * *."
"The forests of the country, under private ownership, are, furthermore, cut
down faster than they are restored. * * * Public ownership and operation, on
the other hand, would guarantee scientific forest management."
"Bituminous coal mines should be brought under the control of the Federal
Government. * * * The condition of the industry under private control has long
been chaotic."
"Anthracite coal is another resource which, in the interest of the Nation, should
be owned and controlled by the Federal Government."
"The waste in the exploitation of our oil resources likewise necessitates further
Federal control."
"The Federal Government should likewise increase its control over the Nation's
power resources * * * Dr. Isador Lubin 20 some years ago suggested the creation
of a Federal Power Corporation, which should have ownership not only of water-
power, but of coal, oil, and natural gas, with the view of coordinating the efforts
on a national scale of all of those industries which generate power."
"The case for the nationalization of the railroads is a powerful one. Such owner-
ship, in the first place, would make possible the scientific planning of the trans-
portation industry for the entire country."
"Only under Government ownership can a sensible plan be worked out. Only
under such ownership can a foundation be laid for cooperation between the rail-
road system and busses, water transportation, airlines, trucks, and other forms
of transportation, a cooperation absolutely essential to the health and welfare of
the Nation's transportation system."
2 « Dr. Lubin, Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics from 1933 until 1946. was the United States
representative to the U. N. Economic and Social Council from 1946 until March of 1953.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 103
We agree with Mr. Earl that "If this means anything at all, it
means rigid government control over all forms of transportation, not
just railroads. Note also the wholly unreal assumption of bureau-
cratic infallibility which underlies the case for continental coordination
of transportation."
"Only under Government ownership will it be possible to secure enough cheap
capital adequately to modernize the railroad system.
"Finally, Government ownership would serve the interests of democracy by
taking this vitally necessary industry out of the grip of a mass of holding com-
panies and financial interests intent on profits and placing it in the hands of
representatives of the 150 million people in the United States. Surely an industry
on which the health of the whole continent system is so dependent should not be
the plaything of small groups of railroad magnates and financiers. * * *" (Hear-
ings, pp. 768, 769.)
Can there be any doubt of the political nature of these statements?
Mr. Laidler goes on arguing for public ownership of power, com-
munications, manufacturing, banking and credit (Hearings, p.
770), and includes an advocacy of government planning of a degree
which can only be called socialistic. (Hearings, p. 771.)
Mr. Earl included in his statement various passages from utterances
of prominent LID members concerning Communism. Actually,
while they indicate a distaste for Russian Communism as a violent
force they welcome the social and economic ideas behind that Com-
munism. (Hearings, pp. 771, et seq.) Alfred Baker Lewis, Chairman
of the LID Board in 1943 suggested that the world revolution
promoted by Russia was "largely a defense measure" ; that the Russian
seizure of part of Poland was merely to achieve a band of defense
against Naziism; and that subversion is merely the Russian way of
combating the aggressive war plans of the American capitalists. Note
the implication in the second sentence of the following quotation that
the Communist dictatorship itself is not aggressive:
"The Soviet's original attacks on the governments of the democratic nations
through the Communist Parties which it set up and controlled, were defensive
measures against attacks actual or expected from those capitalist nations. Rus-
sian imperialism today is the result of an act of will on the part of the Russian
dictator, Stalin, and not because it is the nature of a Communist dictatorship to
practice aggression upon its neighbors." (Hearings, p. 772.)
This was a Chairman of the LID speaking.
Norman Thomas, another LID Board chairman, in the pamphlet
entitled Freedom and the Welfare State, published in 1950, includes
this treasure, after asserting we must save the world through a
"cooperative commonwealth":
"That cannot be done simply by the ballot in a world gone mad. Indeed, under
no circumstances can the working class put its trust simply in the political democracy
of which the ballot is the symbol." (Hearings, p. 773.)
Mr. Earl quoted at length from a pamphlet Freedom From Want,
which recorded the proceedings of the LID conference of May 8,
1943, in which political discussions were paramount. (Hearings, p.
774, et seq.) Alfred Baker Lewis added his touch with this state-
ment:
"To get freedom from want in the postwar world we must be clear that we cannot
do so by reestablishing complete freedom of enterprise, the fifth freedom which ex-
President Hoover and the National Association of Manufacturers want to add
to the four freedoms." (Hearings, p. 778.)
104 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
George Baldanzi, Executive Vice-President of the Textile Workers
Union of America contributed this treasure:
"Business and industry are looking for a solution to the problem of full employ-
ment within the framework of what they call free enterprise. What they mean,
of course, is their old freedoms to exploit. But free enterprise is drawing its last
gasp. This very war we are fighting, and the causes of the war, are indications
of the breakdown of the economy of free enterprise."
* * * * * * *
"Labor believes that special privilege will have to accept a planned economy, that
the days of laissez-faire are gone with the winds of war. We believe that production
will have to be geared to social need rather than to private profit."
*******
"History has shown us that full employment is ngt possible under a system of free
enterprise. * * * The free enterprisers are interested in profits, not people."
* * * • * * * *
"Whether it is established on the basis of democracy or on the basis of monarchy
or on the basis of fascism, the system of free enterprise inevitably leads to war.
When they dry up at home, entrenched privilege must look for them abroad.
War inevitably follows, and another war will follow this war unless the leaders
of the United Nations begin to think in terms of changing the economic pattern
as well as the political pattern of liberated and conquered nations." (Hearings,
pp. 778, 779.) vs.
Among the other speakers was Nathaniel Minkoff of David Dubin-
sky's International Garment Workers' Union (ILGWTJ). Mr.
Minkoff is this years president of the LID. He contributed this call
for political action through a new party:
*******
"So much for the present. The real test will come j'mmediatelv after the war,
when, what with sudden deflation, demobilization and shrinkage of production,
as well as with the inevitable worldwide confusion, our Nation will face the
grave danger of economic collapse. Only a courageous, farsighted economic
policy, based on long-range social planning, can save us from disaster. It is not
my purpose now to discuss what this postwar planning should consist of nor
how it should be undertaken. 1 merely want to stress that it is not merely an
economic and social question, least of all a mere question of technical expertness.
It is primarily a political question, for even the best program in the world must
remain a mere scrap of paper unless it is implemented with political power."
* * " * * * * *
"We must organize independently of old, now meaningless party affiliations into
a compact and mobile force able to exert its influence where and how it will do the most
good * * *."
* * * . * * * *
"Above all we must be clear as to our social basis. What we want, I think, is a
democratic coalition of all functional groups in the community with organized
labor as its backbone and basis. I am not holding out to you any perfect models
but, with all its faults, I think the American Labor Party of New York State is
something of the sort we have in mind." (Hearings, p. 779.)
This was hardly "educational" propaganda!
Samuel Wolchok, President of the Retail, Wholesale and Depart-
ment Store Employees of America, CIO, seconded this call in a speech
before the Washington Chapter of LID:
There is the sharp line of cleavage as to the future of the postwar world, between
the idealistic forces of the liberals on the one hand, and the blind, cruel forces of
the reactionaries on the other.
*******
The reactionaries are well organized. They have power, the press, the radio
money and ruthlessness on their side. They are well-girded for battle. They
are far more interested in controlling the peace than in winning the war and
their energies are solely directed to that end.
*******
The solution then lies in a third party * * * a party supported by trade unions
and true farmers' unions, by welfare organizations, by civic bodies, and by other
social-minded groups and committees * * *. (Hearings pp. 779 780.)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 1®5
Other speakers followed the same general line. Interesting also
was the round table discussion of Mobilizing our Forces, Economic,
Political, Cultural, In Behalf of the New Freedom. (Hearings, p. 779*
et seq.)
In another LID pamphlet entitled Toward a Farmer-Labor Party,
Harry W. Laidler issued in 1988, expressed impatience with the
Democratic Party and agitated for the formation of a new party on
"liberal" lines. (Hearings, p. 781.)
Is this pamphlet educational or political?
Far more excerpts from LID publications could be given to show
the essential political character of the organization and that its efforts
were directed to influence legislation. See, for example, the discussion
of the LID annual conference in New York in April 1951, at Hearings,
pp. 781, 782, et seq. The final session of this conference was given
over to "consideration of labor political action." Mr. Robert Bendiner,
for example, urged:
"Labor should aim at political action that would not be confined to a narrow
program of wages and hours, but would be directed to the achievement of public
welfare in the broadest sense. Labor should show more and more independence
than has been hitherto the case." (Hearings, p. 784.)
There had earlier been a discussion on the subject, How Free is Free
Enterprise. (Hearings, pp. 768, et seq.)
With these words of Mr. Earl at the end of his presentation, this
Committee heartily agrees:
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman and members of this committee, let me say that
in this presentation I do not quarrel with the right of these many people in the
LID, and all of those who have been recipients of its awards or have spoken to it,
and I don't quarrel with their people, to say and write the things which we have
discussed, though I disagree with many of the things which they advocate.
My thesis is this: If the LID is to continue to fill the air with* propaganda concerning
socialism; if it is to continue stumping for certain legislative programs; and if it is to
continue to malign the free enterprise system under which we operate^— then I believe
that it should be made to do so with taxed dollars, just as the Democrats and the
Republicans are made to campaign with taxed dollars. (Hearings, p. 785.)
We urge the Bureau of Internal Revenue to read Mr. Earl's entire
prepared statement and all of the long list of LID pamphlets which
he submitted in evidence and left with the Committee.
Dr. Laidler, as Executive Director of the League for Industrial
Democracy filed a statement with this Committee which is in the
record. It is an attempt (1) to show that this socialist organization is
no longer socialist and (2) that it is essentially an educational organi-
zation. As to the first contention, that it is no longer "socialist", we
might grant that it is now "collectivist" if that distinction is in any
way helpful. Few of its members, associates and officers may be
members of the Socialist Party, but the fact is that very few socialists
now belong to the Party. Norman Thomas, so long its leader, has
ceased to hope that the Party would continue to be an effective vehicle
for the promotion of socialism. The socialist movement is now in
substance outside the Party.
As to the second contention, that the organization is essentially
an educational institution, it is difficult to reconcile this claim with
the literature it has produced, the nature of its meetings and con-
ferences and the identity of the persons associated with it. We
might grant the organization an educational character of a kind — that
it %s an organization to educate the public into the advantages of over-
55647—54 8
10$ TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
throwing our society and substituting a collectivism for it. If that is
properly educational, to entitle it to receive donations with tax exemption
to the donors, something is very wrong with the law.
Another- Specific Instance of Clear Political Use: The
" ■ ■ American Labor Education Service.
The American Labor Education Service is a foundation presumably
engaged in the "education" of "labor." Its activities seem, however,
to have trespassed the borders of political propaganda and political
action.
The background of some ALES staff members, together with a list
of participants in ALES conferences suggests an interlock with indi-
viduals and groups associated with militant socialism and, in some
instances, with Communist fronts.
Eleanor C. Anderson (Mrs. Sherwood Anderson) is listed in the
1938 ALES report as its treasurer and as a director. Among its other
officers have been —
Max Lerner, a former treasurer and director,
J. Raymond Walsh, a director and vice chairman up to at least 1948,
Edttard C. Lindeman, a director until his death in 1953.
All these have a record of Communist front affiliation which will
be found in the Appendix to this Report.
■ An analysis of some of the activities of ALES is included in the
record at page 727 et seq., and is worth careful reading. Various
conferences have been held by the organization. The Washington's
Birthday Workers' Education Conference sponsored annually by
ALES was originally started at Brookwood Labor College in 1924
under the auspices of a local of the American Federation op Teach-
ers. This association did not bode too well, for Brookwood College
was denounced by the American Federation of Labor in 1928 as an
"incubator of Communists."
At various ALES conferences, political subjects received prominent
attention. Nor were they studied merely from an educational angle.
An October 2, 1946 invitation to attend a conference at Milwaukee
stated:
."The topic for this year's discussion is a timely one 'How can Workers' Educa-
tion Advance Labor's Economic and Political Objectives' .
"At the dinner, we shall consider methods labor must use when collective bar-
gaining does not work, especially methods of dealing with the government." [Em-
phasis ours.]
Among the subjects of the 1947 ALES Mid- West Workers' Educa-
tion Conference, were "Political Action for Labor"; and a work-shop
project-— "Political Action Techniques." The Conference at the New
School for Social Research in February, 1950, discussed: "The
Contribution of Labor in Rebuilding Democratic Society" and "The
Role of Workers' Education in Political Action." Similar to a Mid-
West Conference in November, 1948, the 1950 Conference strongly
stressed "the urgency of participation in political action by labor,
and, the re-evaluation of education in relation to political action."
Nor was political action to be confined to the domestic field at ALES
conferences. "International affairs" for labor received much atten-
tion, as did foreign policy and the desirability of labor participating
in establishing foreign policy. ALES even operates a Philadelphia
Center for leadership training in world affairs.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS $07
"Joint farmer-labor action" receives frequent attention. "Action" >
as used, presumably means action, the building up of political pressure.
In other words, labor is not being merely educated in facts, issues and
principles, but is being urged to take action, sometimes in association
with other groups and sometimes by itself, for political goals. Is
that "education" of the type entitling the ALES to tax exemption?
If it is, there is something wrong with the law which permits tax-
exempt money to be used for propaganda to induce political pressure.
The 1953 Report of ALES says that it has, in recent years^. given
special attention to "areas of work where the labor movement believes
that, through education, responsible action .might be strengthened j
Action, action, action — education for action—is the keynote Of the
ALES program. This includes inducing "white collar workers" to
join the labor movement (1953 Report, p. 11). It. also includes
giving attention to
"the legislative and political scene in Washington,' with special emphasis on legislative
and community action carried on by organized labor."
Among the materials used by the ALES for its "educational**
service, are a series of pamphlets "for Workers' Classes." These
include Toward a Farmer-Labor Party by Harry W. Laidler (whom
we have met as executive director of The League for Industrial Df T
mocracy, which published this pamphlet) as well as other publications
of the LID. One pamphlet is of a nature which would bring on a ;
smile, were the orientation not so serious. It is called "Fordism";
it should bring pleasure to the hearts of those in the Ford Foundation
who were responsible for contributing very substantial sums of public
money to ALES, through its Fund for Adult Education.
These pamphlets were listed in an Annotated List, a 45 page
brochure, in 1938 and sold by ALES. The brochure also includes $
list, with a synopsis of each, of plays which are recommended by pro-
duction by labor groups in order to improve the "education" of labor.
Many of these deserve special attention. They are calls to action,
indeed! Two of them were sponsored by the Highlander Folic
School of Monteagle, Tenn., directed by Myles Horton and James. Ai
Dombrowski, officers of and two of the leading lights in The Southern
Conference for Human Welfare— an organization officially cftGcl
as a Communist front. The Highlander Folk School received large
sums of money from the Robert Marshall Foundation. Many were
recommended by the Brookwood Labor College, upon which we
have already commented. Sponsored by the Southern Summer
School, was Bank Bun and Job^Huntlng, and On The Picket Line,
none of which were intended to improve the relationship of labor with
the capitalistic system.
A treasure is Black Pit by Albert Maltz (who was cited by the
House of Representatives on October 24, 1947, for contempt of Con-
gress and subsequently served a jail term) which ALES describes as
follows:
"A miner, framed because of union activity, after coming out of jail, attempts
to find work but is blacklisted everywhere because of union record. Is driven to
accept position as stool pigeon. Requires convincing use of Slavic dialect and
intelligent direction."
Another Malt/ masterpiece is Rehearsal, recommended highly by
ALES; it has to do with the Detroit auto strike. And there are
108 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
many more treasures in the recommended list of plays. There is
The Maker of Swords which, laid in an imaginary country, shows
what mischief munitions makers can do. And Blocks (sponsored by
the Vassar Experimental Theatre) is described as:
"A powerful saltire in which Green Worker and Tan Worker symbolize all the
masses forced unwillingly to war, while the Green Man and the Tan Man symbol-
ize all the leaders, generals, and capitalists making war without engaging in it."
[Emphasis ours,]
Two plays from Soviet Russia are included in the list, which seem
to be adulatory of the efforts of the Communists to improve the lot
of the Russian peasant.
In 1942 ALES published Songs Useful for Workers' Groups. This
includes "Socialist and Labor Songs", some of them revolutionary
works translated from foreign languages, including the Russian. Some
are set to "stirring original music" by Hans Eisler, that notable
Communist. There is also a Rebel Song Book on the list.
The reader is referred to the material in the record (page 727,
et seq.) for further examples of the incitement to action and the indica-
tions that "education" as recommended by ALES consists largely of
creating class hatred and animosity against the free enterprise system.
One person associated with ALES deserves some special attention.
He is Mark Starr, its' Vice-Chairman. Mr. Starr has also been
Chairman of the LID- His interlockings are rather extensive. He
is Director. of Education of the ILGWU, and a member of the United
States Advisory ' Commission on Educational Exchange. He has
been appointed to responsible policy position in the field of education;
as labor consultant to Elmer Davis' Office of War Information (OWI) ;
as a member of the American delegation to establish UNESCO; as a
labor education consultant to the American military government in
Japan; and as a member of President Truman's Commission on
Higher Education. He has also been chairman of the Public Affairs
Committee. Let us, then, examine into Mr. Starr's philosophy of
education to see /whether an organization with which he is intimately
connected in policy making deserves foundation support.
MR. STARR'S Labor Looks at Education, published by the LID
in 1947, not only makes no distinction between education and propa-
ganda, but affirmatively approves of the latter. There must be pur-
pose in education, he mdicates, and his own purpose is made quite
clear:
"A new philosophy of education is striving to be born— a planned community
to replace the jerry-built dwellings produced by the haphazard efforts of the
past."
He expresses sympathy with the efforts of Marx and Veblen to "blast
away the intellectual girders supporting the modern economic system."
MR. STARR has been a heavy beneficiary of largess from the
Ford Foundation's Fund for Adult Education, But he has his own
opinions about foundations. He says that "colleges too often have to
go cap-in-hand and exploit personal contacts with the uncrowned kings
and agents oj philanthropy * * * There are, of course some foundations
which delouse effectively the millions accumulated by monopolies and
dynastic fortunes; but if one could choose a way for the long time support
of education, it would be done by community intelligence rather than the
caprice of the big shots of big business who wish to perpetuate their names
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 10<j>
in a spectacular fashion, a process which may not in ail cases coincide
with the real educational activity oj the college."
Education must be used to cure the social ills. Workers' education,
in particular, is necessary to "the end of group action." His general
thesis is that labor unions and their leaders have a monopoly on
patriotism, while Congress, business and everybody else, are selfish.
Political science and civics courses should so indoctrinate students.
(For an example, see pp. 41-42, of "Labor Looks at Educatim")
Another ALES director is Hilda Smith, who has been noted
for her questionable connections both by the Dies Committee find the
House Un-American Activities Committee.
The controversial Director of Workers' Education of the Works
Progress Administration, who was a member of the American League
for Peace and Democracy, another organization officially cited to be
a Communist front.
Adult education for the so-called "working man" is a truly worthy
objective, and its conduct through unions is highly desirable. But
this is no mere "education" which is being given by the Apericark
Labor Education Service. It is incitement to political action and
breeding of class hatred. As such, it is neither a proper function for a
foundation which enjoys tax-exemption nor does it entitle other foun-
dations to give it support.
The Twentieth Century Fund
This foundation gives a good example of carelessness in selecting
foundation manpower by ignoring radical political bias. This Com-
mittee assumes it was carelessness. If the persons discussed below
were integrated with the Fund's work with a full understanding of
their identities, and an intention to use them because they had
exhibited strong, radical political bias, our criticism would be far
sharper.
The Twentieth Century Fund was founded in 1919 by the late
Edward H. Filene of Boston. ■ Its purpose is "the improvement of
economic, industrial, civic and educational conditions," but the 19ol
report of the Fund indicates that it has confined itself to economic
fields. Apparently, since 1937, the Fund has made no grants to others
but has acted as an operating unit within itself.
The Fund (says its 1951 report) purposely selects subjects for re-
search and study which are "controversial * * * since controversy
is an index of importance and since the Fund's impartial professidhal
approach is clearly of most value to the public just where controversy is
sharpest."
This Committee has not been able to study the work of the Fund
in detail and can offer no opinion as to the extent that the Fund has,
in fact, been impartial. It is impressed, however, with the fact that
some of the key men associated with the Fund have records which
would not indicate that they would be likely to give impartial treat-
ment to any subject having political implications. It is, of course,
theoretically possible for even a Communist to do an impartial eco-
nomic study; but it is our opinion that a foundation which selects
persons of known radical political opinion risks the misuse of the public
money which the foundation's funds represent.
For many years Evans Clark was Executive Director of the
Fund and as such wielded considerable influence,. While he no lotoger
TAX-E&EMPT FOUNDATIONS
holds that position, he is still a trustee of the Fund. Prior to 1920
Mb. Clark was director of the Department of Information, Bureau
of the Representative in the United States of the Russian Socialist Federal
Soviet Republic. In 1920, the Rand School, well-recognized as a
radical institution, published Mr. Clark's book, Facts and Fabri-
cations about Soviet Russia. It is an ardent defense of things Russian
and Communist and riducules the criticism levelled at them. MB.
CLARK has been cited a number of times both by the Dies Committee
and the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
It might be that he has since modified his opinions, and perhaps he
has. Perhaps he no longer supports Soviet Russia. But we note
that he is . the husband of Frieda Kirchwey, well-known as an
extreme radical, whose citations by the Dies Committee and the
Un-American Activities Committee are almost monumental. We do
not mean to imply "guilt by association," but recite the facts to
indicate that the general atmosphere surrounding Mr. Clark would
hob have recommended him for selection as the Executive Director of
an "impartial" foundation active in the politically-charged field of
economics.
The Editor of the Fund's publications is one, George Soule.
Mr. Soule was cited by the Dies Committees, and his record is among
those in the Appendix to this Report. Should a man with the radical
opinions proved by his record be "editor of publications" in a founda-
tion dedicated to the public welfare?
Among the other trustees of the Fund are: Bruce Bliven, Robert
S, Lynd, and Paul H. Douglas all of whom have been cited by
congressional committees and their records appear in the Appendix
to this Report.
. The Twentieth Century Fund has published many of the works of
Stuart Chase, whose political bias is discussed in section VIII of
this report.
. That one officer or one trustee of a foundation may have been
citecl 10, 1.5, 20, or more times by a Congressional Committee investi-
,gating subversive activities, for his associations and his affiliations
with. Communist Fronts, may not thereby establish the legal proof
required in a court of law that he is a card carrying member of the
Communist Party itself; but it would seem to this Committee that
such a record would be conclusive evidence that such person was an
extreme radical or a complete dupe and has no business serving in a
position of trust.
_ Such ah individual would most certainly be tagged as a security
•risk by any agency of the Government under past or present loyalty
standards and dismissed. Tax Exempt Foundations should be no
less exact in their standards of loyalty to the United States and our
American institutions.
. That several such persons should be actively and importantly associated
wm\a\ public trust, TAX EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS, spending
'inittions of dollars in public money is, in our considered opinion, highly
improper and exhibits an utter lack of responsibility by foundation
trustees \ and directors in the discharge of their duties.
The Fund for the Republic
An example of the danger that a great foundation may use its
piihJie'Wu&t funds for political purposes or with political effect is to
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS HI
be found in the creation of The Fund for the Republic as an offshoot
of The Ford Foundation.
Mr. Paul Hoffman, Chairman of the Fund, filed a statement with
the Committee (included in the record) on behalf of the -Fv/rtfl
"because", he stated, "Representative Reece's speech of July 27 >
1953, now a part of the record of the 'investigation', 21 contains refer-
ences to the Fund, and to me personally which, in the interests of
accuracy and fairness, require comment." Mr. Hoffman denies that
there is any basis "whatsoever for the charge that The Fund for the
Republic was established to attack Congress." He asks "th&t the
Committee will refer" to "documents and data requested by the
Special Committee" which have been supplied, "rather than to the
Reece speech for the facts." We shall, in deference to Mr. Hoffj-
man's request, refrain from quoting Mr. Reece and shall use, in this
discussion, principally material supplied by The Ford Foundation and
The Fund for the Republic themselves.
The aggregate donation of The Ford Foundation to its offspring,
created for the purpose, was $15,000,000. This is a rather large sum
of money, even for the gigantic Ford Foundation. After all, that
foundation's principal assets are in stock of the Ford Company. Its
cash resources are pretty much limited to its income of something
over $31,000,000 per year. Thus about half a year's gross income of
earnings of the Ford Motor Company was allotted to The Fund, for
the Republic. While The* Fund for the Republic is presumably under
independent management, its Chairman is Mr. Paul Hoffman, who
was formerly Chairman of The Ford Foundation and who was ap-
pointed to head the Fund upon his resignation from The Ford
Foundation.
The first President of The Fund was Clifford P. Case, who apparently
resigned from Congress to take the job. Mr. Case had made clear
while in Congress that he was a severe critic of some Congressional
investigations. Recently, Mr. Case resigned from his post with the
Fund to run for the Senate from New Jersey. His first major speech
in his campaign made clear that he is a violent "ahti-McCarthyite".
We do not object to his taking a strong position in this area; we point
out, however, that his public utterances have hardly characterised
him as objective in his approach.
Mr. Case's successor is Dr. Robert Maynard Hutchins, who resigned
from a directive post in The Ford Foundation to take this new position.
Dr. Hutchins' ideas on Congressional investigations are too-well known
to need any elaboration, as, indeed, are those of Mr. Hoffman. As
The Fund for the Republic has as one of its purposes an investigation of
Congressional investigations, it does not seem to this Committee that
the trio of Hoffman, Case and Hutchins was well selected in. the
interests of objectivity. •
Only a small part of the capital of the Fund has been spent to date.
One of its grants was to the American Bar Association for studies relat-
ing to "civil rights" and Congressional investigations. The implica-
tion is given by the statement filed on behalf of the Fund for the
Republic by Mr. Hoffman that this is the sum total of its expected
activities in the Congressional investigation area. We are inclined
to Wonder, however, whether the presence of this current investiga-
J1 Putting "investigation" in quotes was an intended insult to this Committee. Mr. Hoflm'an's' state-
meat is, of course, directly insulting to tho Chairman of the Committee. : . '
IIS TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
tion by a Congressional Committee has not acted as a deterrent and
kept the Fund (perhaps only for the moment) from launching an inde-
pendent "study" of its own. We italicize the word "study"; the evi-
dence|persuades us that it would not be a mere study but an attack
on Congressional committee methods.
At the time The Fund for the Republic was publicly announced
stories began to circulate to the effect that it had been created to
"investigate Congressional investigations." This rumor has been
denied by The Ford Foundation and by The Fund for the Republic.
Yet the conclusion is difficult to avoid that such was, indeed, one of its
purposes.
The Fund for the Republic was allegedly formed in furtherance of a
program of the parent organization as follows:
"The Foundation will support activities directed toward the elimination of
restrictions on freedom of thought, inquiry, and expression in the United States,
and the development of policies and procedures best adapted to protect, these
rights in the face of persistent international tension ...
"The maintenance of democratic control over concentrations of public and
private power, while at the same time preserving freedom for scientific and tech-
nological endeavor, economic initiative, and cultural development.
"The strengthening of the political processes through which public officers are
chosen and policies determined, and the improvement of the organizations and
administrative procedures by which governmental affairs are conducted.
"The strengthening of the organization and procedures involved in the adjudi-
cation of private rights and the interpretation and enforcement of law.
"Basic to human welfare is general acceptance, of the dignity of man, This
rests on the conviction that man is endowed with certain unalienable rights and
must be regarded as an end in himself, not as a cog in the mechanics of society
or a mere means to some social end. At its heart, this is a belief in the inherent
worth of the individual and the intrinsic value of human life. Implicit in this
concept is the conviction that society must accord all men equal rights and equal
opportunity. Human welfare requires tolerance and respect for individual,
social, religious, and cultural differences, and for the varying needs and aspira-
tions to which these differences give rise. It requires freedom of speech, freedom
•of the press, freedom of worship, and freedom of association. Within wide
limits, every person has a right to go his own way and to be free from interference
or harassment because of nonconformity."
That the words "The Foundation will support activities directed
toivard" carries the significance of supporting political action or
political movements, might fairly be concluded. The contrary, has
certainly not been made clear in the quoted statement. But the
paragraph from which this phrase is taken proceeds; "the elimination
of restrictions on freedom of thought, inquiry, and expression in the
United States * * *." What "restrictions" exist in the United
States on "freedom of thought"-— in fact, what restrictions could con-
ceivably ever be placed anywhere on the freedom to think — is a
question indeed! The use of the phrase, "freedom to .think," one
tossed about emotionally by those who falsely call themselves
"liberals," does not indicate the sober reflection which one would
expect of the managers of public trust funds, but rather an accept-
ance of the current "liberal" "line".
As to the other restrictions mentioned, it is not difficult to draw the
conclusion that Federal loyalty procedures and Congressional investi-
gating activities are intended to come within the compass of the Fund's
studies. Moreover, political-action significance may well be attached
to the rest of the section, from which we have quoted.
The second paragraph of the quoted material seems to "Us either
"double-talk" or an advocacy of expanded government control of
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 113
industry and business. The third paragraph has political intention if
it means what it says. The fourth paragraph is more difficult to
understand but seems political. The fifth paragraph contains some
admirable material, the significance of which in its context escapes us.
A report of the President of The Ford Foundation of October, 1951,
stating the purposes for which The Fund for the Republic is to be
created, says the Fund is to take into account: "The danger to the
national security arising from fear and mutual suspicion fomented by
short-sighted or irresponsible attempts to combat Communism through
methods which impair the true sources of our strength." This lan-
guage, taken in the general context of other statements by The Ford
Foundation and its off -shoot, The Fund for the Republic, cannot mean
anything else than that the Fund shall attack the Congressional inves-
tigations. It is not wording which indicates an objective point of view.
It does not indicate a fair study of pros and cons and a sensible weighing
of evidence. It states its bias in advance; it heralds an attack. The
wording used is reminiscent of much similar language used by those
who claim that these investigations impair our freedom and thus fight
Communism with weapons which are destructive of our society.
It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that the President of The
Ford Foundation, in making this statement, had in mind a severely
critical study of Congressional investigations, and that he starts
with the bias that the investigations are "short-sighted" and "irre-
sponsible".
The purpose of The Fund for the Republic becomes clearer in the
face of a recitation in a report signed by its Chairman, Mr. Hoffman,
and made to The Ford Foundation. This report recites the "areas
of action" which have been chosen for the Fund. While it is stated
that these are free "from implications of political or legislative activity
or propaganda", the list is:
"1. restrictions and assaults upon academic freedom;
"2. due process and equal protection of the laws;
"3. the protection of the rights of minorities;
"4. censorship, boycotting and blacklisting activities of private
groups; .
"5. principle and application of guilt by association."
The report goes on to state:
"The following subjects are also possible subjects for consideration: the scope
and procedure of Congressional investigations; investigation of the loyalty of
government employees: * * * and national loyalty of international civil serv-
ants." [Emphasis ours.]
The Fund for the Republic was created for the purpose, among others,
of investigating Congressional investigations. Whether this is a proper
field for the private expenditure of public trust funds is a question we
submit to Congress and the people. We conclude that it was the intention
of those who were responsible for the creation of the Fund for the Republic
to use it, in part, to launch an attack upon Congressional investigations.
This strikes us as a wholly unjustifiable use of the public's money:
If a "study" of Congressional practices could be made in an unbiased
fashion, it might well be of great usefulness, even to Congress itself.
But the power of great sums of money thrown into political Helds can be
very dangerous, indeed. It would have to be administered with the greatest
care and objectivity; those into whose hands the expenditure of the appro-
114 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
priated funds is thrown would have to be selected for unquestioned lack
of bias. The publicly expressed opinions of Messrs. Hoffman, Hutchins
and Case on some of the subject matters within the expressed scope of
activity^ of the Fund for the Republic, 'particularly in regard to Congres-
sional investigations, are too well known to permit the conclusion that the
public was to be assured of an objective study.
The entry of The Ford Foundation into the area of "civil liberties"
is, in the opinion of this Committee, highly regrettable. The "civil
liberties" issue has been called "one of the great phonies of American
politics" by Harold Lord Varney in an American Mercury article,
entitled The Egg-head Clutch on the Foundation. Mr. Varney said that
The Ford Foundation should have known that under the "high-flown
phrases" of the "civil rights" issue, "pro-Communists, muddled
liberals and designing pressure groupists scheme constantly to main-
tain a Left Wing balance of power in America."
In closing this discussion of one Ford venture into politics, we must
note this sentence in the Fund for the Republic's release to the news-
papers, dated February 26, 1953:
"We propose to help restore respectability to individual freedom."
This astonishing sentence is obviously a product of the "red herring"
and "witch hunt" school of political philosophy. It is an understatement
to describe the quoted sentence as arrogant, presumptuous and insulting.
Other "Civil Liberties" Projects
Grants have been made by other foundations in the same general
area referred to loosely as "civil liberties" . The Rockefeller Foundation,
for example, refers in its 1947 and 1948 annual reports to a study by
Cornell University of loyalty measures, civil liberties, etc., which it
had financed. Statements such as this are to be found in the reports:
"Nevertheless, it is an important task of political democracy to recon-
cile, if possible, the claims of national security and civil liberties."
Such statements seem to us pretty closely to follow the Anti-Anti-
Communist line. It is utterly surprising to us that so much greater
attention is given to attacks on those who attack Communism than
to the basic problem of subversion itself.
The following quotation from an address made by J. Edgar Hoover
to the Daughters of the American Revolution on April 22, 1954, is apt
in this connection:
"In taking a stand for the preservation of the American way of life, your
organization became the target of vile and vicious attacks. So have all other
patriotic organizations and, for that matter, every other person who has dared
to raise his voice against the threat of Communism. It is an established fact
that whenever one has dared to expose the Communist threat he has invited upon
himself the adroit and skilled talents of experts of character assassination. The
Federal Bureau of Investigation has stood year after year as taunts, insults and
destructive criticism have been thrown its way.
"To me, one of the most unbelievable and unexplainable phenomena in the
fight on Communism is the manner in which otherwise respectable, seemingly
intelligent persons, perhaps unknowingly, aid the Communist cause more effec-
tively than the Communists themselves. The pseudo liberal can be more destruc-
tive than the known Communist because of the esteem which his cloak of respectability,
invites." [Emphasis ours.I
Mr. Hoover might well agree that the danger of this pseudo-
liberalism is all the greater when the "cloak of respectability" it
wears is eminent office in the foundation world. We regret to say
that this pseudo-liberalism is not uncommon among the executives
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS . 115
of the great foundations and their intermediary organizations. We
regard as unfortunately typica], the address made in 1953 by Mr.
Pendleton Herring, now President of The Social Science Research
Council, to The American Political Science Association, of which he
was then President. After a discussion of the position and work of
the political scientist in America, and after emphasizing the necessity
of empirical approaches and of observing the cultural lag theory, he
launched into a tirade in the "civil rights" area.
Let us re-quote for guidance, the words of Mr. Hoover — "It is an
established fact that whenever one has dared to expose the Com-
munist threat he has invited upon himself the adroit and skilled
talents of experts in character assassination." Let us then quote
from Mr. Herring's address, made under the cloak of office in two
tax-exempt organizations supported heavily with the public's money
through foundation grace. He speaks of "political quacks" who ask
"careers for themselves through exploitation of public concern with
the Communist contagion." He does not identify any one man
against whom he may have some special animus. His terminology,
his selection of phrase, condemns as "quacks" whoever try to expose
Communists. He makes no exceptions. He does not exempt from
his excoriation any Congressional investigators or investigation. He
indicates that investigating Communists may, indeed, be worse than
Communism. He repeats the hysterical claim that books have been
"burned." How many and how often? Is there truly danger in
the United States of "book burning?" He speaks of giving "cool,
intelligent treatment" to "the transmission of erroneous information
and propaganda" — is it not transmitting "erroneous information and
propaganda" to infer that there is widespread "book burning" in
this country!
He uses the term "witchdoctors" to characterize the whole breed of
exposers of Communism. He speaks of "contrived excursions and
alarums" — implying that the Communist menace has been grossly
exaggerated for political reasons. He refers to the whole exposure
business as "malarkyism", putting it in capital letters. He gives us
this profound comment upon our concern with the Communist
menace:
"We must go from symptoms to the causes. A deep cause, I think, is a failure
to understand the forces operating in the world around us. Why do so many
Americans feel threatened? It is the stubborn complexity of world problems and
the difficulties arising from ideological differences and international rivalries
that lead them to seek scapegoats among their fellow-countrymen."
That is an astounding statement to come from one of the top rank
of those who disburse the public money which foundations control.
"You poor dumb Americans", he might well have said, "you are
afraid of the Russian-Communists only because you do not under-
stand the dears."
Mr. Herring says: "Why assume that the conspiracy of Communism
is best exposed where the limelight shines brightest?" He forgets
that it has frequently taken a glaring limelight to induce government
officials to expose a Communist — witness, among many, the case of
Harry Dexter White.
Another example of the "cloak of respectability" (to which Mr. J.
Edgar Hoover referred) through eminence in the foundation world, is
to be found in public utterances of Mr. Paul Hoffman, formerly
116 . TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Chairman of the Ford Foundation and now Chairman of its offspring,
the Fund for the Republic. In an article To Insure the End of Our
Hysteria in the New York Times Magazine Section of November 14,
1954, Mr. Hoffman referred to the California Senate Un-American
Activities Committee as a "highly publicized witch hunt."
The Slant of the "Concentration"
There are many foundations whose activities deserve the detailed
attention which our limitations of time and money prevented giving.
Some show strong indications of transgressing the border of political
action, whether to the left or the right. In the political area, however,
we have felt obliged to confine ourselves chiefly to the major founda-
tions and to the "clearing houses" associated in what we have referred
to as a "concentration of power".
We cannot escape the conclusion that some of the major founda-
tions, in association with the operating, intermediary associations,
have been turned substantially to the left and have supported slanted
material having a leftist propaganda character.
It is difficult to realize that great funds established by such con-
servative individuals as Rockefeller, Carnegie and Ford have been
turned strongly to the left. It appears to have happened largely
through a process of administrative infiltration and. through the
influence of academic consultants of leftish tendencies.
The trustees of these foundations, with a few possible exceptions,
could not have intended this result. It seems to us that it must have
happened through their lack of understanding of what was developing,
or through negligence.
What seems most unfortunate, however, is that the foundations
have been so rarely willing to admit an error, or the seriousness of it.
They assert that they are entitled to reasonable error, as, indeed, they
are— for all human institutions are susceptible of mistake. But the
individual instance of error is geuerally defended, instead of being
frankly admitted. This Committee has found this to be true in
examining the statements filed by some of the foundations. Rarely
is there to be found a candid confession of error. -The impression is
given that only minor errors have occurred, and without specification.
This Committee would feel more encouraged about the willingness
of foundation trustees fully to discharge their fiduciary duties if they
would, occasionally, repudiate expresssly some venture which has
gone wrong. The statement filed by The Rockefeller Foundation, for
example, says that "If in rare instances the recipient of a grant has
departed from" the high standards which the foundation has set for
itself, "this has not been done with the consent or approval of our
organization." But how many of such cases of " departure" from high
standards has the Foundation itself repudiated or publicly criticized?
One clue to the apparently strong leftist movement of some of the
foundations was given by Professor Colegrove in his testimony. He
said: "Curiously enough, people are sometimes much more interested
in pathology, 22 in disease, than they are interested in the healthy
body." He continued:
* * * I think there has been unfortunately a tendency on the part of the
foundations to promote research that is pathological in that respect, that is point-
« During the hearings the ranking minority member of the Committee remarked that the Committee
itself was too interested in pathology, concerning itself only with criticism, instead of applying itself to the
admittedly fine things for which foundations have been responsible. The Committee submits that its
work must necessarily deal with the pathological. A Congressional Committee, by the very nature of its
investigative function, must be chiefly concerned to find out what is wrong in the area under study.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 117
ing out the bad aspects of American government, American politics, American
society, and so on, instead of emphasizing the good aspects.
Upon being asked whether research had not been used as a "cloak
for reform; that there has been this conscious movement to reform
our society; and that that has sometimes taken a distinctly radical
trend?", he replied:
Yes. Undoubtedly. If you are going to study the pathological aspects, the
natural tendency of human nature — we are getting back to human nature, of
course — is to find out how to cure it, how to alleviate it, and so on. And if the
foundations contribute overmuch to pathological studies, and not sufficiently to
the studies with reference to the soundness of our institutions, there would be more
conclusions on the pathological side than there would be conclusions on the sounder
traditional side of American government, American history, and so on. That
would inevitably follow. (Hearings, p. 577.)
Professor Colgrove added that the pathological approach had
fastened itself on the concentration of power which the close asso-
ciation of the major foundations and the intermediary organizations
represents. This research concentration, he said, directed its work dis-
tinctly "to the left." He also saw a tendency to believe that the
"conservative" is against progress, saying that "for years and years
there has been a tendency in the American classroom * * * to think
that intellectualism and liberalism or radicalism were synonymous;
but if a person was conservative, like Edmund Burke, he was not an
intellectual." (Hearings, p. 572.)
The Committee gives great weight to the testimony of Professor
Colegrove, an eminent professor of political science and for eleven years
Secretary and Treasurer of the American Political Science Association.
We were interested, therefore, in his discussion of the probable effect
of certain individuals on the swing to the left. He opined, for example,
that John Dewey had promoted the movement very strongly, and
that another propellant had been Professor Beard who became in-
fected with Fabianism in England and brought back to the United
States an enthusiasm for ideas which were distinctly Marxian. Pro-
fessor Colgrove continued that Professor Beard had exercised a great
influence on political scientists and historians — he was "the idol of
our political scientists. ' ' He noted sadly that, after Beard had changed
his political attitude late in life, he was hissed when he made an address
before the American Political Science Association — "Apparently be-
cause he had become a little anti-New Deal, and partly because he
opposed bitterly the foreign policy of the New Deal." (Hearings, pp.
572, 573.)
A Carnegie Corporation Example.
It has been a convenience to some foundations to take the position
that they are not responsible for the results of their grants. If the
grantee turns out something radical — well, the foundation can say it
did not feel warranted in supervising the work and holds no responsi-
bility for what was produced. This Committee suspects that this
may sometimes be an evasion — that the identity of the grantee might
well have predicted the result; yes, that the foundation, in many such
instances, expected it. Certainly that must have been the case in the
instance of the grant by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement
of Teaching to Professor Robert A. Brady. In 1934 no congres-
sional investigations had mentioned the name of Professor Robert
A. Brady, and the Foundation cannot be held accountable for making
118 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
the initial grant. However, once the manuscript of the book had
been read and its theme demonstrated, this Committee is of the
opinion that no justification of further grants to this individual can
be advanced by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement for
Teaching. The "Acknowledgments" in Brady's Business as a System
of Power, published in 1943, recites that his work was made possible by
a Carnegie grant in 1934 ; it also states that a "more recent grant * * *
makes possible prompt publication of this book by the Columbia
University Press. I am deeply grateful not only for the financial
assistance given by the Foundation, but also for the keen and sustained
interest of Dr. Frederick Keppel and his associates in the work as it
has been developed." Dr. Keppel was President of the Foundation,
The thesis of this Carney-supported book is that the, structure of
capitalistic enterprise is incompatible with democratic government.
It is asserted repeatedly or implied that Big Business is a greater
threat to freedom than Nazi Germany. In a Foreword by Professor
Robert S. Lynd (the first Permanent Secretary of The Social Science
Research Council, a trustee of the Twentieth Century Fund, and a man
with Communist-front affiliations) he says:
"In this book Dr. Brady cuts through to the central problem disrupting our
■world, the most dangerous issue democracy faces. This problem is not basically
created by Adolf Hitler and the Axis nations, hut by the organized economic power
backing the Hitlers in nation after nation over the industrial world as a device for
shoring up for yet a while longer a disintegrating economic system."
He says, further:
"* * * capitalistic economic power constitutes a direct, continuous and funda-
mental threat to the whole structure of democratic authority everywhere and
always."
and adds:
"Under such a distorted view of democracy [the American System] in which
the state and society are nothing and the individual everything, democracy has
become increasingly identified with the protection of one's personal affairs: and
this has steadily sapped its vitality."
Both Dr. Brady and Dr. Lynd repeatedly point to Big Business as
an essential evil. It is the "great corporations" which account for
much of our mischief. And "industrial capitalism is an intensely
coercive form of organization of society" from which great evils flow.
Emotionalism is shown in such descriptive phrases as "Anglo-American
feudal monopoly control" —Lynd points this out as a fascist objective
of American Big Business.
"In the United States, the present stage of organized, centralized business
power, already reaching out in control of schools, media of communication, public
opinion and government itself, provides more than a broad hint of the direction
events will take, if present tendencies remain unchecked."
Can it be mere chance or accident that foundations like The Carnegie
Corporation and the Carnegie Foundation have so frequently supported
the radical thinkers in the United States? Dr. Lynd predicts in his
book that "We shall emerge from this war well on our way to having a
permanently planned and managed economy * * *." And, he warns,
if this is to be controlled by "business", then "all relevant social and
cultural life" will be controlled. The fresh, growing shoots of new life
in our American culture will either be destroyed or ruthlessly grafted
to the main trunk." Dr. Brady says it is "now truly inescapable"
that government "is to be the coordinator" of economic forces, but
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 119
he worries for fear this may not reflect what the peopla want but
"the specialized interests of self-assertive and authoritarian minority
groups." (p. 6)
The National Association of Manufacturers is one of his betes noire,
which, he predicted, would resort to all sorts of pressures and prop-
aganda to achieve political as well as social and cultural domination of
American society, (pp. 193, 198) And, in this effort, the National
Industrial Conference Board was to be its intelligence agency and
ministry of propaganda, (p. 205) The concentration of power
through that thing which Dr. Brady deems detestable, "self-govern-
ment" in business, "would seem on all the evidence, to date, to
lead directly to autarchy aDd the companion use of the government
for the purpose of suppressing antagonistic social elements." (p. 219)
The business system is distinctly feudal, according to Dr. Brady,
and "completely authoritarian (antidemocratic)." (pp. 311, 310)
Leadership is "self-appointed, self-perpetuating, and autocratic."
(p. 313) The employer is in a military relationship to his employees,
(p. 317) And "business" encourages fear of "aliens" and "fifth col-
umnists" and "other menaces". These "encourage in turn emphasis
upon group loyalties, patriotic sentiments." (p. 318) War is neces-
sary for capitalist survival, according to Dr. Brady, as say the
Communists, (p. 234) And other Marxian postulates receive Dr.
Brady's support— for instance:
"The 'average citizen', for example, is gradually losing his property stakes.
The little businessman is in a more precarious position than at any time since the
very beginning of the capitalistic system." (p. 292)
"The farmer-operator is in the process of being transferred from an independent
owner to a dependent tenant." (p. 292)
"A large and increasing range of skilled crafts and white collar workers are being
proletarized." (p. 292)
Apparently the Carnegie Corporation approved by Dr. Brady's
position (for it financed the publication of his completed work, after
following its development carefully) that, as capitalism had created
Hitler and Mussolini, it could do the same thing in the United States
and was likely to do so. Said Brady:
"There is nothing to distinguish the programs of the Reichsverbund der deut-
schen Industrie from that of the National Association of Manufacturers in the
United States * * *." (p. 295)
There is much more of this. During war, Big Business comes to
the front. And "Mr. Knudsen, Edward Stettinius, and Bernard
Baruch are paralleled by Mr. Ogura in Japan, Lord Beaverbrook in
England, and Hermann Goerring (himself a leading industrialist),
Friedreick Flick, and their group in Germany", (p. 309) It is obvious
enough to Dr. Brady (and the Carnegie Corporation?) that:
"The natural frame of reference of ownership is, and has been from the begin-
ning, as clearly political as economic, as obviously 'Machiavellian' and 'Ricard-
ian'." (p. 296)
And the law is the mere tool of the "haves" (an old Marxian concept):
"Law and the courts as frequently underline as correct the resultant distortion
(of power relationships based on property rights)." (p. 297)
The conclusion of Dr. Brady is that Big Business may well lead
us into fascism. There is no fundamental difference between business
groups in our country, says Dr. Brady, and those in the states which
turned totalitarian.
120 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Another Example of Slant: The Citizens hip Education Project
Many foundation grants and their operation and results should
have that detailed examination which our Committee had not time
or funds to give. One of these is the Citizenship Education Project,
financed by The Carnegie Corporation and carried on at Teachers
College of Columbia University. That the Project was carried on with
considerable bias to the left is unquestionable. To what extent this
may have resulted from intention or negligence on the part of the proj-
ect managers or The Carnegie Corporation, respectively, could not be
determined without further inquiry. We do, however, see responsi-
bility lodged with The Carnegie Corporation. It may not have had the
duty to supervise the project or to direct it in transit— this may even
have been unwise. But, as the project represented a substantial in-
vestment of public money and its impact on society could be very
heavy, it seems clearly to have been the duty of Carnegie to examine
what had been done and to repudiate it if it was against the public
interest. This, as far as we know, Carnegie did not do.
The Project was discussed in a preliminary way by Mr. Dollard,
the President of The Carnegie Corporation, in his 1948 and 1949
Reports. These statements contain some pleasant platitudes and
cliches regarding the necessity of educating the American people into
an increased understanding of the principles underlying our society.
What apparently prompted the project was essentially, as Mr. Dollard
expressed it in the Corporation's 1949 Report, that teachers "seemed
to be hampered, on the one hand, by a lack of fresh teaching materials,
both textual and visual, which relate old principles to contemporary
problems, and on the other, by the inherent difficulty of bridging the
gap between the classroom and the larger community in which the
business of democracy is carried forward". Out of this general
problem sprang several Carnegie ventures, among them the Project
under discussion: it was described in the 1950 Report as a program
for educating for "Americanism"; the 1951 Report, however, and the
change may be significant, referred to it as a program of "Citizenship
Education." The project received aggregate grants far in excess of a
million dollars from Carnegie Corporation.
Now let us see what was produced. Official discussions of the
project stress its non-political character. The fact is, however, that
it was heavily slanted to the left. This appears chiefly in one of its
main accomplishments, a card index file; the cards summarized selec-
tions from books, magazines, articles, films, etc., and were arranged
topically so that high school teachers might select from their references
to teach citizenship. The card file is sold to schools at nominal cost.
The cost of production seems to have been about $1,500,000.
The primary usefulness of the card index system was to enable
teachers to get the gist of each reference without having to read it.
The material was roughly "canned". The net result is that no one
needs to read the actual references— neither teacher nor student — all
that is necessary is to digest what has been "canned" on the card.
On educational grounds per se this method of teaching is subject to
severe criticism, and on many counts. But even those who believe
in "canned" education cannot defend the slant with which this card
system was devised, unless they believe that education should not be
unbiased but should be directed toward selected political ends, and
radical ones at that.
TAX-EXEMPT FOTJNDATIONS 121
The preponderance of "liberal", leftist or interna tionalistic books
and references selected for the card system, over those which are con-
servative and nationalist, is overwhelming. Many books are included
by authors whose works and opinions certainly do not deserve recom-
mendation to schoolchildren except (and they are not given this use)
to hold them up as horrors. It would have been useful to include
radical authors like Langston Hughes (of "Goodbye Christ" fame),
Howard Fast, Paul Robeson and other Communists and pro-
Communists, if they were held up to the criticism they deserve. But
an examination of the cards will show that, with surprising consistency,
leftist books received adulatory notation while conservative books
received coups de grace or derogation. 9
Here are a few examples:
Card No. 554 refers to We Are the Government by Etting and
Gossett, and describes it as "factual, entertaining, descriptive,
illustrative." Etting was at least a radical.
Card No. 249 refers to A Mask for Privilege, by Carey Mc-
Williams, who has been named a Communist — the description
is: "Historical, descriptive."
Card No. 901 refers to Building for Peace at Home and Abroad,
by Maxwell Stewart, who has been named a Communist — it
is called "Factual, dramatic."
Card No. 1020 refers to The American by Howard Fast, a
pro-Communist, and is designated: "Historical, Biographical."
Card No. 877 refers to Rich Land, Poor Land, by Stuart
Chase, a collectivist, and calls it "Descriptive, Factual, Illus-
trative."
One of the infamous Building America productions, Privileges
of American Citizenship, is called by card No. 34: "Factual,
Ideals and Concepts of Democracy."
Now let us compare the way some conservative works are charac-
terized by this guide for teachers prepared by Teachers College and
financed by Carnegie:
The Road to Serfdom by Frederick A. Hayek is described by
card No. 809 as: "Factual, strongly opinionated, logical. [Em-
phasis ours. J
Card No. 730 refers to Be Glad You're a Real Liberal, by Earl
Bunting, is called by card No. 730 "Opinionated, biased, de-
scriptive." Moreover, the author is noted as a director of the
N. A. M. and his use of the term "liberal" is noted to be as
denned by the National Association of Manufacturers. Similar
notations in the case of leftists are not apparently deemed
necessary.
A full examination of this card index system would reveal further
wonders. It would also reveal (at least it was true of the 1950 index)
that books like these are not included :
America's Second Crusade, by William Henry Chamberlain;
The Roosevelt Myth, by John T. Flyrin;
The Key to Peace, by Clarence Manion;
Pearl Harbor, by George Norgenstern;
Seeds of Treason, by Ralph Toledano and Victor Laski;
55647—54 9
122 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Undermining the Constitution, by Thomas James Norton;
Ordeal by Planning, by John Jewkes;
Economics in One Lesson, by Henry Hazlitt;
The Road Ahead, by John T. Flynn ;
The Return of Adam Smith, by George Montgomery;
The Red Decade, by Eugene Lyons ; etc.
No full examination of this card index has been possible. The
Committee's request of September 16, 1954, for a set of cards has thus
far elicited first the statement that revision is now underway, and
when the request was pursued, with promise on December 10, 1954,
that arrangements woujpd be made to furnish it to the Committee.
Reluctantly, to the Committee this does not seem that full measure
of cooperation which a Congressional Committee has the right to
expect and which in this instance was so fulsomely promised by
foundations and their grantees.
It would be highly advisable to investigate who was responsible for
producing this heavily slanted "canned" reference material to Ameri-
can teachers under this project financed by one of our great foundations
and operated by one of our foremost institutions. It would more-
over, seem to us to be the duty of that foundation itself to have a truly
objective study made, and to make a public report on its findings.
To merely wash its hands of such a project, having once granted it financial
existence, seems violative of its fiduciary duty.
The General Problem.
If social scientists were content to produce the results of their
research as data to be added to the general store of knowledge, that
would be admirable. But those of them who have been associated
with the developing cartel have generally no such idea of limiting
their work to the mere accumulation of knowledge. They clearly
see that they can make, and they intend to make, a contribution to
"planning", a planning which necessitates or looks forward to the
enactment of change either by legislation or by radical alterations in
our society. An expression of this is to be found in Wealth and Culture
published in 1936 and written by Edtjaed C. Lindeman, an educator
and prominent foundation executive. He says:
"The New State of the future will need social technicians who will be asked to'
engage in cultural planning just as technological experts and economists will
be called upon to plan for orderly material production and distribution. Those
who have exercised a similar function during the individualist-competitive phase
of modern economy have been, to a very large extent, associated with foundations
and trusts. Consequently it becomes pertinent to discover how these culture-
determiners operated in the past."
Note that he gave the coup de grace to the "competitive" system.
Note also that the planners of the future must take over the founda-
tions; there, he implies, is where the control of our culture lies. He
makes this doubly clear elsewhere in saying:
"Taken as a group, that is, as a whole, the trustees of foundations wield a power
in American life which is probably equalled only by the national government
itself."
And that was in 1936; since then foundation wealth and power have
grown enormously.
To the extent that it can be prevented, society cannot sanction the use of
the public funds which foundations represent for any political purpose.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 123
There are instances enough of direct or obviously recognizable political
action, and these should receive the attention of the Internal Revenue
Service. Such instances as the League for Industrial Democracy are
readily recognizable. The more subtle cases are the more dangerous
to our society because of the greater difficulty of identifying them
and proving their political character. Political slants are easily
introduced into social material. Here is an example taken from the
September 20, 1952 Report of The Ford Foundation:
"The high cost of a college and of a higher education in general makes real
equality of opportunity impossible. More and more the financial burden is being
thrust upon the student in the form of higher tuition fees. In consequence,
higher education threatens to become increasingly the prerogative of the well-
to-do."
That statement is just not true. "More and more", to use the
Ford phrase, those who are not well-to-do are taking higher education.
Here are the statistics of enrollment:
Students enrolled
Year ' Thousands
1900 238
1910 355
1920 598
1930 1,101
1940 1, 494
1950 2,659
Why did representatives of The Ford Foundation, who were well
aware of the true facts, make such false statements? Did they intend
political propaganda? Did they wish to manufacture a class argu-
ment, an attack on the well-to-do who alone are able (which is false)
to attend colleges!
Social Engineering.
According to Professor Rowe, the roots of the distinct leftist
political trend in foundation-supported research in the social sciences
lie largely in the urge to reform and in the concept of "social engi-
neering."
Mr. Wokmseb, As an extension of just what you have been talking about,
Professor, is it your opinion that there has been a result already from the power
of these foundations to control or affect research, particularly in their associationa
together in some sort of what you might loosely call an interlock, and the use of
these intermediate organizations? Has that resulted in some sort of political
slanting in your opinion? I want to be a little more precise than that, and refer to
the term which has been used quite frequently in social science literature of
"social engineering." There seems to be a tendency to develop a caste of social
scientists who apparently deem themselves qualified to tell people what is good
for them, and to engineer changes in our social status. Would you comment on
that?
Dr. Rowe. Here, of course, you are getting into a problem of what is the cause
and what is the effect. I am not quite clear as to whether the activities of the
foundations along this line are the result of the development of social science in
the United States over the last 40 or 50 years, or whether the development of
social science in the United States over the last 40 or 50 years along such lines has
been primarily the result or even heavily the result of foundation initiative.
I would be inclined to the former of these two views, but I don't think you
can completely disentangle these two things. I think that the development of
the social sciences in this country in the last 40 or 50 years has been very heavily
influenced, in my opinion, by ideas imported from abroad, which have been
connected with, if not originated in, socialistic mentality, and to say this is to
simply say that it is normal in social science to accept today a great deal of
economic determinism., to accept a great deal of emphasis upon empirical re-
124 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
search over and against basic thinking and the advancement of theory, and to
accept a lot of ideas about the position of the social scientist in the society that
seem to me rather alien to the American tradition.
/ think it must be kept in mind that the theory of social engineering is closely
related to the notion of the elite which we find dominant in Marxism, the notion thai
a few people are those who hold the tradition and who have the expertness and thai
these people can engineer the people as a whole into a better way of living, whether
they like it or want it or not. It is their duty to lead them forcibly so to speak in this
direction.
That is all tied up with the conviction of the Marxists that they seem to have,
rather that they do have, a perfect social science. This is one of the main tenets
of Marxism, that they have a social science which is perfect; it not only explains
all the past history, but it will lead to the complete victory of the socialist state
on a worldwide basis.
I am not maintaining that my colleagues are all dyed in the wool along this
line, but there is such a thing as infection. I think some of these ideas have
infected us, and have gotten over into a much more influential place in our
thinking than many of us understand or realize. The complete respectability of
some of the basic ideas I have been talking about in the framework of American
intellectual life can be seen when you ask Yourself the question, "When I was in
college, what was I taught about the economic interpretation of history, the
frontier interpretation of American history, the economic basis of the American
Constitution, and things of this kind?"
This is the entering wedge for the economic analysis of social problems which
is related to economic determinism, which is the very heart and soul of the
Marxist ideology. When we reflect on the extent to which these ideas have
become accepted in the American intellectual community, I think we ought to
be a bit alarmed, and be a bit hesitant about the direction in which we are going.
For my own purposes, I would much rather complicate the analysis of social
phenomena by insisting that at all times there are at least three different kinds of
components that have to be taken into account. There is not only the basic
economic thing. We all recognize its importance. But there are what I call
political factors. These have to do with the fundamental presuppositions people
have about the values that they consider important and desirable. These can be
just as well related to abstract and to absolute truth, which we are all trying to
search for in our own way, as they can be to economic formation and predetermi-
nation, if I make myself clear. Along with this you have to take into account the
power element in the military field. If you throw all these things, in together, I
think it rather tends to scramble the analysis and reduce it from its stark simplicity,
as it is embodied in the doctrines of communism, into something which is much
harder to handle and much more difficult and complicated, but is a good deal
closer to the truth.
I make this rather long statement only because the subject is extremely com-
plicated. I know I can't discuss it adequately here, and I don't pretend to try,
but I am trying to introduce a few of the things which give me the feeling that in
our academic community as a whole we have gone down the road in the direction
of the dominance of an intellectual elite. We have gone down the road in the
direction of economic determination of everything, throwing abstract values out
of the window.
Mr. Wormser. Moral relativity. m
Dr. Rowe. Moral relativism is implicit. It is not important whether it is
right or wrong in abstract terms. It is only when it works and who works and
things of that kind. This is the evil of the sin of social science in this country
which can only be redressed by adequate emphasis on humanistic studies, and even
there you have to be extremely careful about how you do it in order to get the
maximum effect out of it. (Hearings, pp. 550, 551, 552.)
Professor Colegrove commented on "social engineering" in the fol-
lowing testimony:
Mr. Wormsek. Professor, the term "social engineering" has become rather
widespread. We seem to find social scientists conceiving of themselves as sort
of an elite entitled by their peculiar qualifications and by their presumed ability
as scientists to solve human problems, justified in telling the rest of us how we
should organize ourselves and what form our society should take.
Would you comment on that, on this social-engineering feature which has
arrived in the social sciences?
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 125
Dr. Colegkovb. That, of course, grows out of the overemphasis on the constant
need for reform. The assumption is that everything needs reform, that unless
you are reforming you are not progressing. I think it is in large part due to the
failure of the foundations, the failure of many of the scholars they choose, to
fully understand what the principles of the American Constitution are, what the
principles of American tradition are. Some of them, I know, do not accept those
principles as sound. They even attack the principles. Of course, we all know
that the principles should be examined and reexamined. But there is a tendency,
on the part of those who get grants from the foundations to think that they must
turn out something in the way of reform ; not a study which does not suggest a
definite reform but a study more like Myrdal's study, The American Dilemma,;
which poses a condition in which there must be reform.
Mr. Wobmseb. Does that tendency to insist on reform in turn tend to attract
the more radical type of scholar, with the result that grants are made more gen-
erally to those considerably to the left?
Dr. Colegrove. I think undoubtedly it does, especially in the cooperative re-
search, where a large number of people cooperate or operate together on one re-
search project.
* * ' * . * * * *
Mr. Wormser. Professor, back to this term' "social engineering," again, is
there not a certain presumption, or presumptuousness, on the part of social
scientists, to consider themselves a group of the elite who are solely capable and
should be given the sole opportunity to guide us in our social development?
They exclude by inference, I suppose, religious leaders and what you might call
humanistic leaders. They combine the tendency toward the self -generated social
engineering concept with a high concentration of power in that interlocking ar-
rangement of foundations and agencies, and its seems to me you might have some-
thing rather dangerous.
Dr. Cole grove. I think so. Very decisively. There is a sort of arrogance in
a large number of people, and the arrogance of scholarship is in many cases a very
irritating affair. But there is a tendency of scholars to become arrogant, to be
contemptuous of other people's opinions. (Hearings, pp. 577, 578, 579.)
Professor Hobbs, in his testimony, indicated that the "social engi-
neers" were not merely to engage in useful studies pointed at easing
us into new social forms, but were to exercise or contribute to pol-
itical control.
Mr. Wormser. Dr. Hobbs, in connection with one subject you discussed, that
the foundations support a type of research which you call scientism, which some-
times penetrates the political area, do you have any opinion that any of the
foundations themselves encourage going into the political scene?
Dr. Hobbs. Certainly, that type of thing is indicated repeatedly throughout
one of the books that I mentioned yesterday, in Stuart Chase's The Proper Study
of Mankind.
In addition here is a report of the Social Science Research Council, annual
report, 1928-29, in which they have what I would consider to be quite an extreme
statement, but perhaps there is some other explanation of it. They have a listing
of their history and purposes of the Social Science Research Council, and one of
these purposes is that —
a sounder empirical method of research had to be achieved in political science,
if it were to assist in the development of a scientific political control.
Mr. Wormser. Is that a quote?
Dr. Hobbs. That is a direct quote from this annual report.
Mr. Hays. Is that bad?
Dr. Hobbs. It could be. The implications that you are going to control
political
Mr. Hays. They say "on a sounder." In other words, the inference is there
that they recognize it is not very sound.
Dr. Hobbb (reading) :
"A sounder empirical method of research to assist in the development of
a scientific political control."
// you are talking in terms of "scientific poliUcal control" it would seem to me that
you are going to hand over government to these social scientists. That seems to be the
implication. [Emphasis supplied.] (Hearings, pp. 170, 171.)
126 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The term "social engineering" appears frequently in the founda-
tion-financed literature of the intermediary organizations. The con-
cept of the "social engineer" is widespread in the social science fields.
"What are these "engineers" to do? They are to be the planners who
are to lead us into The Promised Land. Mr. Pendleton Herring's
filed statement denies that The Social Science Research Council is
"engaged in developing or in advocating public policies or political
programs." This statement seems to conflict sharply with state-
ments made, for example, in the 1933-4 Annual Report of the Council:
"Beyond the preparation of materials for the use of policy and action-deter-
mining agencies of government, the Council took a further step in its endeavors
to be of direct public service, in appointing two commissions of inquiry. One
commission has been created on national policy in international economic rela-
tions; one has been created on public service personnel. Eoth undertakings were
approved at their beginning by the President of the United States and by mem-
bers of the Cabinet. Both commenced work in January 1934. The commissions
represent an attempt by the Council to contribute directly to clarity of thinking
on important public issues. Acceptance or rejection of any conclusions at which
these commissions may themselves arrive on questions of public policy is a matter
of less concern than the fact that their analysis of issues will contribute to the
organization of intelligent public opinion," [Emphasis supplied. 1
Perhaps this is no evidence of a plan to promote a specific theory
or program; but it certainly indicates a policy to participate in the
determining of policies. Moreover, the literature of the SSRC is
replete with further indications. The emphasis on "planning" is
paramount. In an article by Mr. Herring himself in the first issue
of Items, an SSRC publication, he says:
"With respect to social problems, there is much more reliance upon planning
and organized philanthropic effort, whether public or private. * * * Here we
wish simply to emphasize that in our generation efforts are being made to arrange
and control human relationships more consciously, more deliberately, and, it is
to be hoped, more responsibly than during the last century. An interdependent
world is being forced to an awareness of the limitations of individual freedom and
personal choice."
The "Elite."
The concept of the elite may be one of the factors which has led the
executives of some of the great foundations and their clearing-house
agencies into an assumption of the right to direct us politically.
In his statement filed with the Committee on behalf of The Social
Science Research Council, Mr. Herring, its President, included this
observation :
"In conclusion I would like to emphasize that it is the men and the women in
these fields of learning who are our strongest national resource for advancing the
ranges of knowledge that will make us better able to understand our common
problems. They command the analytical methods for most effectively getting
at such questions in basic and tangible terms. Eternal vigilance is the price of
liberty and social science research is an essential tool for the vigilant."
It seems to this Committee that this is an expression of the pre-
sumed elite character of the social science profession. We would cer-
tainly not for one moment deny the value of the so-called "social
scientists", the specialists in history, anthropology, economics and the
other so-called "sciences" included within the class designated as
"social". But these specialists are no more capable of making ulti-
mate decisions or of giving ultimate advice than other groups of citi-
zens who, in their own fields learn as much and have as much to con-
tribute, the clergymen, the lawyers, the doctors and others. Indeed,
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 127
even the business men have contributions to make to ultimate deci-
sions. For what reason do the "social scientists" presume that their
contributions are greater than those of other professions and vocations!
Yes, "eternal vigilance is the price of liberty" — but we are inclined
to conclude that the public must be eternally vigilant to see that no
group like the social scientists arrogates to itself effectively the role
of designers of our political, economic or social destinies.
Mr. Herring says later:
"To deny that the social sciences have a contribution to make, or to cast doubt
on the capacity of man to guide his destiny by applying thought to human prob-
lems, in secular terms at least is to embrace either an obscurantist or anti-
intellectual position or to adhere to a determinist position."
This statement sets up a straw man and knocks him down. This
Committee knows of no one who denies that social scientists have a
contribution to make!
There follows an implication that because the Russian Communists
are anti-empirical, those who believe foundations have over-promoted
the empirical approach in research in the United States are in some
way intellectually authoritarian. Mr. Herring asserts that "authori-
tarianism" is expressed in the initial statement filed by Mr. Dodd, the
Director of Research, "in an indirect and subtle fashion, and is all the
more dangerous for that reason." This attempt to make an authori-
tarian out of our Research Director would be laughable were it not
deadly serious in its implications. What Mr. Dodd referred to in
his statement was the existence of certain basic moral and juris-
prudential principles which must be taken into consideration in the
making of all sound decisions regarding our society. Who can doubt
that the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution itself
contain such principles! If Mr. Herring means to imply that the
belief that these basic verities, fundamental to our system of society,
form an authoritarian base which the social scientists must penetrate
or ignore in arriving at his "scientific" conclusions, then he implies the
structure of our society and government rests on insecure ground
indeed. We doubt that many Americans would accept Mr. Herring's
position as valid. If the foundations accept it, they are accepting moral
relativism and are expending public money in a direction which certainly
is hardly consonant with our traditions.
Mr. Herring, in his article The Social Sciences in Modern Society,
published in the SSRC Items of March, 1947, said, at page 5:
"One of the greatest needs in the social sciences is for the development of
skilled practitioners who can use social data for the cure of social ills as doctors
use scientific data to cure bodily ills."
These "skilled practitioners" — are they to be our salvation? We
quote again this testimony by Professor Briggs regarding The Ford
Fund for the Advancement of Education:
"like stockholders in any other enterprise, the public has a right to determine
what it wishes the product to be. The principle that the public should decide
what it wants in order to promote its own welfare and happiness is unquestionably
sound. An assumption that the public does not know what is for its own good is
simply contrary to the fundamental principles of democracy." (Hearings, p. 97.)
What the "engineers" are to produce is not always what the people
may want but what these "engineers" believe to be good for them.
The 1927 annual report of The Social Science Research Council gave,
128 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
among its aims: "to make possible the substituting of more scientific
social control for the rule-of -thumb methods which men have happened
upon in their effort to live together." We wonder whether the Ten
Commandments and the principles of the Declaration of Independence
and the Constitution are deemed by these "social engineers" to be
mere "rule-of-thumb?" We shall not labor the point, but, we repeat,
we do not understand the desirability of permitting a self-appointed set
of guardians to determine our ways of living together merely because
they call themselves "social scientists" or "social engineers" and by these
terms seek to set themselves up as social arbiters superior to legislators,
lawyers, clergymen and intelligent citizens in general.
The Report of the SSRC for 1930-31 speaks of the pressure groups
which manipulate public opinion. The Report suggests a study on a
large scale to see, among other things, "whether these varied elements
are themselves susceptible to coordination and control in the public
interest." The concept of "control" is to this Committee somewhat
alarming. It is repeated in the Report of the following year, which
speaks of "the controversial field of industrial control which involves
the relationships between government and private enterprise."
The Report proceeds :
"Here the attack must be piecemeal, the first move leading toward a planning
program in the field of public utilities." [Emphasis supplied.]
The 1934 Decennial Report says that the Council "determined not
to avoid current issues by reason of their generally controversial
nature, but rather to give weight to the promise of particular research
to contribute to an understanding of contemporary questions." It
says later, indeed, that the "research function" has not been extended
"to the solution of problems of policy and action" but merely to the
"marshalling of knowledge in forms readily applicable to the practical
needs of society." This qualification reads meritoriously. But the
very study of controversial political problems by organizations which
have shown by their actions that they represent a distinct political
bias, is a danger in itself.
"Marshalled Knowledge" can easily be propaganda, and has frequently
been so.
This problem becomes all the more acute when such organizations
with a tendency to promote collectivist programs or principles become
agencies for other organizations. The Social Science Research Council's
Decennial Report, 1923-33, contains a reference to a request from
The Rockefeller Foundation for "suggestions of work relating to urgent
problems confronting the National Government in the current emer-
gency." The Report continues;
"Drawing largely upon the crystallizing plans of the Council's division of Indus-
try and Trade, suggestions were offered relating to banking unemployment,
national planning, governmental statistics and other data, taxation, and the exam-
ination of measures for the stimulation of business revival. The Rockefeller
Foundation has financed, among studies proposed by various agencies, a number
of studies in line with the Council's suggestions: Administration of the Agri-
cultural Relief Act, Effects of Sales Taxes, Administration of the National Re-
covery Act, and Government Financial Policy. The Committee on Govern-
ment Statistics and Information Services, a joint committee of the Council and
of the American Statistical Association, was also financed for a year's work in
Washington."
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 129
The "Engineers", "Planning" and Socialism.
There is a justified suspicion that the "social engineers" who so
strongly advocate "planning" are often motivated by an urge to
usher in a quite radical form of society. The very concept of "plan-
ning" has connotations of what may be, moderately, called "collec-
tivism."
Mr. McNiece pointed out that the Socialist program had, from the
first, called for national planning, quoting Engels:
"The planless production of capitalist society capitulates before the planned
production of the invading socialist society." (Hearings, p. 612.)
He also gave strong arguments to support the impossibility of
effective and rational planning by our Federal Government. (Hear-
ings, pp. 610 et seq.) Nevertheless, after five years of deliberation,
The Commission on Social Studies of The American Historical Asso-
ciation (a foundation-supported 101 (6) organization) echoed the
Socialist concept as follows (page 16 of its Report):
Under the melding influence of socialized processes of living, drives of tech-
nology and science, pressures of changing thought and policy, and disrupting
impacts of economic disaster, there is a notable waning of the once widespread
popular faith in economic individualism; and leaders in public affairs, supported
by a growing mass of the population, are demanding the introduction into economy
of ever wider measures of planning and control. [Emphasis supplied.] (Hearings,
p. 612.)
This was no mere "ivory- tower" pronouncement. The concept
found its way into government. The National Planning Board was
formed in 1933. Its 1933-4 Report includes the following (page 11):
State and interstate planning is a lusty infant but the work is only beginning.
Advisory economic councils may be regarded as instrumentalities for stimulating
a coordinated view of national life and for developing mental attitudes favorable to
the principle of national planning. [Emphasis ours.]
* * * * * * *
Finally mention should be made of the fact that there are three great national
councils which contribute to research in the social sciences. The Council of
Learned Societies, the American Council on Education, and the Social Science
Research Council are important factors in the development of research and add
their activities to the body of scientific material available in any program of
national planning. (Hearings, p. 612.)
Was this perhaps, in turn, an independent aberration of govern-
ment, disassociated from the foundations and their agencies? Indeed
not. The Report continues:
The Council of Learned Societies has promoted historical and general social
research.
The American Council on Education has recently sponsored an inquiry into
the relation of Federal, State, and local governments to the conduct of public
education. It has served as the organizing center for studies of materials of
instruction and problems of educational administration. It represents the educa-
tional organizations of the country and is active in promoting research in its
special field.
The Social Science Research Council, a committee of which prepared this mem-
orandum, is an organization engaged in planning research. It is true that its
object has not been to make social plans, but rather to plan research in the
social field. A decade of thought on planning activities through its committees,
distributed widely over the social sciences, has given it an experience, a back-
ground with regard to the idea of planning, that should be of value if it were
called on to aid in national planning. Furthermore, the members of the Social
Science Research Council, its staff, and the members of its committees are per-
haps more familiar than the members of any other organization with the per-
sonnel in the social sciences, with the research interests of social scientists, and
130 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
with the experience and capabilities of social science research workers in the
United States. The members of the council are familiar with the different bu-
reaus of research. The council has been concerned chiefly with the determina-
tion of the groups and persons with whom special types of research should be
placed. For this purpose it has set up committees, organized commissions, pro-
moted research, and sponsored the development of various research agencies and
interests. With its pivotal position among the social sciences, it could undoubt-
edly render valuable aid if called on to do so, in the formidable task of national
planning. [Emphasis supplied.] (Hearings, pp. 612, 613.)
Further quotations from this Report are pertinent:
It was after the Civil War that American economic life came to be dominated
by the philosophy of laissez faire and by the doctrines of rugged individualism.
But the economic and social evils of the period resulted in the development of
new planning attitudes tending to emphasize especially public control and
regulation.
Summing up the developments of these 125 years, one may, say that insofar
as the subject here considered is concerned, they are important because they left
us a fourfold heritage:
First, to think in terms of an institutional framework which may be fashioned
in accordance with prepared plans;
Second, a tendency to achieve results by compromise in which different lines
and policies are more or less reconciled;
Third, a tendency to stress in theory the part played in economic life by indi-
vidualism, while at the same time having recourse in practice to governmental
aid and to collective action when necessary; and
Fourth, a continued social control applied to special areas of economic life.
Such was the note already heard in America when during 1928-29 came the
first intimations of the 5-year plan, and the Western World began to be inter-
ested in the work and methods of the Gosplan in Moscow. The Russian experi-
ence was not embodied in any concrete way in American thinking, but it stimulated
the idea that we need to develop in an American plan out of our American bach-
ground. [Emphasis supplied. 1 (Hearings, p. 613.)
Its work done, the National Planning Board discontinued. The
National Resources Committee took its place and ran from 1934 to
1939. Its personnel was somewhat the same as that of its predecessor.
Page 3 of its final report contained the following:
The National Resources Planning Board believes that it should be the declared
policy of the United States Government to promote and maintain a high level
of national production and consumption by all appropriate measures necessary
for this purpose. The Board further believes that it should be the declared policy
of the United States Government.
To underwrite full employment for the employables;
To guarantee a job for every man released from the Armed Forces and the
war industries at the close of the war, with fair pay and working conditions;
To guarantee and, when necessary, underwrite:
Equal access to security,
Equal access to education for all,
Equal access to health and nutrition for all, and
Wholesome housing conditions for all.
This policy grows directly out of the Board's statement concerning which the
President has said:
"All of the free peoples must plan, work, and fight together for the maintenance
and development of our freedoms and rights."
THE POUR FREEDOMS
Freedom of speech and expression, freedom to worship, freedom from want,
and freedom from fear: and
A NEW BILL, OF RIGHTS
1. The right to work, usefully and creatively through the productive years;
2. The right to fair pay, adequate to command the necessities and amenities
of life in exchange for work, ideas, thrift, and other socially valuable service;
3. The right to adequate food, clothing, shelter, and medical care;
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 131
4. The right to security, with freedom from fear of old age, want, dependency,
sickness, unemployment, and accident;
5. The right to live in a system of free enterprise, free from compulsory labor,
irresponsible private power, arbitrary public authority, and unregulated
monopolies ;
6. The right to come and go, to speak or to be silent, free from the spyings of
secret political police ;
7. The right to education, for work, for citizenship, and for personal growth
and happiness;
8. The right to equality before the law, with equal access to justice in fact; and
9. The right to rest, recreation, and adventure, the opportunity to enjoy life
and take part in an advancing civilization.
Plans for this purpose are supported and explained in this report. The previous
publications of the Board, including National Resources Development Report for
1942, transmitted to the Congress by the President on January 14, 1942, and a
series of pamphlets {After Defense — What? After the War — Full Employment,
Postwar Planning, etc.), also provide background for this proposal. (Hearings,
pp. 613, 614.)
The reader is referred to pages 612 et seq. of the Hearings for further
quotations from this report which indicate a complete program of
social, as well as economic, planning — a program more detailed and
comprehensive than that proposed by avowed socialists. The in-
clusion (in the statement of proposed government policy quoted
above) of "A New BUI of Rights" is more than astounding. It implies
that our Constitutional Bill of Rights is not good enough; we must
have a new one. This new one has features which we find later in
the Declaration oj Human Rights drafted in UNO with the collabora-
tion of Communist delegates, and rejected by our government. The
"New Bill of Rights" is silent about property rights and contains
strange new rights some of which could be effected only under a
government so directive as to be totalitarian. It reads nobly; but
it is the product of advocates of the compulsive state.
One cannot read the report without concluding that it was intended to
lay out a program jor enormously increased centralization, a rapidly
enlarged participation by government in human affairs, a sharp turn
toward paternalism and away from free enterprise and individual free-
dom. In a broad sense, the proposals were revolutionary, both the
National Planning Board and the National Resources Board having
followed rather closely the plan of The Commission on Social Studies,
embracing virtually all phases of our economic life, including educa-
tion.
We cannot trace the influence of each leader of this movement for
a planned (socialized) economy in detail, leaders who were almost all
part and parcel of tax-free organizations or actively associated with
them and beneficiaries of foundations. But the career of one of these
leaders may illustrate the point of view which dominated.
The man is Charles K. Merriam, who held a dominating position
in the foundation world for many years. He was Chairman of a
Committee on Political Research of the American Political Science Asso-
ciation in 1921, the purpose of which was to examine research in gov-
ernment and to offer recommendations. Its report in 1922 advised
that "a sounder empirical method of research had to be achieved in
political science if it were to assist in the development of scientific
political control." It recommended the creation of The Social Science
Research Council, and this was, in turn, formed in 1923. Mr. Merriam
became its first President, serving until 1927.
Mr. Merriam could hardly be called a conservative. Yet he him-
self was a dissenting member of the Commission on Social Studies,
132 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
whose report has previously been discussed. It may have been that
some parts of the report were too extreme for him to swallow. If he
objected to its strongly Marxist tendency, however, it is probably
that his distaste was only a matter of degree. His The Agenda of
Democracy and his New Democracy and the New Despotism indicate
that he was one of the most active proponents of a new order and a
revolutionary one. "The old world is gone," he said, "and will not
return. We face a new era, which searches all creeds, all forms, all
programs of action, and spares none." The new era must be planned.
His active political part in planning it may be gleaned in part from
the frequent references to him and his work in both published volumes
of Harold L. Ickes' Diary.
The Committee's Assistant Director of Research filed with the
Committee (it is included in the Hearings, pp. 627, et seq.) a report
entitled "Economics and the Public Interest." In this report he
showed in considerable and valuable detail how the expenditures of
fovernment had followed the proposals of The National Planning
hard, The National Resources Committee, and The National Resources
Planning Board closely. We cannot in this report go into his material
in detail. We recommend that it be read in full. It is the opinion
of this Committee that this material, together with the data provided
elsewhere in Mr. McNiece's testimony, establishes clearly that Govern-
ment agencies consciously planned for what can fairly be called at least
a semi-socialist economy; that this planning was the work, sunstantially,
of foundation-supported, tax-free organizations; and that these plans
were effected to a very considerable degree in the ensuing period.
There may be doubt as to the exclusiveness of the factors which
Mr. McNiece discussed and which have been testified to elsewhere by
others. Other factors, indeed, may have played some part in what
happened. But what cannot be doubted is that foundation's funds
financed and supported a definite political and economic propulsion to
the left and away from our traditional forms. Could they have done so
with closed eyes?
Something close to a social revolution took place. We doubt the right
of foundations to use their public funds for the purpose of propelling a
revolution. A Communist not aligned with Russia might well have the
rightfully to try to promote his political purposes, as long as no treasonable
acts are involved. But we deny the right of any public trust fund to use
its public money, or permit it to be used, for political purposes. That
is clearly what has occurred.
We have advanced considerably toward that "welfare state" which
the new Fabians in England understand is a stage intermediate
between free enterprise and socialism. (See the New Fabian Essays,
the current Mein Kampf of British Socialism) . The necessary mech-
anism to reach the welfare state in full, and to go on from there to
socialism or some form of totalitarianism, is high centralization and
the absorption by the Federal government of more and more of the
powers of the States. We fully agree with President Dwight D.
Eisenhower, who in 1949, while still president of Columbia University,
said 2S :
"I firmly believe that the army of persons who urge greater a grendater cen-
tralization of authority and greater and greater dependence upon the Federal
23 Dwight D. Eisenhower, in letter to Hon. Ralph W. Gwinn, dated Columbia University, New York,
June 7, 1949, in opposition to a general Federal-aid-to-education program. (Congressional Record, 81st
Cong., 1st sess., vol. 95, p. 14, p. A3690.)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 133
Treasury are really more dangerous to our form of government than any external
threat that can possibly be arrayed against us."
The evidence warrants the conclusion that the foundations have con-
tributed substantially and consciously to the movement which President
Eisenhower so condemned.
The International Press Institute
Among the many organizations supported by foundations to which
this Committee has been unable to give close attention but which
deserve intensive research, is The International Press Institute located
at Zurich, Switzerland. This organization was granted $120,000 by
The Rockefeller Foundation initially, and received further support from
it and other foundations. Its purposes, as contained in The Rocke-
feller Foundation Review for 1950 and 1951, include "the immediate
objective of advancing and safeguarding the freedom of the press
throughout the world." It is quite conceivable, however, that the
concept of "freedom" espoused by this foundation may differ from that
held by others.
The possible political implications of The International Press Insti-
tute will warrant study.
The University of Chicago Roundtable Broadcasts.
The Roundtable broadcasts have been abandoned, presumably
because their leftist slant became so apparent. They were financed
by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, to its distinct discredit. A careful
analysis could be made of the actual broadcasts, the material used
and the speakers selected to disclose an example of how foundation
money can be used for quite direct political purposes.
Facts Forum.
The Committee staff, at the request of Mr. Hays, collected tran-
scripts and tape recordings of Facts Forum broadcasts and turned
these over to him, also at his request.
This material has not been returned by Mr. Hays, nor has any
pertinent 2i report been made to the other members of the Committee
by him.
Without being in a position to judge of the propriety of the Facts
Forum broadcasts, this Committee puts itself on record, in any event,
as concluding that the financing of a radio or a television program
(or, for that matter, any program using any form of public com-
munication) by a foundation directed in such a way as to have
political slant, either to the left or to the right, is highly improper.
Referring to Facts Forum, the ranking minority member of this
committee, during the hearings, made these comments (Hearings,
p. 185):
I want to make it clear here, which apparently it has not been in some people's
minds, that if they are biased, they still have a perfect right to go on the air;
but they don't have any right to go on with tax-exempt funds.
# * . * * * * * ■
They can be just as biased as they want to as long as they are using their own
money without any tax exemption.
For the reasons stated above, the othef members of this Committee are
not in a position to determine whether or not Facts Forum has been
24 At the time the Committee met on November 29, 1954 to consider the final draft of this report, Mn
Hays at this point in the discussion asked to have included at this point a reference to the report he said
he made to Congress on Facts Forum. No copy of that report has been officially filed with the Committee.
134 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
guilty of bias. In any event, however, Mr. Hays' comments just Quoted
have the full and complete support of the other members in relation to
any foundation which does show bias, or permits it; the comments would
apply, of course, whatever the direction in which a foundation's bias
might run.
The Public Affairs Pamphlets.
These have been produced under the aegis or with the financing of
the Sloan and other foundations, and also deserve a detailed study
which we have been unable to give. The pamphlets were under the
editorship of Maxwell Stewakt, who had been an associate editor
of the Moscow News and, according to proven reports, had taught
in Moscow. Mr. Stewart wrote a good many of the Public Affairs
Pamphlets, heavily biased against the free enterprise system. Others
of the pamphlets were written by other leftists and some contain
heavily slanted bibliographies.
Further illustrations of the use of foundation funds for political
purposes will be given in Section X. Foundations and Education,
and in Section XL "Internationalism."
X. Foundations and Education
Carnegie and Rockefeller Reform the Colleges.
The Rockefeller General Education Board (terminated in 1953) was
chartered in 1903; The Carnegie Fund for the Advancement of Teaching,
in 1905. Other organizations created by the Rockefeller and Carnegie
reservoirs of wealth which went into educational work were:
The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1910
The Carnegie Corporation of New York, 1911
The Rockefeller Foundation, 1918 and
The Laura Spellman Rockefeller Memorial, 1918 (later merged
with the Rockefeller Foundation) .
Miss Kathryn Casey, legal analyst of the Committee, filed a detailed
report on the educational activities of these foundations (hearings,
pp. 668 et seq.). One of the subjects treated in this report was the
campaign instituted by the Rockefeller and Carnegie foundations to
raise the standards of our institutions of higher learning. Dr. Ernest
Victor Hollis (now Chief of College Administration in the United
States Office of Education) once described the background of this
campaign as follows:
"* * * unfavorable public estimate of the elder Rockefeller and Andrew
Carnegie, made it inexpedient in 1905 for their newly created philanthropic
foundations to attempt any direct reforms in higher education." (Hearings,
p. 671.)
The method adopted, therefore, was one of coercion by indirection.
"The subject was approached indirectly through general and non-controversial
purposes —nearly all foundation grants made before 1920 being for such pur-
poses."
As Dr. Hollis said: 25
Far-reaching college reform was carefully embedded in many of these non-
controversial grants. It was so skillfully done that few of the grants are directly
chargeable to the ultimate reforms they sought to effect. For inscance, there is
little obvious connection between giving a pension to a college professor or giving
2' Philanthropic Foundation and Higher Education, Ernest Victor Hollis, p. 127.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 135
a sum to the general endowment of his college, and. reforming the entrance re-
quirements, the financial practices, and the scholastic standards of his institu-
tion. This situation makes it necessary to presert qualitative influence without
immediately showing the quantitative grant that made the influence possible.
(Hearings, p. 671.)
The Carnegie and Rockefeller foundations aligned themselves behind
the "progressive educators" (the words are those of Dr. Hollis —
Hearing, p. 672), "who are seeking such changes as those described
as taking place at the University of Chicago * * *."; and financed,
to the tune of several hundreds of millions of dollars, measures which
were intended to reform the colleges and universities. It is undoubt-
edly true that many or most of the results were highly commendable,
in the sense that the standards in institutions of higher learning were
effectively raised. We question, however , whether foundations should
have the power even to do good in the coercive manner which was employed.
We cannot repeat too often that power in itself is dangerous. What may
have been used for a benign purpose could in the future be used for the
promotion of purposes against the interests of the people. It does not
write off this danger to say that good men ran the foundations. It is
power which is dangerous — power uncontrolled by public responsibility.
Plans for the pensioning of professors, and offers of college endow-
ment, were conditioned upon conformity to the plans and standards
of the granting foundations. These plans and offers were irresistible.
Accrediting systems were established. Grants and pensions were not
available unless the arbitary standards set by the foundations were
accepted. Thus, the foundations grew to be the comptrollers of higher
education in the United States, its directors and molders.
Research and experimental work in education was established,
largely at Columbia, Chicago and Stanford Universities. The Ameri-
can Council on Education "provided the general administrative and
supervisory direction necessary to coordinate such a large cooperative
undertaking." (Hearings, p. 672.) Regional accrediting associations
were formed, and other media were created or used to implement the
coercive plans of the Carnegie and Rockefeller funds. As an example
of the extent of the coercion, The Carnegie Foundation for the Advance-
ment of Education held that no college could participate in its pension
fund if it remained under the control of a religious group. Moreover,
those colleges which were deemed (by the foundation executives) to
be "weak and tottering" or "superfluous" were permitted to die a
hoped-for natural death.
"Clearing house" organizations and other agencies were treated to
very substantial contributions: among them The American Council
on Education, The National Education Association and The Progressive
Education Association.
Miss Casey took up separately each of the major foundations in-
volved in her exposition. She found that The Carnegie Corporation
of New York had contributed a total of $1,237,711 to The National
Education Association, The Progressive Education Association and The
American Council on Education, perhaps the major part of their
sustenance in the early years. (Hearings p. 679.) She concluded that
these three organizations have operated to the end of producing uni-
formity in teaching, teacher-training and administrative practices in
education and that the Carnegie Corporation must have approved this
work. It must also have approved the work done by The Institute of
136 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
International Education. The Institute of Educational Research, Co-
lumbia Teachers College and its appendage, the Lindoln School, into
which enterprises millions were poured. (Hearings, p. 704.) Miss
Casey said :
Even those not in the educational field recognize that today there is, in effect,
a national set of standards of education, curricula, and methods of teaching
prevailing throughout the United States. As a practical matter, the net result
of this is nothing more nor less than a system of education which is uniform
throughout the country. Moreover, in the case of the National Education As-
sociation, one of its goals for the "united teaching profession in 1951-57," is
stated on page 13 pf the National Education Association Handbook for 1953-54
tp be:
"A strong, adequately staffed State department of education in each State and
a more adequate Federal education agency.
* * * * * * *
v "Equalization and expansion of educational opportunity including needed State
.and national finapcing." (Hearings, p. 704.)
The Carnegie Foundation gave considerable attention to the place,
relationship and function of the secondary and primary schools as
well. (Hearings, pp. 684 et seq.). This was done largely through
The National Education Association and The Progressive Education
Association, to which other foundations also contributed heavily.
Some of the strange things which have happened in the secondary and '
primary educational fields can be traced directly to the influence of
these two organizations.
The General Education Board was, initially, the chief dispenser of
Kockefeller moneys in the field of education. Its activities were
chiefly in the southern states and largely in the areas of primary and
secondary education, and Negro education. It dispensed much of its
funds unquestionably commendably. Yet its operations illustrate the
dangers which lie in great power. It lent its financial assistance to the
preparation of the Building America texts which we shall later discuss.
That public funds should have been used in the preparation of these educa-
tional horrors is a tragic example of foundation negligence, recklessness
or incompetence.
This foundation, too, lent itself to experiment in education. The
agencies it chose for this work were chiefly The Progressive Education
Association, The National Education Association, Department of Second-
ary School Principals, and The American Council on Education, as well
as The National Council of Parent Education, the American Youth
Commission and Teachers College at Columbia University. (Hear-
ings, p. 696.)
The Rockefeller Foundation has spent vast sums of money both in
education and in research in the social sciences generally.
Without going into further detail as to the educational activities
of the foundations mentioned, let us examine the import of their work
on a broad scale. Miss Casey quoted Dr. Hollis as saying that
"foundations" had influenced higher education notably and increas-
ingly "toward supporting social and cultural ideas and institutions
that contribute to a rapidly changing civilization * * * the chief
contribution of the foundations has been in accelerating the rate of accept-
ance of the ideas they choose to promote." [Emphasis ours.] (Hearings,
p. 707.) Dr. Hollis also wrote:
"The Philanthropic Foundation is a social institution important enough to be
ranked with the school, the press, and the Church. It often fails to be accorded
a ranking with these agencies however because, unlike them, it most frequently
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 137
attacks social problems indirectly. * * * Through these agencies [(to which the.
foundations make grants)] its influence extends to cultural and social -planning in
almost every department of our life." [Emphasis supplied.]
In the field of education it seems clear that foundations have played
an almost controlling part in promoting uniformity and conformity on
a national scale. Miss Casey questioned whether a national system
of education was not a violation of the principle of separation of powers
between the Federal government and the States, a violation of States'
rights. (Hearings, p. 708, 709.) This is worthy of careful consider-
ation by those who see in continued extensions of Federal power a
danger to our system of limited Federal jurisdiction. What impresses
this Committee with equal or greater seriousness is the danger which
lies inherently in the power of vast funds of public trust-capital,
administered without public responsibility by private individuals.
That they may have directed education in the United States desirably
(if that is so) is beside the point. Should not education be directed by
local government or, at least, by government, and the people? Should it
be directed and controlled by the power of privately administered public
trusts?
The Carnegie Corporation Finances Socialism.
From 1928 to 1933 The Carnegie Corporation of New York provided
heavy aggregate financing (a total of $340,000) to The American
Historical Society, a constituent of The American Council of Learned
Societies, for the production of a study by its Commission on Social
Studies whose final report was published in sixteen sections. The
last section, issued in 1934, is known as Conclusions and Recommenda-
tions. This is a momentous document. We have referred to it briefly
.in the previous section of this report. It deserves closer study.
The Commission heralds the decline of the free enterprise system.
It does not contest the movement for radical social change. It
accepts the new era as already fait accompli, saying:
"9. Cumulative evidence supports the conclusion that, in the United States
as in other countries, the age of individualism and laissez faire in economy and
government is closing and that a new age of collectivism is emerging." (Hear-
ings, pp. 476, 477.)
There follows this remarkable statement;
10. As to the specific form which this "collectivism," this integration and inter-
dependence, is taking and will take in the future, the evidence at hand is by
no means clear or unequivocal. It may involve the limiting or supplanting of
private property by public property or it may entail the preservation of private
property, extended and distributed among the masses. Most likely, it will
issue from a process of experimentation and will represent a composite of his-
toric doctrines and social conceptions yet to appear. Almost certainly it will
involve a larger measure of compulsory as well as voluntary cooperaxion of
citizens in the conduct of the complex national economy, a corresponding en-
largement of the functions of government, and an increasing state intervention
in fundamental branches of economy previously left to the individual discretion
and initiative— a state intervention that in some instances may be direct and
mandatory and in others indirect and facultative. In any event the Com-
mission is convinced by its interpretation of available empirical data that the
actually integrating economy of the present day is the forerunner cf a con-
sciously integrated society in which individual economic actions and individual
property rights will be altered and abridged. [Emphasis supplied.]
We pause here, to note that the social scientists who composed this
masterpiece apparently made up their minds on empirical data. No
better illustration could be given than this to show the fallacy of an
55647—54 10
138 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
overemphasis on empiricism in the social sciences. The document
proceeds:
11. The emerging age is particularly an age of transition. It is marked by
numerous and severe tensions arising out of the conflict between the actual trend
toward integrated economy and society, on the one side, and the tranditional prac-
tices, dispositions, ideas, and institutional arrangements inherited from the pass-
ing age of individualism, on the other. In all the recommendations that follow
the transitional character of the present epoch is recognized. [Emphasis supplied.]
Note "the passing age of individualism." The statement is not
that the age of individualism may be passing; the statement is
definite — the age of individualism is passing. Is there any expres-
sion of disapproval or regret at its passing? We find none. We must
assume that the foundation-financed authors approved, that they
were eager to help put skids under the free enterprise system to help
slide it out of the United States. This was their right as individuals.
But we question the right of a foundation to finance the undertaking
with public funds!
The statement continues:
12. Underlying and illustrative of these tensions are privation in the midst of
plenty, violations of fiduciary trust, gross inequalities in income and wealth,
widespread racketeering and banditry, wasteful use of natural resources, un-
balanced distribution and organization of labor and leisure, the harnessing of
science to individualism in business enterprise, the artificiality of political bound-
aries and divisions, the subjection of public welfare to the egoism of private
interests, the maladjustment of production and consumption, persistent tenden-
cies toward economic instability, disproportionate growth of debt and property
claims in relation to production, deliberate destruction of goods and withdrawal
of efficiency from production, accelerating tempo of panics, crises, and depres-
sions attended by ever-wider destruction of capital and demoralization of labor,
struggles among nations for markets and raw materials leading to international
conflicts and wars.
We pause again to note that this description of the era does not
expose these "elite" social scientists as objective students of history.
The description smacks of either hysteria or intended bias. It gives
the impression that the world has gone to pot and the United States
particularly. The facts are that a higher standard of living had been
attained in the United States than ever before in our history. There
was a depression but we had had depressions before. There had
been a war not so long before, but there had been wars before. To
sum up the condition of the world and of the United States as uniquely
disturbing was blind or unconscionable. One cannot escape the
conclusion that these "scientists" were merely echoing the political
ideas which precipitated the strong political movement toward pater-
nalism and looked far beyond it rather than doing that objective
analysis which one would expect of those who deem themselves an
elite entitled to tell the rest of us what is good for us. The report
continues:
13. If historical knowledge is any guide, these tensions, accompanied by oscil-
lations in popular opinion, public policy, and the fortunes of the struggle for
power, will continue until some approximate adjustment is made between social
thought, social practice, and economic realities, or until society, exhausted by the
conflict and at the end of its spiritual and inventive resources, sinks back into a
more primitive order of economy and life. Such is the long-run view of social
development in general, and of American life in particular, which must form the
background for any educational program designed to prepare either children or
adults for their coming trials, opportunities, and responsibilities. (Hearings,
pp. 476, 477.)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 139
Under the heading of "Choices Deemed Possible and Desir-
able" the report proceeds:
1. Within the limits of the broad trend toward social integration the possible
forms of economic and political life are many and varied, involving wide differences
in modes of distributing wealth, income, and cultural opportunity, embracing vari-
ous conceptions of the State and of the rights, duties, and privileges of the ordi-
nary citizen, and representing the most diverse ideals concerning the relations of
sexes, classes, religions, nations, and races. * * * [Emphasis supplied.]
The emphasized phrase in this section interests us. Under our
form of society, "wealth" and "income" and "cultural opportunity"
are not distributed. To some extent we "re-distribute" wealth and
income — that is, by taxing it heavily and using the proceeds for social
purposes. Perhaps we overemphasize the selection of the term "dis-
tributing"; but it seems to be an intended selection, one anticipating
(and approving) a form of collectivism.
Under the heading of "The Redistribution of Power" it con-
tinues :
1. If the teacher is to achieve these conditions of improved status and thus
free the school from the domination of special interests and convert it into a
truly enlightening force in society, there must be a redistribution of power in the
general conduct of education— the board of education will have to be made more
representative, the administration of the school will have to be conceived more
broadly and the teaching profession as a whole will have to organize, develop a
theory of its social function and create certain instrumentalities indispensable
to the realization of its aims.
2. The ordinary board of education in the United States, with the exception
of the rural district board, is composed for the most part of business and pro-
fessional men; the ordinary rural district board is composed almost altogether
of landholders. In the former dase the board is not fully representative of the
supporting population and thus tends to impose upon the school the social ideas
of a special class; in both instances its membership is apt to be peculiarly rooted
in the economic individualism of the 19th century.
3. If the board of education is to support a school program conceived in terms
of the general welfare and adjusted to the needs of an epoch marked by transition
to some form of socialized economy, it should include in its membership adequate
representation of points of view other than those of private business.
4. With the expansion of education and the growth of large school systems,
involving the coordination of the efforts of tens, hundreds and even thousands
of professional workers and the expenditure of vast sums of money on grounds,
buildings and equipment, the function of administration has become increas-
ingly important and indispensable. (Hearings, pp. 477, 478.) (Emphasis sup-
plied.]
It is apparent that this foundation-supported report lends its vast
influence to the concept that education must be turned in the direc-
tion of preparing the public for a new form of society, a collectivist or
socialist system, the coming of which is taken for granted and appar-
ently approved by the "scientists" who presume to tell us what is
good for us. Of course, this movement for adjustment to the expected
Nirvana must be implemented. Under the heading "Appendix A —
Next Steps" the Report continues:
2. However, the commission is mindful of the proper and practical question:
What are the next steps? It indicates, therefore, the lines along which attacks
can and will be made on the problem of applying its conclusions with respect to
instruction in the social sciences. {.Hearings, p. 478.)
After this comes what might be called the "pay-off":
3. As often repeated, the first step is to awaken and consolidate leadership
around the philosophy and purose of education herein expounded — leadership
among administrators, teachers, boards of trustees, colleges and normal school
presidents— thinkers and workers in every field of education and the social
140 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
sciences. Signs of such an awakening and consolidation of leadership are already
abundantly evident; in the resolutions on instruction in the social sciences
adopted in 1933 by the department of superintendence of the National Education
Association at Minneapolis and by the association itself at Chicago; in the
activities of the United States Commissioner of Education during the past few
years; and in almost every local or national meeting of representatives of the
teaching profession. (Hearings, p. 478.)
A concerted effort is thus to be made by all those having to do with educa-
tion to help with the business of easing in the new era, the age of collec-
tivism. The report sees signs of an "awakening and consolidation of
leadership", noting among them "the resolutions on instruction in the
social sciences adopted in 1933 by The Department of Superintendence
of The National Education Association at Minneapolis and by The
Association itself at Chicago." The American Historical Association
announces further that it has taken over a publication called The
Historical Outlook, a journal for social science teachers, (it was then
re-named The Social Sciences). Among the new purposes of the
publication was to be "to furnish as rapidly as possible various pro-
grams of instruction organized within the frame of reference outlined
By the Commission,"
Writers of textbooks, said the report, were "expected to revamp and
rewrite their old works in accordance with this frame of reference and
new writers in the field of the social sciences will undoubtedly attack
the central problem here conceived * * *." "Makers of programs in
the social sciences in cities, towns and states" were expected to "recast
existing syllibi and schemes of instruction * * *." Colleges and
normal schools were to "review their current programs" and conform
to the "frame of reference." One of the objectives was the "guarantee-
ing" of "a supply of teachers more competent to carry out the phi-
losophy and purpose here presented."
"Educational journalism" was expected to follow the same line.
And, continues the Eeport, it is important that "the spirit" of its
"frame of reference" be "understood and appreciated" in order to
"facilitate the fulfillment of the Commission's offering."
This Committee finds the document from which we have quoted an
astounding piece of work. We cannot understand how a foundation,
Carnegie in this instance, administering funds dedicated to a public
trust and made free of taxation by the grace of the people, could justify
itself in having supported such a program. Is this what foundation
executives refer to when they assert the right of foundations to "experi-
ment" and to use "risk capital" to reach "new horizonsV These same
men caution Congress against any regulation or control which would
deprive them of the freedom to use foundation funds as they, the supposed
elite, see fit. We wonder whether they have merited that confidence.
We wonder whether our society can afford to let them "experiment" with
our institutions — whether we the people of the United States can afford
the "risk"!
The aggregate import of this document financed by the Carnegie
Corporation was that our American way of life was a failure; that it
must give way to a collectivist society; that educators must now
prepare the public for a New Order; and traditional American prin-
ciples must be abandoned. In his filed statement, Mr. Dollard, Presi-
dent of the Carnegie Corporation says: "The Corporation regards its
entire program as 'pro-American' ." We do not so regard the product
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 141
in which it invested hundreds of thousands of dollars of public-dedicated
money.
The late Congressman Shafer and his collaborator, Mr. Snow,
expressed their view of this foundation-supported Report in The
Turning of the Tides:
,( A strategic wedge was driven in 1934 following the Conclusions and Recom-
mendations of the American Historical Association's Commission on Social Studies.
"Its point of entry was adroitly chosen. The Commission proposed to con-
solidate the traditional high school subjects of geography, economics, sociology,
political science, civics and history, into a single category designated as the 'social
studies'. Here was the most strategic of all teaching areas for the advancement
of a particular philosophy.
"Success in enlisting teachers in this field in the cause of a 'new social order'
would have an influence out of all proportion to the number of teachers involved.
"What this all meant was summed up by Professor Harold J. Laski, philosopher
of British socialism. He stated:
" 'At bottom, and stripped of its carefully neutral phrases, the report is an educa-
tional program for a socialist America' ". [Emphasis supplied.] (Hearings, p. 480.)
The reader who would excuse The Carnegie Corporation from respon-
sibility for the report of its agent, The American Historical Association
on the ground that it merely provided the funds for the study project,
must reconcile this viewpoint, so assiduously nurtured by foundation
spokesmen, with the fact that the annual report of the President
and Treasurer of The Carnegie Corporation of New York for 1933-4
not only endorsed but lauded this program of socialism:
"That its {the Commission's) findings were not unanimously supported within
the Commission itself, and that they are already the subject of vigorous debate
outside it, does not detract from their importance, and both the educational world
and the public at large owe a debt of gratitude both to the Association for having
sponsored this important and timely study in a field of peculiar difficulty, and
to the distinguished men and women who served upon the Commission."
According to The Carnegie Corporation, the public owes a debt of
gratitude for the production of a document of tremendous influence in
the educational field promoting socialism!
It must not be concluded that the report referred to was an acci-
dental or incidental thing, the product of one isolated group, the
opinion of a tiny fraction of the foundation-financed intellectual world.
The following quotation is from Education for the New America, by
Willard E. Givens, in the Proceedings of the 72nd Annual Meeting of
The National Education Association:
"A dying laissez-faire must be completely destroyed and all of us, including the
'owners' must be subjected to a large degree of social control. A large section of
our discussion group, accepting the conclusions of distinguished students, main-
tain thflt in our fragile, interdependent society the credit agencies, the basic indus-
tries and utilities cannot be centrally planned and operated under private owner-
ship." [Hearings, p. 482.]
Nor was Mr. Givens himself an isolated person acting solely on his
own. He was executive secretary of the NEA from 1935 to 1952 and
was given its award in 1953 for his "many contributions to the field of
education" which were deemed "without parallel."
In the Agenda of Democracy , by C. E. Merriam, vice-chairman of the
National Resources Planning Board and for many years the leading
figure in The Social Science Research Council, the author wrote :
"The days of little-restricted laissez-faire, the days when government was
looked upon as a necessary evil — these have gone for a long time, perhaps forever,
although in the mutations of time one never knows what forms may recur."
[Hearings, p. 482.]
142 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Example after example can be given of the widespread expression,
by persons connected with or financed by foundations, of approving
conviction that free enterprise was dead and a new order must be
ushered in, an order of collectivism.
The Commission on Higher Education appointed by the President
produced a report in the form of six pamphlets in 1947. The Presi-
dent of The American Council of Learned Societies was Chairman of
this Commission. The reports gave credit to The American Council
of Learned Societies, The American Council on Education, The American
Association of hniversity Professors and The Association of Land
Grant Colleges and Lmiversities for aid received.
This report emphasized that higher education must be guided to
help usher in the new society. Not only was the domestic scene to
be changed by a concerted effort on the part of the intellectual leaders
of the nation, but we were to be led toward world citizenship as well.
The Report of the President's Commission on Higher Education con-
tained this statement:
PREPARATION FOR WORLD CITIZENSHIP
In speed of transportation and communication and in economic interdepend-
ence, the nations of the globe are already one world; the task is to secure recog-
nition and acceptance of this oneness in the thinking of the people, as that the
concept of one world may be realized psychologically, socially and in good time
politically.
It is this task in particular that challenges our scholars and teachers to lead
the way toward a new way of thinking.
* * * * t * * *
There is an urgent need for a program for world citizenship that can be made
a part of every person's general education. (Hearings, p. 483.)
' Social Engineering" and Education.
The 1947 Report of the President's Commission on Higher Education
makes clear that our old friend, the "social engineer", is to lead us
into better pastures. It recites:
It will take social science and social engineering to solve the problems of human
relations. Our people must learn to respect the need for special knowledge
and technical training in this field as they have come to defer to the expert in
physics, chemistry, medicine, and other sciences. (Hearings, p. 483.) [Emphasis
supplied. 1
The people are no longer to direct their own welfare. "Scientists"
must be trained to lead us, to "engineer" us into that better world,
domestic and international, which only these experts are capable of
determining. It would, of course, be foolish to discount the valuable
aid which specialists can give in the advancement of human knowledge
and the development of a better society. But the concept of "social
engineering" is one with which this Committee has no sympathy.
It is again the concept of an elite group determining what is good for
the people; it smacks so closely of the fascist principle of a guiding
party that we find it distasteful and indigestible. That the governing
party might be composed of presumed scientists does not make it a
more palatable dish. Moreover, there is evidence enough in the
record that the "social sciences" are not sciences and the "social
scientists" cannot fairly compare themselves with the experts in
physics, chemistry, medicine, and other sciences. There is something
completely false, as well as highly dangerous, in the entire concept of
" social engineering."
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 143
The presumption of it all is quite astounding. The same report
contains this statement:
Colleges must accelerate the normal slow rate of social change which the
educational system reflects; we need to find ways quickly of making the under-
standing and vision of our most farsighted and sensitive citizens the common
possession of all our people. (Hearings, pp. 483, 484.)
Who are these "most farsighted and sensitive citizens" who are to
use the colleges and universities to accelerate the "normally slow rate
of social change?" They are, of course, the intellectual elite, the
foundation-financed, self-appointed "social engineers" who mislead-
ingly bear the title of "scientist" by carrying the label of "social"
scientists. "We need", says the report, "men in education who can
apply at the point of social action what the social scientist has dis-
covered regarding the laws of human behavior." The basic laws of
human behavior have not been "discovered" by self-designated
"scientists" but by great philosophers and ethical leaders. We
doubt that the social-scientific mind can be relied upon to discover,
by inductive methods and quantitative measurement, such laws of
human behavior as may be sound determinants in delineating a new
society.
"Certainly", continues the report, "the destiny of mankind today
rests as much with the social sciences as with the natural sciences."
That statement may well be doubted. What is more serious is that
these "social scientists" who subscribe to the point of view expressed
do not truly mean that the solution rests in science. They do mean
that it rests in their own opinions and predilections. That is evi-
denced by the following quotations from an article in Progressive
Education for January-February, 1934 by Horace M. Kallen, a mem-
ber of the President's Commission, entitled "Can We Be Saved by
Indoctrination?":
I find, within the babel of plans and plots against the evils of our times, one
only which does not merely repeat the past but varies from it. This is a proposal
that the country's pedagogues shall undertake to establish themselves as the
country's saviors. It appears in two pamphlets. The first is a challenge to teach-
ers entitled, "Dare the Schools Build a New Social Order?" Its author is George
Counts. The second is, ''A Call to the Teachers of the Nation."
* & % & # $ #
With an imagination unparalleled among the saviors of civilization, with a faith
stronger than every doubt and an earnestness overruling all irony, Mr. Counts
suggests that the Great Revolution might be better accomplished and the Great
Happiness more quickly established if the teachers rather than the proletarians
seized power.
Having taken power, the teachers must use it to attain the "central purpose" of
realizing the "American Dream." They must operate education as the instru-
ment of social regeneration. This consists of inculcating right doctrine. (Hear-
ings, p. 484.)
Clearly enough "right doctrine" is what the elite believe in.
A strong proponent of this proposal that the social scientist should
be given the task of directing society is Professor Norman Woelfel.
His Molders oj the American Mind, was dedicated "to the teachers of
America, active sharers in the building of attitudes, may they col-
lectively choose a destiny which honors only productive labor and
promotes the ascendency of the common man over the forces that
make possible an economy of plenty." In it, we find this:
To the teachers of America, active sharers in the building of attitudes, may
they collectively choose a destiny which honors only productive labor and pro-
144 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
motes the ascendency of the common man over the forces that make possible
an economy of plenty.
* # '" * * * * *
The younger generation is on its own and the last thing that would interest modern
youth is the salvaging of the Christian tradition. The environmental controls which
technologists have achieved, and the operations by means of which workers earn their
livelihood, need no aid or sanction from God nor any blessing from the church.
* * * * * * *
The influence which may prove most effective in promoting the demise of
private business as the dominant force in American economic life is the modern
racketeer. His activities are constantly in the spotlight of public attention,
and the logic upon which he pursues them is the logic of competitive business.
He carries the main principles of the business life to their logical extreme and
demonstrates their essential absurdity. Like the businessman he is interested
in gain, and like the businessman he believes in doing the least to get the most,
in buying cheap and selling dear. Like the businessman he believes in attain-
ing a monopoly by cornering the market whenever possible. The chief differ-
ence between the racketeer and the business-wan is that the businessman's pursuits
have about them an air of respectability given by customary usa(>e and established
law. He may pursue them in the open, advertise them in the public press and
over the radio, whereas the racketeer must work undercover.
* * * * * * *
In the minds of the men who think experimentally, America is conceived as having
a destiny which bursts the all too obvious limitations of Christian religious sanctions
and of capitalistic profit economy.
*******
This Committee wonders whether the phrase "the men who think
experimentally" relates to the insistence of many foundation executives
that foundation funds must be used as "risk capital," for "experiment."
Is this the kind of experiment which the foundations defend? Pro-
fessor Woelfel makes his own experimental objectives very clear:
From the vantage point of the present study, the following objectives for educators
are suggested. They, in no sense, purport to be all-comprehensive or final. They
do, however, lay claim to be along the line of much needed strategy if educational
workers are to play any important part in the society which is building in America.
*******
5. Active participation by educators and teachers in various organizations of
the lay public agitating for social reforms whose realization would be in harmony
with evolving ideals of American society.
* * * * * * *
9. Active participation of individual educators and of professional organiza-
tions of educators in the gradually crystallizing public effort to create out of pre-
vailing chaos and confusion in economic, political, spiritual, ethical, and artistic
realms a culture which is under no continuing obligations to past American or
foreign cultural pattern.
* * * * * * *
11. A system of school administration constructed under the guidance of ex-
perimental social philosophy with the major aim of meeting the professional
needs of teachers. This implies relegating the elaborate administrative tech-
nology modeled after business practice and capitalistic finance to the background
where it may be drawn upon when needed in reconstruction programs.
* * * * ' * * *
14. A program of public elementary and secondary education organized in the
interest of collective ideals and emphasizing the attainment of economic equality
as fundamental to the detailed determination of more broadly cultural aims.
15. Centralized organization in public education to an extent which will not
only guarantee provision of the most valid . knowledge together with adequate
facilities for incorporating it into educational practice in every local community
throughout the country, but promote as well the construction of attitudes, in the
populace, conducive to enlightened reconstruction of social institutions.
"16. A program of public vocational, professional, and higher education
integrally organized in terms of a social order wherein all natural resources and the
entire industrial structure is controlled by governmental agencies and operated for the
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 145
equal benefit of all. This portends educational planning in terms of broadly
cultural and creative motives and the final disappearance of programs of education
based upon the motive of individual monetary success.
*F* f ■!* ^ t* , •!* *p
20. Gradual abolition of specified grades, subjects, textbooks, testing, and
promotion schemes as conceived under the present administrative-supervisory
set-up in public education. The development of a series of flexible organiza-
tional schemes and teaching programs by local faculties under the guidance
and sanction of professional associations and of the lay public.
21. Domination of all specific teaching aims for an indefinite period by the
general aim of rendering the attitudes of all normal individuals toward all the
problems of life sufficiently tentative to allow for growth and change. (Hearings,
pp. 485, 486.) [Emphasis supplied.]
Professor Woelfel does not mince words. In an article, in Pro-
gressive Education in 1934 called The Educator, The New Deal and
Revolution lie said:
The call now is for the utmost capitalization of the discontent manifest among
teachers for the benefit of revolutionary social goals. This means that all available
energies of radically inclined leaders within the profession should be directed toward
the building of a united radical front. Warm collectivistic sentiment and intelligent
vision, propagated in clever and undisturbing manner by a few individual leaders t
no longer suits the occasion.
If we wish the intelligent utilization of the marvelous natural resources and
the superb productive machinery which America possesses, for all of the people,,
with common privileges, and an equal chance to all for the realization of exclu-
sively human potentialities — that is possible, although we must not blindly
shrink from the fact that it may require some use of force against those at present
privileged. (Hearings, p. 486.)
Professor Woelfel's call to force indicates the intensity of the
messianic impulse of many of the social scientists who contributed to
the movement for the reform of society, the financing of which was
chiefly supplied by foundation funds.
In the Social Frontier, of which Dr. Counts was editor and Professor
Woelfel an associate editor, appeared these remarks in the October
1934 issue:
In a word, for the American people, the age of individualism in economy is
closing and an age of collectivism is opening. Here is the central and dominating
reality in the present epoch.
Page 5, Educating for Tomorrow:
To enable the school to participate in raising the level of American life the
educational profession must win meaningful academic freedom, not merely the
freedom for individuals to teach this or that, but the freedom of the teaching-
profession to utilize education in shaping the society of tomorrow. (Hearings,
p. 488.)
and
The task of enlarging the role of education in shaping the future of our collec-
tive life cannot be accomplished by individual educators nor by individual in-
stitutions. It is a task for an organized profession as a whole. It is a task which
the NEA might make its central project. (Hearings, p. 489.)
*******
We submit to the membership of the NEA that its role in the life of the nation
would be greatly enhanced if it identified itself with an ideal of social living
which alone can bring the social crisis to a happy resolution — a collectivistic and
classless society. We further submit that the effectiveness of the NEA would be
greatly increased if instead of looking for defenders of education among the ranks
of conservative groups, it would identify itself with the underprivileged classes-
who are the real beneficiaries of public education and who can find their adjust-
ment only in a radically democratic social order. (Hearings, p. 489.)
146 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Professor Woelfel's appeal to The National Education Association
is indeed a dangerous one, in view of the power of that organization.
The 1953 NEA Handbook proclaims that the Association has 490,000
individual members and 950,000 affiliated members; that it consists
of 66 state organizations and 4434 Affiliated Associations; that it has
29 departments, 14 Headquarters divisions and 23 Commissions and
Committees: It says:
"The National Education Association Is the Only
ORGANIZATION THAT EePEESENTS OR H.AS THE POSSIBILITY
of Representing the Great Body op Teachers in the
United States." [Emphasis supplied.]
It thus professes itself to be a monopoly. As it is characteristic of
organizations that a small group usually controls, it gives one pause to
think what such a powerful organization could do if its leaders listened
to voices like that of Professor Woelfel.
The activities of The Progressive Education Association (for some
period called the American Education Fellowship) have been strongly
in the direction of the promotion of the thesis that the schools should
be used as an instrument for social change. This organization, which
up to 1943, had received $4,257,800 from foundations (we do not have
a record of subsequent donations) indicated its position in its publica-
tion called at various times, The Social Frontier, Frontiers of Democ-
racy, and Progressive Education. In the issue of December 15, 1942,
for example, appeared a series of letters by Professor Rtjgg which
constitute a "call to arms." He announces The Battle for Consent.
The "Consent" is the consent of the governed to accept change, and
it is the position of Professor Rtjgg (of whom, more later) which
undoubtedly was supported by The Progressive Education Associa-
tion, that this consent can only be obtained through proper educa-
tion of the people. They must, we gather, be educated into under-
standing the necessity for social change as Professor Rugg believes
it should change — then the battle for the new era can be won. Thus
the schools are to be a weapon by these agitators for the winning of
the war against our institutions.
There may not have been a (legal) "conspiracy" to change our social
and governmental system, but a mass of evidence demonstrates that the
most influential formulators of educational thought strenuously attempted
to suborn our schools and that heavy contributions from the tax-exempt
foundations provided them with effective sounding-boards for their sub-
verting doctrines.
The Foundation-Supported Collectivist Text-Books- — The Back-
ground.
The witness Aaron M. Sargent is a lawyer actively practicing in
the State of California, to the bar of which he was admitted in 1926.
He testified that he had 27 years' active experience in the practice of
law and 17 years "concerned to some extent with anti-subversive
work and investigations affecting American education, and partic-
ularly the public schools system." He participated in hearings in
1941-42 before the San Francisco City Board of Education in regard
to Rugg social science textbooks. At the request of the California
Society, Sons of the American Revolution, he studied the progressive
system of education between 1942 and 1945 and inquired into the
textbook condition of the state schools and the State Department of
Education in Sacramento.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 147
In 1946 he began an inquiry which led up to proceedings which
were brought to Congress on the so-called Building America textbooks.
He handled these proceedings for the Sons of the American Revolution
before the State Board of Education in California and California
legislative committees. He drafted legislative bills on education and
studied the national aspects of this subversive teaching problem. He
is the author of a Bill of Grievances which was filed with the Judiciary
Committee of the United States Senate and the House Committee
on Un-American Activities by the National Society, Sons of the Ameri-
can Revolution, and conducted the research on which that document
was based.
In May, 1952 for a brief period he was employed as a consultant for
staff work in research by the Senate Internal Security Committee.
In 1952-53 he directed research at the Hoover Institute at Stanford
University on War, Peace and Revolution. He served for a number of
years as Chairman of the Americanization Committee of the National
Society, Sons of the American Revolution. He had been approached
by Congressman Cox, Chairman of the Cox Committee, to act as
Counsel to that Committee.
Mr. Sargent testified that in his opinion the investigation of this
Committee "is one of the most important matters which has ever
come before the Congress of the United States. It concerns the na-
tional security, the defense of the principles set forth in the Constitu-
tion of the United States. You will find that the situation confronting
you is the result of a disregard of trust responsibility — a condition
amounting to abdication of duty by the trustees of the tax-exempt
foundations which have exerted such a great influence in the history
of our country since the turn of the century." (Hearings, p. 198.)
Mr. Sargent stated in his opinion the following should be the yard-
stick to be applied to the conduct of foundations:
Standards of foundation conduct: It is the duty of tax-exempt foundations and
their trustees to observe and be guided by the following standards of conduct:
First: Patriotism. To bear true faith and allegiance to the philosophy and
principles of government set forth in the Declaration of Independence and the
Constitution of the United States.
Second: Loyalty. To be active and positive in supporting the United States
Government against revolutionary and other subversive attacks;
To put patriotic money at the disposal of patriotic men in this field of education
to enable them to support and defend our Constitution and form of government.
Third: Obedience to law. To faithfully obey the laws of the United States
and the provisions of State law under which foundation charters are granted;
Fourth: Respect for exemption. To use the tax-exemption privilege in good
faith, recognizing the purpose for which that privilege is granted;
To refrain from supporting communism, socialism, and other movements which
(1) increase the cost of government, (2) endanger the national security, or (3)
threaten the integrity of the Federal Government.
The fifth standard here is academic responsibility. This is a part of my con-
cept of standards of foundation conduct.
Academic responsibility requires these foundations to limit their activities to
projects which are, in fact, educational, and are conducted in an academically
responsible manner in accordance with proper academic standards;
To refrain from using education as a device for lobbying or a means to dissemi-
nate propaganda. (Hearings, pp. 108, 201.)
In using the term "socialism" Mr. Sargent carefully distinguished
this area of criticism, defining the term as follows:
When I use the term "socialism," I refer to the political, movement which is
known as the Socialist movement. The movement which is working for a general
program of planned economy based on nationalization of industry, business,
148 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
national resources, and credit. The political operation of a nation's economy,
not fragmentary things. Politics is something which these foundations are not
supposed to go into, and I think they have no right to undermine the basis of
their exemption by doing things of that type. (Hearings p. 201.)
Mr. Sargent's testimony concerned itself chiefly with the support
by foundations of policies and programs in education of a nature which
he deemed destructive of American principles. He narrated that a
movement began in the United States shortly before the turn of the
century, closely related to Fabian socialism, which had previously
become established in Great Britain "which has undermined and
almost destroyed the economic system of Great Britain." According
to Mr. Sargent, a group of American radical intellectual organized
an attack upon patriotism, "challenging basic American philosophy
founded on the doctrine of natural law." He asserted that this
group sought to slant and distort history and to introduce a new
and revolutionary philosophy, based on the teachings of John Dewey.
He called this movement "the greatest betrayal which, has ever
occurred in American history." (Hearings, p. 203.) He indicated
that one of the most vicious aspects of this betrayal was the attack
on the doctrine of unalienable rights and natural law set forth in the
Declaration of Independence. (Hearings p. 206.)
Mr. Sargent suggested that foundations had supported a move-
ment to attack the stature and function of the Supreme Court as the
bulwark of our judiciary system, pointing out that in October, 1936,
before the Presidential election, a group of educators had put in the
hands of American school children a school book advocating a plan
to pack the Supreme Court of the United States. (Hearings, p. 213.)
He accused the foundations of propaganda in having a consistent
policy of always supporting one side of controversies having political
connotations and never supporting the other. The side which the
foundations have neglected is the side of conservatism. (Hearings, p.
214.)
Citing the book, Fabian ism i n. Great Br itain, hySister^ Margaret
Patrid i aMc^arrari, the daughter of SenatolTvrcdarran^ whicnnar-
ra/E es thVTustory of "Fabianism" in England, Mr. Sargent drew a par-
allel between this movement and its intellectual offspring, the so-
cialist movement in the United States. What he described as the
"beachhead" occurred with the organization of The Intercollegiate
Socialist Society in 1905 under the direction of Jack London, Upton
Sinclair and others. This organization, which we have already dis-
cussed, 26 later "changed its name to The League for Industrial De-
mocracy and exists and operates to this day as a tax-exempt founda-
-^> tion. Branches were installed in many of the major colleges and uni-
versities, and persons now well-known were among the leaders of
these branch groups, among them Bruce Bliven, Freda Kirch-
wey, Paul (Senator) Douglas, Kenneth Macgowan, Isadore
Lubin, Evans Clark, John Temple Graves, Jr., and others. The
purpose of the Society was the active promotion of socialism. (Hear-
ings, p. 220.)
Kobert Morss Lovett, a man with a total of 56 Communist
front affiliations, became the first president of the Intercollegiate
Socialist League. (Hearings, pp. 221, 222, 223, 224.)
M See page '
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 149
Mr. Sargent indicated that the movement propelled by this socialist
group took over the teaching of John Dewey "who expounded a
principle which has become destructive of traditions and has created
the difficulties and the confusion, much of it, that we find today.
Professor Dewey denied that there was any such thing as absolute
truth, that everything was relative, everything was doubtful, that
there were no basic values and nothing which was specifically true."
With this philosophy, Mr. Sargent points out, "you automatically
wipe the slate clean, you throw historical experience and background
to the wind and you begin all over again, which is just exactly what
the Marxians want someone to do." John Dewey, said Mr. Sargent
was a "gift from the Gods to the radicals." His teachings brought on
attacks on American tradition and on patriotism. (Hearings, p. 217.)
A natural consequence of this movement to reject tradition was an
undermining of the doctrine of inalienable rights proclaimed by the
Declaration of Independence and a denial of the theory of natural
rights upon which our government is based.
According to Mr. Sargent, the philosophy of John Dewey had
appeared just about the time when John D. Rockefeller established
his first foundation, The General Education Board in 1902. It was an
era of reform agitation; and reform was badly needed in several areas
of our economic and social life. The socialists, crypto-socialists and
collectivists then took hold of the Dewey philosophy and spread it,
taking advantage of the existing discontent to make considerable
inroads in academic fields. The National Education Association,
another tax-free organization, also began early to promote the Dewey
philosophy.
Mr. Sargent narrated that, in 1916 the Department of Educational
Research was established at Teachers College, Columbia University.
Under its direction, The Lincoln School was established in 1917, and
this "kindled the fire which helped to spread progressive education."
The quotation is from a pamphlet issued by Teachers College itself.
The same pamphlet states that John D. Rockefeller made available
$100,000 per year for ten years for Teachers College through The
International Education Board, to establish and maintain an Inter-
national Institute at that College. It also recorded, among other things,
that a Dr. George S. Counts had been made Associate Director
of the Institute a few years before 1923. (Hearings, pp. 252, 253.)
Reference will later be made to the opinions of Dr. Counts. Suffice
it to record here that his work proceeded with Rockefeller Foundation
financing.
Mr. Sargent pointed out that the period under discussion was one
of growing intellectual radicalism, citing the statement of Professor
Von Mises that socialism does not spring from the people but is a
program instigated by special types of intellectuals "that form them-
selves into a clique and bore from within and operate that way. * * *
It is not a people's movement at all. It is a capitalizing on the
people's emotions and sympathies and skillfully directing those
sympathies toward a point these people wish to reach." (Hearings
p. 254.)
The Rugo Textbooks.
Among these intellectuals was Professor Harold Rugg, who
began issuing pamphlets in the Lincoln Experimental School as early
150' TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
as 1920. The Rugg pamphlets subsequently were developed into
what came to be known as the Rugg Social Science Textbook Series.
About five million of these books had been put into the American
public schools. Yet their character may be assessed through a pro-
ceeding before the San Francisco Board of Education as a result of
which a panel of highly competent men was appointed to evaluate
the Rugg books: the Provost of the University of California, pro-
fessors at Mills College, the University of San Francisco and Stanford
University, and a member of the Bar.
The report of this panel was unanimous; it recommended that the
Rugg textbooks be barred. The Report is well-worth reading.
(Hearings, p. 256, et seq.) It condemns the RUGG books for advo-
cating the principle that "it is one of the functions of the school,
indeed it appears at times to be the chief function, to plan the future of
society. From this view we emphatically dissent. Moreover, the
books contain a constant emphasis on our national defects. Certainly
we should think it a great mistake to picture our nation as perfect or
flawless either in its past or its present, but it is our conviction that
these books give a decidedly distorted impression through over-
stressing weaknesses and injustices. They therefore tend to weaken
the student's love for his country, respect for its past and confidence
in its future."
One of the members of the panel, Mr. McKinnon, added:
What Professor Rugg is trying to do is to achieve a social reconstruction
through education. The end in view is a new social order in which all the aspects
of human relationships, including the political and economic, are to be refashioned
and rebuilt. The means by which this end is to be accomplished is education.
*******
The lack of an underlying assumption of moral law which is inherent in human
nature and which is the norm of good conduct, of happiness, and of socially
desirable traits, is evident throughout the texts. Professor Rugg, of course rejects
such an idea of law.
*******
Nothing is. more insistent in the books than the idea of change. From the
habit of denying facts and fixed realities, Professor Rugg proceeds to the
motion of trial and error in all human affairs. One is never sure one is right.
Since everything changes, there is nothing upon which one can build with perma-
nence. Experiment is the rule in social affairs as well as in physical science —
experiment in government, in education, in economics, and in family life.
*******
Throughout the books runs an antireligious bias. (Hearings, p. 259.)
Joining his fellow panel-members in the unanimous decision to
bar the Rugg books, Mr. McKinnon added:
America, in spite of all its faults, has achieved something in the history of
social and political life which has borne rich fruit and which may bear richer
provided we do not lose the thread. But this is the condition: provided we
do not lose the thread.
What is that thread? It is the concept upon which our country was founded,
that man is a rational being who possesses rights and duties. (Hearings, p. 260.)
Mr. McKinnon continued that Professor Rugg's philosophy
contravened the principles of the Declaration of Independence. Mr.
McKinnon said:
It is true that social conditions and circumstances change. The point is that
the principles themselves do not change, for they are inherent in the nature of
man, a nature which does not change. (Hearings, p. 260.)
tax-exempt foundations 151
Br. Counts and others
It was Rockefeller money which had made possible this attempt by
Professor Rugg, and those who agreed with his thesis, to use
the schools as an active force for social and political change. This
Committee wonders whether those who provided the money for such
a movement acted in ignorance or with intention.
Nor was Professor Rugg alone. Among others who employed
foundation largess in their attempt to introduce radical social and
political change through the use of the school, was the Dr. Counts
to whom we have previously referred. In his pamphlet, Dare the
Schools Build a New Social Order, published in 1932, a composition
of addresses made to The Progressive Education Association in Wash-
ington and The National Council oj Education in Washington, Dr.
Counts advocated ''Education through indoctrination." The pam-
phlet is a call for action: education must be "emancipated" from
the influence of the "conservative class"; "it is a fallacy that the
school shall be impartial in its emphasis and that no bias should be
given to instruction"; "Progressive education wishes to build a new
world but refuses to be held accountable for the kind of world it
builds."
In 1933 The Progressive Education Association, a foundation, sup-
ported in part by other foundations, issued a pamphlet called A Call
to The Teachers oj the Nation. It was prepared by a committee of
which Dr. Counts was chairman. It contained this:
"The progressive minded teachers of the country must unite in a powerful
organization militantly devoted to the building of a better social order, in the
defense of its members against the ignorance of the masses and the malevolence
of the privileged. Such an organization would have to be equipped with the
material resources, the talent, the legal talent, and the trained intelligence to
wage successful war in the press, the courts, and the legislative chambers of the
nation. To serve the teaching profession in this way should be one of the major
purposes of the Progressive Education Association."
This Committee wonders whether anyone would seriously assert that
such proposed conduct is properly encouraged by a tax-free founda-
tion supported by other tax-free foundations. There can be little
doubt that Dr. Counts' call to action was answered, and answered
with foundation funds.
It seems reasonable that one be known somewhat by the company
one keeps. The Progressive Education Association (which had changed
its name to the American Education Fellowship) publishes a magazine,
Progressive Education. Its November, 1947 issue has a lead article
by John J. DeBoer, the president of the organization, in which he
recites that at the 1947 convention there were such speakers as
W. E. B. Dubois (whose Communist front record is well-known) and
Langston Hughes, a Communist. It is very edifying to learn that
this educational organization was addressed by Hughes, the author
of the notorious poem, "Goodbye Christ", which contains sentiments
such as this:
"Goodbye,
Christ Jesus Lord God Jehova,
Beat it on away from here now.
Make way for a new guy with no religion at all —
A real guy named
Marx, Communist Lenin, Peasant Stalin, Worker Me—"
152 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
In the same issue of the magazine there is an article by Theodoke
Brameld entitled "A New Policy for A. E. F." (the American Edu-
cation Fellowship). This article contains a resolution which was
adopted at the 1947 convention and contains these interesting
proposals:
"I. To channel the energies of education toward the reconstruction of the economic
system, a system which should be geared with the increasing socializations and public
controls now developing in England, Sweden, New Zealand, and other countries;
a system in which national and international planning of production and distri-
bution replaces the chaotic planlessness of traditional 'free enterprise'; a system
in which the interests, wants and needs of the consumer dominate those of the
producer; a system in which natural resources, such as coal and iron ore, are
owned and controlled by the people, a system in which public corporations replace
monopolistic enterpiises and privately owned 'public' utilities; a system in which
federal authority is synchronized with decentralized regional and community
administration; a system in which social security and a guaranteed annual wage
sufficient to meet scientific standards of nourishment, shelter, clothing, health,
recreation, and education, are universalized; a system in which the majority
of the people is the sovereign determinant of every basic economy policy.
"II. To channel the energies of education toward the establishment of genuine
international authority in ail crucial issues affecting peace and security; an order
therefore in which all weapons of war (including atomic energy, first of all) and
police forces are finally under that authority; an order in which international
economic planning, of trade, resources, labor distribution and standards, is prac-
ticed, parallel with the best standards of individual nations; an order in which
. . , races and religions receive equal rights in its democratic control; an order
in which 'world citizenship' thus assumes at least equal status with national
citizenship." [Emphasis supplied.]
The same Theodore Brameld, writing in Science and Society in
1936, had said:
"The thesis of this article is simply that liberal educators who look towards collec-
tivism as a way out of our economic, political, and cultural morass must give more
serious consideration than they have thus far to the methodology of Marx. . . . The
possibility remains that ultimately they will agree with the value of Marxian philosophy
not only methodologically but systematically as well. But at present what they need
especially to consider in devising a strong and skillful strategy to cross the social
frontier of a new America, is whether Marxism has not less but rather more — much
more — to offer than as yet they willingly admit." [Emphasis supplied.]
Now let us return to Dr. Counts.
And what was this new social order of which The Progressive Edu-
cation Association was to become a leader? Dr. Counts became a
member of the American Advisory Organization connected with the
summer sessions at Moscow University. The purpose of this
Organization was to introduce American teachers and students to the
new education methods used in Soviet Russia. It is difficult to avoid
the conclusion that Dr. Counts, and perhaps some of his associates,
were very sympathetic to the Communist experiments in education
and willing enough to have them introduced into America. (Hearings,
p. 266, et seq.) Mr. Sargent gave this as his opinion:
My comments are that this document shows a framework of a complete system
of indoctrination of American educators which could only be put together on the
theory of their receiving such indoctrination and coming back here and introducing
it into our school system. It even includes the reflexology item I just referred to,
including material on Pavlov, who was the author of the principles of brain wash-
ing. (Hearings, p. 283.)
Dr. Counts' interest in things Russian was evident by several
of his books; among them The Soviet Challenge to America. His work
had the approval of the Russians, witness the February 1933 issue of
the Progressive Education Journal, the official organ of the foundation
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 153
known as The Progressive Education Association, which contained an
article in which reference was made to a letter written by Johannson I.
Zilberfarb, a member of the State Scientific Council and Commissariat
of Education of the Soviet Union. This was a letter to Dr. Counts
congratulating him on Dare the School Build a New Social Order, and
the "remarkable progress you have made in challenging capitalism."
He added "May I be so bold as to hope that your profound and con-
sistent attack on the social order in your country will eventially
lead you to a complete emancipation from American exclusiveness
and intellectual messiahship so aptly exposed in your pamphlet,
thus enabling you to consider all social progress from a universal
proletarian point of view." (Hearings, p. 285.)
Professor Rugg and Dr. Counts cannot lightly be dismissed
as incidental examples of those "rare and inevitable mistakes" con-
fessed by the foundations — on the contrary, both of these gentlemen
appear by the evidence to be typical spearheads of the foundation-
supported movement to convert our schools into vehicles for radical
social change. Dr. Counts, it should be noted, was among the
signatories of the Conclusions and Recommendations of the Commission
on Special Studies of the American Historical Association. We have
already discussed it in detail, but Mr. Sargent's testimony on the
Conclusions and Recommendations is particularly significant:
What these gentlemen propose to do is set forth in their chapter at the end
talking about next steps. It says that it is first to awaken and consolidate
leadership around the philosophy and purpose of education expounded in the
report. That The ■ American Historical Association in cooperation with the
National Council on the Social Studies has arranged to take over the magazine,
The Outlook, as a social science journal for teachers. That writers of textbooks
are to be expected to revamp and rewrite their old works in accordance with
this frame of reference. That makers of programs in social sciences in cities and
towns may be expected to evaluate the findings. That it is not too much to
expect in the near future a decided shift in emphasis from mechanics and method-
ology to the content and function of courses in the social studies. That is the
gist of it.
This report became the basis for a definite slanting in the curriculum by selecting
certain historical facts and by no longer presenting others, * * *". (Hearings,
pp. 287 et seq.)
It seems undeniable that these Conclusions and Recommendations
of the American Historical Association played a great part in the
campaign to slant education by playing down American traditions,
thus paving the way for radical social change, and other foundations
and foundation-supported enterprises joined in this campaign.
In The Progressive Education Magazine of May, 1946 appeared an
article by Norman Woelfel in which he stated:
"It might be necessary paradoxically for us to control our press as the Russian
press is controlled and as the Nazi press is controlled." (Hearings, p. 292)
The analogy with Russian methods seems pretty close. It was the
purpose of the Communists in Russia (as it is the purpose of every
totalitarianism) to condition youth to accept the new state. Radical
educators in the United States such as Dr. Woelfel, DR. COUNTS
and DR. RUGG, and there were many others, proposed a method quite
similar. There is even some evidence to indicate that the progressive
education movement itself was intended to be a vehicle for this form
of thought control. (Hearings, p. 302.)
We have discussed another evident instrument of this movement to
condition the American mind toward social change, namely The
55647—54 11
154 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
League jor Industrial Democracy. Mr. Sargent in his testimony
referred to a letter written by Harry W. Laidler, secretary of this
organization, on September 9, 1935 which was a blueprint of their
specific plans.
As to plans for the immediate future— we must launch student organization
everywhere and at once, early in the college and high school year. We must
build up the lecture circuits in new centers. We must arrange various radio
programs. We must complete the pamphlets begun in the summer. These are
preliminary to establishing a new research service which we believe will double
the amount of researchproduced and reach a much larger audience than we have
had in the past. The Chicago office, with a plan for extended work in the metro-
politan area, is ready to reopen. The emergency committee for strikers relief
will be called upon to renew its efforts on behalf of the sharecroppers who are
about to undertake a cotton pickers strike.
In addition to our major program, the L. I. D. continues its work of active
cooperation with other groups. By arrangement with the New Beginning group,
which carries on underground work in Germany, one of its leaders is to come to
America Under our auspices. With several defense organizations we are under-
taking a campaign to widen the support for Angelo Herndon ; we are active on the
Sacramento defense committee to fight the criminal syndicalism laws in California.
Other joint efforts find the L. I. D. actively participating. (Hearings, p. 306.)
The Buildwq America Textbooks.
The story of the Building America textbooks is as good an example
as any of the attempt by radical educators financed by foundations
to suborn the schools. The General Education Board of Rockefeller
provided over $50,000 to assist in the development of this series of
textbooks. (Hearings, p. 309.) It is impossible to believe that those
in this Foundation who authorized the work did not appreciate what
its significance could be. The 1940 Annual Report of The General
Education Board describes the "project" in some detail and anticipates
that it will cover such subjects as "planning and natural resources",,
"personal security and self -development", "free enterprise and
collectivism", etc.
Mr. Sargent pointed out instance after instance in which the
attempt was made to destroy our traditions and to use the schools
for political propaganda. (Hearings, p. 311, et seq.) Yet these books
were taken over by the National Education Association and promoted
broadly jor use in the schools.
These NEA sponsored books came under severe criticism in the
State of California where, as a result of a proceeding, they were
barred from the California schools. The report of the Senate Investi-
gating Committee on Education of the California Legislature, known
as the Dil worth Committee, severely condemned these books and
labeled them as subtle attempts to play up Marxism and to destroy
our traditions. Interesting quotations from the report of this Com-
mittee are to be found on page 315 of the Hearings and elsewhere.
The legislative report listed the many front organizations of some
of the authors of reference material in these books, among them
Anna Louise Strong, Albert Rhys, and Allen Roberts. One
cannot read the quotations from these books and the comments of
the California legislative committee, as contained in the testimony
of Mr. Sargent (Hearings, p. 309 et seq.), without coming to the con-
clusion that these books promoted by the National Education Associa-
tion and financed by the Rockefeller Foundation contained vicious,
radical propaganda in substantial degree.
Part of the plan of the radical educators financed by foundations
was apparently to combine various courses, history, geography, etc.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS " 155
into a new course generally known as "social studies". This mecha-
nism assisted them in using the schools for propaganda. Later, bor-
rowing a Communist term, the combined courses were sometimes
called "core studies". Mr. Sargent pointed out that there was a
blackout in history in California for a long period. No history books
were furnished by the Department of Education from 1928 to almost
1940. It was not until a legislative investigation that history books
were furnished as required by law. The Building America books
apparently took their place. The books, along with a great amount
of propaganda, lampooned some of our great traditional figures such
as Lincoln and Jefferson and in contrast exhibited Stalin in friendly
light. The Dilworth Committee was profoundly shocked at the pres-
ence of a cartoon showing President Lincoln burying the Constitution.
Nothing was provided to teach the children that Lincoln was a noble
and inspiring character. As the Dilworth Committee said :
"Nothing so vividly illustrates the change in attitude of some of our national
educational leaders in some policy-forming positions of the National Education
Association of professional educators and teachers as this about-face toward the
memory of Abraham Lincoln who lived and labored 'That government of the
people, by the people and for the people shall not persih from the earth.' " (Hear-
ings, p. 319.)
The Committee Report stated further:
"There are two great Americans that the devotees of foreign isms and ideol-
ogies consistently smear. They are Abraham Lincoln because he suppressed a
revolution and Thomas Jefferson because he is the great advocate of rights of
state and individuals as opposed to centralized government control." (Hearings,
p. 319.)
It could not have been coincidence that the Dilworth Committee
"found among other things that 113 Communist-front organizations had to do with
some of the material in these books and that 50 Communist-front authors were con-
nected with it. Among the authors are Sidney and Beatrice Webb, identified with
the Fabian Socialist Movement in Great Britain." (Hearings, p. 3l9.)j
One of the basic components of the Building America textbooks
was a pamphlet entitled the American Way of Business, by Oscar
Lange and Abba P. Lerner. Both have been beneficiaries of
Rockefeller fellowships. Both have been collectivists for a long time.
Oscar P. Lange, a professor at the University of Chicago under
Robert Maynard Htjtchins, renounced his American citizenship
in Warsaw in order to accept appointment as ambassador to the
United Nations from Communist dominated Poland. It would be
difficult for the National Education Association or the Rockefeller
Foundation to convince the average American citizen that the "Ameri-
can way of business" should be taught to the American school child
by Messrs. Lange and Lerner. The following are quotations
from this piece of literature widely promoted for use in our schools:
"The idea of abolishing private enterprise came from socialist thinkers who
believed that this change would actually further the development and freedom
of the individual."
"Publie enterprise must become a major constituent of our economy, if we are
really going to have economic prosperity."
1» Jjf Ijt 5fl %Z Jp Sp
"It is necessary to have public ownership of banking and credit (investment
banks and insurance companies)."
•T Sp Jp ^p ^fi H> *
156 ' TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
"A publicly owned banking and credit system alone is compatible with the
flexibility of capital value necessary to maintain competitive standards in pro-
duction and trade."
*******
"it is necessary to have public ownership of monopolistic key industries. . . . The
legal basis for public ownership of such industries should be provided by an
amendment to the anti-trust laws, providing that in cases of proved repetition
of monopolistic practices and impossibility of correcting the situation on the
basis of private enterprise, the companies in question should be transferred into
public ownership and operated on the 'principle of public service.' "
. * * * * * * *
"It is necessary to have public ownership of basic natural resources (mines,
■oil fields, timber, coal, etc.)".
"in order to insure that the public corporations act in accordance with the com-
petitive 'rules of the game,' special economic court (enjoying the same inde-
pendence as the courts of justice) might be established . . . and that the economic
court be given the power to repeal any rules of Congress, of legislatures, or of the
municipal councils. . . ."
The Building America textbooks are apparently still used in some
of the schools. They are being used in Arlington, Virginia and in
Maryland right now. (Hearings, p. 320.)
Mr. Sargent introduced evidence that The National Education
Association in the anxiety of its leaders to promote a "progressivism"
in education along radical lines has been aggressive in its "smearing"
of Americans who opposed its policies (Hearings, p. 321, et seq.),
has engaged in extensive lobbying and interfered substantially with
the local jurisdiction of school authorities.
Mr. Sargent testified that in his opinion the chief support for the
radical movement in education had come from the Rockefeller, Carnegie
and Ford Foundations.
Mr. Sargent. The Rockefeller Foundation has actively promoted and supported
the injection and the propagation of the so-called John Dewey system of experi-
mental education and has aided the introduction of Communist practices in our
school system and is defending and supporting the continuance of those practices
in the schools.
Mr. Hays. That is the Rockefeller Foundation?
Mr. Sabgbnt. Yes, sir, and also the General Education Board and the Inter-
national Education Institute.
Carnegie has aided it through various grants; both of them incidentally are
carrying on a lobby and a very extensive lobby, involving the schools which I
will testify about this afternoon.
The Ford Foundation has become the lobby which has interfered or is interfer-
ing with the integrity of local schools and is promoting world federalism and world
federal government, among other things, and extending its power into many areas
capable of being dangerous. (Hearings, p. 337.)
Many have pointed out that few of the major foundations do much, if
anything, in the way of an affirmative defence of existing institutions.
The witness, Mr. Sargent, testified that he had written to 115 text
book publishers throughout the country to determine "what materials
were available for instructing students and adult groups desiring to
study the propaganda and activities of socialist and communist organ-
izations, or for the study of the economic, financial and political and
constitutional effects of Fabian Socialism and the social welfare state."
(Hearings, p. 387.) He stated that the substance of the replies was
"that practically no material of this kind was available by any of
these publishers." He submitted supporting data to the Committee.
It would be interesting to aggregate the total funds poured by founda-
tions into the dissemination of leftist propaganda and compare it with
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS ftgfl
the tiny trickle which flowed into an exposition of the fallacies m
frailties of collectivism.
The Moscow University Summer Sessions
In the hearings starting at page 272 is disclosed a remarkable dop^j
ment: a travel information folder published by World Tourists, Imw
an agency of the Soviet Government, announcing the Anglo-Amerieta
Section of a summer session at Moscow University. The Institute '«*
International Education, Inc., is listed as the "American Advisory
Organization", and among its individual "advisors" appear the names
of George S. Counts and Heber Harper. Then there is listed a
"National Advisory Council" which contains the names of some emi-
nent professors, presidents and chancellors of universities, and a selec-
tion of social scientists and executives of foundations. Immediately
under this list of names there is the following recitation:
"The tremendous progress of the Soviet Union in the cultural field creates for
Americans an unequalled observation ground for education, psychology, and the
social sciences. The Soviet Union presents a unique opportunity for the study of
the processes of cultural change. * * * The Soviet Union possesses the most
progressive system of public education, extensively making use of the best achieve-
ments of international pedagogy. * * * "
Summer courses are then announced to be held in the University of
Moscow, and the attendance of American students is solicited. Appar-
ently they are to learn how pleasant life is in Soviet Russia and how
much better the Communists have solved their social problems. The
entire announcement is worth reading.
Significant is the fact, however, that among the members of the
National Advisory Council which particpated in the project wece
Stephen Duggan, director of the Institute of International Education,
John A. Kingsbury, secretary of the Milbank Memorial Fund; Charles
R. Mann, director of the American Council on Education; and Edward
"""!._ Murrow, then assistant director of the Institute of International ^
EmicalionT It was a strange venture, indeed, to receive American
foundation support.
There had been previous summer sessions of the Moscow Univer-
sity—in 1933 and 1934. The first one (1933) was called the First
Russian Seminar and Near East Cruise. The brochure for the 1935
Summer Session (Anglo-American Section of the Moscow State Uni-
versity) contains the following paragraph indicating that the 1933
session was also under the auspices of the Institute of International
Education:
"In order to insure close cooperation with American educational institutions,
and with students and educators in the United States, an advisory relationship
was established in 1933 with the Institute of International Education. At the
same time, a National Advisory Council of prominent American educators was
formed by Professor Stephen Duggan to assist the Institute of International
Education in its advisory capacity. To facilitate still closer rapprochement, each
year several American educators are invited to Moscow as resident advisors to
the Summer Session. Dr. George S. Counts and Dr. Heber Harper, Professors
of Education, Teachers College, Columbia University, will act as advisors during
the summer session of 1935."
The Advisory Committee for 1933 was:
Stuart Chase, New York City.
Kenneth Conant, Associate Professor of Architecture, Harvard University.
Samuel H. Cross, Assistant Professor of Slavic Languages and Literature,
Harvard University.
188 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Wftm* ./M*&- Dana, Cambridge.
GroBGK N. Day, Professor of Economics and Sociology, Occidental College.
Samubl N. Harper, Professor of Russian Language and Institutions, The Uni-
versity of Chicago.
KjHfsr L f Harriman, President, United States Chamber of Commerce, Boston.
BiSB^'d. 'Hopper, Assistant Professor of Government, Harvard University.
WSIWe* 'W. Hyde, Professor of Greek and Ancient History, University of
jfliPOfljitania.
ItaWA*|D.R. Mtjhrqw, Assistant Director, Institute of International Education.
Jinc.;, New York City.
~$VAbi k'NhrwAK, Professor of Slavic History, Boston University.
Grio'vE Patterson, Editor of the Toledo Blade, Toledo.
D. C. Poole, School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University.
Geroid T. Robinson, Associate Professor of History, Columbia University.
Tbedwell Smith, New York City.
Whiting Williams, Cleveland.
v According to the brochure (page 4) "The Summer Session is officially
an organizational part of the Moscow State University" and
"The Moscow University Summer Session is sponsored in the Soviet Union by
the Peoples' Commissariat of Education of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet
. Republic; by VOKS, the All-Union Society for Cultural Relations with Foreign
Countries; and by Intourist, the State Travel Company of the U. S. S. R. Intour-
ist, through its Educational Department, will supply information to persons
interested."
VOKS was the subject of testimony before the Senate Internal
Security Sub-committee Hearings (July 25, 1951-June 20, 1952) by
two witnesses both of whom stated under oath that it was an operation
supervised by the Communist Party. According to one witness the
v official translation of these letters is: "Society for Cultural Relations
Between Soviet Union and Foreign Countries". He added, "Actually
it* was one of the cover organizations for, again, these double tracks,
getting information from abroad to the Soviet Intelligence, and
sending infiltration of ideas and selling Communist ideas to the west."
The 1933 announcement of the 1933 Seminar carried these state-
ments under the heading "Seminar Aims":
"The Russian Revolution has brought on one of the greatest social upheavals
of all time. Socialism has been given microscopic trials before, but never on such
a Gargantuan scale. Now, in our own times and under our very eyes, the world's
most important experiment in Communism is taking place. The inspirational
opportunities for study and observation are unlimited. Would you like to have
been an observer in France during the French Revolution? The present oppor-
tunity in Russia is of equal significance. The First Russian Seminar will take
advantage of this opportunity.
"Those for whom the Seminar will be a success, those who derive the greatest
benefit therefrom, those who will come away heavily laden with thought-provoking
experiences and unforgettable memories, will be those members who have entered
into the spirit of the Seminar. This may be tersely worded as follows: 'We are
interested in seeing and understanding. We desire something more lasting than
the memory of de luxe accommodations. For these we do not even need to leave
our American homes where these comforts abound, but Russia has something
to show us. Let us try to comprehend.' "
The 1934 session was known as the American Institute of Moscow
University (instead of the Anglo-American Institute) ; and according
to a report entitled "Report For the Institute of International Edu-
*/ cation" it functioned under the auspices of:
1. The Society for Cultural Relations with Foreign Countries —
VOKS
2. The Ail-Union Travel Company Intourist
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 159
The lectures were held in the morning, and the afternoons were
devoted to field trips, 130 such excursions being made. After exami-
nations students had a choice of one of the following four itineraries:
Days Students
1. Kharkov, Yalta; Sevastopol, Odessa, Kiev 15 39
2. Kharkov, Yalta, Sevastopol, Odessa, Kiev 10 66
Both these tours were conducted by Professor Svadkovsky (as-
sistant director of the Central Pedagogical Institute) and Miss
Samokhvalova.
3. Gorki, Volga, Rostov, Kharkov, Kiev 15 40
Conducted by Y. L. Robbins of VOKS.
4. Leningrad, Baltic and White Sea Canal, Kharkov and Kiev 15 25
Conducted by Professor Gramp,
Attendance of less than 40 at the 1933 session increased to 212 at
the 1934 session (according to announcement of 1935 session), among
whom were "undergraduates, teachers, principals, professors, psy-
chologists, social workers, physicians, nurses and artists". The
following reference to the previous sessions is also taken from the
1935 announcement:
"Basing their judgment upon the undeniable success of these ventures, the
Soviet Educational authorities organized at the Universitv of Moscow, an Anglo-
American Section offering full and regular instruction in ^English, The students
and professors of the 1933 and 1934 sessions approved the academic advantages of
the plan, which enabled the student to travel during his vacation period and at the
same time to further his own professional experience. It is a plan that has the full
support of the foremost educators and scientists of the Soviet Union."
One of the academic regulations was:
"2. The course, "Principles of the Collective and Socialist Society" is pre-
requisite for admission to all other courses; however, the student may enroll simul-
taneously in this and other courses. Students may be exempted from this require-
ment by presenting evidence of having completed:
a. An equivalent course during the Moscow University Summer sessions of
1933 or 1934."
(Italics in original.)
Principles of the Collective and Socialist Society teach the violent
overthrow of the traditional social order — it is the communist creed — **'"'
yet it was "prerequisite" for acceptance at the American Institute of
the Moscow University.
According to the same announcement folder:
"All student applications must be approved by the office of the Institute of
International Education."
To summarize:
1. Summer sessions of the Moscow University were held in 1933
and 1934.
2. A projected summer session in 1935 was not held as such; how-
ever an "alternative program" was offered (see post).
3. The 1933 and 1934 sessions were under the auspices of
a. VOKS — an undercover organization for soviet Intelligence.
b. The Institute of International Education.
Stephen Duggan (who advocated recognition of Russia in 1920, the
father of Laurence Duggan — named under oath as a Soviet agent) ^
was director of the Institute and Edward R. Murrow was assistant
director, serving as acting director during T)uggan's absence in 1933-
34.1
4. The announced 1935 summer session was to be under the same
auspices.
160 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
5. Applications were subject to approval by the Institute of Inter-
national Education.
6. Prerequisite for admission was the course which teaches the
overthrow of government by force and violence.
Since all student applications were approved by the Institute it is
interesting to look into some of those who were approved — obviously,
it has been impossible to check into all of the over two hundred such
students, nor does the committee have a complete list of them.
The names referred to, however, are fairly familiar.
Julia Older
Sister of Andrew Older, an exposed Communist. According to
the report made to the Institute of International Education on the
1934 Moscow Summer School "Julia Older of Hartford Courant"
was chairman of the Editorial Committee which "prepared two
issues of the student wall newspaper 'Soviet Summer'."
Julia Older Bazar appeared before the Internal Security Sub-
committee on two occasions (September 25, and October 14, 1952)
at which time she refused to answer questions regarding the Moscow
University Summer school under the privilege of the Fifth Amend-
ment.
At that time, Julia Older Bazar was employed by the Bureau of
Documents and Editorial Control Section of the United Nations:
"I review manuscripts that come through for reproduction and pre-
pare reports of the various departments of the United Nations for
publication."
She refused to state whether she had been a member of the Com-
munist party while doing this work, or while she worked for the Farm
Security Administration of the Department of Agriculture and the
Coordinator of Information Office.
She refused to state whether she had been a roommate of Anna
Louise Strong, an exposed Communist; and other questions regard-
ing her activities drew a refusal to answer on "the basis of the first
and fifth amendments."
John Bovingdon
According to the February 11, 1941 issue of The Peoples World
(west coast official organ of the Communist Party) John Bovingdon
was to lecture throughout America on "what Soviet Russia is trying
to accomplish".
Referring to his stay in Russia, Bovingdon said his final successful
year in Russia made him realize the work to be done in the United
States.
Ring Lardner, Jr.
Exposed as a Hollywood Communist (as a result of his testimony
before the House Un-American Activities Committee he was indicted
and convicted) Ring Lardner, Jr., refused to answer as to his Com-
munist Party membership, even when faced with a card showing
membership in the Communist Party.
Oakley Johnson
The 1940 report of the Special Committee on Un-American Activi-
ties referred to the American League for Peace and Democracy (cited
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 161
by the Attorney General as subversive and Communist) and stated
that its secretaries "Oakley Johnson and Dinald Henderson were
well-known Communists".
Ballis Edwin Blaisdell
In May, 1953, Blaisdell testified before the Sub-committee of the
House Un-American Activities investigating infiltration in Education
that he had been approved to attend the Moscow University Summer
session in 1935 and when it was not held availed himself of the oppor-
tunity offered to spend an equivalent amount of time travelling in the
Soviet Union with guided tours. He also testified that the following
spring— 1936— he looked up the Communist Party address and joined
the Party.
Mr. Hays (Hearings, p. 266 et seq.) stressed that the 1935 summer
session of the American Institute of the Moscow State University
was never held. That appears to be the fact; yet it is equally the fact
that when the decision not to hold the session was reached an alterna-
tive program was offered and many of those "approved" by the Insti-
tute of International Education availed themselves of that alternative
program. This is evidenced by the following letter, which is on file
with one of the government agencies:
We, a group of students who were enrolled in the Anglo-American Summer
School at the Moscow University, although regretting the necessity which caused
the closing of the school, nevertheless wish to express our appreciation for the
unending thoughtfulness shown us by the Intourist organization and staff in
their efforts to make our stay in the Soviet Union enjoyable and instructive. No
expense has been spared to take care of our needs. The greatest of pains have
been taken by Intourist with the cooperation of VOKS, to arrange visits and
interviews for us with many directors of institutes and factories, teachers, writers
and artists. These men and women have spent hours answering our questions
and delivering exhaustive talks to us on the various phases of socialist construc-
tion in the U. S. S. R. The greatest hospitality was shown us during the course
of these interviews.
By this means, and by mixing with the people in the streets, parks and elsewhere,
we have obtained a clear picture of the life and culture of this country, a picture
which we hope to make more complete when we travel among the minority
nations of the Soviet Union during the next few weeks.
Moscow, July 28, 1935.
Louis Cohen Celia Lipsky John Fisher
Louise M. Edelson Adele C. Martin Marian Grosberg
Genevieve Williamson Sarah Goodman Lee Saltzman
H. R. Buros Charlotte Owen Jack Cohn
Leopold London Adele Birnbaum L. O. Ghaller
Shirley Olmsted Herberg Eiges Louise Bovingdon
John Galio Helen Eiges Lillie Davidson
H. H. Gleickman Oakley Johnson Majorie Schwarz
John Bovingdon Ena Lu Sharer Britton Morris
R. N. Rubin Joyce Lengfr Betty Padford
Baronig Baron D. Zablodowsky J. W. Nixon
S. K. Bedekar Mollie Rice Alice Stewart
Gert Davidson Betty Turner
Alvin E. Coons Gene Lizitzky
The Ford Fund for the Advancement of Education
The Testimony of Prof. Thomas H. Briggs (Record, p. 94 et seq.)
indicates that a thorough investigation of this unit of the Ford Founda-
162 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
lion is highly desirable. Prof. Briggs (now retired) was one of our
most eminent educators. He was selected by the Ford Fund as a
member of its Advisory Committee and resigned in disgust at its
policies and principles. He testified, moreover, that although the
Fund had expressed gratefulness to the Advisory Committee for its
help, that Committee had really not been consulted at all in any
significant manner.
Among the projects of The Ford Fund for the Advancement of Educa-
tion which would bear scrutiny is its support of the Institute for Philo-
sophical Research, San Francisco, California. The 1952 annual report
of The Ford Foundation states that one of the problems upon which
it would concentrate is a "clarification of educational philosophy." In
the same report appears this:
"A more fundamental and long-range approach to clarifying the philosophical
questions basic to education in the United States is being made by the Institute
of Philosophic Research, supported jointly by the Fund and the Old Dominion
Foundation. The Institute is undertaking, with the counsel and participation
of leading thinkers, to clarify the whole body of Western thought. It hopes,
thereby, to foster a community of understanding that will make discussion about
fundamental issues more intelligible."
The annual report of The Fund for the Advancement of Education
reports a three year grant of $565,000 to the Institute and notes that
it is to be under the direction of Me. Mortimer Adler. The project
is there described as
"undertakingf'a dialectical examination of Western humanistic thought with a
view to providing assistance in the clarification of basic philosophical and educa-
tional issues in the modern world."
That this project deserves attention is witnessed by the well-known
radical opinions of Mr. Adler, its director. In the January, 1949
issue of Common Cause, Mr. Adler had an article entitled The
Quiet Revolution, in which he said :
"The basic trend toward socialism, which began with Wilson's New Freedom,
and which was greatly accelerated by Roosevelt's New Deal, has been confirmed
by Truman's return to the presidency on a platform which does not yield an
inch to the right and in many respects goes further to the left. That fact suggests
the possibility that some form of socialism which is quite compatible with democ-
racy — as in England and the United States — may prove to be the middle ground
between the free enterprise capitalism and the oligarchical politics of the 'economic
royalists' on the one hand, and the dictatorship of the proletariat and the despot-
ism of the party on the other."
The following is from the same article by the man selected to direct
"a dialectical examination of Western thought" to the tune of over a
half -million dollars of Ford Foundation (public) money:
"It all adds up to a clear picture . It looks like a quiet but none the less effective
revolution. If we still wish to be cautious we need say no more than that we have
reached a turning point in American politics at which it has become evident that
the general social process of the last twenty years is irreversible— except by force.
By choice the American people are never going to fall back to the right again.
That deserves to be called a revolution accomplished. But it is also a revolution
which will continue. Either the Democratic Party will move further to the left
or a new political party will form to the left of the Democrats."
Inter-University Labor Education Committee
Another Fund for Adult Education grant which warrants study is
that to the Inter-University Labor Education Committee (totalling
$384,000 from January 1, 1952, to June 30, 1953). There exists an
TAX-EXEMPT FGUNBAfEONS 163
undated publication of this Committee called Labor's Stake in World
Affairs, marked "Preliminary Draft for Limited Distribution and
Comment". It was prepared by the Union Leadership Project of
the University of Chicago under the direction of the Review and
Evaluation Committee of the Inter-University Labor Education Com-
mittee, and credit is given to members of the faculty, including Bert H.
Hoselitz, who had been active in the Inter-Collegiate Socialist Society.
This Committee finds highly reprehensible in this booklet the char-
acterization of the conflict between Russia ai>d the United States as
a "struggle for world power". And, while the booklet says that labor
must help in the fight against Communism, one would gather from it:
that the Soviet Union wants peace; is against imperialism and inter-
vention; and wishes to cooperate with the United States. The
reader is left with the impression that, in view of Russia's good-will,
there is no point in arming — we should just make peace. A distorted
account of the events preceding and following the institution of the
Marshall Plan further misleads the reader, as does the inference that
the growing Communist movement in Eastern nations is the pure
result of nationalism.
Race relations is treated in a most unfortunate manner. The
question is asked whether we would have used the atom bomb on
white Europeans— did we not use it against the Japanese only be-
cause they had yellow skins? The same question is raised over our
use of napalm in Korea.
The section of the booklet devoted to "People Of The World— A
Day In Their Lives" has a definite pro-Russian slant. In a French
family, the question is asked: If Russia invades, should we fight? —
and a worker answers "yes". Then the question is asked: "But
what if American starts it-^are we still supposed to fight? The
question is left unanswered. In a Russian family the wife asks for
some new shoes for the children, but the husband replies that she
must get used to it— "Our country must first build up its industrial
might. Today steel is more important than a large selection of
shoes". There is no intimation that the build-up is for armament
purposes.
In a reference to the Berlin Blockade, the pamphlet intimates that
the difficulties arose because the original agreement between the
three parties provided that Germany would be kept as an agricul-
tural state, but later America began competing with Russia for
German's favor and opposed an agricultural economy. When the
four-power control broke down the American, French and English
zones were consolidated and currency reforms were made in the
Western zone. The increased production and industrialization in
that zone made it mandatory on Russia to retaliate and this she did
by what the pamphlet implies was the only method she could choose —
The Berlin Blockade. The airlift is treated as similar to the Russian
blockade. The section again contains what seem to this committee
as very slanted questions, raising the question "was the U. S. airlift
consistent with American policy objectives?"
Bert H. Hoselitz is one of those to whom the pamphlet expresses
appreciation for the discussion materials — and Mr. Hoselitz was an
active member of the Socialist group on the campus of Chicago
University.
164 TAXFESfaaeei mxmnATiWE
Good Books Discussion Groups: Another Ford Fund for Adult
Education Project
Increasing emphasis is being placed on continuing the educational
process beyond the adolescent and usual years of schooling. The
basic idea is certainly a worthy one, but this Committee seriously
questions whether one Fund project in this field has been entirely
commendable. That is another of the matters which warrant inquiry
by a continued investigation.
We refer to the support of the American. Library Association —
American Heritage Project, which has received substantial sums from
the Ford Fund for Adult Education. It is based on group discussion
of books (selected from the so-called "Good Books") and 16 mm edu-
cational films designed to "bring adults together at their public
libraries to discuss the great American documents and American
political freedoms".
The Great Books project is closely allied through its directorate
with the Encyclopedia Brittanica, and the latter issues 16 mm docu-
mentary and educational films used by the discussion groups.
It is obvious that because of its very nature "adult education" has
tremendous possibilities for use as a propaganda medium, directed
as it is particularly to adults of foreign birth (whose formal schooling
in this country may have been limited) and to those who seek a
greater knowledge of political science and America's place in the
world today. The material in the hands of this Committee is not
exhaustive but it appears to lean heavily to civil liberties, political
and social action, and international world politics.
In addition to the fact that the preponderance of current authors
are definitely not of the conservative point of view (and many of
them, as will be seen by referring to the Appendix to this Report
have citations of various degrees) the films suggested as part of these
joint presentations are even more radical and contentious. There
seems little justification for the use of any of the films mentioned
here, even if they were balanced by an equal number of innocuous
ones — which is not the case. When the nature of the films is con-
sidered in the light of some of the personalities associated with the
project and with the films, this committee questions the objectivity
and the good faith of those responsible for the selection of individuals
and discussion material.
Due Process of Law Denied
This film, somewhat uniquely paired with "The Adventures of
Huckleberry Finn" deals with excerpts from "The Ox Bow Incident",
a brutal story of mob "justice". Described in the material furnished
to the discussion groups as "forceful re-enacting of a lynching", a
more accurate statement is that it is inflammatory and designed to
convey the impression that throughout the United States there is
widespread disregard for law and order.
The Cummington Story •
By Waldo Salt, who on April 15, 1951, refused to answer, claim-
ing the privilege of the Fifth Amendment when questioned by the
House Un-American Activities Committee regarding his Communist
affiliations.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 165
The House I Lite In
By Albebt Maltz referred to earlier, who refused to answer ques-
tions regarding his Communist Party record, and was cited for
contempt.
Of Human Bights
Prepared by the United Nations Film Department, it is used with
the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights, and is described as
follows:
"An incident involving economic and racial prejudice among children is used to
dramatize the importance of bringing to the attention of the peoples of the world
their rights as human beings as set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights proclaimed by the UNP General Assembly in December 1948." [Em-
phasis supplied.]
The United States government by rejecting this Universal Declara-
tion has gone on record as stating this country does not consider that
document — prepared in collaboration with the Communists — as a
statement of our "rights as human beings". The rights of citizens
of the United States are set forth in the Declaration of Independence,
in the Constitution and its Amendments.
Brotherhood of Man
Also suggested for use on the program "Human Rights" this film
produced by United Productions of America for the United Auto-
mobile Workers of the CIO is distributed by Brandon Films. The
Washington representative of Brandon Films testified before the
Jenner Committee in May 1951 that Brandon Films advertised in the
Daily Worker but took refuge behind the Fifth Amendment against
self-incrimination when questioned as to his own Communist Party
membership.
The film itself is based on the pamphlet "Races of Mankind"
written by Ruth Benedict and Gene Weltfish, whose records are
included in the Appendix. Following complaints as to its nature and
accuracy the pamphlet was withdrawn from the Armed Forces Educa-
tion Program — but as recently as September of this year the film was in
use at the Film Center at Fort Monmouth. To this Committee the
use of such a film cannot be justified, and it condemns the subterfuge
by which a document branded as inaccurate is withdrawn as it were
by one hand and surreptitiously reinstated with the other.
With These Hands
Produced by the International Ladies Garment Workers' Union, this
film is a highly colored protrayal of violence on the picket lines, featur-
ing the horrors of the Triangle Fire in New York City almost fifty
years ago, giving a completely unrealistic picture of present day
working conditions.
The Challenge
This is another film on the theme that the guarantee of "life, liberty
and the pursuit of happiness" is denied to Negroes and other minority
group members in the United States; it is unrealistic, distorted and
deceptive.
Such presentations as these cannot be called educational in the
opinion of this Committee, they deliberately seek to stress "what's
wrong" in present and past group relations rather than provide facts
166 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
for objective discussion of such relations, and ignore the fact that here
in the United States can be found the outstanding example of liberty
in action in the world today.
The Fund For Adult Education along with the 20th Century Fund,
and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, is closely
associated with the Film Council of America. Evans Clark is listed
as a member and William F. Kruse (at one time connected with Bell
and Howell) is in a policy-making position on the Film Council.
Mr. Kruse's background is particularly interesting to this Committee
since he carries great weight with the Council — and the Council's films
find their way into the discussion groups sponsored by the American
Library Association with Ford money.
Mr. Kruse is reliably reported to have been a communist as recently
as 1943, and there are witnesses who state he still was after that date.
As late as 1943 he was listed as sponsoring the Chicago Council of
American-Soviet Friendship.
Another individual indirectly associated with the Film Council is
John Grierson, who produced "Round Trip" spearhead for a world
trade campaign in this country starring Paul Hoffman. Grierson
resigned as head of the National Film Board of Canada at the time of
the Canadian atomic spy ring revelations. Denied a visa to this
country he came in through Unesco and thereafter headed the film
section of that organization. Unesco and UNO films are likewise
used in the Good Books discussion groups.
The 16 mm film is being increasingly recommended for use in all
levels of education — including so-called adult education. This Com-
mittee would strongly urge that the whole matter of the type of films
as well as the subject matter and the individuals and organizations
who produce these films, be carefully studied. There is no greater
media today through which to propagandize and it is no exaggeration
to say that such things as ostensibly "educational" films can well
prove to be the Trojan horse of those ideologies which seek to scuttle
American principles and ideals.
Other projects of The Fund for the Advancement of Education need
the attention of a continued investigation. Professor Briggs' testi-
mony indicated that much was badly wrong with the operation of the
great Fund and very seriously so. We have referred to his testimony
elsewhere but add these excerpts from it:
"Representing, as I think I do, the sentiment of the vast majority of educators
of the country I am deeply concerned that a major part of the program of The
Fund for the Advancement of Education deprecates the professional education of
teachers and of school administrators.
"It apparently is assuming that a good general education is sufficient to insure
effective professional work." (Hearings, p. 99.)
* * * * * * *
"The desired increase in general education of teachers will not result from the
projects, costly as they are, of the Fund for the Advancement of Education.
They may improve a small fraction of teachers, but they are unlikely to have
any widespread national effect." (Hearings, p. 100.)
"But after 3 years of what the Fund erroneously calls "a great experiment"
there is no evidence that the hoped-for result is in sight. Nor, according to
reports from a number of schools from which the favored teachers were selected,
has the expenditure of several million dollars on the project produced any material
improvement in education or in the increased ambition of other teachers.
"This is but one of several expensive projects that the Fund, has financed for a
purpose praiseworthy in itself but wastefully unlikely to have any significant
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 167
results on education throughout the country. The relatively few fortunate
teachers probably profited from their year of study, but it was unrealistic to
expect that their experience would materially affect all, or any considerable part,
of the schools of the Nation." (Hearings, p. 100.)
* * * * * * *
"* * * But concerning the professional education of school people the officers
of the Fund begin their propaganda against current practices by an assumption
that they know what the preparation should be with such an assumption,
however unsound, would not be disturbing if these officers did not have at their
disposal millions of money, yours and mine, as well as Mr, Ford's to promote
their theories. To whatever extent successful their propaganda, disguised under
declared benevolence, the effect is likely to be decreasing public confidence and
perhaps decreased public support for what is desirable and necessary. (Hearings,
p. 101.)"
*******
"All this being understood, we can assert without fear of successful contradiction
that any attempt by outside agencies, however heavily they may be financed and
however supported by eminent individuals, to influence school administrators and
teacheis to seek othei objectives than those which have public approval or to use methods
and materials not directed by responsible management is an impudence not to be
tolerated. Though cloaked with declared benevolence, it cannot hide the arrogance
underneath," (Hearings, p. 99.) [Emphasis supplied.]
The following was Professor Briggs' summarized indictment against
the Ford Fund for the Advancement of Education:
In summary, I charge:
1. That The Fund for the Advancement of Education is improperly manned with
a staff inexperienced in public elementary and secondary schools, ignorant at
firsthand of the problems that daily confront teachers and school administrators,
and out of sympathy with the democratic ideal of giving an appropriate education
to all the children of all of the people;
2. That the Fund is using its great resources, mostly contributed by the public
by the remission of taxes, to deprecate a program of professional education of
teachers and school administrators that has been approved by the public with
legislation and appropriations;
3. That the Fund has ignored the professional organizations of teachers and
school administrators, neither seeking their advice and cooperation nor making
appropriation to support projects proposed by them;
4. That the Fund has made grants to favored localities and individuals for
projects that are not likely to have any wide or important influence;
5. That the Fund has given no evidence of its realization of its obligation as a
public trust to promote the general good of the entire Nation;
6. That the Fund has in some cases been wastefully prodigal in making grants
beyond the importance of the projects; and
7. That the Fund either has no balanced program of correlated constructive
policies, or else it has failed to make them public. (Hearings, p. 103.)
An Inevitable Conclusion.
The evidence forces the conclusion that the movement which resulted
in the use of the school systems to change our social order was basically
socialistic in nature. Its purpose was to turn educators into political
agitators. The term "collectivism" was frequently used by the organs
and agents of the movement. That term will do as well as "socialism"
if one prefers to use it. Some organizations and individuals promoting
the movement were not abashed at using the bare term "socialism."
The League for Industrial Democracy, a still functioning and still
tax-exempt foundation, in its New Frontiers, Vol. TV, No. 4, of June,
1936 said:
"All political institutions of democracy are perverted by private property in
the means of production. Personal, legal, political equality — they all can be fully
realized only when private property is abolished, when men have an equal control
over property." (Hearings, p. 467.)
168 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
A similar expression of purpose is to be found in the October 13,
1943 issue of Frontiers of Democracy, the successor to the Social
Frontier. Dr. Harold Rugg was editor of this magazine and author
of an article which included the following:
* * * We have suddenly come out upon a new frontier and must chart a new
course. It is a psychological frontier, an unmarked wilderness of competing desires
and possessions, of property ownerships and power complexes * * *.
* * * The test is whether enough of our people — perhaps a compact minority of
10 million will be enough — can grasp the established fact that, in company with
other industrializing peoples, we are living in a worldwide social revolution.
(Hearings, p. 468.)
This Committee wishes to make its position completely clear. It does
not support uniformity; it insists that the individual shall have the right
to advocate and teach and promote socialism if he wishes to. It does
insist, however, that a trust administering public funds has no right to
support a movement so antithetical in its basic designs to the American
system as is the socialist movement. We are dealing, after all, with
trusts which are and must be dedicated to the public welfare. What is
that welfare? Is it what the accidental administrators of the public
trusts deem it to be; or is it what the people deem to constitute their
own welfare? Along with that eminent educator, Professor Briggs,
who testified before us, we believe that the public has the right to
determine what is in its interest, and that it perforce rejects the dis-
semination of socialist teaching in the schools of the nation — that is
not in the public interest as the public sees it.
As Mr. Wolcott of this Committee stated it:
I am sure that the founders of these foundations would turn over several times
in their graves if they felt that their money was being used for the destruction of
the American system of government. Whether it is destroyed by socialism cr
communism is not the point. I think we owe them an obligation, as well as our-
selves and the people whom we represent, to find out whether there is any danger
to the American system, and where it lies. That is the reason I am on this com-
mittee. I would not be on the committee if I was not interested in that subject.
(Hearings, p. 237.)
We believe this expresses the point of view of every conscientious
American.
XI. "Internationalism" and the Effect of Foundation Power
on Foreign Policy
The New "Internationalism" .
Some of the major foundations have had a significant impact upon
our foreign policy and have done much to condition the thinking of our
people along "internationalist" lines. What is this "internationalism"
which meets with such hearty foundation support? Professor Cole-
grove in his testimony described it well. He said:
"In my opinion, a great many of the staffs of the foundations have gone way
beyond Wendell Willkie with reference to internationalism and globalism. * * "*
There is undoubtedly too much money put into studies which support globalism
and internationalism. You might say that the other side has not been as fully
developed as it should be." (Hearings, p. 595.)
Professor Colegrove pointed out that "the other side" had been well
represented in Congress but that the foundations had seen fit to
support only the one point of view or approach. He felt that there
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 169
is a definite tendency to "sacrifice the national interest of our country
in dealing with foreign affairs." He said:
"* * * But there is too frequently a tendency of Americans not to think in
international conferences on foreign policy about the national interest of the
United States. We are thinking always of what is the interest of the whole
world.
"And that kind of thinking always brings us to the point where we are too
likely to make sacrifices to accomplish this globalism which England would not be
willing to make under Churchill, or Attlee for that matter, which Laniel would not
be willing to make, or Bidault, or whoever is Prime Minister. That is a very
unfortunate tendency. * * *" -'
Many Americans today join with former Assistant Secretary of
State, Spruille Braden, who said in a letter to Counsel for this
Committee:
"I have a very definite feeling that a number of the foundations have been
taken over by what I describe in my testimony before the Senate Internal
Security Sub-Committee, not so much the Communists, as by state interven-
tionalists, collectivists, misguided idealists, 'do-gooders' and 'whatnots', and that
this is one of the greatest perils confronting our country today. * * * my respect
for the Rockefeller Foundation in connection with its health work in such places
as Colombia, in yellow fever, malaria, etc., has been severely jolted when I read
that Chester Bowles has now been made a director of that institution. The
reason for my concern is that only a few months ago I heard the former Ambas-
sador and Governor of Connecticut declaim against the Farewell Address of
George Washington as typifying the evils of isolationism [sic]! * * * / have the
very definite feeling that these various foundations you mention very definitely do
exercise both overt and covert influences on our foreign relations and that their in-
fluences are counter to the fundamental principles on which this nation was founded »
and which have made it great." [Emphasis supplied.] _ 'TO"*
(The "various foundations" referred to in counsel's letter are
"Carnegie Endowment, Rockefeller Foundation, Ford Foundation,
Rhodes Scholarship Trust, etc.")
The weight of evidence before this Committee, which the foundations
have made no serious effort to rebut, indicates that the form of globalism
which the foundations have so actively promoted and from which our
foreign policy has suffered seriously, relates definitely to a collectivist
point of view. Despite vehement disclaimers of bias, despite platitudinous
affirmations of loyalty to American traditions, the statements filed by
those foundations whose operation touch on foreign policy have produced
no rebuttal to the evidence of support of collectivism. Some indication
of this is given by the 1934 Yearbook of the Carnegie Endowment
for International Peace which complains about the "economic national-
ism which is still running riot and which is the greatest obstacle to
the reestablishment of prosperity and genuine peace * * *," referring
to it later as "this violently reactionary movement." (Hearings,
p. 910.)
The Rockefeller Foundation minced no words in its 1946 Report ■■*
(Hearings, p. 934):
"The challenge of the future is to make this world one world— a world truly
free to engage in common and constructive intellectual efforts that will serve the
welfare of mankind everywhere."
However well-meaning the advocates of complete internationalism
may be, they often play into the hands of the Communists. Commu-
nists recognize that a breakdown of nationalism is a prerequisite
to the introduction of Communism. This appears in a translation of
55647—54 12
170 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
a Kussian poster dealing with international education, which reads
as follows (Hearings, p. 288):
"Without educating internationalists, we will not build socialism. Animosity
between nations is the support of counter-revolutions and of capital. It is there-
fore profitable and so is maintained. War is needed by capitalists for still greater
enslavement of oppressed people. International education is the way toward
socialism and toward the union of the toilers of the whole world."
The Interlock in "Internationalism."
Substantial evidence indicates there is more than a mere close work-
ing together among some foundations, operating in the international
field. There is here, as in the general realm of the social sciences, a
close interlock. The Carnegie Corporation, The Carnegie Endowment
for International Peace, The Rockefeller Foundation and, recently,
The Ford Foundation, joined by some others, have commonly cross-
financed, to the tune of many millions, various intermediate and
agency organizations concerned with internationalism, among them
the
! Institute of Pacific Relations
, The Foreign Policy Association
\ The Council on Foreign Relations
I The Royal Institute of International Affairs
and others. No one would claim, of course, that there has been a
contract or agreement among this group of foundations for the com-
mon support of these organizations, or the common support of like-
minded propagandists, but the close working together has incontro-
vertibly happened. That it happened by sheer coincidence stretches
credulity. That such unity of purpose, effort and direction resulted
from chance or happenstance seems unlikely.
Carnegie's Money for Peace.
In 1910 Andrew Carnegie created The Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace. His motive could not have been more com-
mendable. How to expend the granted funds for the purpose of
promoting peace, however, became a difficult problem. Unable to
think of many direct ways in which to accomplish Mr. Carnegie's
purposes, the trustees, from time to time, suggested various collateral
approaches. That these occasionally went far beyond the donor's
intention is testified to by the minutes of an Executive Committee
meeting in August, 1913, in which, referring to certain proposals, the
minutes read :
"Mr. Choate raised the question whether 'the recommendations as a whole did
not seem to suggest the diversion of the Endowment from its particular object of
promoting international peace to a general plan for the uplift and education of
humanity' ".
At the same meeting Mr. Carnegie stated that he "understood the
Endowment's resources were to be applied to the direct means for
abolishing war, that he did not regard the proposed expenditures
in the Orient as coming within these means, and that there were other
more important and pressing things bearing directly upon the question
of war and peace which could be done instead."
It is to be doubted that Mr. Carnegie would have approved of some
of the methods later used to distribute the fund which he had created
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 171
to promote peace. He must have contemplated that some propa-
ganda-production might be necessary. However, we doubt, that he
had any idea that the propaganda would reach into fields other than
the promotion of international arbitration and things directly con-
cerned with the peaceful settlement of international disputes. Yet
the Endowment started early to organize media for widespread propa-
ganda efforts to educate the American public into what Dr. Nicholas
Murray Butler called "the international mind." It was as though the
conception was that we could have world peace if only Americans became
more world-minded.
An extremely powerful propaganda machine was created. It spent
many millions of dollars in:
The production of masses of material for distribution;
The creation and support of large numbers of international
polity clubs, and other local organizations at colleges and else-
where;
The underwriting and dissemination of many books on various
subjects, through the "International Mind Alcoves" and the
"International Relations Clubs and Centers" which it organized
all over the country;
The collaboration with agents of publicity, such as newspaper
editors;
The preparation of material to be used in school text books,
and cooperation with publishers of text books to incorporate
this material;
The establishing of professorships at the colleges and the
training and indoctrination of teachers;
The financing of lecturers and the importation of foreign lec-
turers and exchange professors;
The support of outside agencies touching the international
field, such as the Institute of International Education, the Foreign
Policy Association, the American Association For the Advancement
of Science, the American Council on Education, the American
Council of Learned Societies, the American Historical Association,
the American Association of International Conciliation, the Institute
of Pacific Relations, the International Parliamentary Union and
others, and acting as mid-wife at the birth of some of them.
Miss Casey's report (Hearings, p. 869, et seq.) proves beyond any
doubt that The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace created
powerful propaganda mechanisms and was, indeed, quite frank about
it. There was no hesitation in its minutes, for example, at using the
term "propaganda." Its eventual Division of Intercourse and Edu-
cation was originally referred to as the "Division of Propaganda."
(Hearings, p. 871.)
One does not need to doubt the complete good will of those who
passed upon the Endowment's various activities. The Endowment has
always had and still has on its Board men of high competence and
character. But there is inherent danger in the creation of a great
propaganda machine. It can be used for good, but it is also available
for undesirable purposes. No other proof of the truth of this state-
ment is needed than the history of the Institute of Pacific Relations
which undoubtedly started as a desirable enterprise, operated by
good men for benign purposes. Yet it became an instrument for
172 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
subversion; its great propaganda power, originally the weapon of
well -intended men, became a powerful force for evil.
The danger of misuse is all the more serious in the light of the
Endowment's own estimate of the effectiveness of its propaganda.
Its yearbook of 1945 states:
"every part of the United States and every element in its population have been
reached by the Endowment's work. The result may be seen in the recorded
attitude of public opinion which makes it certain that the American government
will be strongly supported in the accomplishment of its effort to offer guidance
and commanding influence to the establishment of a world organization for pro-
tection of international peace and preservation of resultant prosperity."
(Hearings, p. 899.)
It thus takes credit for having a powerful propaganda machine indeed.
It is not beyond possibility that 'The Carnegie Endowment for Inter-
national Peace might have followed the same course as did the Institute
of Pacific Relations. After all, Alger Hiss was made President of the
Endowment. He was probably not in office long enough to do ir-
remediable damage, but it is always possible that a great propaganda
machine could get into the hands of another traitor, with tragic results
to our country. When it is easy for a Hiss to become a trustee of the
Woodrow Wilson Foundation, a director of the Executive Committee of
the American Association for the United Nations, a director of the Ameri-
can Peace Society, a trustee of the World Peace Foundation-, a director
of the American Institute of Pacific Relations, and the President of the
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, it is highly doubtful that
propaganda machines should be operated by foundations . They have a
way, at times, of getting out of hand and being used for purposes other
than originally intended.
The basic problem of the Endowment trustees was: what activities
do in fact weightily relate to its intended purpose of promoting inter-
national peace? The trustees decided upon some strange ways to
approach this problem. The 1939 Year Book of the Endowment
recites :
"Recognizing the desire of American public opinion for educational material
on economic questions and also for encouragement in the effort to carry on demo-
cratic discussion of these problems, the division has cooperated with the U. S.
Department of Agriculture, in its discussion program and with the campaign for
world economic cooperation of thelNational Peace Conference described later in
this report."
It is difficult to understand the connection of such activities with
the promotion of international peace. Perhaps a case could be made
for the proposition that, regardless of how belligerent or aggressive
the rest of the world might be, a mere increase in the education of
the American public, an expansion of its understanding of "Economic
questions", of agriculture and of "world economic problems", might
promote the cause of peace. That seems rather far-fetched. But it
is the conclusion of this Committee, from a reading of Carnegie Endow-
ment reports, that no simple educational program was intended. The
term "public education" is used far less often than the term, the
"education of public opinion" (Hearings, pp. 906, 907, 908), which is
a far different thing. This term is too apt to result from accident.
It has the clear connotation of propaganda.
By its own admission, a prime purpose of the Endowment was to
"educate" the public so that it would be conditioned to the points of
view which the Endowment favored. There is very serious doubt
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
173
whether these points of view were always in the best interests of our
nation; but here their validity or falsity is beside the point. The
basic question is: should vast aggregations oj public money in the control
of a handful of men, however well selected, have the power and the right to
condition public opinion!
Of all the many media of propaganda used by the Endowment,
perhaps the most reprehensible was its attempt to control or, at least,
deeply influence text book material. It engaged in close and intensive
collaboration with publishers with the objective of making sure that
the historical material used in text books suited its own positions.
Time has not permitted an analysis of the products of this collabora-
tion; we are not in a position to judge of the damage to objectivity
which resulted from this collaboration. But one thing seems utterly
clear; no private group should have the power or the right to dictate
what should be read and taught in our schools and colleges.
The Endowment's "Mind Alcoves".
A random sampling was taken by Miss Casey of books distributed
by the Carnegie Endowment through the International Mind Alcoves
or through the International Relations Clubs and Centers. Professor
Kenneth Colegrove looked over the names of some of these books and
commented upon a number of them as follows (Hearings, p. 926,
et seq.):
Author
Name of Book
Prof. Colegrove's Comments
Harold J. Laski
Studies in the Problem Sover-
eignty.
International Relations
"Opposed to the 'national interest'
Raymond Leslie Buell
Inclines toward extreme left."
"Globalist"
Bead, Elizabeth F
International Law and Interna-
tional Relations.
The Good Earth
"Rather Leftist"
Buck, Pearl S
"Slightly leftist"
Angell, Norman _ . . .
The Unseen Assassins
"Globalist"
Patterson, Ernest Minor
Salter, Sir Arthur
America: World Leader or World
Led?
Recovery, the Second Effort.
Business and Politics in the Far
East.
Humanity Uprooted _ .
"Globalist"
"Globalist"
Ware, Edith E
"Doubtful"
"Marxian slant"
McMullen, Laura W .._.._
Building the World Society
The Road to the Grey Pamir
Disarmament- ..
"Globalist"
Strong, Anna Louise
"Well known communist"
de Madariga, Salvador
James T . Shotwell -
"Ultra globalist and aimed at sub-
On the Abyss...
mergence of 'national interest.' "
"Globalist"
William T. Stone and Clark
Peaceful Change.. .. .. ..
"Globalist and leftist. Regarding
M. Eiehelberger.
Salter, Sir Arthur
World Trade and Its Future
Peace with the Dictators?.. _ ...
W. T. Stone, see report of Mc-
Carran sub-committee. Stone was
closely associated with Edward
Carter of I. P. R."
"Globalist"
"Globalist"
Union Now...
"Globalist and submersion of
American Policy in the Far East,
1931-
Citizens for a New World, year-
book of Commission for Organi-
zation of Peace.
Toward an Abiding Peace ..
America and Asia. _ . .
national interest. Fallacious in
his analogy of Union of American
states in 1781 with world federa-
tion"
' ' Pro-communist ' '
Hunt, Dr. Erling (Teachers
College)
Maelver, R. M
"Ultra Globalist"
"Extremely globalist and careless of
Lattimore, Owen -- - -
the American 'national interest.' "
"Subtle propaganda along Com-
Pfeffer, Nathaniel
Basis for Peace in the Far East
American Russian Institute
Britain: Partner for Peace .. ...
munist line. Lattimore cited in
McCarran sub-committee report
as part of Communist cell in the
Institute of Pacific Relations."
"Leftist. See McCarran sub-com-
The Soviet *Union Today an
Outline Study.
Percy E, Corbett — . ...
mittee report."
"Favorable to U. S. S. R."
"Extremely globalist"
174 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
A detailed analysis of the entire list of books distributed by the
Endowment would probably disclose many more, the distribution of
which could be seriously criticized on the ground of lack of objectivity
or because in the aggregate they represent a distinct and forceful
slanting to the globalist point of view. Nor is "globalism" the limit
or extent of the criticism of the Endowment in its selection of books
for wide distribution through the International Mind Alcoves and
otherwise. It has been called to our attention that The Pupils of the
Soviet Union, by Corliss Lamont currently a professor of philosophy
at Columbia University, is being distributed by the Carnegie Endow-
ment to the Alcoves. In view of the well-known fellow-traveller iden-
tity of the author (whose Communist affiliations are too extensive to
be included in this report), it is quite shocking to learn that public
funds are being used to distribute his literature.
A Carnegie Endowment Created International Relations Club,
Dr. Felix Wittmer, formerly Associate Professor of the Social Studies
at New Jersey State Teachers College, filed a sworn statement with
the Committee (Hearings, Part 2) describing his experiences as
faculty advisor to one of the International Relations Clubs founded by
the Carnegie Endowment at the colleges. He stated that there was a
network of close to a thousand of such clubs and indicated that, as a
result of their operation and of the material fed into them by the
Endowment, a large proportion of the student members had acquired
leftist tendencies.
Dr. Lamont in a recent Facts Forum program, Answers for Ameri-
cans, made the following amazing remarks:
"I don't think that Communist China is under control of Soviet Russia."
"We should have Communist China come in as a member [of„the|UN]." (Facts
Forum News, August 1954, page 26.)
The Endowment supplied a large amount of printed material to
the Clubs, Bulletins of the Foreign Policy Association, the Headline
Books, publications of the Institute of Pacific Relations and of the
American Russian Institute, and numbers of books on international
subjects. Let us look at some of this literature fed into the colleges
by the Endowment.
According to Dr. Wittmer, they included works by such pro-
Communist stalwarts as Ruth Benedict, T. A. Bisson, Evans Clark,
Corliss Lamont, Owen Lattimore, Nathaniel Pfeffer and Alex-
ander Werth. Three of these, T. A. Bisson, Corliss Lamont and
Owen Lattimore were identified as Communists before the McCarran
Committee. Miss Benedict was the co-author with Gene Weltfish
of a pamphlet which was finally barred by the War Department. Miss
Weltfish resigned from Columbia University after a Fifth Amend-
ment refusal to state whether she was a Communist or not. Evans
Clark (for many years a Director of the Twentieth Century Fund —
which seems to need explaining at some future inquiry) has had a
long record of association with subversive organizations. Professor
Pfeffer has disclosed himself frequently as a pro-Communist or, at
least, an advocate of support of the Chinese Communists. In a
review of George Creel's Russia's Race for Asia in the New York
Times, Pfeffer reprimanded Creel because "he fears Russia and
does not like or trust the Chinese Communists." AlexandeH Werth
is a well-known European apologist for many Communist causes.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 175
Dr. Wittmer notes that "Many other books which the Carnegie
Endowment sent to our college club as gifts, while not quite so out-
spokenly pro-Communist, were of the leftwing variety", and he named
several in his statement.
Dr. Wittmer apparently had to supply his students from other
sources with books which might tend to counteract the radical points
of view of the literature presented by the Endowment. Such books
were not obtainable from the Endowment itself.
Regional conferences were held from time to time and Dr. Wittmer
notes that "a large majority of those students who attended such
conferences, favored the views which came close to that of the
Kremlin." One can hardly avoid the conclusion that these points of
view had been indoctrinated through the material supplied by the
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Speakers were furnished for the International Relations Club by
the Endowment. Dr. Wittmer notes that, as a final speaker, one
year the Endowment suggested Alger Hiss. Dr. Wittmer, knowing
something of his activities, protested but was overruled. The
Secretary of the Endowment reminded him "in no uncertain terms that
our club, like all the hundreds of other clubs, was under the direction
of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, which had for
years liberally supplied it with reading material, and which contrib-
uted funds to cover the Honoraria of conference speakers."
Dr. Wittmer states that radical infiltration into the International
Relations Club of which he was faculty adviser became so acute that he
finally felt obliged to disassociate himself from it.
The cumulative evidence indicates that the Carnegie Endowment
created something of a Frankenstein in building up its vast propa-
ganda machine. We suggest that much further study should be given
to this subject. The extent to which this machine has been responsible
for indoctrinating our students with radical internationalism needs
careful inquiry. We have said that a propaganda machine can
become a dangerous weapon, even though designed for good. How
this propaganda machine may have been suborned deserves intense
study.
The Foreign Policy Association.
Some of the worst literature distributed by the Carnegie Endowment
apparently came from the Foreign Policy Association, which it heavily
subsidized. It is quite astonishing how frequently we find leftists in
important positions in organizations supported by major foundations.
The Foreign Policy Association was created "to carry on research and
educational activities to aid in the understanding and constructive
development of American Foreign policy." [Emphasis supplied.] Its
Research Director for years has been Vera Michaels Dean. Here
is what Dr. Wittmer had to say about Mrs. Dean:
"MRS. DEAN belonged among those who in 1937 signed their names in the
Golden Book of American-Soviet Friendship, a memorial which appeared in the
Communist front magazine Soviet Russia Today, of November, 1937. According
to the testimony of Walter S. Steele, before the House Un-American Activities
Committee, on July 21, 1947, Mrs. Dean's writings figured in the Communist
propaganda kit for teachers of the NATIONAL COUNCIL OF AMERICAN-
SOVIET FRIENDSHIP.
"MRS. DEAN cooperated with the world's toughest Communist agents, such
as Tsola N. Dragiocheva, of Bulgaria, and Madame Madeleine Braun, the French
Communist deputy, in helping set up the Congress of American Women, a Com-
176 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
munist front so important in its world-wide ramifications that the House Un-
American Activities Committee devoted a 114-page pamphlet to it. At one of
the preliminary meetings of this Communist front VERA MICHEALS DEAN,
according to The New York Times of October 14, 1946 (page 26), told 150 foreign
and 50 American delegates to "whittle away their conceptions of national sover-
eignty" and to pull themselves out of the "ancient grooves of nationalism."
This was the selection of the Foreign Policy Association, virtually a
•creature of the Carnegie Endowment, to run its "research!"
The Foreign Policy Association purports to be objective and dis-
claims seeking "to promote any one point of view toward international
affairs." Its produce, however, indicates that it is only interested in
promoting that form of internationalism which Dr. Colegrove de-
scribed in his testimony, frequently referred to as "globahsm." Its
principal financing has come from The Carnegie Endowment and The
Rockefeller Foundation and, recently, from the Ford Fund for Adult
Education, and in very substantial amounts indeed.
Among its productions have been the "Headline Books." These
supposedly objective studies are worth a detailed examination. One
■of them, World of the Great Powers, by Max Lerner, (1947), gra-
ciously says: "There are undoubtedly valuable elements in the
capitalist economic organizations." It proceeds to say that "The
economic techniques of the future are likely to be an amalgam of the
techniques of American business management with those of govern-
ment ownership, control, and regulation. For the people of the
world, whatever their philosophies, are moving towards similar
methods of making their economic system work." Mb. Lerner, this
foundation-supported author, proceeds to tell us that:
"If democracy is to survive, it too must move toward socialism. * * * It is the
only principle that can organize the restless energies of the world's peoples. * * *"
(Hearings, p\ 883.) [Emphasis supplied.]
Mr. Lerner's position regarding Russia is made clear. We must
allay the mutual fear and suspicion by granting loans to Russia to
provide her with tools and machinery. We must also give "greater
United Nations control of Japan and the former Japanese Island
bases in the Pacific." Thus we can live in peace with Russia. Thus
money indirectly contributed by the American taxpayers is employed
to promote doctrines which many, if not most, seriously question or
directly oppose. Yet the 1950 Rockefeller annual report refers to
the Headline Books as "the popular Headline Books, with details on
problems of importance to America and to the World." (Hearings,
pp. 883, 941.)
Another of the Foreign Policy Association's Headline Books is
Freedom's Choice, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, by
Dr. 0. Frederick Nolde, which lauds this Declaration (emphatically
rejected by our Government) without any mention of possibly dis-
tressing effects on our Constitutional law. (Hearings, p. 884.)
All this is "education" of our public, to give it the "international
mind!"
The Council on Foreign Relations.
This is another organization dealing with internationalism which
has the substantial financial support of both the Carnegie Endow-
ment and the Rockefeller Foundation. And, as in the case of the
Foreign Policy Association, its productions are not objective but are
directed overwhelmingly at promoting the globalism concept. There
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 177
are, after all, many Americans who think that our foreign policy should
follow the principle consistently adopted by the British and the French,
among others, that the national interest comes first and must not be
subordinated to any theoretical internationalistic concept; that interna-
tional cooperation is essential but < nly as directed in favor of the national
interest. That point of view goes begging in the organizations supported
by the Carnegie, Rockefeller and Ford organizations. If private for-
tunes were being used to the exclusive support of the globahst point of
view, that would be beyond criticism. But it is important to keep con- f
stantly in mind that we are dealing with the public's money, public
trust funds.
We would like to make it clear that this Committee does not speak
from an "isolationist" standpoint. It is obvious enough that the
world has grown smaller and that international cooperation is highly
desirable. But the essence of intelligent international cooperation
can be measured by its direct usefulness to our national interest.
Globalists may be correct in believing we should ignore the national
interest in the wider interest of creating a world collectivism ; but we-
feel confident we are right in our conclusion that a public foun-
dation has no right to promote globalism to the exclusion of sup-
port for a fair presentation of the opposite theory of foreign policy, t
The Council on Foreign Relations came to be in essence an agency I
of the United States government, no doubt carrying its internationlist
bias with it. When World War II broke out, it offered its assistance
to the Secretary of State. As a result, under the Council's Committee
on Studies, The Rockefeller Foundation initiated and financed certain
studies on: Security and Armaments Problems; Economic and Finan-
cial Problems; Political Problems; and Territorial Problems. These
were known as the War and Peace Studies. Later this project was
actually taken over by the State Department itself, engaging the
secretaries who had been serving with the Council groups. A fifth
subject was added in 1942, through the "Peace Aims Group. "
There was a precedent for this. The Carnegie Endowment had
offered its services to the Government in both World War I and World
War II. There was even an interlock in personnel in the person of
Professor Shotwell and many others, some of whom proceeded into
executive and consultative office in the Government. There can be |
no doubt thatjmuch of the thinking in the State Department and . |'
^/mucE of the background "of" direction of its policies came from the i
^TsonW^of^ The_Carnegie Endowment and The Council on ForeigTk:
Relations. Th considering the propriety of this, it must be kept in.
mma^that these organizations promoted only the internationalist
point of view, rejecting and failing to support the contrary position
that our foreign policy should be based primarily on our own national
interest. A reading of Miss Casey's report (Hearings, pp. 878, 879,
f 884 et seq.) gives some idea of the substantial integration of these two
organizations with the State Department.
' The Endowment in its 1934 Yearbook proudly asserts that it — —y
"is becoming an unofficial instrument of international policy, taking up here and j
there the ends and threads of international problems and questions which the j
governments find it difficult to handle, and through private initiative reaching j
conclusions which are not of a formal nature but which unofficially find their way j
into the policies of governments." (Hearings, p. 909.) [Emphasis ours.] — *
71
178 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Note, moreover, that the term used is "governments", the plural.
Perhaps this marked a feeling of satisfaction at having accomplished
a successful infiltration into government function. The original
method of the Endowment had been limited to arousing public pres-
sure. Its 1925 Yearbook had stated:
"Underneath and behind all these undertakings there remains the task to in-
struct and to enlighten public opinion so that it may not only guide but compel the
action of governments and public officers in the direction of constructive progress."
(Hearings, p. 908.) [Emphasis ours.]
It is quite astounding to this Committee that the trustees of a public
trust could possibly conceive of having the right to use public funds
for the purpose of putting pressure on the government, to adopt the
ideas the trustees happened to favor, by inflaming public opinion.
The Historical Blackout.
It must be kept in mind that the evils attendant on permitting
propaganda by any individual foundation multiply geometrically
when there is unified or combined or similar action by a group of
foundations. We have seen that The Carnegie Endowment financed
the production of text book material approved by its elite. The
Rockefeller Foundation and some of its associates also entered this field
of propaganda.
Professor Harry Elmer Barnes in his The Struggle Against the His-
torical Blackout, said:
"The readjustment of historical writing to historical facts relative to background
and causes of the first World War — what is popularly known in the historical craft
as 'Revisionism' — was the most important development in historiography during
the decade of the 1920's."
Wars in this day and age are accompanied by the perversion of
history to suit a propaganda thesis. Historians know this. Many of
them, in a spirit of patriotism, misguided or not, lend themselves
to this propaganda process. Whether they are ethically justified
in this, is gravely questionable. It certainly becomes then' duty,
however, to revise their contorted historical emanations after propa-
ganda reason for perversion has ceased to be in any way useful. This
most* of them seem not to do.
Where have the foundations fitted into this picture? The Council
on Foreign Relations, an organization supported by The Rockefeller
Foundation, The Carnegie Corporation and others, made up its mind
that no "revisionism" was to be encouraged after World War II.
The following is an extract from the 1946 Report of The Rockefeller
Foundation, referring to the Council's work:
"The Committee on Studies of the Council on Foreign Relations is concerned
that the debunking journalistic campaign following World War I should not be
repeated and believes that the American public deserves a clear and competent
statement of our basic aims and activities during the second World War."
Accordingly, a three volume history of the War was to be prepared
under the direction of Professor William Langer of Harvard, in which
(one must gather this from the use of the term "debunking") no
revisionism was to appear. In other words, the official propaganda
of World War II was to be perpetuated and the public was to be
protected against learning the truth. As Professor Charles Austin
Beard put it:
"In short, they hope that, among other things, the policies and measures of
Franklin D. Roosevelt will escape in the coming years the critical analysis
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 179
evaluation and exposition that befell the policies and measures of Woodrow
Wilson and the Entente Allies after World War I."
Do foundations have the right, using public funds, to support measures
calculated to hide historical facts from the public and to perpetuate those
contortions of history which war propaganda imposes on us! —
A reading of Dr. Barnes' Historical Blackout is rewarding. He sets
forth in detail what verges on a veritable conspiracy to prevent the
people from learning the historical truth. Parties to this conspiracy
are a good many of the professors of history with notable names; the
State Department of former years; publishers who, under some mis-
apprehension of their duty to the public, refuse to publish critical
books; and newspapers which attempt to suppress such books either
by ignoring them or giving them for review to rabidly antagonistic
"hatchet-men". But what is most shocking in the story he tells is
the part played knowingly or unknowingly by foundations in trying,
to suppress the truth. The Rockefeller Foundation, in 1946, allotted
$139,000 to the support of the three volume history which was to be
produced as described above.
The Institute of Pacific Relations.
The most tragic example of foundation negligence is to be found in
the long continued support of The Institute of Pacific Relations by
both The Carnegie Corporation oj New York and the Rockefeller Founda-
tion, as well as the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. We
have referred elsewhere to the great power of the large foundations, for
food or evil — what intrinsic danger there is in permitting them to
ave free rein in areas which involve human behavior or relations, or
impinge on the political. Foundation executives have said that, while
they make mistakes with some frequency, freedom of action is essen-
tial to enable them to perform their part of leading society into better-
ment. Should they have this license when some of their mistakes have
tragic consequences?
The Internal Security Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on
the Judiciary held long hearings on IPR. Its report, substantially
its opinion at length, concludes:
"The subcommittee concludes * * * that the IPR has been in general, neither
objective nor nonpartisan; and concludes further that, at least since the mid-
1930's, the net effect of IPR activities on United States public opinion has been
pro-communist and pro-Soviet, and has frequently and repeatedly been such as
to serve international Communist, and Soviet interests, and to subvert the inter-
ests of the United States." (Report, p. 84.)
Note that the Committee held that IPR had become a propaganda
vehicle for the Communists as early as the mid-1930'*s. We have,
then, the astounding picture of great foundations, presuming to have
the right to expend public trust funds in the public interest, so unaware
of the mis-use to which their funds were being applied that they per-
mitted, year after year, Communist propaganda to be produced and
circulated with funds supplied by these foundations. The contribu-
tions of The Carnegie Corporation, The Carnegie Endowment for Inter-
national Peace and The Rockefeller Foundation to the IPR, (the Pacific
and American groups taken together for this purpose) ran into the
millions.
In addition to these grants, both the Rockefeller and Carnegie
foundations made individual grants to some of the most reprehen-
180 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
sible characters associated with IPR, these contributions to the Com-
munist cause running into very substantial sums of public money.
The story of the suborning of our foreign policy through the activi-
ties of IPR and persons associated with it, including the sad story of
infiltration into our State Department, has been told. Nor does the
point need to be labored that the loss of China to the Communists may have
been the most tragic event in our history, and one to which the foundation-
supported Institute of Pacific Relations heavily contributed.
It must be remembered that the foundation executives consider
themselves elite groups, entitled to guide the people by financing with
public money research and propaganda in social fields. Are they
elite if they have been so blind or so careless in their use of funds that
their acts may actually be held to have been responsible for one of the
most tragic events in our history?
According to the McCarran Committee, the foundations should
perhaps have known in the 1930's that the IPR had ceased to be a
proper or even safe recipient of foundations funds. Can they excuse
themselves by saying they did not know or had not been informed?
Were they not in fiduciary duty bound to learn? Are the trustees of a
foundation entitled to give money, year after year, to an institution
without making any attempt to follow the effects of their donations?
But the situation is worse even than this. The hearings of the
Cox Committee disclose this set of facts. Mr. Alfred Kohlberg
testified that he had been a member of IPR; that he had never paid
much attention to what it was producing until 1943, when he saw
some material which he found questionable. He then studied an
accumulation of IPR material and made a lengthy report which he
sent in 1944 to Mr. Carter, the secretary -general of IPR, and to the
trustees and others. As a result he came into communication with
Mr. Willets, a Vice-President of The Rockefeller Foundation. In the
summer of 1945 an arrangement was made, apparently through Mr.
Willets, for a committee of three persons to hear Mr. Kohlberg's
charges, and his evidence of Communist infiltration and propaganda,
and to make a report to IPR and to The Rockefeller Foundation.
Later, apparently at the insistence of Mr. Carter, Mr. Willets with-
drew as a mediator. Mr. Carter had indicated that he would take
the matter up himself.
In the meantime, Mr. Kohlberg had brought, and lost, an action
to compel IPR to give him a list of his fellow-members. At any rate,
a meeting of the members was finally called at which Mr. Kohlberg
presented his charges and asked for an investigation. His motion
was voted down and no investigation was held.
The Rockefeller Foundation nevertheless went right on supporting
the Institute. The explanations made by Mr. Rusk (now, but not
then, its President) in his statement filed on behalf of the Foundation
(Hearings, p. 1062 et seq.) and by Mr. Willets, its Director of Social
Studies, in a separate statement (Hearings, Appendix), are highly
unsatisfactory. Mr. Rusk stated that, at the time the Kohlberg
charges were levied, the Foundation could not conduct a "public"
hearing, "an undertaking for which the Foundation was neither
equipped nor qualified." (Hearings, Part 2 ) This begs the ques-
tion, as no public hearing was necessary. Mr. Willets, on the other
hand, admitted that the Foundation was equipped to make a thorough
investigation. He said that one was actually made — "a very thor-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 181
ough inquiry into the whole IPR situation by the Foundation staff" —
"a careful investigation by us." But what sort of an investigation
was this? Mr. Kohlberg, from his testimony before the Cox Com-
mittee, evidently had never heard of it. The grave charges had been
made by him, yet he seems not to have been called upon to present
them to the Foundation either in person or in documentary detail.
According to Mr. Willets' statement, great reliance was placed
upon "A special committee of IPR trustees" who "reported that the
Executive Committee had investigated Mr. Kohlberg's charges and
found them inaccurate and irresponsible." Was this a way to dis-
charge the duty of the Rockefeller trustees to determine whether
support of the IPR should be continued — to rely largely upon some
cursory investigation by the trustees or officers of that organization
itself? Using such methods as this, it is no wonder that the Founda-
tion concluded that the Kohlberg charges had been "exaggerated."
The McCarran Committee did not find them exaggerated in any
degree!
We have this sorry situation, then, that after Kohlberg had made
his grave charges, The Rockefeller Foundation continued active support
of the unit which was later declared to have supported subversion.
The official Rockefeller Foundation position, from its filed statement,
seems to be that further funds were advanced in order to help reform
the organization. That is not convincing. Neither a sufficient alert-
ness to danger was shown, nor a willingness to face the facts when dis-
closed and to repudiate an organization which had demonstrably
turned out to be an instrument of subversion. This baleful incident
illustrates all too clearly the dangers of permitting public money to be
used by private persons, without responsibility, in areas vitally affecting
the public weal. It further illustrates the danger of delegating the dis-
cretion involved in the distribution of public funds, to an intermediary
organization.
We must grant to the Carnegie Endowment that it apparently
withdrew its support of the IPR in 1939. Whether this was due
partly or wholly to other reasons we have not investigated. If it was
because of an understanding that the IPR had come upon evil ways,
this would make all the more reprehensible the continued contribu-
tions by The Rockefeller Foundation after 1939.
The Foundations, the State Department and Foreign Policy.
Miss Casey's report (Hearings, pp. 877, 878, 879, 881, et seq.) shows
clearly the interlock between The Carnegie Endowment for Inter-
national Peace and some of its associated organizations, such as the
Council on Foreign Relations, and other foundations with the State
Department. Indeed, these foundations and organizations would not
dream of denying this interlock. They proudly note it in reports.
They have
undertaken vital research projects for the Department;
virtually created minor departments or groups within the
Department for it;
supplied advisors and executives from their ranks;
fed a constant stream of personnel into the State Department
trainecl by themselves or under programs which they have
financed; and
have had much to do with the formulation of foreign policy
both in principle and detail.
182 TAX-EXEMPT PQUNDATIONS
They have, to a marked degree, acted as direct agents of the State
Department. And they have engaged actively, and with the expendi-
ture of enormous sums, in propagandizing ("educating"? — 'public
opinion) in support of the policies which they have helped to formu-
late. (Hearings, pp. 886 et seq.)
It is obvious enough that a state department should be able to
draw upon the services of specialists in the international field for
necessary assistance in times of emergency and even in times of peace.
No one could doubt the desirability of such procedure. What this
Committee questions, however, is whether it is proper for the State
Department to permit organizations to take over important parts of its
research and policy-making functions when these organizations consist-
ently maintain a biased, one-tracked point of view. Whether that
point of view is the majority's, whether it is perhaps entirely sound
(and historical events have proved it not to be) is beside the point.
It is only through a conflict of ideas, and the presentation of opposite
points of view, that objective decisions can be made.
What we see here is a number of large foundations, primarily The
Rockefeller Foundation, The Carnegie Corporation of New York, and
the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, using their enormous
public funds to finance a one-sided approach to foreign policy and to
promote it actively, among the public by propaganda, and in the
Government through infiltration. The power to do this comes out
of the power of the vast funds employed. Research and propaganda
by those of the persuasion opposite that of the agencies of these
foundations (The Council on Foreign Relations, The Institute of Inter-
national Education, The Foreign Policy Association, The Institute of
Pacific Relations, and others) receive little support.
It may well be said that a majority of the "experts" in the inter-
national field are on the side of globalism. It would be amazing if this
were otherwise, after so many years of gigantic expenditure by founda-
tions in virtually sole support of the globalist point of view. Pro-
fessors and researchers have to eat and raise families. They cannot
themselves spend the money to finance research and publications.
The road to eminence in international areas, therefore, just as in the
case of the social sciences generally, is by way of foundation grants or
support.
The United Nations and XJnesco.
The Carnegie Endowment has justified its ardent support of the
United Nations on the ground that support of UNO is an official part
of United States policy. We are not convinced that this is the basic
reason for the Endowment's support. It gave equally fervent support
to the old League of Nations, after that organization had been repudi-
ated by our Senate. The fact is that the Endowment has consistently
advocated and propagandized for an international organization to
promote peace as shown by its own report. (Hearings, pp. 909, 910,
911, et seq.)
That would be an estimable objective and a worthy cause to support
in principle. To blindly support and educate an international or-
ganization merely because it is international seems hardly to be of
eneflt to our country. That seems to be exactly what the Endow-
ment has done with its public funds. There are many who believe
that an effective international organization is most highly desirable —
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 183
and even that it may be the only sound, eventual solution to the
problem of preserving peace — and yet feel that the UNO as it now
exists is abysmally ineffective, showing no hope of being reformed to
effectiveness. Yet you may search in vain among the material
circulated by the Endowment and the organizations it supports for any
presentation of this point of view. If there is any such literature
among the produce of these organizations, we have missed it.
What the official position of our Government may have been, or
may now be, there are innumerable Americans who view the United
Nations Organization with much less than enthusiasm. It is generally
accepted that we are in it and should not at the moment desert it.
Yet it is obvious enough that, short of a miracle or complete reform
of the Communists, the UNO is a hopeless vehicle for producing inter-
national peace and understanding. Why, therefore, should founda-
tions pour millions of public funds into "educating" the public into
the idea that the UNO is our light and our savior, the hope of human-
ity. It may be granted that it has some usefulness as a place to ex-
change ideas with other nations and to reach some common under-
standings on lower levels of interest aud importance, but to play it up
as the magnificent instrument for peace which it so clearly is not, does
our people a distinct disservice by obstructing that realism without
which we cannot hope to solve our international problems.
Even the "sounding board" theory of UNO usefulness finds eminent
detractors. The New York Times of August 11, 1953, reports General
Mark W. Clark as saying:
"That, although he had been the commander of United Nations forces in
Korea, he 'had not had much respect' for the United Nations. It had high pur-
poses, he said, a nice big building in New York, and delegates from all over the
world. But, he added, it gave a 'sounding board' to Soviet Russia and its satel-
lites, and turned loose spies, saboteurs, to the point of giving great assets to Russia
and dangerous disadvantage to the United States."
Why are these critical points of view, shared by many eminent Americans,
such as Generals MacArthur and Van Fleet and innumerable other worthy
citizens, military and civilian, not supported or even given some distribu-
tion by the foundations and the organizations they finance, which deal
with things international?
The 1947 Year Book of The Carnegie Endowment for International
Peace contains a reprint of a document called Recommendations of the
President to the Trustees, which recites that the most significant special
circumstances favorable to an expansion of the Endowment's own direct
activities is the establishment of the United Nations with its head-
quarters in New York, and with the United States as its leading and
most influential member. "The opportunity for an endowed American
institution having the objectives, traditions and prestige of the
Endowment, to support and serve the United Nations is very great."
The President then recommended earnestly "that the Endowment
construct its program for the period that lies ahead primarily for the
support and the assistance of the United Nations." The program
suggested should have two objectives. First, it was to be "widely
educational in order to encourage public understanding and support
of the United Nations at home and abroad" and "it should aid in the
adoption of wise policies, both by our own government in its capacity
as a member of the United Nations, and by the United Nations Organi-
zation as a whole."
184 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The report then proceeds:
"The number and importance of decisions in the field of foreign relations with
which the United States will be faced during the next few years are of such
magnitude that the widest possible stimulation of public education in this field
is of major and pressing importance. In furthering its educational objectives
the Endowment should utilize its existing resources, such as The International
Relations Clubs in the colleges, and International Conciliation, and should strengthen
its relationships with existing agencies interested in the field of foreign affairs.
These relationships should include close collaboration with other organizations
principally engaged in the study of foreign affairs, such as The Council on Foreign
Relations, The Foreign Policy Association, The Institute of Pacific Relations, the
developing university centers of international studies, and local community
groups interested in foreign affairs of which the Cleveland Council on World Affairs
and the projected World Affairs Council in San Francisco are examples.
"Of particular importance is the unusual opportunity of reaching large seg-
ments of the population by establishing relations of a rather novel sort with the
large national organizations which today are desirous of supplying their members
with objective information on public affairs, including international issues. These
organizations — designed to serve, respectively, the broad interests of business,
church, women's, farm, labor, veterans', educational, and other large groups of
our citizens — are not equipped to set up foreign policy research staffs of their
own. The Endowment should supply these organizations with basic information
about the United Nations and should assist them both in selecting topics of
interest to their members and in presenting those topics so as to be most readily
understood by their members. We should urge The Foreign Policy Association
and The Institute of Pacific Relations to supply similar service on other topics of
international significance.
"Exploration should also be made by the endowment as to the possibilities of
increasing the effectiveness of the radio and motion pictures in public education
on world affairs." (Hearings, pp. 920, 921.)
It should be noted at this point that the President of the Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace who made these recommendations
was Mr. Alger Hiss.
A continued inquiry into foundation activities might well study
their support of Unesco projects. Whether all these are to the best
interests of the United States, warranting the support by public funds
through foundations, is doubtful.
An International Social Science Reabch Council.
One agency which has come into being as a result of Unesco action
deserves special study. It is the Provisional International Social
Science Council. Donald Young, President of the Russell Sage Foun-
dation, explains the origin of this new organization in the March, 1952
issue of Items, the publication of the Social Science Research Council.
A consultative organization meeting was held at the call of Mme.
Alva Myrdal as Director of the Department of Social Sciences
of Unesco. Mme. Myrdal (wife of Gunnar Myrdal, whose An
American Dilemma is discussed in section XIII of this report) is an
extreme leftist who was at one time denied a visa by our State Depart-
ment. That a person of Mme. Myrdal's persuasion should be a
director of the social science department of Unesco is rather forbidding.
Three Americans were selected for places in the ten man initial
group to organize the new International Council. One of these was
Mr. Young, who was elected president; another was Professor P. H.
Odegard of the University of California; the third was Professor
Otto Klineberg of Columbia University, well-known as an ex-
treme leftist.
We have been unable to expend the time to investigate this new
organization with any thoroughness. We suggest that such an in-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 185
vestigation is highly desirable. There are indications that it is to
act in the international field somewhat in the manner The Social
Science Research Council acts in the domestic scene. The oppor-
tunities for coercive direction of research into a leftist direction will
be present; and its integration with Unesco makes it likely that its
direction will be to the left. Foundation support for its activities is
apparently expected. The extent and purpose of such support, cur-
rently and in the future, bears watching. Perhaps more significant
than anything else is that the International Council shall have among
its duties (according to Mr. Young's article) this function:
"Whenever asked to do so, to tender [to Unesco] advice on the choice, of
suitable social scientists for interdisciplinary projects of research."
It could thus become a virtual accrediting agency, with all the power
and danger such a system involves. The danger is increased by the
apparent fact that the structure of the new organization is un-demo-
cratic, perhaps even more so than that of The Social Science Research
Council after which it seems to have been somewhat patterned.
Carnegie Endowment and the American Bar Association.
Starting in 1946 The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
made substantial contributions to the American Bar Association on a
matched-fund basis — that is, requiring the Association itself to supply
part of the necessary funds— for the purpose of studying problems of
international law. One of the problems contemplated for study was
the crime of genocide. This project commenced while Alger Hiss
was President of the Endowment and progressed while Professor
Shotwell was his interim successor. Shortly after Joseph E. Johnson,
the present President of the Endowment, came into office he launched
into a controversy with the American Bar Association claiming that
it had misused the funds granted by the Endowment. His main claim,
as expressed in a letter of September 27, 1950 to Mr. Codey Fowler,
President of the American Bar Association, was "that funds from the
Endowment grant have been or are being employed for the purpose of
opposing ratification of the Genocide Convention as submitted to the
United States Senate by the President." Mr. Johnson also com-
plained that in the deliberations of the Association the point of view
supporting the Genocide Convention had not been given sufficient
hearing.
Without going into details of the controversy, which involved some
rather sharp correspondence, we conclude from the facts that Mr.
Johnson/s irritation stemmed from the Bar Association's having
dared to condemn the Genocide Convention.
Foundation executives make much of the assertion that they are
under no obligation to follow up their grants and that they have in
fact no right to interfere with the use of funds which they have allotted.
.Mr. Johnson's quite bitter controversy with the Bar Association,
however, indicates that when the grantee arrives at conclusions dis-
tasteful to those who control the granting foundation, they feel they
have a right to object and complain. We do not believe that Mr.
Johnson would have complained if the American Bar Association had
come to the conclusion that the Genocide Convention should be rati-
fied. This is consistent with the propaganda nature of the Carnegie
Endowment.
55647—54 13
186 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Ford Enters the Field.
The Ford Foundation entered the international field with ardor.
It has already spent vast sums of money on projects abroad. One of
its five major programs concerns international and foreign objectives.
We find, in the furtherance of this program, grants in 1951 and 1952
to the American Friends Service Committee aggregating $1,134,000.
The Ford Foundation Annual Report for 1951 recites that the "officers"
(note it is not the trustees) "felt that the American Friends Service
Committee had demonstrated over a long period its capacity to deal
effectively with many of the economic, social and educational condi-
tions that lead to international tensions." The same report later
contains this somewhat naive statement:
"Our policy in Asia has failed to lead us to the real objectives of the American
people because its preoccupation with strategy and ideology has prevented
our giving sufficient weight to the economic, social and political realities of Asia.
There, as elsewhere, we have tended to label as Communist any movement that sought
a radical change in the established order, without consideration of the roots of such
a movement. Quaker workers, during years of service in the troubled Orient,
have witnessed the great changes taking place and the increasing hostility with
which the United States has regarded them. They are convinced that an effective
policy must take into account the actual conditions that have produced these
changes, as well as the new situation that revolution- has created in Asia. Our
fundamental ignorance of the East is costing us dear, but the situation has been
further complicated by the fact that United States policy towards Asia has recently
been exposed in an unusual degree to the hazards of domestic criticism arising from
political partisanship.
"It is surprising that we have not been able to understand the situation in Asia,
because Americans should be peculiarly able to comprehend the meaning of
revolution. Our own independence was achieved through a revolution, and we have
traditionally sympathized with the determined attempts of other peoples to win national
independence and higher standards of living. The current revolution in Asia is a
similar movement, whatever its present association with Soviet Communism."
[Emphasis supplied.]
Are these "officers" of a foundation who characterize a Russian-
Communist armed and financed coup in China as a revolutionary move-
ment similar to our War of Independence qualified to expend huge sums
o/ money belonging in equity to the American people! Can a foundation
be trusted to administer a half billion dollars of public funds in an area
having to do with foreign affairs and international relations when its
trustees apparently follow the advice of "officers" so uninformed in
American history and institutions as to draw an analogy between a Com-
munist conquest and the American Revolution!
American Friends Service Committee.
Now let us briefly examine the record of the American Friends
Service Committee to which the officers of the Ford Foundation', attrib-
uted such "capacity to deal effectively" with vital problems that the
Foundation granted that organization a total of $1,134,000 of the
public's money.
The Friends Service Committee supported the pacifist Frazier Bill
which would have prevented us from waging war; and the Griff en
Bill which would have prevented us from denying citizenship to those
aliens who refused to take oath to defend the United States.
It sponsored the World Youth Congress which has been cited
as a Communist front. It sent a delegate to the World Youth
Festival, held in Prague in 1947, a pro-Soviet and Communist-
sponsored affair.
In June, 1948 it circulated Congress with a statement expressing
its unalterable opposition to conscription for military service. This
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 187
statement was signed by its Chairman, Henry J. Cadbury, and its
Executive Secretary, Clarence E. Pickett. The Communist
front affiliations of these two men (as well as of others associated with
the Friends Service Committee)^ are«shown in an appendix to this report.
The Friends Service Committee organized the Student Peace Service
Committee, which assisted in the organization of the Youth Committee
Against War, which brought together:
The American Student Union (cited as a Communist front) ;
The War Resisters League ;
The Fellowship of Reconciliation ;
The Young Peoples Socialist League;
The Farmers Union ;
The Independent Communist Labor League;
The Methodist Federation for Social Service (Youth
Section) ;
The American Youth Congress;
and other left wing groups.
The Friends Service Committee has been an active lobbyist. A few
years ago an organization known as the Friends Committee on National
Legislation was set up in Washington. It is believed to be a vehicle
of the American Friends Service Committee, or closely associated
with it. This unit opposes military training, favors liberalization of
the immigration laws and asks legislation to sustain conscientious
objectors. It supported the Lehman Amendment to the McCarran-
Walter Immigration Act; it urges extensive foreign aid programs. It
solicits financial contributions. Whether it is right or wrong in its
respective legislative positions is of no moment here — the point is
that it engages actively in prompting some legislation and opposing
other measures. This function should, in itself, deny it the support
of a foundation.
Nor does the American Friends Service Committee itself refrain from
political pressure. In January, 1950, it wrote the following message
to President Truman, presuming to press him in an area of govern-
ment activity of the greatest moment:
"Further intervention will result in the hardening of Chinese resentment
against America and the strengthening of Sino-Russian ties by treating Com-
munist China as an enemy and by refusing to recognize her, we are not isolating
China, we are isolating ourselves."
It is the conclusion of this Committee that, in deciding that this
organization should be supported, the officers of The Ford Founda-
tion exhibited a lack of sound bases for judgment; and the trustees
who gave these officers their support in distributing $1,134,000 of
public trust money were guilty of gross negligence.
Remember the contention of the foundations, expressed several
times in the Cox Committee hearings, that they are entitled to make
mistakes, that they cannot enter "experimental" fields without making
mistakes! This contention is wholly acceptable when a mistake is
sometimes made in some innocuous, nose-counting piece of research.
When the mistake relates to the safety of our country, the burden
passes heavily to the foundation to prove that its action was reasonable,
carefully thought-out and without reasonable possibility of damage.
The Ford Foundation has become a propagandist for Unesco, as
indeed have several of the other great foundations. Our school chil-
188 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
dren are being taught that Unesco is one of the hopes of the world.
No critical analysis is ever given, as far as we have been able to deter-
mine, but merely blind adulation. The following testimony by Mr.
Aaron Sargent is illuminating regarding Ford's position:
The Ford Foundation used its financial power to attempt to resist the will of
the people of Los Angeles in connection with a pamphlet known as "The B in
Unesco." This pamphlet was put out by the Los Angeles City School Depart-
ment, and it promotes various Unesco activities, and it includes the international
declaration of human rights.
Mr. Paul Hoffman, the president of The Ford Foundation, personally appeared
before the Los Angeles Board of Education and sought to prevent the removal of
these pamphlets out of the Los Angeles city schools by the action of a duly con-
stituted board of the city of Los Angeles, and in so doing he engaged in lobbying
an activity prohibited to The Ford Foundation, '
I have a news clipping, bearing date of August 26, 1952, Tuesday, in the Los
Angeles Times, and it contains a picture of Mr. Hoffman, several other gentlemen
with him, and the statement below reads as follows:
"Urge that it stay — These proponents of teaching Unesco were on hand as
speakers. From left: Dr. Hugh M. Tiner, Pepperdine College president; Paul G.
Hoffman, of Ford Foundation; Elmer Franzwa, district governor of Rotary, and
William Joyce."
Mr. Hays. What is wrong with that?
Mr. Sakgent. He has no right to engage in lobbying, and he was opposing a
local matter and should not have in any way interfered with it. He was presi-
dent of The Ford Foundation.
Mr. Hays. You would not want anybody to say you have no right to come
here and expound your views, would you?
Mr. Sakgent. He did it as president of The Ford Foundation, and used the
power of The Ford Foundation as a leverage in the case. (Hearings, p. 379.)
Later came the following colloquy:
Mr. Hays. You are inferring that because he was president of The Ford
Foundation and he went out there to advocate this, he automatically brought
The Ford Foundation into it.
Mr. Sakgent. They were discussing how they were going to handle it and they
were afraid the Unesco pamphlet was going to be thrown out and they were dis-
cussing other ways in which they could back up Mr. Hoffman and bring more
strength to bear on that Los Angeles City Board of Education. I overheard that
conversation, and 1 was in the office at the time. Mr. Hoffman was lobbying
intentionally. (Hearings, p. 381.)
(The statement filed by the Ford Foundation maintains that Mr.
Hoffman did this bit of lobbying on his own as a private citizen and
a resident of California, unconnected with his position with the
Foundation. That may, of course, well be. He may, for the moment,
have stepped out of his official character to go to work as an indi-
vidual, but the general impression that he was acting as President of
The Ford Foundation was a reasonable one.)
Subsequently Mr. Sargent explained that the propaganda in the
Unesco matter included the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
which has been rejected by the American Bar Association and our
government itself. (Hearings, p. 382 et seq.)
The frantic efforts of some of the foundations to widen public sup-
port for Unesco deserve studied attention.
Intercultural Publications, Inc.
One of the organizations established by the Ford Foundation
"In an attempt to increase understanding among the peoples of the world and
to advance mutual appreciation of differing cultural and intellectual backgrounds
through the exchange of ideas and literary and artistic productions * * *"
was Intercultural Publications, Inc. According to the application for
a tax-exempt status filed with the Internal Revenue Service, it was
organized, among other purposes
TAX-EXEMPT FOtTNDATIONS
189
"* * * to help maintain world peace and to promote better understanding be-
tween peoples of different nations, races and relations; to increase without the
United States knowledge of the culture, art, intellectual works, customs, and
interests of the United States and its peoples; * * *"
by means of production and distribution of all forms of written and
spoken communication.
In addition to the quarterly magazine Perspectives, U. S., which is
published in 20 countries, it also publishes Diogenes, Kultura, and
an Atlantic Monthly Supplement, Perspective of India.
From its establishment in April 1952 until the close of 1953 The
Ford Foundation has granted $759,950 to Intercultural Publications,
Inc., no figures being available for the year 1954.
As in so many of the projects with which The Ford Foundation
and its offspring have associated themselves, the purposes set forth
are entirely praiseworthy. But as a practical matter, based on a
study of the six issues of Perspectives published to date, it is evident
that there might be two schools of thought as to whether the particular
means selected, as demonstrated by the content of these quarterly
volumes, would necessarily accomplish the avowed purposes.
There is a much bigger question mark, however, in the minds of
this committee, based on a study of the personalities associated with
this "cultural" disciple of The Ford Foundation, either as a member
of the advisory board, as a contributing author, or as an author whose
works are selected for review.
The latest volume available (No. 6) lists 59 individuals as members
of the advisory board. Of that number 18 have been mentioned in
one way or another before Government agencies looking into sub-
version. These individuals, whose complete records are included in
the appendix to this report are- —
MOBTIMEB AdLER
Jambs Ages
W. H. Auden
Jacques Barzun
Bernard Berelson
Paul Bigelow
R. P. Blackmur
Francois Bondy
Harvey Breit
Cleanth Brooks
Marguerite Caetani
Cyril Connolly
Aaron Copland
Malcolm Cowley
Hallie Flanagan Davis
Irvin Edman
Jambs T. Farrell
Francis Fergusson
W. H. Ferry
Alfred M. Frankfurter
Albert J. Gtjerard
Hiram Haydn
Rudolf Hirsch
Henry Russell Hitchcock
Alfred Kazin
Paul Henry Lang
Melvin J. Lasky
Harry Levin
Alvin Lustig
Richard P. McKeon
Perry Miller
Robert Motherwell
Dorothy Norman
Norman Holmes Pearson
Duncan Phillips
Renato Poggioli
John Crowe Ransom
Annada Sankar Ray
Robert Redfield
Kenneth Rexroth
Selden Rodman
Eero Saarinen
Meyer Schapiro
Arthur Schlesinoer, Jr.
Mark Schorer
Delmore Schwartz
Gilbert Seldes
Kael J. Shapiro
Wallace Stegner
Allen Tate
Lionel Trilling
Ralph E. Turner
Robert Penn Warren
Gordon Bailey Washburn
Victor Weybright
Monroe Wheeler
Tennessee Williams
Kurt Wolff
Morton D. Zabel
190
flySaPJBflCEfifiP* F5tMDAtI0^rS
Perry Miller
Gardner Murphy
Henry Murray
Reinhold Niebuhr
Meyer Schapiro
Karl Shapiro
Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.
Gilbert Seldes
Jacob Viner
Alexander Werth
William Carlos Williams
Edmund Wilson
Among those who have contributed to the periodical, or whose books
have been favorably reviewed are the following, whose records are also
in the appendix.
Kenneth Burke
Aaron Copland
Malcolm Cowley
Martha Graham
Horace Gregory
Kenneth Gearing
Albert J. Guerard
Sidney Hook
Robert Hutchins
John Houseman
George F. Kennan
Archibald M. MacLeish
Norman Mailer
Summarized, tax exempt funds are being channeled into the hands
of persons like Malcolm Cowley (literary editor of the New Republic),
a member of the advisory board who has consistently followed the
Communist Party line, has sponsored or been a member of at least
half a dozen or so organizations cited by the Attorney General and
Congressional committees and other governmental agencies as Com-
munist, subversive or Communist front organizations. Or, like Aaron
Copland, also a member of the advisory board, who in addition to a
consistent record of joining such organizations as did Cowley, has
composed a song entitled "The First of May" which drew high praise
from such Communists as Hans Eisler.
The records of individuals obtained from official sources have been
included in the appendix, and will bear close scrutiny. This Commit-
tee finds it difficult to believe that only these individuals can adequately
portray to the people of the world the culture of the United States,
and equally difficult to believe that there do not exist in this country
rising artists of equal ability, whose art would be enhanced by a firm
belief in the fundamental concepts of our political philosophy.
Globalistic Economics.
The extent to which foundations have promoted the theory that
we must subordinate our own economic welfare for that of the world
in order to have peace is worth an investigation of its own. The
Rockefeller Foundation in its 1941 report said:
"If we are to have a durable peace after the war, if out oi the wreckage of the
present a new kind of cooperative life is to be built on a global scale, the part that
science and advancing knowledge will play must not be overlooked."
The presumption is that a global economic system is desirable. Such
a system could not exist without some form of coercive supervision.
Whether Americans are ready to accept such supervision is extremely
doubtful.
An aspect of this subject which may sorely need attention is the use
made of foundation funds to promote international arrangements for
the control and distribution of raw materials and other interferences
with domestic manufacture and trade. In the overwhelming desire
to make us part of "one world" as quickly as possible, many associated
with foundation work have supported movements which are decidedly
short-sighted from the standpoint of the nationalistic world in which
we still, as a practical matter, live and work.
tax-exempt foundations 191
The National Education Association Gobs "International."
In 1948 the National Education Association issued a volume entitled
Education jor International Understanding in American Schools —
Suggestions and Recommendations, prepared by the Committee on
International Relations, the Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development and the National Council for the Social Studies, all depart-
ments of the NEA. (Hearings, p. 64 et seq.) It was the result of a
project financed in part directly by the NEA through contributions
from teachers and partly by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of
New York. (Hearings, p. 65.)
The foreword by Warren Robinson Austin, then our representative
at the UN, stated that the UN in 1949 had unanimously called upon
the member states to provide effective teaching about the UN in
schools. Apparently the NEA project was at least partially in answer
to this call. It recommended that the teachers in our schools educate
pupils into internationalism and gave specific suggestions as to objec-
tives and methods. (Hearings, p. 65.)
There is a grave question in the minds of this Committee whether
this powerful organization of teachers has any right to attempt to
promote a uniform program of education on a national basis; but, if
such a procedure is proper, it might well be that planning to educate
our children into a better understanding of the world and its com-
ponent parts and how international things work might be highly
desirable. The program of the NEA, however, as expressed in the
book under discussion, went far further than a mere educational
program. It assumed that because the United Nations had been
accepted as an intrinsic part of American foreign policy it should
receive virtually unqualified and uncritical support.
The fact is that while the United Nations does play an intrinsic part
in our foreign policy, support among our citizens for its mechanism
and the detailed actions of its various constituents, boards and
bodies is far from universal. The intelligent observer cannot escape
the conclusion that the agencies of the United Nations themselves in
many instances have promoted ideas and concepts which seem anti-
thetical to many of our own basic principles.
We find in Mr. Austin's preface, for example, reference to the
necessity for "rationalization of production and distribution on a
world-wide basis." It is suggested that "solution of economic prob-
lems on a purely national basis without regard to the effect of their
conduct on other peoples and nations breeds economic war." (Hear-
ings, p. 66,) That may well be but there are many in the United
States who believe that our efforts to improve the world's economy at
enormous cost to the American taxpayer have not only been ineffective
but have been met with a universal egocentric response by the other
nations. The general tone of the volume is that we must sacrifice a
considerable part of our national independence in order to create a
stable and peaceful world. That may also be true if and when the
time comes when most of the nations of the world will be ready them-
selves for honest international collaboration. In the meantime, to
train our children into the desirability of becoming internationalists at a
time when world society is characterized by the most intense kind of
selfish nationalism seems both unrealistic and dangerous.
The volume implies that the creation of the United Nations is only
the first step in the establishment of a world order. Its adulation of
192 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
the United Nations itself is almost childish. In the face of our diffi-
culties with Russia it says: "Through its Security Council, every
dispute that affects the peace of the world can be brought before an
international body endowed with authority to take all necessary steps
for the restraint of aggression." (Hearings, p. 67.)- To impose this
concept upon our children in the schools is to teach them nonsense. The
futility of the United Nations in settling international disputes has been
tragically evident. And this futility, moreover, is not the result of a
failure on our part to be "international minded."
"Collaboration" is emphasized in this volume. We are to collabo-
rate with all the various UNO bureaus and agencies, even the Com-
mission on Human Rights.
The volume emphasizes the responsibility of teachers for "contrib-
uting to the maintenance of enduring peace". (Hearings, p. 67.)
This is to be accomplished by indoctrinating our children with the de-
sirability of full cooperation with the UNO and all its works. "This
will certainly involve curriculum revision and the recasting of many
time-honored educational policies and practices. It is a case in which
half-measures and lip-service will not be adequate, for if these are
the substance of the effort, the challenge will go unanswered." (Hear-
ings, p. 68.) The goal is set as producing citizens who might be called
"world-minded Americans". We cannot escape the conclusion that
what is meant is the production of advocates of a world state.
Again, we say that someday a world state may be desirable and
possible. However, we are living in a very realistic era in which
"one world" could only be accomplished by succumbing to Commu-
nism. The program suggested contains this specific identification of
the "world-minded American": "The world-minded American knows
that unlimited national sovereignty is a threat to world peace and that
nations must cooperate to achieve peace and human progress."
On page 21 of this volume we find this astounding statement
(Hearings, p. 69):
"* * * More recently, the idea has become established that the preservation
of international peace and order may require that force be used to compel a nation to
conduct its affairs within the framework of an established world system. The most
modern expression of this doctrine of collective security is in the United Nations
Charter."
On page 31 we find this:
"* * * The social causes of war are overwhelmingly more important than the
attitudes and behavior of individuals. If this be true, the primary approach to the
prevention of war must involve action in the area of social and political organization
and control. (Hearings, p. 69.) [Emphasis supplied.]
Education is the recommended road to "social and political organi-
zation and control" and education is described "as a force for condi-
tioning the will of a people * * *. It utilizes old techniques and
mass media such as the printed word, the cinema, the radio, and now
television." (Hearings, p. 69.) If we read these terms correctly
they seem to mean to us that the educators are to use all the tech-
niques of propaganda in order to condition our children to the particu-
lar variety of "world -mindedness" which these educators have adopted.
Considerable space is later spent for "education for peace through
mass media." (Hearings, pp. 69, 70.)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 193
There is constant repetition of the idea that "the world-minded
American believes that unlimited national sovereignty is a threat to
world peace". On page 44 we find:
"* * * Many persons believe that enduring peace cannot be achieved so long as
the nation-state system continues as at present constituted. It is a system of inter-
national anarchy — a species of jungle warfare. Enduring peace cannot be attained
until the nation-states surrender to a world organization the exercise of jurisdiction
over those problems with which they have found themselves unable to deal singly in the
past. If like conditions continue in the future as in the past, like situations will
arise. Change the conditions, and the situations will change."
Again, on page 46, we find this:
"We are likely to take the present nation-state system for granted; but in so doing,
we are likely to overestimate its permanence and underestimate its significance. * * *"
[Emphasis supplied.] (Hearings, p. 70.)
There is a definite call to political action or at least to a promotion
of the idea that we must surrender some of our political independence.
On page 57 we find this:
"* * * The demonstration of the feasibility of international organization in
nonpolitical fields and the failure of the League of Nations makes even more clear
the fact that it is in the area of 'political' organization where failure seems to be
consistent. This suggests that the difficulty may be traceable to the dogma of
unlimited sovereignty— that nothing must be allowed to restrict the complete
independence of the state. It suggests also that the dogma of sovereignty has a
high emotional content that is self-generated and self-sustained and that so long
as the dogma of illimitability obtains, international cooperation of a political
nature will at best be tenuous." (Hearings, p. 71.)
On page 60 we find this recommendation that we must conform our
national economic policies to an international world economy:
"* * * The development of international cooperation as a contributing force
to economic well-being is possible only insofar as it is applied to give direction to
common positive aims and to condition the effects of national economic policies
that would otherwise be serious disruptions of the interdependent world
economy." (Hearings, p. 71.)
We must have (page 62) a "planned economic cooperation on a
world-wide scale."
Our children are not merely to be educated into international points
of view — they are told how to make themselves effective in creating
political pressure. We offer these quotations as examples:
Page 80:
"* * * An individual can increase his effectiveness in influencing foreign policy
by associating himself with organizations and by helping to formulate their
attitudes on international questions. The groups most suitable for this purpose
are the political party and those generally called pressure groups."
Page 81:
"* * * The world-minded American, as a part of his program of action, should
concern himself with how these groups operate. He will find that he himself can
probably have a greater influence through this technique. He will also find that
since a great deal of official action is determined by pressure group action, the
use of this device will enable him to be heard and will also enable him to urge
his interest for peace against those he considers to be urging a contrary interest.
He will find that the variety and interest of the groups with which he can affiliate
are endless; and he must, therefore, examine carefully the aims of the group or
groups to which he will devote his energies."
Page 82:
"* * * Teachers must act As citizens, their obligation to act on behalf of
peace and international cooperation is a responsibility shared with all other
citizens. But teachers cannot be content merely to do just as much as others;
they must do more. Teachers in almost any American community have greater
competence in leadership skills and in knowledge than most of their fellow
194 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
citizens. With greater capacity goes greater responsibility for bringing personal
influence to bear on civic action on the local, State, and National levels." (Hear-
ings, p. 72.)
The school is to be a sort of militant agent so that "the total impact
of community thinking may be brought to bear on major issues.
Such a role brings the school into working contact with those agencies
in the community which are keyed to action * * *."
The schools are told how "to assume their responsibility". Pro-
grams are to be developed rapidly. School planning committees are
to pool ideas and coordinate. "Aids and sources" are recommended,
including reading materials, film and film strips, etc. A list of books
are recommended and among them we find some the advisability of
recommendations we seriously doubt. (Hearings, p. 73.)
Putting the evidence together, we conclude that the National Education
Association has been an important element in the tax-exempt world used
to indoctrinate American youth with "internationalism" , the particular
variety which Professor Colgrove referred to as "globalism." This point
of view is cloesly related to the "new era" which so many social scientists
have envisioned as the ultimate goal of our society when they have gotten
through "engineering" us into it.
We note that the filed statement by the National Education Asso-
ciation has made no effort to explain any of the criticisms made of that
organization in the testimony, including the material we have just
treated on globalism. This crucial and well documented issue is com-
pletely evaded with the remark that the NEA is "unable to learn
whether any of the previous testimony is regarded by your Committee
as worthy of further examination." The following characterization
disposes of the evidence itself: "This testimony, insofar as we have
been able to examine it, is so vague and so self-contradictory, that
detailed comment seems unnecessary." (Hearings, p. 1147.) We beg
to differ with the NEA.
Expenditures Abroad.
This Committee has not been able to expend the time to ascertain
the extent of foundation spending abroad. It is clear,, however, that
millions of the taxpayers' money are spent annually outside of the
United States. A further investigation might well consider whether
there should not be some limitations placed upon such a foreign use
of American money. In this era in which our Government feels
obliged to pour billions into the support of the rest of the world, it is
questionab e whether foundations should have the right, freely to use
further millions of the people's money in alien ventures.
There is the further problem of whether foundation expenditures
abroad may not, at times, directly conflict with government policy.
The whole subject is worthy of intensive study.
The Basic, Foundation-Supported Propaganda re Foreign
Affairs.
It is our conclusion, from the evidence, that the foundation sup-
ported activities which relate to foreign policy have been turned
consciously and expressly in the direction of propagandizing for one
point of view. That point of view, widely disseminated by founda-
tions at great cost in public funds, has been the official line of the
former two administrations, submitted with such rare criticism, if any,
as to constitute truly political activity. Where has been the objec-
tivity which we have the right to expect when trustees disburse our
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 195
money? Where has been an expression of the minority points of
view which have, m the course of time, proved themselves correct?
The following quotation is from the speech of ex-President Hoover,
as reported in The New York Times of August 11, 1954, upon the
occasion of his 80th birthday, after so many years of selfless devotion
to the people of the United States:
"In our foreign relations there are great dangers and also vital safeguards to
free men. During the last war we witnessed a special encroachment of the Exec-
utive upon the legislative branch. This has been through a new type of com-
mitment of the United States to other nations.
"I am not going to argue legalisms, for they do not go to the center of the issue.
The real issue is whether the President, through declaration or implication or by
appeasement or by acquiescence or by joint statements with foreign officials, can
commit the American people to foreign nations without the specific consent of the
elected representatives of the people.
"There has been a grievous list of such commitments. They include interna-
tional agreements which shackle our economy by limiting a free market. But
more terrible were such executive agreements as our recognition of Soviet Russia
which opened the headgates for a torrent of traitors.
"Our tacit alliance with Soviet Russia spread communism over the earth. Our
acquiescence in the annexation by Russia of the Baltic States at Moscow and the
partition of Poland at Teheran extinguished the liberties of tens of millions of
people.
"Worse still was the appeasement and surrender at Yalta of ten nations to
slavery. And there was the secret agreement with respect to China which set in
train the communization of Mongolia, North Korea and all of China.
"These unrestrained Presidential actions have resulted in a shrinking of human
freedom over the whole world. From these actions came the jeopardies of the
'Cold War.' As a by-product these actions have shrunk our freedoms by crush-
ing taxes, huge defense costs, inflation and compulsory military service.
"We must make such misuse of power forever impossible.
"And let me say, I have no fears of this evil from President Eisenhower but
he will not always be President.
"Our dangers from the Communist source of gigantic evil in the world are un-
ending. All of the peace agencies we have created and all of the repeated con-
ferences we have held have failed, to find even a whisper of real peace.
"Amid these malign forces, our haunting anxiety and our paramount necessity
is the defense of our country.
"It is not my purpose to define the foreign policies of our Government.
"Sooner or later a new line of action will become imperative.
"I have disagreed with, and protested against, the most dangerous of our
foreign political policies during the whole of the twenty years prior to the last
Presidential election. I opposed and protested every step in the policies which
led us into the Second World War.
"Especially in June, 1941, when Britain was safe from a German invasion
due to Hitler's diversion to attack on Stalin, I urged that the gargantuan jest of
all history would be our giving aid to the Soviet Government. I urged we should
allow those two dictators to exhaust each other. I stated that the result of our
assistance would be to spread communism over the whole world. I urged that
if we stood aside the time would come when we could bring lasting peace to the
world.
"I have no regrets. The consequences have proved that I was right."
It would be interesting to take each criticism offered by President
Hoover and to determine how much foundation money has been spent
in disseminating it among our people, as against disseminating the
concept or principle which it criticizes. We are confident, from the
evidence we have examined, that the result would show a preponder-
ance against Mr. Hoover's criticisms of about one million to one, in
almost every instance. If this is the way these foundations have dis-
charged their duty to the people to be objective and fair, we are frank to
say that their tax exemption may have been a tragic mistake. They have
been propaganda agencies; and foundation propaganda in any political
area cannot be tolerated.
196 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
XII. Communism and Subversion
The Communist Penetration.
The group frequently referred to as the "aw^-anti-Communists"
has persuaded a large part of the American public that exposing Com-
munists and their helpers undermines our traditions and principles.
It admits that Communism is a grave danger to our national safety.
It asserts that Communists should be driven out of government and
places of power and influence. But it suggests that this should be
done (in some mysterious and undefined way) by the government.
Yet, strangely, these anti-anti-Communists vigorously and consist-
ently oppose all determined and effective measures by which the gov-
ernment, through its duly delegated committees, exposes Communists.
It does not seem quite clear how this is to be managed; but nothing
is worse, in the opinion of this vociferous group, than a Congressional
investigation. That, they assert, is the worst way to handle the
problem; a Congressional investigation is almost per se a violation of
individual right; the individual must be protected, they allege, against
the abuse inherent in Congressional inquiries even if the safety of the
nation is at stake.
Some of this group say that the Attorney General should act, and
he alone; forgetting that he cannot prosecute anyone for merely being
a Communist: he can prosecute for espionage (and how rarely a spy
is caught) or for perjury (and how rarely even a Hiss is caught).
Others say that the job is one for the F. B. I., as though it should be
used as a sort of Gestapo, with the right to both catch and try and,
perhaps convict, for Communism. The fact is that the F. B. I. can
only report what it finds to executive authority and then hope for
the best. Many feel that, in any event, no man should be deprived
of any right to position or employment unless he has actually been
convicted of espionage or something equally overt and sinister. A
man may, after all, they say, be a Communist and still be a good
citizen and mean us no harm.
Against these various types of soft-mindedness and blindness to
danger, the Congressional investigation still stands as a protection.
//, for example, the Cox Gommitiee had done nothing else, its investigation
was justified in so far as it disclosed that there had been an actual, definitive
and successful Russian-Communist plan to infiltrate American philan-
thropic foundations. Little reference has subsequently been made
to this material disclosed by the Cox Committee hearings — -it has
certainly been conveniently forgotten by those in the foundations who
are <mi^-anti-Communists. It bears review.
One of the Cox witnesses was Maurice Malkin, Consultant with the
Immigration and Naturalization Service, who had been a charter
member of the Communist party in America and had been expelled
in 1937. He testified that a Russian agent had come to this country
in 1936 "and ordered us that instead of depending on Moscow to
finance the American party directly and at all times, we should try to
work out ways and means of penetrating philanthropic, charitable,
grants, foundations, and et cetera, and these organizations like social-
service organizations, charitable institutions, and other cultural fronts,
to try to penetrate these organizations, if necessary take control of
them and their treasuries: if not, to at least penetrate them where
we would have a voice of influence amongst those organizations, in
TAX-EXEMPT FftTOSTDATIONS 197
order to drain their treasuries that they should be able to finance the
Communist Party propaganda in the United States, besides the
subsidies that will be granted by Moscow," (Cox Hearings, p. — — .)
The existence of this plot was corroborated by others and stands
amply proved. The infiltration had commenced earlier than 1936.
Mr. Bogolepov testified before the Cox Committee concerning in-
filtration as early as 1930. Bogolepov quoted Stalin as having said
that Marx was wrong in so far as he may have thought that the
Western world could be won by the workers. Stalin said:
"* * * it would be necessary to maintain the revolutionary status through
the brains of Western intellectuals who were said to be sympathetic with Com-
munist ideas." (Cox Hearings, p. 676 et seq.)
There were many waiting to be used by the Communists for their
own purposes, — socialists and other leftists who did not always have
sympathy with Communism itself but joined with it in certain imme-
diate objectives, not realizing that, by doing so, they were assisting
Communism to achieve its ultimate goals. Among this group were
those innocents who, in the SO's, sought to direct education in the United
States, and research in the social sciences, to the end of ushering in a new
order, prerequisite to which was the destruction or sapping oj f free enter-
prise. We have met some of them in previous sections of this report.
In the August 20, 1954 issue of U. S. News and World Report is a
long interview with Congressman Martin Dies, entitled They Tried
To Get Me, Too. It is well worth reading. Mr. Dies tells the story
of his difficulties as Chairman of the famous committee bearing his
name which investigated Communism, in the face of the most bitter
opposition from the then Administration. To the "liberals" of that
day, Mr. Dies was worse than McCarthy is to the "liberals" of today.
Yet his disclosures of Communism in high and important places were
beyond questioning and were staggering in their implications. At one
time he presented to the Executive a list of 2,000 Communists on
the Federal payroll, including Alger Hiss, Harry Dexter White and
Harold Glasser. Perhaps no one man, outside the F. B. I., knows
more about the subversive movement during the period of his inves-
tigation than Mr. Dies. In his interview he recounts how so many
"liberals" became the tools of Communism:
"The truth of the matter was, as I told the Jenner Committee, there were 10
million 'liberals' running around like a chicken with its head chopped off and
wanting to change everything. They didn't know exactly what they wanted to
change, but they were for changes. Along came the Commies, and they were
the only group in that bunch that had a program. They knew where they were
going and what they were doing.
"So they took over this 10 million and used them, and then suddenly came
the exposure that here were these organizations that the 'liberals' had sponsored
and worked under and contributed money to under the control of Moscow."
Mr. Louis Budenz testified before the Cox Committee that he was
chairman of a Communist group which penetrated the press and other
media of public information and that a commission had been created
to penetrate the foundations, and he named names. Mr. Manning
Johnson testified that he Was a member of the Party from 1930 to
1940 and gave his opinion that the foundations had been successfully
penetrated on both high and low levels. He said that from his own
personal experience he knew that the Garland Fund, the Marshall
Foundation, the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation and the
198 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Rosenwald Fund, in particular has been used, as well as the Institute of
Pacific Relations.
How Do They Do ItI
How has the penetration by Communists taken place? How was it
accomplished? In an effort to see if the foundations themselves could
assist in answering these questions, Counsel to this Committee asked
three selected foundations, the William C Whitney Foundation, the
Rockefeller Foundation and the John Simon Guggenheim MemoriM
Foundation, to examine their own records to try to see if they could
shed any light on how grants to Communists and Fellow-travellers
came to be made. In the case of the Whitney Foundation, two of its
officers cooperated fully. In conferences with Counsel, it was agreed
that no pattern appeared and the number of grants to subversives was,
in any case, insufficient to provide a pattern.
In the case of the Rockefeller Foundation, Mr. Dean Rusk, its
President, also cooperated fully, reporting to Counsel in writing both
for the Foundation and for the (Rockefeller) General Education Board.
The reports described the origin of each grant in so far as Mr. Rusk
was able to ascertain it, and stated his conclusion that "no pattern
emerges."
In the case of the Guggenheim Foundation, nothing further was
heard from Dr. Moe, its chief officer, after the request for a study was
made by Counsel. As the suggestion had been made merely to see if
the foundations could assist in discovering how subversive grants
came about, nothing further was done in the case of the Guggenheim
Foundation, which apparently did not see fit to cooperate. (Appendix
to Report, pp. .)
This Committee is unable to arrive at any express conclusion as to
the methods and manner of Communist penetration of foundations or
the ways which have been used to take advantage of foundations.
The subject would require detailed study far beyond this Committee's
capacity in time and money. We suspect, however, that one factor
which has contributed to the ease with which Communism has used
our foundations has been the attitude of many foundation executives
that the political opinions of a grantee is of no consequence. Dr.
Hutchins, long a power in The Ford Foundation and now President of
its offspring, The Fund for the Republic, has put himself on record as
taking that position, and he is not alone. The attitude of Dr. Johnson
in selecting his assistants in connection with the preparation of the
Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, referred to elsewhere, seems typical
of many of the leading characters in the social science field.
Some foundations have prided themselves that they do not enquire
into the "politics" of those who receive grants or fellowships. They
say they would not, of course, take on an avowed or proven, present
Communist, but they do not seem concerned, however leftist the
political or social bias of the prospective recipient of public money by
their grace may be, short of actual, present, proven Communist mem-
bership. To some this position may seem sound — that a "scientist"
should not be condemned or discriminated against unless he is estab-
lished as an enemy of our country. Certainly whether the recipient
is a Democrat or a Republican can make no possible difference. It
may not even matter that he is some variety of collectivist, provided
his political slant could make no material difference in the area in
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 199
which, he is to work. But we are concerned in this report almost ex-
clusively with the social sciences; in these, the political slant of a
grantee may have enormous impact on his work. In dealing with
mathematics or physics, it may be utterly inconsequential that a re-
searcher is a socialist: in the social sciences, which so often have direct
or indirect political significance, the radical character of the researcher
may be all-important. Political conformity should not be the price of
foundation support. However, in projects of political significance, when
the radical opinions of the applicant may affect his work, foundation sup-
port should be denied. Nor is it sufficient for a foundation to take the
position that it is not responsible for the results produced by a radical who
has received a grant in error or who has abused the confidence of the founda-
tion. It is encumbent on the foundation, as a dispenser of public money,
to publicly disavow the radical results promptly and without equivocation.
The Extent of Subversive Omants.
During the testimony of Professor Rowe of Yale, Mr. Hays of this
Committee pointed out that, in the case of one foundation, it had made
only forty grants to persons or organizations allegedly subversive, and
that this was but a small percentage of the total grants. Professor
Rowe answered that it seemed to him this was a mis-use of statistics.
His position was that it was the aggregate impact of the unfortunate
grants which was important, not their relative number. The Chair-
man then suggested that the number of grants did not tell the whole
story of Communist infiltration, whereupon the testimony continued:
Dr. Rowe. Yes. Could I comment on that briefly, and make a few other
comments that are connected with this? I am fully in agreement with the notion
that — picking a figure out of the air— 2 or 3 grants that are made to wrong people
can have a tremendous effect in undoing much of the good that is made by the
jest of the 40,000. Again it is not a matter of every grant being equal in signifi-
cance. You can't evaluate them in terms of how many dollars were involved.
A small grant made to a person in a critical position where he is going to make a
wrong move, and implement the matter, can negate hundreds and thousands of
grants made to people who are out on the fringes, the outskirts of positions of
power and influence where the impact of everything they do that may be good
will not be directly felt in policy areas.
Another interesting feature of that is that grants to organizations, it seems to
me, have to be very carefully taken into account when you are talking about the
total number of grants. I don't quite understand here whether the grants to
organizations were included in this total figure.
The Chaibman. They were not. These are grants to individuals.
Dr. Rowe. Of the grants to organizations I can only give you the best example
that I know of. Those that involved, for instance, the Institute of Pacific Relations.
I don't know what the sum total of the money was. It came from Rockefeller and
Carnegie and from private contributions.
Mr. Wokmsbh, I believe it was something over $3 million.
Dr. Rowe. $3 million. The grants to the Institute of Pacific Relations, it
seems to me, helped to implement a lot of people who did not, in my opinion,
have the best interests of the United States at heart. (Hearings, pp. 535, 536.)
Professor Rowe then proceeded with testimony which this Com-
mittee found to be of extreme importance:
Here I want to talk about another item. It seems to me we make a mistake
in talking about identifying Communists as grantees on the one hand, non-
Communists as grantees on the other hand. In much of the activity that has to
do with identification of Communist activity in the United States, it has seemed
to me that we are going off on the wrong track when we limit ourselves to efforts to
identify overt Communists, or let us say organisational Communists, people who
carry a card or who can be positively identified as members of an organization subject
to organized discipline. For every one of those that you fail to identify, and it seems
200 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
to me we even fail to identify most of those, there are a thousand people who coubi
not possibly be identified as such, because they have never had any kind of organiza-
tional affiliation, but among those people are many people who advance the interests
of world communism, in spite of the fact that they are not subject to discipline and
do not belong to any organization.
So here again I think your categories, statistically, have to be refined somewhat.
Here, of course, you get into this area of opinion. What constitutes an individual
who is attempting to advance the interests of world communism?
This is a very controversial subject, but if we are ever to deal with the problem
of Communist influence in this country, or ever to deal with the problem of
preserving our security against the world Communist conspiracy, this is the
critical area. The people who can be trailed and tagged by the FBI are a very,
very small minority. They occupy a very powerful position and a potentially
important one, but the people who do the important work are unidentifiable, and
if I were planning to infiltrate the United States, I would see to it that they were
unidentifiable.
Here it seems to me you have to set up an entirely different category than the
two categories of Communists on the one side, and other people on the other side.
(Hearings, p. 536.) fEmphasis supplied.]
To illustrate the necessity of making qualitative rather than quan-
titative judgments as to foundation grants, Professor Rowe discussed
the IPR situation as follows:
* * * I would like to add this regarding the IPR and regarding the problem
of Far Eastern policy. You remember some of my earlier remarks about the
state of Far Eastern studies in the United States 20 or 30 years ago, how I said
there was practically none of it; how some of the foundations started to finance
the building up and training of personnel . It seems to me this kind of thing has
to be taken into account in evaluating foundation grants, namely, that the area
of ignorance in the United States about Far Eastern matters was so great that
here was the strategic place in which to strike at the security of the United States
by people interested in imperilling our security and fostering the aims of world
communism. They would naturally not pick the area in which we have the
greatest intellectual capacities and in which we have the greatest capacities for
defense. They would pick the area of greatest public ignorance, with the greatest
difficulty of defending against the tactics of their attack, and so these peopl'e
naturally poured into Far Eastern studies and exploited this area as the area in
which they could promote the interests of world communism most successfully
in the general ignorance and blindness of the American people.
So that it is not only quantitative evaluation that counts; it is not only the
numbers of grants or the amounts of grants ; it is the areas in which the grants
are given that are significant. Here, you see, it seems to me, it takes a great deal
of subject matter know-how — quite apart from dollars and cents — people and
their affiliations or lack thereof, to evaluate the impact on this country of any
given foundation grant, I don't care whether it is $50 or $5 million. It is a quali-
tative matter, not a quantitative matter. Here is where judgment comes in and
where the greatest possibility of disagreements and controversies lies. But where
it seems to me if you are going to do an evaluating job on foundation activities
you are going to have to make up your mind with the best help you can find just
what the meaning of the grants was. (Hearings, pp. 541, 542.)
Subversives Fed to Government.
We have described briefly elsewhere the extent to which the gov-
ernment has come to rely upon foundations and foundation-supported
organizations to provide "social scientists" for research and in advi-
sory capacities. The whole subject deserves deep and careful study
and analysis, particularly the part which these foundations and asso-
ciated organizations have played in infiltrating government with sub-
versives. A shocking example of this was disclosed by the testimony
of Professor Kenneth Colegrove.
Professor Colegrove testified concerning the appointment of politi-
cal advisors to the occupation forces at the end of the second World
War. In 1945, as Secretary of the American Political Science Asso-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 201
elation he submitted a list of names of experts for the Army of Occu-
pation in Japan and for that in Germany — a list of political scientists
who would be helpful to the government. While he did not put his
own name on the list, he was asked to become an adviser to General
MacArthur, and did subsequently occupy that position. (Hearings,
p. 560.)
What became of the list which Professor Colegrove had provided?
It was not accepted by the Pentagon. Another list was accepted
and, as Professor Colegrove testified:
I was shocked when I saw the list, because there were none of the recommenda-
tions that we had made.
I took that list over to an old friend of mine who had served as Chief of the
Far Eastern Division in OSS (Office of Strategic Services) . His name is Charles
Burton Fahs, a very outstanding specialist in Japan and a man of great integrity.
And I remember that Charles Burton Fahs was astonished by the character of the
names that had been recommended.
We checked those names off. Some of them were known to us to be Communists,
many of them pro-Communists or fellow travelers. They were extremely leftist.
I went back to the Pentagon to protest against a number of these people, and
to my amazement I found that they had all been invited, and they had all accepted,
and some of them were already on their way to Japan.
I wanted to find out where the list came from, and / was told that the list had come
from the Institute of Pacific Relations. [Emphasis supplied.] (Hearing, p. 561.)
Professor Colegrove testified later that another list had been supplied
by the American Council of Learned Societies and that the final selections
had been made from these two lists (the IPR and the American Council
of Learned Societies) and the list of the American Political Science
Association had been ignored. (Hearings, p. 580.)
"And so",
said Professor Colegrove,
"General MacArthur, who had very little control over the personnel that was
sent to Japan at this time for civil affairs, practically no control, had to receive a
large group of very leftist and some of them communist advisers in the field of
political science." (Hearing, p. 561.)
The Basic Problem of Subversion.
There have been very few foundations which would consciously
make a grant to a known Communist. In fact, with a few notable
and tragic exceptions such as the Institute of Pacific Relations, the
Marshall Foundation and the Garland Fund (these last two having
lost their tax exemption and being now extinct) we do not know that
any large sums of foundation money have gone directly into Com-
munist channels. That is not the most serious problem which faces
those foundation trustees who wish to do their full fiduciary duty to
the people whose money, in the form of foundation trust funds, they
administer. The leakage, the substantial diversion of foundation funds
to subversive purposes, comes clearly through the support of individuals
and efforts which are contributive to Communist success though not
always easily so recognizable.
Many individuals have permitted themselves to be seduced into the
support of Communist front organizations through negligence and an
anxiety to join "progressive" and ''liberal" causes. So, the founda-
tions have often, in the social sciences, lent themselves to the support
of efforts and causes which weaken our society and create factors
of dissidence and disorganization of which the Communists are alert
to take advantage. We cannot too strongly state that this Committee
55647—54 14
202 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
respects the true liberal and deems him as important to the proper political
functioning of our society as is the conservative. In using the term
'.'liberal" in quotes, we do so to indicate a type of leftist who is the un-
conscious helper of Communism. He may be, with the utmost earnest-
ness, a violent and inveterate opponent of Communism: but he travels
in, if not under the same direction. The term "fellow-traveller" is
perhaps too extreme. He may utterly reject revolution in favor of evolu-
tion, but the evolutionary change he seeks must be a quick one, and he
must hurry to aid in ushering it in. In his anxiety for the better world
of the future, he falls into the error of wishing to destroy before he knows
the significance of that with which he wishes to replace.
These political comments are to this Committee of grave importance in
relation to foundations. The evidence indicates that the foundations
dealing in the social sciences have become so enamoured of the idea that
foundations funds must be used for "risk capital" that they have all too
infrequently failed to measure the risk. The "risk capital" concept is
admirable in such areas as medicine and health and the physical sciences.
To apply it in areas where the security of the state is involved, and the
construction and manner of our society, converts it into "danger capital"
instead of "risk capital." It propels foundation executives into a con-
stant search for something new, a pathological scrutinizing of what we
have, on the premise that there must be something better. Much of what
we have is undoubtedly susceptible of improvement or even desirable
supplanting. But much that we have is, to the average American, sound
and inviolate . The tendency always to seek an improvement runs founda-
tion executives into the hazards of neglecting the study of what we have in
order to ascertain why it is so good and, rather, supporting change on the
premise that what we have must be wrong.
This premise leads to the support of the leftist, the man who does not
like what we have and wants to change it. What so few of the trustees
of the major foundations seem to realize is, as Harold Lord Varney
put it in his article in the American Mercury entitled The Egg-Head
Clutch on the Foundations:
"The social sciences are the citadel of the 'egg-heads'. Once the foundation
millions begin to flow into these fields, queer specimens with queer ideas begin
to come out from under the academic logs, and qualify for grants and fellowships
and sinecures. The Left Wing boys constitute the largest segment of this zany
band."
We quote again from Mr. Hoover's speech 27 rendered on his 80th
birthday:
"Despite the clamor over ferreting out these persons, you must not be led into
the mistake that Moscow has closed down its recruiting offices for American
agents. Or that continued action of the F. B. I. and Congressional committees
is not equally imperative.
"I have little fear that these Communist agents can destroy the Republic if
we continue to ferret them out. Our greater concern should be the other varieties of
Karl Marx virus.
"Among them are the Socialists. They assert they would proceed only by
Constitutional means.
"The Socialists prowl on many fronts. They promote the centralized Federal
Government, with its huge bureaucracy. They drive to absorb the income of the
people by unnecessary government spending and exorbitant taxes. They have
pushed our government deep into enterprises which compete with the rights of
free men. These enterprises are endowed with exemption from control of state
and local governments. Congressional committees have listed hundreds of these
« New York Timet, August 11, 1954.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 203
Federal activities. But only a drop of typhoid in a barrel of drinking water sickens
a whole village.
"Every step of these programs somewhere, somehow, stultifies the freedom, the
incentives, the courage and the creative impulses of our people.
"Beyond all this, there is proof in the world that the end result of socialism
can be bloody communism. In the Iron Curtain states it was the Socialist intellec-
tuals who weakened the freedom of men by destroying free enterprise. Thus they
furnished the boarding ladders by which the Communists captured the Ship of
State.
"One of the post-war cousins of socialism is the so-called 'Welfare State.' This
poison gas is generated by the same sort of fuzzy-minded intellectuals. Its slogan
is 'Planned Economy.' The phrase itself was borrowed from totalitarian govern-
ments. The end of it would at least be a government wherein whatever is not
forbidden would be compulsory.
"One of the annoyances of this cult is its false assumption that our nation has never
been heedful of the welfare of our people. That we are our brother's keeper was rooted
in religious faith long before these fuzzy-minded men were born. Since the founda-
tion of the Republic we have recognized and practiced both private and govern-
mental responsibility for the unfortunate and the aged; for the education of our
youth and the health of our people.
"Moreover, this cult has a host of gimmicks for giving away the people's
money. Among their ideas is that government should guarantee every citizen
security from the cradle to the grave.
"But it is solely the initiative and the labor of the physically able in the prime
of life that can support the aged, the young, the sick— and the bureaucracy. And
this active earning group requires the pressures of competition, the rewards of
enterprise and new adventure to keep it on the job.
"Even if security from the cradle to the grave could eliminate the risks of life,
it would be a dead hand on the creative spirit of our people. Also, the judgment
of the Lord to Adam about sweat has not been repealed.
"When we flirt with the Delilah of security for our productive group we had
better watch out lest in our blindness we pull down the pillars of the temple of
free men.
"The British under a Socialist government tried it. Its result was a level of
poverty which British Socialists sought to obscure with the term 'austerity.'
Britain is now in retreat from it.
"Among the delusions offered us by fuzzy-minded people is that imaginary
creature, the Common Man. It is dinned into us that this is the Century of the
Common Man. The whole idea is another cousin of the Soviet proletariat. The
Uncommon Man is to be whittled down to size. It is the negation of individual
dignity and a slogan of mediocrity and uniformity.
"The Common Man dogma may be of use as a vote-getting apparatus. It
supposedly proves the humility of demagogues.
"The greatest strides of human progress have come from uncommon men and
women. You have perhaps heard of George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, or
Thomas Edison. They were humble in origin, but that was not their greatness.
"The humor of it is that when we get sick, we want an uncommon doctor.
When we go to war, we yearn for an uncommon general or admiral. When we
choose the President of a university, we want an uncommon educator.
"The imperative need of this nation at all times is the leadership of the Uncom-
mon Men or Women. We need men and women who cannot be intimidated, who
are not concerned with applause meters, nor those who sell tomorrow for cheers
today.
"Such leaders are not to be made like queen bees. They must rise by their own
merits. America recognizes no frozen social stratifications which prevent this
free rise of every individual. They rise by merit from our shops and farms.
They rise from the thirty-five million boys and girls in our schools and colleges.
That they have the determination to rise is the glorious promise of leadership
among free men.
"A nation is strong or weak, it thrives or perishes upon what it believes to be
true. If our youth is rightly instructed in the faith of our fathers; in the traditions
of our country; in the dignity of each individual man, then our power will be
stronger than any weapon of destruction that man can devise.
"And now as to this whole gamut of Socialist infections, I say to you, the
neighbors of my childhood, the sons and daughters of my native state, God has
blessed us with another wonderful word — heritage. The great documents of that
heritage are not from Karl Marx. They are the Bible, the Declaration of Independence
204 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
and the Constitution of the United States. Within them alone can the safeguards
of freedom survive. Safeguard the true spirit of these guarantees for your chil-
dren, that they may not become the prisoners of a hydraheaded socialism.
"If anyone rises to say that all this is reactionary, you may class him as either
fuzzy-minded or an ignorant enemy of free men." [Emphasis supplied.]
The evidence before us leads to the conclusion that conservative
causes, those which seek to support what we have, have received but
meager support from foundations operating in the social sciences;
overwhelmingly, the foundations have prompted and supported
ventures and individuals to the left. In a broad sense, and vitally so,
much of this leftist trend of the foundations in the social sciences has been
"subversive", in so far as it has worked to undermine some of our precious
institutions, and some of our basic moral and religious and political
principles.
The social scientist can fall readily into a close relationship with
Communism or socialism if he succumbs to what Professor Hobbs has
called "liberal scientism." Starting at page 145 of his Social Problems
and Scientism, Professor Hobbs says:
"One of the greatest windfalls which ever fell the way of the zealots of scientism
was the depression of the 1930's. How eagerly they exploited this temporary
condition, and how reluctant they are to recognize that it is long since past.
Particularly amusing was the exploitation of 'one-third of a nation.' This phrase,
or a similar one, is to be found in practically every sociology textbook published
from 1937 to the present. The wide usage, and the unquestioning acceptance of
such a phrase is another illustration of the double standard of evidence employed
by 'liberal' zealots of scientism. The phrase itself goes back at least to 1919,
when it was picked out of the air by a social worker to dramatize poor housing
among unskilled workers. It was then revived on the basis of a study made in
the mid-thirties. This study was not even a study of income distribution, and
was full of misleading interpretations. Did the 'scientists' investigate it, and
point out the fallacies? Not at all. They were even more eager than politicians
to seize upon any data which seemed to give scientific support to their dramatiza-
tion of the failure of capitalism. They not only accepted the conclusions of one
of the loosest studies ever made, they even exaggerated them. They coupled
such conclusions with horrendous plaints about the breakdown of the system, the
death of opportunities for youth, and the futility of efforts to improve one's
economic or social status. They were pathetically eager to seize this seeming
excuse to plead for ever-greater expansion of government.
"When the depression ended, the scientistic liberals were among the last to
admiu it, and they still continue to present figures to 'prove' that a large percentage
of the people are in an 'underprivileged' category. Despite great increases in
wages — increases which far outstrip rises in prices- — despite marked narrowing of
the gap between upper and lower income groups, the theme continues to be
played. As a matter of fact, several of the textbooks appearing during the
period of high wage levels following World War II contained figures which
'proved' that there was a higher percentage of underprivileged than was alleged to
exist during the depression! Governmental agencies have also contributed to-
ward fostering this aelusion. The exaggerated and one-sided, criticism of the
economic system is not confined to textbooks but is also expressed in many novels
and in some of the most popular non-fiction 'trade' books. One of the more
popular of these was Middletown.
"Scientistic liberals make no serious effort to describe the economic system nor
to present an objective description of economic conditions. Their efforts are
devoted almost solely to criticism. This criticism paints a picture of tragic con-
ditions which can be remedied only by 'social planning.' The details of such
planning are not described, nor are the ramifications admitted, but almost in-
variably it is presented as a remedy. You will find 'social planning"recommended
in a substantial majority of the modern textbooks in sociology, and I believe you
will also find it in other fields of social science. It is commonly recommended
even in the professional journals, which are supposed to be much more scientific
and moderate than the texts. A study of articles dealing with the topic of social
planning was made by a graduate student at the University of Pennsylvania,
Mr. Kenneth E. Cuthbertson. Mr. Cuthbertson analysed all such articles which
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 205
appeared in Sociology and Social Research from 1930 to 1950. The conclusion he
reached was :
" 'There is only one generalization that can be made. In all of the forty-seven
articles studied, not one raises the question of the desirability and necessity of
social planning. Without exception, every article is based on the assumption that
social planning is necessary.'
"Kecommendations for social planning are presented in a manner which gives
the impression that they have a scientific basis, whereas no scientific basis actually
exists. The technique is one wherein one-sided criticism is levelled against the
economic system; economic conditions, arising out of capitalism are assumed to
cause a wide variety of individual and social problems, and social planning is
presented as the remedy. Of course, it has never been proved that economic
conditions do actually cause delinquency, marital maladjustment and the other
problems which they are supposed to cause. Nor do the 'liberal' advocates of
social planning specify how the planning is to be scientifically accomplished or
how it will remedy the conditions it is designed to cure. As with most other
aspects of scientistic liberal programs, social planning is offered as an amorphous
idealism. On this level, those who question social planning can be denounced as
'reactionaries,' 'vested interest groups/ and enemies of progress,
" 'Liberals' as well as Communists and Socialists consistently criticize private
enterprise and capitalism. The criticism is frequently one-sided and creates a
very unfavorable impression of what has been, by and large, a highly successful
economic system. The criticism is not confined to intervals of economic depres-
sion, but continues unabated during prosperity such as no society in history has
ever witnessed. It is of such persistence and variety that it can never be satisfied
by any objective improvement in the system or in economic conditions.
"These three groups similarly advocate 'social planning.' The programs and
techniques differ in detail, but are similar in principle. This similarity should
not serve as an excuse for silencing merited criticism of capitalism, nor for label-
ling all critics as 'Communists' or 'Socialists,' but it should be recognized."
He says further, at p. 160:
"The line of liberal scientism parallels those of communism and socialism
through several important areas. All three have a common focus in economic
determinism which contends that economic inequalities are responsible for de-
linquency, unhappiness, marital maladjustment, war, and a variety of other
problems. All three slant toward an exaggerated and one-sided criticism of the
economic system of capitalism and private enterprise. All three contrapose their
exaggerated criticism with idealisms such as 'cooperation' and 'security' and
'democracy.' All three, but in varying degrees, advocate governmental regula-
tion of economic processes in a program of 'social planning.' All three promote
political policies behind a facade of 'science' and 'democracy'. All three exploit
desire for peace and the conditions of war to promote their economic-political
programs, to disparage patriotism, and to promote internationalism. All three
emphasize differences between social classes and the extent of class conflict."
Foundations and Subversion.
Foundation spokesmen have emphatically denied any support of
subversion. We question, however, whether in such denials they did
not misinterpret the meaning of the term "subversion". Their de-
nials w r ere justified in so far as they are related to the direct support
of Communism, but these spokesmen were well aware of the nature
of some of the evidence produced before this Committee which showed
that foundations had frequently supported those who wish to under-
mine our society. Their denials of subversion in relation to such
activities are without merit.
What does the term ''subversion" mean? In contemporary usage and
practice, it does not refer to outright revolution, but to a promotion oj
tendencies which lead, in their inevitable consequences, to the destruction
of principles through perversion or alienation. Subversion, in modem
society, is not a sudden, cataclysmic explosion, but a gradual under-
mining, a persistent chipping away at foundations upon_ which beliefs
rest. _ ,. . n, ;,... x
206 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
By its very nature, successful subversion is difficult to detect.
It can easily be confused with honest, forthright criticism. In our
free society outright and honest criticism is not only permissible but
immensely desirable. Individuals who engage openly in such criti-
cism, who criticize political institutions from a political perspective,
and economic institutions from an economic perspective, should be
given free rein and encouraged. The issues involved in permitting
open and honest criticism, however, differ vitally from the issues
raised by subversion promoted by foundations. Some of these vital
differences (which foundation spokesmen refused to acknowledge,
much less discuss, in their conscious misinterpretation of the term
"subversive") are these:
Fundamental to the entire concept of tax-exemption for
foundations is the principle that their grants are to be primarily
directed to strengthening the structure of the society which
creates them. Society does not grant tax exemption jor the privi-
lege oj undermining it. Seasonable license is granted to satisfy
personal idiosyncracies, with the result that there is much social
waste when grants serve no truly useful purpose to society. But
such tolerated waste is something far different from the impact
of grants made by foundations which tend to undermine our
society. Such grants violate the underlying, essential assump-
tion of the tax-exemption privilege, that the substantial weight
of foundation effort must operate to strengthen, improve and
promote the economic, political and moral pillars upon which
our society rests.
Despite vehement protestations to the contrary, abundant
evidence indicates that many of the social science projects
sponsored by foundations are neither in the form of open and
honest criticism, nor can they be interpreted as promoting the
welfare of our society — except as interpreted by those who wish
radically to change its form and nature.
In the modern usage of the term, "subversion", it is no exaggeration
to state that in the field of the social sciences many major projects which
have been most prominently sponsored by foundations have been sub-
versive.
Numerous examples of such foundation-sponsored projects, sub-
versive of American moral, political and economic principles, were
offered in testimony. Foundation spokesmen failed utterly to provide
any evidence that such heavily-financed and prominently-sponsored
projects were in any real sense balanced by projects which promoted
or strengthened the principles upon which our society rests. In this
sense, the weight of influence of foundation tax-exempt funds applied
in the social sciences has been on the side of subversion.
Moreover, the subversive projects have been offered with spurious
claims to "science." With this false label they have been awarded a
privileged status. They have been offered as "scientific" and, there-
fore, beyond rebuttal. The impact of these subversive works has
been intensified manifold by the sponsorship of foundations.
PART THREE
CONCLUDING OBSERVATIONS
XIII. Some Supplemental Comments
The Problem of Foundation Survival.
A number of foundations have complained bitterly about a "second"
investigation, bemoaning the inconvenience of repeated inquiries.
Whatever the inconvenience, this Committee urgently recommends a
continued inquiry. The fullest possible study is necessary adequately
to expose certain weaknesses and errors of operation, the failure to
recognize which might, some day, result in a growing movement to
destroy the foundation as an institution by wholly denying it tax
exemption.
There are many today who believe that foundations should not be
permitted. Among them are one group of advocates of "state plan-
ning," who take the position that all the functions now performed by
foundations should be in government control; that foundations pre-
vent the over-all coordinated planning in Washington which, they say,
should be our goal. Others feel that the privilege of giving away the
public's money (tax-exempt money) should not be subject to the idio-
syncrasy of the donor or the disposition of a self-perpetuating group
of foundation managers. There are others who resent, on a simple
motivation of human envy, the presence of great sums of money segre-
gated to the directed desires of some person of great wealth.
None of these points of view are received sympathetically by this
Committee.
There is another group, however, which says that nothing would be
lost by abolishing foundations, except factors which are undesirable
or unpleasant. That is, they say, a donor could still make all the
charitable donations he wished, by conferring his benefactions on exist-
ing institutions such as colleges and universities, hospitals, churches,
etc. He could still get the same tax benefit for himself and for his
estate, and save the equity control of a business for his family through
such transfers. He could give himself the same egotistical satisfac-
tion, if that is important to him, by attaching his name to a fund. He
could even designate a purpose for which a recipient college, for ex-
ample, must use his grant. He could even attach reasonable condi-
tions and restrictions to his gifts.
All that would thus be lost by abolishing foundations, say these
critics, would be (1) the inability to use a foundation itself as a vehicle
for maintaining control or partial control of a business and (2) the
inability to insist upon the management of the fund through family
members or other self-perpetuating, designated persons. We would,
thus still have the equivalent of foundations, but they would be ad-
ministered by universities and other responsible institutions instead of
by those appointed by a miscellaneously selected board of private
trustees and by "clearing houses."
207
208 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
This argument cannot be lightly dismissed. Nor can it be defeated
by the insistence that foundation funds are most valuable as "risk
capital." If the risk capital theory is sound, would it not be a safer
"risk" to society to have such funds administered by responsible
university trustees? The delineation of scope of purpose in a deed
of gift could very easily warrant the taking of reasonable "risks."
While we recognize the weight oj these arguments, we do not support
the proposal that foundations be abolished or refused Federal tax exemp-
tion. One reason is that foundations are generally creatures of state
law and it does not seem to us that the Federal government should,
through the power of its taxing arm, virtually prevent the states from
retaining the foundation as a permissible institution if they wish to.
Another reason is that some foundations have accomplished so
much that is good. Institutions which are capable of doing for the
American people the magnificent things which foundations have been
responsible for, in medicine, public health and elsewhere, indicate
that they should be saved if they can be. But the foundations cannot
rest on their beneficial accomplishments alone. Not only must their
balance sheets show a preponderance of good — that preponderance
must be truly overwhelming. That they have improved the public
health, for example, cannot offset that they have permitted themselves
to be used to undermine our society and some of our most precious
basic concepts and principles.
If they are to be permitted to continue and to wield the tremendous
power which they now exercise, it must be upon the basis of complete
public acceptance — because they will have committed mere venial
sins and not mortal ones. For this reason we so strongly advocate
the most complete possible airing of criticism and the most thorough
possible assembling of facts. In no other way can foundation trustees
come to realize the full degree of their responsibility, nor the extent of
the dangers which they must avoid to prevent foundation destruction.
The Proposed Continued Inquiry.
Various suggestions have been made as to the proper or most
advisable vehicle for a continued inquiry. One is that a permanent
sub-committee of Ways and Means be created to complete the investi-
gation and to act as a permanent "watch-dog." Another is that the
whole problem be turned over to the Joint Committee on Internal
Revenue Taxation. A third is that something in the nature of a
British "royal commission" be created. Whatever the means used,
we urge that the investigation be retained under the control of the
legislative branch of the government, where it belongs.
How should that continued inquiry be conducted? We have pointed
out that such an inquiry is primarily a matter of laborious research.
Facts are best secured by this method, rather than through the
examination and cross-examination of a parade of witnesses.
Some foundation spokesmen have alluded to "Committee witnesses"
and "foundation witnesses" in connection with the current investi-
gation. There has been no such division of witnesses. All who came,
or were to come, before us were, or were to be, "Committee witnesses."
What these foundation spokesmen have attempted to do is give this
proceeding the character of a trial, rather than an investigation. It
has been no trial, and could not be.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 209
There has been a growing insistence on the part of some groups of
extreme "liberals" that Congressional investigations be changed in
character to approach very closely to trial practice. Such suggestions
fly in the very face of the nature of Congressional investigations and
seek to undermine the independence of the legislative arm of the
government by depriving it of the right to unhampered inquiry.
The use of a trial method, with complaint, answer, reply, rebuttal,
surrebuttal, etc., as to each issue, would mean utter confusion and
make of each investigation an endless "circus."
This Committee has been much maligned, in part by the press and
by foundation spokesmen, because it first placed critical witnesses on
the stand. This was done, with the unanimous approval of the full
Committee, in order to be utterly fair to the foundations by letting
them know, in advance of their own expected appearances, the main
lines of inquiry which were to be followed. This was explained re-
peatedly by the Chairman and by Counsel, and appears in the record
again and again. In the face of these statements foundation spokes-
men, echoed by parts of the press inimical to this investigation for
whatever reasons of their own, have cried "unfair!"
The insistence on something close to trial practice is illustrated
by a telegram from The Rockefeller Foundation to the Committee
which says:
"We must assume that the Committee's decision [(to discontinue the hearings)]
means that it will not submit a report to the Congress containing any material
adverse to our foundation on which we are not fully heard." (Hearings, p. 1062.)
This statement is made as though this condition were advanced as a
matter of right. We reject it emphatically. We are not "trying"
the foundations ; we are investigating them. To require us, in advance
of a report, to submit to a foundation every piece of evidence or com-
ment which our staff may have collected would be an absurdity,
hampering a committee such as this to the point of destroying its
effectiveness.
The Rockefeller Foundation statement goes even further than
demanding to see every piece of material which might be used in criti-
cism of it. It says: "We suggest that the Committee insure this
[refraining from unfairly injuring the foundations] by affording the
foundations an opportunity to be heard on the draft of any report
which the Committee proposes to submit." That is both intolerable
arrogance and an absurdity. Perhaps this will be added to the list of
things which the advanced "liberals" are asking of Congressional
procedure — that no Congressional committee be permitted to file any
report until all persons interested have had an opportunity to see it
in draft and comment upon it to the committee!
Such procedure, aside from its interference with the independence
of Congress, would involve the endless protraction of investigations.
In our case, for example, there are some seven thousand foundations.
Does Mr. Rusk, who signed the Rockefeller statement, believe that
only The Rockefeller Foundation should have the right of examination?
Or does he believe all foundations should have that right? Does he
suggest they be called in one by one, or all in a group? The impossi-
bility of his suggestion is obvious enough. And how about the cost?
We have heard no foundation voice raised to assist this Committee
in securing adequate financing.
210 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The Attitude of the Foundations.
United States News and World Report of October 22, 1954, page 104,
contains excerpts from an article in Harpers Magazine for February,
1936, concerning Congressional investigations, written by Supreme
Court Justice Hugo L. Black. Justice Black describes how pressure
against an investigation commences before the investigation even
begins.
"At the first suggestion of an investigation the ever-busy, ceaseless vigilant
Washington lobby sounds the alarm."
The instant a "resolution is offered, or even rumored, the call to arms is
sounded by the interest to be investigated."
"High-priced political lawyers swarm into the Capitol. Lobbyists descend
upon members. Telegrams of protest come from citizens back home protesting
against the suggested infamy."
Certain newspapers can generally be depended upon to raise a cry
against the proposed investigation. The opposition does not end
when a resolution passes; the next step is to try to influence appoint-
ments to the Committee. Finally, pressure is put upon the controlling
legislative Committee to restrict the activities of the investigating
committee by limiting its funds.
Justice Black's article is worth reading. It goes on to describe the
difficulties which confront Congressional investigations when they do
get under way.
Unfortunately this Committee concludes that some of the founda-
tions have followed the traditional course which Justice Black
described as taken by "the interest to be investigated." Nor have we
been impressed with the general willingness of foundations to submit
their performance to public scrutiny.
This Committee can judge the attitude only of those foundations
with which it has had intimate contact. These, as well as the "clear-
ing house" organizations have been fully cooperative in supplying
information. Both groups, however, have demonstrated an intoler-
ance toward criticism. This unwillingness even to consider that they
might, in any respect, be guilty of serious error, we find distressing and
discouraging. We can only conclude that it emanates from a sense of
power and security, even vis-a-vis the Congress. Some of the founda-
tions have gone so far as to imply that it is an injustice for Congress
to investigate any complaint against them.
They have filled their statements with cliche material regarding the
desirability of "free speech", and "freedom of thought", and "aca-
demic freedom" as though they had a monopoly on the defense of
freedom and there were serious danger that Congress might unfairly
curtail it. A form of arrogance and a pretension to superiority leads
them to believe that critics must, per se, be wrong. Foundations are
sacred cows. The men who run them are above being questioned.
This Committee, continues their general attitude, is bent upon the
destruction of the sacred right of foundations to do as they please;
it is full of malice; its staff is manned with incompetents who have
called in incompetents as witnesses ; no one who criticizes a foundation
could be competent.
One gathers the impression from some of the filed statements that
the foundation officers who have signed them believe that they have a
vested and inalienable right to do as they please, and that it is an
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 211
outrage that a Congressional Committee should dare to question any
of their actions. The fact is that they have a limited privilege —
limited by what the public may determine is for its own good; and
the public, in this sense, is represented by the Congress.
This Committee has even been attacked by foundations which it has
not investigated in any detail. Several such attacks, for example, have
been launched by the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith, one
appearing in its October, 1954, Bulletin, which begins by announcing —
"before the completion of our investigation, that it has failed. The
lengthy article refers to the Committee members and staff as "actors"
in a "charade", and refers to the witnesses called by the Committee
as "a strange group." It is replete with vituperation and prejudges
in vicious manner before the publishing of a report upon which alone
any final judgment of this Committee's work could be made. The
concluding sentence of the article is:
"Its failure as a Congressional investigation is a great victory for the American
people."
There can be no possible justification for such an attack by a. tax
exempt organization in the course of a Congressional investigation.
This Committee is quite conscious of the possibility that it may
itself have erred in some facts or in some judgments, Unlike some
of the foundation-supported social scientists and some of the founda-
tion executives (to judge them from their own statements) we do not
consider outselves Olympian. It is partly for this reason that we
strongly recommend a completion of the project of an investigation
of foundations — so that all possible facts in the criticized areas may
be adduced which might be favorable to them. Based on an incom-
plete inquiry, all final conclusions are subject to possible revision.
On the other hand, we are quite shocked that some of the foundations
have presumed to imply malice and an intention by this Committee
to do a biased and prejudiced job. We should like to print in full the
initial report prepared by Counsel to the Committee under date of
October 23, 1953, outlining his proposals for the conduct of the work.
It is a measured, objective and thoroughly unprejudiced document
running to 22 pages, the result of extremely careful thought; it formed
the basis upon which the Committee built its operations. We shall
quote merely part of it to indicate the attitude which this Committee
has had in its work.
"Control as a Basic Problem. This brings us to the basic control problem. We
would assume that the Committee would be disposed to a minimum of Federal
control. The rights, duties and responsibilities of foundations are, in our opinion,
primarily matters of state law with which the Federal government should not
interfere unless grounds of national welfare, strong enough to induce an application
of a broad Federal constitutional theory, should appear. For the moment, then,
the only available mechanism of control available to the Congress is the tax law.
Congress has the clear right to place reasonable conditions upon the privilege of
tax exemption. It has done so, as to income tax, gift tax and estate tax. If
amendments to these tax laws come to appear desirable it is the province of the
Committee on Ways and Means, as we understand it, to consider such amend-
ments. We conceive our function in part to be to produce the facts upon which
that Committee may, if it chooses, act further. We deem it within our province
to state the facts which have appeared, collate them, and suggest areas of con-
sideration for Ways and Means if the Committee finds this desirable.
"If acute or chronic foundation ailments should appear, the remedies may not,
in every case, be through legislation. A disclosure of the ailments may, to some
extent, induce reform within the ailing foundation itself. And the very statement
of the facts may induce the public to take an interest of a nature to bring about
reform through the force of public opinion."
212 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
This measured language does not indicate an intention to "railroad"
the foundations or to impose restrictions on them which might, as
some of the foundations purport to fear, destroy their usefulness.
To quote once more from this initial and guiding report of Counsel:
"Starting with the premise that foundations are basically desirable, excessive
regulation, which would deprive them virtually of all freedom, might well destroy
their character, their usefulness and their desirability. Therefore, regulatory
measures should be approached with great caution. We are not prepared at this
time even to suggest that further regulation is needed. It seems essential to us
that as scientific a collection and integration of facts as possible be accomplished
before anyone, whether in this Committee or outside, arrives at any precise
conclusions."
This is the spirit in which this Committee started its work and in
which it has continued through the preparation of this report.
XIV. Special Recommendations Not Fully Covered in the
Previous Text
We shall not burden this already lengthy report with a repetition
of all the various observations, conclusions and recommendations
stated in its course. Because of the incompleteness of the inquiry,
we have been disinclined to arrive at many final and fixed recom-
mendations. We shall, however, discuss briefly some features of
foundation operation which seem to require additional or fresh
comment.
The Jurisdiction of Ways and Means.
Wherever suggestions are made herein for possible changes in the
tax laws, we are mindful of the superior jurisdiction of the Committee
on Ways and Means and respectfully offer such suggestions to that
Committee for its consideration.
Reform from Within the Foundations.
This Committee has never swerved from the concept laid out in
the initial report of Counsel to it that whatever reform of foundation
procedure is necessary should, if possible, come from within the
foundations themselves. We are not overly encouraged, from the
content and import of the statements filed by some of the founda-
tions, and their general attitude, that much willingness exists among
executives of the foundations and of the associated organizations to
institute any reform whatsoever. A prerequisite to such reform
from the inside would lie in a recognition that it is needed. If these
foundations and organizations persist in their attitude that they are
sacrosanct, that they have not committed and cannot commit any
serious errors, and that they, therefore, need no reform whatsoever,
then Congressional action in various directions seems inevitably
necessary, even to the possible extent of a complete denial of tax
exemption.
Limitations on Operating Costs.
Suggestions have been made that the operating cost of foundations
is sometimes excessive, resulting in a waste of public funds. There
is much to this allegation, particularly in the case of heavily-staffed
foundations with complex machinery of operation, and those which
double overhead by using intermediary organizations to distribute
some of their funds. There seems to be no reasonable way, however,
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 213
to control such waste through any form of regulation. It is our
opinion that this is one of the areas in which reform from the inside
is the only kind possible. We urge foundations trustees to consider
it carefully.
"Collecting" Foundations.
Special attention might be given to abuses by foundations used for
the purpose of collecting money from the public. These have been
extensively investigated in the State of New York and elsewhere, and
organizations like the National Better Business Bureau can supply
much data concerning them. The chief complaint against many of
these organizations is that their costs of operation often far exceed the
net amount available for distribution to "charities." Legislation to
protect the public against abuses of foundations of this type is pos-
sible, perhaps in the form of a limitation on a percentage of permitted
overhead. This Committee has not had time, however, to study
this specific problem nor did it feel it advisable to duplicate any of
the work done, for example, by the investigation in the State of New
York.
Waste in General.
The evidence indicates that there is a good deal of waste in the
selection of projects, particularly mass research projects in which
large sums are expended, and the services of a substantial number of
researchers employed, when the end to be achieved does not measure
favorably against the aggregate expenditure of valuable manpower and
of money. This error seems to us often to relate to an excessive
interest in empirical research. The services of ten or more researchers
might be used to assemble "facts" on some narrow subject when the
same money spent on this piece of mass-fact-production could support
those ten or more men, each in valuable, independent research. It
would not be difficult, for example, to find a better use for $250,000
than the mass research on the Tai Ping Rebellion concerning which
Professor Rowe testified. We urge foundation trustees, who alone
can prevent such waste, to scrutinize carefully the proposed end-
objective of any suggested research project involving possible waste of
manpower and public funds. We suggest to them, further, that
foundation money is precious ; that the capacity to distribute it is not
a right but a privilege, a privilege granted by the people — that, there-
fore, waste should be avoided even more strictly than in the use of
one's personal funds.
Defining Foundations.
In order that statistical material of great value may be produced
by the Bureau of Internal Revenue, and so that special rules might be
applied to foundations (and "clearing house" organizations) as dis-
tinguished from the miscellany of organizations included within the
scope of Section 101 (6) (now 501 (c) (3)) of the Code, we suggest that
the Committee on Ways and Means consider a division of that section
into two parts.
Internal Revenue Service Manpower.
It is the opinion of this Committee that, although complete observa-
tion of foundation activity by the Internal Revenue Service is im-
possible, the subject is of sufficient social importance to warrant an
214 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
increase in the manpower of the pertinent department of the Bureau
to enable it more closely to watch foundation activity.
Full Public Access to Form 990A.
We consider it an absurdity that the public does not have open
access to the full reports filed by the foundations and known as Form
990A. Why any part of the activity or operation of a foundation >
a public body, should not be open to the public eye, we cannot
understand.
A "Rule Against Perpetuities"
Many have urged that a "rule against perpetuities" be applied to
foundations in the form of an aggregate limit on life of, say, from ten
to twenty-five years. We strongly support this proposal. It should
be applied primarily to foundations and other non-institutional
organizations whose sole or chief function is distributing grants. Some
operating research organizations might, possibly, be exempted from
the rule and classed with institutional organizations such as colleges,
universities, hospitals, churches, etc. And careful study may disclose
other types of foundations which might be excluded from the proposed
limitation on length of existence. It would not be easy to define
these classes or to draw the lines of demarcation ; but the difficulty of
delineation should not prevent the undertaking.
Measures to forestall evasion would have to be considered. For
example, a foundation, shortly before its duration-expiration, might
pass its assets to another foundation created for the purpose or having
similar objectives and management. There are other problems re-
quiring difficult study. But it seems wise to proscribe perpetual
foundations of the general class. This would minimize the use of the
mechanism to enable a family to continue control of enterprises ad
infinitum; avoid the calcification which sometimes sets in on founda-
tions; and, among other desirable objectives, minimize the seriousness
of the danger that a foundation might, in some future period, pass into
the control of persons whose objectives differed materially from those
which the creator of the foundation intended.
Accumulations.
Foundations may not accumulate income "unreasonably." The
pertinent provision of the tax law is analogous to Section 102 applying
to ordinary corporations, and has a sound principle behind it. Yet it
seems to us to sometimes work out unhappily. Foundations should
not be overly-pressed to distribute their income, lest they do so
casually or recklessly. We suggest, therefore, that this rule be
changed so that:
1 . a foundation be given a period of two or three years within
which to distribute each year's income, but that
2. within thatjperiod, all of that year's income be paid out.
If a "rule against perpetuities" were applied, our suggestion might be
that a foundation be given an even longer period of income accumu-
lation.
Capital Gains.
With the objective of preventing any accumulations (beyond the
limits discussed above), we suggest that capital gains be treated as
income. That is, all capital gains realized should be subjected to the
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 215
same rule as to accumulations, as though they were ordinary income.
Whether or not capital losses should be allowed as an offset for the
purpose of treating accumulations is debatable.
Restrictions on Corporation-Created Foundations.
We have suggested that such foundations require the thorough
study which we have not been able to give them. We are not in a
position to make final recommendations. We do suggest that, while
such foundations seem entirely desirable, they should be subjected to
some restrictions which would prevent them from aggregating enor-
mous capital funds with which they could (1) exercise powerful control
of enterprises through investment and (2) come to have a very strong
impact upon our society. One method might be to treat all donations
to such foundations as income for the purpose of compelling dis-
tributions and proscribing accumulations. That is, whatever rule is
applied, directed at the improper accumulation of income, should be
applied to a corporation's annual donations as though these were
income to the foundation.
National Incorporation.
It has been suggested that foundations be either compelled or per-
mitted to incorporate under Federal law. We adopt neither sugges-
tion. This Committee does not advocate any unnecessary extension
of Federal jurisdiction. Federal incorporation would have the advan-
tage of permitting regulations to be enacted on a broader base than the
tax law. But we feel that the further centralization of government
function would be an unhappy invasion of states rights.
Retroactive Loss of Exemptions.
This Committee has pointed out that, upon violation by a tax-
exempt organization of the rules of the tax law relating to subversion
and political activity, the only penalty is the future loss of income tax
exemption (and the corresponding right of future donors to take tax
deductions for gifts or bequests) . We urgen tly recommend that means
be studied by which the initial gift tax and/or estate tax exemption,
granted upon the creation of the organization, may be withdrawn and
the tax due collected to the extent of the remaining assets of the organi-
zation. It impresses us as absurd that, having been guilty, for ex-
ample, of subversive activity, a foundation whose funds were permitted
to be set aside because of tax exemption, can go right on expending its
capital for further subversion.
Removal of Trustees.
A sensible alternative to the imposition of the retroactive penalty
described above, would be the immediate removal of the trustees or
directors. This is primarily a matter of state law, and the Federal
government could not force such removal. It could, however, we be-
lieve, provide that the retroactive penalty be assessed unless all the
trustees or directors forthwith resign and arrangements are made for
the election of directors appointed by a court or an agency of the state
of incorporation or of the situs of the trust.
Public Directors.
The suggestion has been made that each foundation should be
required to have, upon its board, or as one of its trustees, a member
selected by a government agency, perhaps the state government.
216 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The purpose of the suggestion is that the public would thus hare a
direct representative who could watch the operations of the foundation
and take whatever action he might deem necessary if he found a viola-
tion of good practice or of law. The suggestion may have merit;
it may be well worth the consideration of the Committee on Ways and
Means.
Revolving Directorates.
Directed against the calcification which may set in upon a founda-
tion, the suggestion has been made that a director or trustee be per-
mitted to sit upon a board for only a reasonably limited number of
years, after which he would be ineligible for reelection. This suggestion
also seems to have considerable merit, and may be worth the attention
of Ways and Means.
Selection of Working Trustees.
We urge most strongly upon those who control the great foundations,
in particular, that they fill their boards with men who are willing to
take the time to do a full job of trust administration. This is meant
as no personal criticism of those many estimable men who sit upon
foundations boards. We have gone into this matter elsewhere in this
report. The president of a great corporation cannot possibly give to
the management of a foundation the time which should be required.
Many of the weaknesses of foundation management might be avoided
if the trustees were selected from among men able and willing to give
a large amount of time to their work.
Belief for the Alert Citizen.
As it is obvious that the Internal Revenue Service cannot, except
at prohibitive cost, follow the activities of the individual foundations
to ascertain whether violations of law exist, this Committee believes
that some additional method should be established to protect the
people against a misuse of the public funds which foundation money
represeDts. An interesting suggestion has been made, which deserves
careful study, that legal procedure should be available in the Federal
courts under which a citizen could bring a proceeding to compel the
Attorney General to take action against a foundation upon a showing,
to the satisfaction of a Federal judge, that a prima facie or probable
cause exists.
Prohibited Abuses.
The Internal Revenue Code specially taxes "unrelated income" and
proscribes certain transactions and uses of foundations. Among
them are the unreasonable accumulation of income and certain pro-
hibited transactions between the foundation and its creator or other
closely associated persons and corporations. Within the limitations
of time and funds faced by this Committee it did not feel warranted
to enter this area of research which is, in any event, peculiarly the
province of the Committee of Ways and Means. Doubtless certain
defects in the existing law covering these areas need attention, but
these must be left to consideration by the controlling Committee.
Foundations Used to Control Enterprises.
One subject which does need careful consideration by the Congress
is the use now so frequently made of foundations to control businesses.
In an early section of this report we alluded to the extent to which
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 217
foundations are being currently created in order to solve estate and
business planning problems. We mentioned also the possibility that
so great a percentage of enterprises may, someday, come into the
hands of foundations that this very factor in itself may oblige legisla-
tive relief. We believe the Congress and the public should be sharply
aware of this factor of enterprise-control through foundations; it haa
already had some effect on our economy.
There is nothing now in the law prohibiting such control. A donor
or testator can transfer the controlling stock of an enterprise to a
foundation and it may hold it in perpetuity, its self-perpetuating
directors or trustees voting the stock as they please. It is conceivable
that certain situations of a special character might be attacked by
the Internal Revenue Service. For example, if the continued hold-
ing of one stock by a foundation seemed to prevent it from using
its funds to the best advantage in relation to its dedicated purposes,
it is possible that a court might cut off its tax exemption. But such
instances would have to be extreme and irrefutably clear to promise
relief. In the ordinary case, nothing will interfere with the continued
holding. By the same token, foundations holding only a minority
percentage of the voting stock of a corporation can act in consort
with other stockholders, perhaps of one family, to become part of a
controlling group ; there is nothing in the law to prevent this either.
To prevent a foundation from receiving any substantial part of the
securities of an industrial enterprise would extremely limit the use of
the foundation mechanism for the solution of the problem of how to
meet the heavy death charges in estates whose assets consist chiefly
of securities in a closely held enterprise. On the other hand, the
retention of a substantial holding in any enterprise may, in the long
run, operate against the general public interest. We are 7 not absolute
in our conclusion, but suggest to the Committee on Ways and Means
that it consider the advisability of denying the tax exemption to
any foundation which holds more than five or ten per cent of its
capital in the securities of one enterprise — and, in the case of an
initial receipt of such securities, it might be well to give the foundation
a period of two to five years within which to bring its holdings down
to the prescribed maximum level.
Area Exclusions and Restrictions.
We qualifiedly support the theory of the foundations that their
capital and income is often wisely used in "experimenting" in areas
which the government or other private philanthropic organizations
do not enter— we support this theory, however, only as to such areas
where there is no grave risk to our body politic and to our form of
society. With this limitation, the theory of "risk capital" seems sound
and its observation accounts for many of the great boons to society
for which foundations have been responsible, particularly in medicine
and public health.
The question comes — should foundations be excluded from any
special fields, such as the social sciences? Some ask that they be
restricted to certain limited fields, such as religion, medicine, public
health and the physical sciences. We do not support this theory.
We believe they should be prohibited from using their funds for "sub-
versive" purposes and from all political use, and we shall discuss this
further. Beyond that, we believe that foundations should have full
freedom of selection of areas of operation.
55647 — 54 — —15
218 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
In giving them this freedom, there is a great risk of waste. This
risk must be taken at the alternative cost of such hampering of opera-
tions through controls as to make foundation independence a virtual
fiction. But we urge again that foundation trustees exercise great
care in avoiding waste.
Type Exclusions,
Suggestions have also been made that foundations be restricted in
various ways as to type of operation. These suggestions are of all
sorts, some of them conflicting:
That they should not be permitted to act as operating units;
That they should only be permitted to operate, and should
not be permitted merely to make grants;
That they should not be permitted to create subsidiaries, affili-
ates or progeny foundations or operating units;
That they be permitted to make grants only to existing oper-
ating units of certain types, such as colleges, universities, hos-
pitals, churches, etc.
That they be denied the right, in the social sciences, to attach
any condition to a grant, as to detail of operation, personnel, etc. ;
That they be excluded from grants to other foundations,
including "intermediary" organizations;
and many others.
If any of these and similar suggestions are to be considered, we
recommend that this be done only after a truly complete investigation
has been had; and then only, after the most careful study. It is
the general position of this Committee that no restraints should be
put upon the operation of foundations which do not seem inevitably
necessary for the protection of our society.
Protection Against Interlock.
Many detailed suggestions have been made to prevent the growth
and even the continuance of the concentration of power to which we
have given considerable attention. These suggestions, for the most
part, should also await the completed study and should be approached
with great care. Some of the intermediary organizations should per-
haps be continued, to go on with whatever valuable and safe activities
they now pursue; but efforts should be made to induce or prevent
them from acting in any coercive role, whether by intention or by
the very nature of the structure of the foundation world.
Some few suggestions are, however, worthy of immediate consider-
ation. One is that no trustee, director or officer of any foundation or
intermediary organization be permitted to act as a trustee, director or
officer of another, except where members of constituent societies may
be associated with a parent body.
Another is that the fullest democracy be imposed on the election
of members of such associations of societies and similar organizations
to prevent the self-perpetuance which exists, for example, in the
Social Science Research Council.
For the moment, we believe that the problem of "power" urgently
demands the attention of foundation trustees. In order to escape
an eventual substantial curtailment of foundation independence, trus-
tees will have to understand how powerful their organizations are
and how much care must be exercised so that no abuse of this power
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 219,
occurs. They must also understand the terrific social impact which
a concentration of foundation power entails and avoid, like the plague,
operations or associations which tend to coerce, or even carry the
propensity for coercing or in any way effecting, social controls, com-
pulsions toward uniformity or any form of pressure on society or on
those who are or are to become its intellectual leaders.
Greater Use of Colleges and Universities.
Among other approaches to the solution of the problems raised by
a concentration of power, this Committee urges trustees of foundations
more frequently to use colleges and universities as media for research
operations, suggesting further that grants to such institutions be made
as free as possible of conditions and limitations.
The Excess of Empiricism.
This Committee is entirely convinced by the evidence that the
foundations have been "sold" by some social scientists and employee-
executives on the proposition that empirical and mass research in the
social sciences is far more important than theoretical and individual
research, and should be supported with overwhelming preponderance.
We are conscious of the fact that Congress should not attempt to
exert any control over the selection of methods of research or the
relative distribution of foundation funds over various types. Never-
theless, this Committee suggests that foundation trustees consider
carefully and objectively our conclusion, from the evidence, that an
Overindulgence in empiricism has had results deleterious to our society,
particularly in subordinating basic and fundamental principles,
religious, ethical, moral and legal. In such consideration, we also
suggest, as we have previously in this report, that they consult not
alone with their professional employees who are the advocates of
overwhelming empiricism but also with those scholars and students
who are critical of the preponderance.
Political Use and Propaganda.
It is the opinion of this Committee that the wording of the tax law
regarding the prohibition of political activity of foundations should be
carefully re-examined. We recognize that it is extremely difficult to
draw the line between what should be permissible and what should not.
Nevertheless, the present rule, as interpreted by the courts, permits
far too much license. While further study may be indicated, we are
inclined to support the suggestion that the limiting conditions of the
present statute be dropped — those which restrict to the prohibition of
political activity "to influence legislation" and those which condemn
only if a "substantial" part of the foundation's funds are so used.
These restrictions make the entire prohibition meaningless. We
advocate the complete exclusion of political activity, leaving it to the
courts to apply the maxim of de minimis non curat lex. Carefully
devised exceptions to this general prohibition against political activity
might be made in the case of certain special types of organizations,
such as bar associations.
Whatever the difficulties which foundations may face in determining
when a proposed activity may have political implications, we cannot
see any reason why public funds should be used when any political
impact may result.
220 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Lobbying.
An astonishing number of tax-exempt foundations are registered
as lobbyists in Washington. Under the present law, it seems clear
that lobbying in itself is not held to be political activity of a type
which might deprive a foundation of its tax exemption. Moreover,
registration may, in many instances, take place to protect the
foundation against a technical violation of the law requiring registra-
tion, when the only activity approaching true lobbying may consist
of merely keeping an eye on developing legislation in some special
field of interest. Nevertheless, there is evidence to indicate that
much true lobbying goes on. The whole area needs investigation.
Whether tax-exempt organizations should have the privilege of
lobbying is at least extremely doubtful. l
Subversion.
The prohibition against the use of foundation funds to support
subversion also needs wholesale revision. As the law stands it is
only the support of Communism and Fascism which is prohibited.
It may be that the adequate revision of the law regarding political
use would suffice, but it is clear to us that all support of socialism,
collectivism or any other form of society or government which is at
variance with the basic principles of ours should be proscribed.
This subject, too, requires considerable study. We well understand
that some research clearly not intended to have any political implica-
tion may, nevertheless, incidentally impinge on the political. We
also understand that the effect may relate to what is merely one facet
of an aggregate of collectivist thought. Yet we feel that the whole
field of the social sciences is of such a nature that "risk" is not desir-
able. As much as we support taking "risks" in the physical sciences,
in medicine and public health and other areas, it is clear to us that
risks taken with our governmental, juridical or social system are
undesirable. If there is a burden placed on the foundations through
the difficulty of drawing a line between what is in the broad sense
"subversive" or "political" and what is not, it is better that the
foundations suffer this burden than that they take risks with our
happiness and safety.
Foreign Use of Foundation Funds.
In this area this Committee has not been able to do sufficient
study to come to a final evaluation. However, we offer this sugges-
tion tentatively and subject to further investigation of the extent
and significance of foreign grants and grants for foreign use— that such
grants be limited to ten per cent of the annual income of ths founda-
tion or, if it is disbursing principal, ten per cent, in the aggregate,
of its principal fund. An exception should be made in the case of
religious organizations, such as foreign missions, and perhaps in some
other instances of peculiar and historic nature.
Further Areas of Investigation.
We have limited ourselves in the scope of our inquiry, in order not
to scatter over the entire, gigantic field. We urge, however, that the
proposed continued inquiry cover those sections which we have per-
force omitted. Among them is that of organizations which have
religious names, or some connection with religion or a religious group,
which have engaged in political activity. There is evidence that such
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 221
groups exist in all three major sects. The right of a minister, priest
or rabbi to engage in political activity is clear enough. When such
activity takes place, however, under the shelter of a tax-exempt
organization which is not in itself a church, we question its per-
missibility.
There are some special types of tax-exempt organizations which
seem to us seriously to need investigation. Among them are the
cooperative organizations, some of which seem to engage in political
activity and even to promote a form of collectivism. Some labor and
union organizations also might be studied to see if they have not
crossed the border from privilege to license in matters political.
Among unions, for example, there is the basic question whether dues
payable by the members should be used for political purposes which
the members have not authorized.
There are some special foundations or similar organizations to
which we have been able to give insufficient attention in some cases
and none in others.' These should all be studied. Among those which
we have not heretofore mentioned (or mentioned only briefly) are
these:
The Public Administration Clearing House;
The National Citizens Commission for Public Schools;
The Advertising Council;
The Great Books Foundation;
The American Heritage Council;
The American Heritage Program of the National Library Associa-
tion;
The American Foundation for Political Education;
The American Friends Service Committee;
The Institute of International Education.
Another special group requiring study is the so-called "accrediting"
organizations. These (apparently tax-exempt) organizations are extra-
governmental, yet thsy act, in effect, as comptrollers of education to a
considerable degree. For various reasons colleges, universities and
specialized schools and departments today require "accreditation",
that is, approval of one or more of these organizations which presume
to set standards. Some of these accrediting organizations are sup-
ported by foundations; through such support, they may well control
them. An incidental factor involved in this accrediting system im-
posed on American education is its often substantial expense to the
institutions themselves. The Committee is informed that some col-
leges are obliged, through this system, to pay as much as $20,000 per
year to enable them to stay in business. The standards set may per-
haps in every instance be beyond criticism, yet the system in itself is
subject to question in so far as it imposes on institutions standards
set by private organizations not responsible to the people or to
government.
As we have been able to devote intensive study only to some of the
major foundations, we suggest that a selected number of the more
important foundations of what might be called the second rank in size
should be examined carefully. A study of these may produce type or
sampling material of great value in considering the over-all founda-
tion problems.
!222 TAX^EXEMFT FOUNEATIONS
We have been unable to do much concerning small foundations and
their problems and difficulties. Some of these involve matters which
should be primarily the concern of the of Internal Revenue Service,
but we have pointed out that its capacity for watching over the foun-
dation field to discover breaches of law and offensive practices is very
limited. A thorough study should, therefore, perhaps solicit from the
public complaints against smaller foundations, as well as large, in
order that studies may disclose what weaknesses exist in the operation
of these smaller organizations.
*♦♦****
While this Committee has spent little time in investigating the
activities of foundations in the natural sciences on the ground that
their performance in this area has been subjected to very little criti-
cism, a continued inquiry might well give attention to this field in
relation to the problem of subversion. There is evidence that some
foundations and foundation-supported scientific enterprises have been
used by Communists, through a special form of infiltration which has
escaped the notice of those in control. Several important scientific
projects seem to have been so employed for Communist purposes.
They have become clearing centers for building up the reputation of
persons of hidden Communist persuasion and subsequently placing
these pseudo-scientists in situations where they are able to engage in
espionage. The process includes using the assistance of scientists who
are fellow-travellers or outright Communists to provide the material
which is then used by the infiltrate to establish his scientific reputation.
This is all done so adroitly that the foundations which support such
projects know nothing of it.
This Committee was fortunate in securing Mr. Rene A. Wormser,
of New York, as general counsel. In addition to his great ability he
brought to the Committee a wealth of training and experience in the
field of our inquiry. The Committee appreciates his devotion to the
task and the superior contribution he has made. The Committee
has relied heavily upon him in assembling and consolidating the
material embodied in this report. He and Mr. Arnold Koch, the
associate counsel, were able to associate themselves with the Com-
mittee only at considerable personal sacrifice.
The Committee has received material assistance from the Internal
Revenue Service which has been at all times cooperative, from the
Government Printing Office, the Library of Congress, and from the
Senate and House committees covering certain aspects of the subject
matter involved.
The Committee also desired to express its appreciation and give
recognition to the able and untiring work of the members of the staff.
The foregoing report is respectfully submitted, this 20th day of
December, 1954, on the affirmative votes of the following members:
B. Carroll Reece, Chairman, Tennessee.
Jesse P. Wolcott, Michigan.
Angier L. Goodwin, Massachusetts.
Casting contrary votes were:
Wayne L. Hays, Ohio.
Gracie Pfost, Idaho.
STATEMENT OF B. CARROLL REECE SUPPLEMENTAL TO
THE MAJORITY REPORT
In view of the decision of the ranking minority member of the
Committee to file a minority report, copies of which will not be made
available to the other members of the Committee until released to
the press, I feel it is desirable to include a brief summation of the
attempts to frustrate the work of the Committee for which the ranking
minority member has been responsible.
It was made clear at the outset that the inquiry was to be an objec-
tive study. In line with this purpose and after consultation by
Counsel with attorneys for some of the foundations, the Committee
decided to inform the foundations in advance of the main lines of
criticism into which inquiry would be made, giving sufficient support-
ing evidence so that they would know what to reply to in their own
testimony This decision was unanimous. It seemed the most fair
approach for the foundations.
In accordance with the unanimously agreed procedure, and also by
unanimous assent, Mr. Dodd, the Director of Research, prepared an
initial report to the Committee which was read into the record at the
first two hearings. This report, representing his tentative personal
observations after initial studies had been made, was intended to indi-
cate the main lines of inquiry. His report stated:
"As this report will hereafter contain many statements which appear to be
conclusive, I emphasize here that each one of them must be understood to have
resulted from studies which were essentially exploratory. In no sense should they
be considered proved. I mention this in order to avoid the necessity of qualifying
each as made."
This statement could not be clearer. On the first day both the
Chairman and Counsel made the purpose of the report utterly clear-
it was "to give the foundations an opportunity to know what most
important matters we want to go into in relation to them." During
the hearings this identification of Mr. Dodd's report was repeated
both by the Chairman and Counsel. Yet the ranking minority
member repeatedly asserted that the majority had arrived at pre-
judged decisions. Newspapers reported him as having said that this
was an "Alice-in- Wonder land" investigation in which a decision had
been made in advance of the trial of a case. The majority submits
that in taking this attitude the ranking minority member intended to
discredit and harass the investigation, and to impugn the good faith
of the majority and of the staff.
From the start, Mr. Hays has assumed an attitude of aggressive
suspicion and insulting distrust of the majority members and the
staff. He has said frequently that he has known in advance what the
majority was going to decide. The shoe is, in fact, on the other foot.
Mr. Hays could not have made clearer, from the beginning of our
work, that he intended to frustrate the investigation to the limit of
his abilities, and to attempt wholly to "whitewash" the foundations.
The lines have not been drawn in this Committee on a political
party basis. The opinions of the majority are not party-line opinions.
They are not "Republican" opinions, any more than the opinions of
the minority are "Democratic" opinions. Many Democrats voted
for the establishment of this Committee, and many Republicans
223
224 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
voted against it. There is no party significance whatsoever in this
Committee's work, which crosses party lines, and I am confident
that our findings will find both supporters and opponents in both
parties.
Sixteen public hearings were held, in the course of which the
patient attempt was made by the Chairman to follow the procedure
unanimously agreed upon in advance : that the main lines of criticism
to be investigated were first to be aired, with sufficient evidence to
show the reasonableness of investigating them, after which the
foundations were to be brought into the hearings to state their
positions.
The last public hearing was held on June 17th. Further public
hearings were discontinued by a resolution passed by the majority
at an executive meeting on July 2, 1954.
The reason for the cessation of hearings was that the attitude and
conduct of the ranking minority member had made it impossible to
conduct orderly hearings. Among the obstructive and harassing acts
of Mr. Hays — all of them during the public sessions— were these:
He interrupted witnesses beyond all reason, attempting to
frighten witnesses and to disorganize both the initial presenta-
tions and orderly interrogation by others. In one session of 185
minutes he interrupted 246 times.
When, after harrowingly frequent interruptions by Mr. Hays,
great numbers of which were on extraneous matters, a rule was
passed by a majority that a witness was to be permitted to
finish his presentation before being questioned, Mr. Hays angrily
remarked that he would pay no attention to any such rule and
would interrupt whenever he pleased; and this he continued
to do.
His interruptions were very frequently intemperate, both in
tone and substance, and in purposeful disregard of parliamentary
procedure and the rules of the House.
He repeatedly, and from the rostrum, villified the staff and ac-
cused it of having prejudged the complaints against the founda-
tions.
He repeatedly, from the rostrum, vilified other members of the
Committee and questioned their good faith. He publicly accused
the Chairman of lying and being a coward; and accused Mr.
Goodwin of duplicity and of cowardice. The following excerpt
from the record of the hearings which I, as Chairman, had deleted
from the printed record in an effort to achieve harmony and to
maintain the dignity of the Committee and the House, is illus-
trative of the violent and abusive remarks of Mr. Hays.
The Chaihman. Now, the gentleman from Ohio, I am sure is not going to
get anybody worked up or irritated here. If he has that in mind he might
just as well subside, because the Chairman for one has made up his mind
that he is not going to let any byplay get him out of temper. That would
impair the usefulness of this committee.
Mr. Hays. Let me say to the Chairman that I took his word and he as-
sured me his word was good, and if the time arose when I felt that we needed
somebody on the minority side that the Chairman would put somebody on.
The Chairman. The conversation was that if the gentleman from Ohio
and his colleague should finally decide to write a minority report, that a
member of the staff would be made available to cooperate with them on
that.
Mr. Hays. No, that was not the pgreement, because I don't want any
member of this staff writing a minority report for me.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 225
The Chairman. I said cooperate.
Mr, Hays. Or to cooperate either.
The Chairman. And assist. That was the conversation. I do not know
what the gentleman had in mind.
Mr. Hays. I will say this to the gentleman, that out where I come from we
have a saying that if a man doublecrosses you once, that is his fault; if he
doublecrosses you twice, that is your fault. I just want you to know you
won't get the second opportunity.
The Chairman. Even that statement is not going to provoke the Chairman,
but there is no living man can justifiably say that this Chairman — that this
man who happens to be Chairman at this time — has ever doublecrossed
anybody or he had failed to keep his word.
Mr. Hays. I am saying both.
The Chairman. That is all right.
Mr. Hays. Is that clear enough? There is no inference there, is there?
The Chairman. That does not disturb me a particle.
Mr Hays. I know. You are pretty hard to disturb. I thought they had
more guts in Tennessee.
The Chairman. You are not going to provoke me. You need not worry,
I have already made up my mind on that.
*******
In an effort to discredit a staff witness, he employed quotations
from papal encyclicals, bringing in by inference a religious issue
where it had no bearing.
He cast aspersions on the character and record of a Catholic
nun, the daughter of Senator McCarran.
He repeatedly vilified and openly insulted witnesses appearing
before the Committee. In a letter dated May 30, 1954 Professor
Kenneth Colgrove noted that Mr. Hays had insulted, villified
and browbeat a witness "in the most brutal fashion." "On thirty
or more occasions" wrote Prof. Colgrove, "Congressman Hays de-
liberately insulted the witness, and on numerous occasions, he in-
ferred that he was a liar. Throughout three days, Congressman Hays
was allowed to interrupt the testimony with irrelevant questions and
to make distracting and insolent remarks. On the second day, even
after Congressman Hays promised to refrain from interruptions (see
page 638), he continued to interrupt and insult the witness without
rebuke from the Chairman. l I doubt whether the entire history of
Congressional investigations will show more unfair or cowardly at-
tack upon a witness than the treatment accorded to Mr. Sargent.
Obviously no self-respecting scholar will care to testify before such a
Committee under such conditions."
Mr. Hays referred in scurrilous terms to witnesses who had
been heard, using such expressions as suggesting that the Com-
mittee should have a psychiatrist present ; referring to witnesses
as "crackpots"; asserting that they had been "dredged up" by
the majority or the staff; asserting that not one single fact had
been adduced by the testimony; etc. Among these witnesses
were professors of repute and eminence. In a letter to the Chair-
man dated June 21, 1954 Professor Hobbs referred to the conduct
of Mr. Hays and said that an atmosphere^ was created "of fear
among competent persons who might otherwise question the omnis-
cience of the directors of those foundations. Witnesses are thereby
warned that no matter how objective their testimony, no matter how
legitimate their questions, their character will be smeared and their
testimony ridiculed. Such threats add substance to an existing
awareness that any pointed questioning of anti-intellectual or
"Note that the'record will show that the Chairman used unlimited patience to try to Induce a reasonable
attitude on the part of Mr. Hays without converting the hearings into an open brawl.
226 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
unscientific activities of these foundations will seriously handicap
or permanently destroy an academic career."
The first witness who might be called a spokesman for the founda-
tions was Mr. Pendleton Herring, President of the Social Science
Research Council. After Mr. Herring had stated what he wished,
and at great length, the Committee's Associate Counsel began cross-
examination, whereupon the ranking minority member of the Com-
mittee immediately made plain that he would not permit sequential,
orderly examination. Starting with an insult to the Associate Counsel,
he indicated by his conduct that he intended to frustrate the cross-
examination of foundation representatives by counsel and to prevent
the eliciting of any material unfavorable to the foundations. The
record of that last hearing on June 17th will show that a final incident
of interference by Mr. Hays with orderly procedure justified the
majority in concluding that no further hope existed of conducting
public hearings properly in view of Mr. Hays' intransigeance and
refusal to obey rules of decency and propriety.
Among the other difficulties for which the ranking minority mem-
ber was responsible was the loss, in the middle of its work, of two of
its ablest investigators, released at the insistence of the ranking mi-
nority member who indicated that he would otherwise oppose any
additional appropriation for the Committee. It was felt advisable to
comply with this demand rather than to risk the abandonment of the
investigation for lack of funds. The loss of the two investigators was
a severe one. Several extremely valuable projects which had been
started by the released investigators were left unfinished, and the re-
mainder of the staff could not add the completion of these studies to
their own heavy schedules. It is the belief of the undersigned that
the demand for the release of the two investigators was prompted by
their very evident ability and information.
One more comment upon the termination of the hearings. Some
of the foundation statements filed with the Committee have been
more than intemperate in castigating this Committee for ending the
hearings. The Ford Foundation, for example, said:
"We therefore regard the decision of the Committee to discontinue public
hearings and to limit the foundations' defense to written statements or closed
sessions as a puzzling and unexpected act of injustice."
The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace was even more
belligerent. It commenced its statement with an introductory para-
graph which is an affront to a committee of the Congress of the
United States. Other foundations approached this insolence in their
statements.
What impresses this Committee, in relation to these unwarranted
and intemperate remarks, is the fact that none of these foundations
interposed any objections to the harassments to which this Committee
was subjected in the course of its work. Indeed, some foundations
very obviously worked closely with the ranking minority member of
the Committee in his attempts to frustrate, the investigation.
B. Carroll Reece.
(Mr. Goodwin's added remarks were not received in time to be in-
cluded in this printing of the report, but will -be included when the
report is reprinted.)
APPENDIX TO THE REPORT
Throughout the text of this report the names of certain individuals
or organizations appear in a distinctive kind of type. This was in
order to identify them immediately as having been cited by the
Attorney General of the United States, or by various governmental
agencies for associations and affiliations of a questionable character.
All the material contained in this Appendix is taken from the
public records, files and publications of the House Committee on
Un-American Activities, and is arranged alphabetically in this Appen-
dix for ready reference. In some cases the records are in narrative
form, and iri others they are in columnar form. The latter identify
particular organizations indicating citation by one of the following:
(1) The Special Committee and/or Committee on Un-American
Activities
(2) The U. S. Attorney General
(3) Other government agencies, state or municipal, etc.
Mortimer J. Adler
It is noted that Ernie Adamson, Counsel, Committee on Un-
American Activities, addressed a letter to Prof. Mortimer J. Adler on
December 14, 1945, requesting a copy of a speech delivered by Pro-
fessor Adler in Cleveland, Ohio, October 29, 1945.
Under date of December 19, 1945, Professor Adler replied:
I do not have a copy of the speech I delivered in Cleveland and elsewhere
because I spoke extemporaneously from manuscript notes. The content of the
lecture, however, was taken from my published book, How to Think About War
and Peace, and the lecture said neither more nor less than that book said.
Briefly, the thesis of my lecture, as of my book, is that world peace depends on
world federal government; that world federal government requires the total
relinquishment and abolishment of the external sovereignty of the United States
as well as that of all other presently existing sovereign nations; that this may seem
a high price to pay for peace, but that it is nevertheless the absolutely minimum
condition, without which we shall have another world war in less than fifteen
years. Since I think that the atomic warfare which impends will be absolutely
destructive of the civilization of the United States, whether we win or lose that
war, I feel that I am justified in strongly recommending action by the American
people to prevent that war — even if it means the loss of our national sovereignty.
Eleanor Copenhaver Anderson (Mrs. Sherwood Anderson)
Organization and affiliation Source
Coordinating Committee to Lift Booklet, "These Americans Say:"
the Embargo (1). Named as a p. 10.
"Representative Individual" in
favor of lifting the Spanish em-
bargo.
Consumers National Federation Pamphlet, "The People vs. H.
(1). Sponsor. C. L.," Dec. 11-12, 1937, p. 2.
Conference on Constitutional Lib- Program leaflet, "Call to a Con-
erties in America (1) (2). Spon- ference on Constitutional Lib-
sor. erties in America, June 7,
1940," p. 4.
Conference on Pan American De- Letterhead, Nov. 16, 1938.
mocracy (1) (2). Sponsor.
227
228
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mrs. Sherwood Anderson
Organization and affiliation
Action Committee to Free Spain
Now (2). Signer of statement
protesting the "delay in break-
ing diplomatic relations with
Franco Spain."
American Committee for Democ-
racy and Intellectual Freedom
(1). Sponsor of Citizens Rally,
Carnegie Hall, New York City,
April 13, 1940.
League of Women Shoppers (1).
Sponsor.
New Jersey League of Women
Shoppers. Sponsor.
National Council of American-
Soviet Friendship (1) (2). Spon-
sor and member of its Commit-
tee of Women.
Source
Daily Worker, June 17, 1946, p. 2.
Leaflet, "Citizens Rally * * *."
Letterhead, Apr. 19, 1940.
Letterhead, July 7, 1941.
"Call to a Conference on Women
of the U. S. A. and the U. S. S. R.
in the Post-War World," Nov.
18, 1944, New York City;
and, letterhead of the NCASF,
Committee of Women, Mar. 1,
1948.
Undated leaflet issued by the
Voice of Freedom Committee.
Save the Voice of Freedom Com-
mittee ]Voice of Freedom Com-
mittee (2)]. A tea under spon-
sorship of the organization given
in her home.
See Also: Public Hearings, Special Committee on Un-American
Activities, vol. 4, page 2898; and, vol. 17, pages 10304, 10341, 10345-
10348. Public Hearings, Committee on Un-American Activities:
Testimony of Walter S. Steele, July 21, 1947, page 83. Hearings
Regarding Communist Infiltration of the Motion Picture Industry,
October, 1947, pages 536 and 537.
Norman Angbll
Organization and affiliation
American League for Peace and
Democracy (1) (2). Contribu-
tor to "Fight."
"Soviet Russia Today" (1). Con-
tributor.
Source
Fight, July 1938, p. 7; Pamphlet,
"7% Million
* * * >>
p. 40.
Soviet Russia Today, Sept. 1936,
p. 17.
See Also: Public Hearings, Special Committee on Un-American
Activities, vol. 1, pages 617, 687, and 689; vol. 4, page 3074.
Roger N.Baldwin
In Report No. 2 of the Special Committee on Un-American Activi-
ties, dated January 3, 1939, a chapter was devoted to the American
Civil Liberties Union. We find the following excerpt concerning it
which was taken from a report of the United Mine Workers, filed in
1924:
There are 200 organizations in the United States actively engaged in or sympa-
thetic with the Communist revolutionary movement as directed and conducted
by the Communist Party in America. * * * In virtually every instance, these
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 229
organizations have direct contact, through the mechanism of inter-locking direc-
torates, with the central executive committee of the Communist Party of America
or with its "legal" branch, the Workers Party of America. '
Illustrative of this arrangement is the executive committee and the national
committee of the American Civil Liberties Union, at New York, posing as the
champion of free speech and civil liberties, but serving as a forerunner and trail
blazer for the active and insidious activities of the Communists * * * The
managing director is Roger Baldwin who served a term as a draft evader in the
Essex County jail in New Jersey in 1918 and 1919 (Report No. 2, pp. 82 and 83).
In Report No. 2290, the Special Committee to Investigate Com-
munist Activities in the United States stated the following:
The American Civil Liberties Union is closely affiliated with the Communist
movement in the United States, and fully 90 per cent of its efforts are on behalf
of Communists who have come into conflict with the law. * * *
Roger N. Baldwin, its guiding spirit, makes no attempt to hide his friendship
for the Communists and their principles. He was formerly a member of the
I. W. W. and served a term in prison as a draft dodger during the war. This is
the same Roger N. Baldwin that has recently issued a statement "that the next
session of Congress our job is to organize the opposition to the recommendations
of the congressional committee investigating communism." In his testimony
before the committee he admitted having said at a dinner held in Chicago that
"The Fish Committee recommendations will be buried in the Senate." Testi-
fying on force and violence, murder, etc., the following is quoted:
"The Chairman. Does your organization uphold the right of a citizen or alien-
it does not make any difference which — to advocate murder?
"Mr. Baldwin. Yes.
"The Chairman. Or assassination?
"Mr. Baldwin. Yes.
"The Chairman. Does your organization uphold the right of an American
citizen to advocate force and violence for the overthrow of the Government?
"Mr. Baldwin. Certainly; in so far as mere advocacy is concerned.
"The Chairman. Does it uphold the right of an alien in this country to urge
the overthrow and advocate the overthrow of the Government by force and
violence?
"Mr. Baldwin. Precisely on the same basis as any citizen.
"The Chairman. You do uphold the right of an alien to advocate the over-
throw of the Government by force and violence?
"Mr. Baldwin. Sure; certainly. It is the healthiest kind of thing for a coun-
try, of course, to have free speech — unlimited.
"The American Civil Liberties Union has received large sums from the Garland
Fund, of which Roger N. Baldwin is one of the directors." (Report issued January
17, 1931; pp. 56 and 57.)
The American Fund for Public Service (Garland Fund), referred to
in the foregoing quotation, was established in 1922. "It was a major
source for the financing of Communist Party enterprises" (Special
Committee on Un-American Activities, report of March 29, 1944,
pp. 75 and 76).
Roger N. Baldwin was a member of the Executive Committee of
the American Friends of Spanish Democracy, as shown on letterheads
of that organization dated November 18, 1936, and February 21, 1938.
A letterhead of the Russian Reconstruction Farms, Inc., lists the
name of Roger N. Baldwin as a member of the Advisory Board of that
organization (letterhead dated March 20, 1926).
Mr. Baldwin sponsored the Mother Ella Bloor Birthday Banquet
in 1936 (Program, January 24, 1936, pp. 7 and 9); the celebration in
1937 (Daily Worker, June 14, 1937, p. 8); and he sent greetings to
and sponsored the 75th birthday celebration (undated letterhead, and
Souvenir Book, p. 23).
Roger N. Baldwin was a member of the Ail-American Anti-
Imperialist League in 1928, as shown on a letterhead of that group,
dated April 11, 1928.
230 TAX-EXEMPT FOtJiSTDATlONS
Letterheads of the American Committee for Protection of Foreign
Born, dated April 27, 1938, and January, 1940, list Roger Baldwin
as a member of the Advisory Committee of the organization. He
was also one of the sponsors of the Fourth Annual Conference of the
organization held in Washington, D. C, March 2 and 3, 1940 (letter-
head of the Fourth Annual Conference).
An undated letterhead of the New York Tom Mooney Committee
listed Mr. Baldwin as a sponsor of the organization.
Labor Defender, a "Communist magazine," in its issue of July
1931 listed the name of Roger N. Baldwin as a member of. the
Prisoner's Relief Fund of the International Labor Defense; he sent
greetings to the Third Biennial National Conference, as shown on
the printed program of that Conference.
Roger N. Baldwin was one of the sponsors of the North American
Committee to Aid Spanish Democracy (New Masses, September 28,
1937, p. 28).
A pamphlet entitled "Youngville, U. S. A.," lists Roger N. Baldwin
as a member of the National Advisory Committee of the American
Youth Congress (p. 62).
Roger N. Baldwin was a member of the Advisory Board of the
American Student Union, as shown in a pamphlet entitled "Presenting
the American Student Union." He was a speaker at the Fourth
National Convention of that group (The Student Almanac, 1939,
p. 32).
An undated letterhead of Frontier Films lists the name of Roger
Baldwin as a member of the Advisory Board of that group.
Roger Baldwin was a contributor to New Masses, issues of Novem-
ber 16, 1937, and May 13, 1941.
Roger Baldwin was a sponsor of the National Congress for Unem-
ployment and Social Insurance and signed the call to the Congress
("Unemployment Insurance Review," Volume 1, 1935, p. 3; leaflet
"Call to a National Congress for Unemployment * * * ").
In a pamphlet entitled "The People vs. H. C. L.," December 11-12,
1937, p. 2, Roger Baldwin is listed as one of the sponsors of the
Consumers National Federation .
The "Struggle Against War" for June 1933, p. 2, listed Roger
Baldwin as a member of the American Committee for Struggle Against
War; the same publication in the August 1933, issue (p. 2), listed him
as a member of the Arrangements Committee for the United States
Congress Against War, under the auspices of the American Committee
for Struggle Against War; a letterhead of November 1, 1933, of the
United States Congress Against War also named him as a member of
the Arrangements Committee.
Roger Baldwin was a member of the National Executive Committee
of the American League Against War and Fascism (Fight magazine
for April 1934, p. 14; the "Call to the Second U. S. Congress Against
War and Fascism, September 28, 29, and 30., 1934, Chicago, Illinois,"
p. 2; and a letterhead of the organization dated August 22, 1935).
He spoke at a Legislative Conference of the group, as shown in the
Daily Worker (February 27, 1937); and sponsored a joint meeting
of the group with the American Friends of the Chinese People (Daily
Worker, September 24, 1937, p. 6).
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 231
A leaflet entitled "Call to Action, American Congress for Peace and
Democracy, January 6-8, 1939, Washington, D. C." listed the name
of Roger Baldwin as one of those who endorsed the Congress. He was
a member of the National Committee of the American League for
Peace and Democracy (letterhead of July 12, 1939, and a pamphlet
entitled "7% Million Speak for Peace"). He spoke at the United
Anti-Nazi Council of the American League for Peace and Democracy,
as reported in the Daily Worker of May 12, 1938, p. 2.
Mr. Baldwin contributed to the November 1933 and September
1937 issues of Fight magazine, official publication of the American
League Against War and Fascism.
The Daily Worker of September 24, 1940, p. 5, reported that Roger
Baldwin had signed a letter of the Communist Party and the American
Civil Liberties Union, demanding discharge of Communist Party
defendants in Fulton and Livingston counties.
The Worker (Sunday edition of the Daily Worker) dated October 30,
1949, p. 6, named Roger Baldwin as one of those who had "spoken out
against" the verdict handed down against the eleven Communist
The New York Times of October 27, 1949, p. 29, reported that
Roger Baldwin, director of the American Civil Liberties Union since
its inception in 1920, will resign January 1.
After leaving his administrative post with the union, Mr. Baldwin will devote
full time to specialized work in the field of international civil lights.
The article further stated that Mr. Baldwin would act for the
International League for the Rights of Man, "an affiliate of the
union."
It is noted in the "Korean Independence" of August 6, 1947, that
Roger N. Baldwin stated that — ■
Unless American policy undergoes a change in southern Korea, we are probably-
going to deliver another country into the waiting arms of the Soviet Union.
Roger Baldwin's name appeared on a partial list of signers on a
statement in behalf of Refugees Behind the Iron Curtain as shown
in the New York Times of October 20, 1949, p. 25,
The following appeared in the Harvard Class of 1905 Thirtieth
Anniversary Report, June, 1935, p. 7:
Roger Nash Baldwin writes, "I have continued directing the unpopular fight
for the rights of agitation, as Director of the American Civil Liberties Union; on
the side engaging in many efforts to aid working class causes. I have been to
Europe several times, mostly in connection with international radical activities,
chiefly against war, fascism, and imperialism ; and have traveled constantly in
the United States to areas of conflict over workers' rights to strike and organize.
Aside from social and economic issues, I have been active in the fight for the
conservation of birds and animals and forests. My "chief aversion" is the system
of greed, private profit, privilege, and violence which makes up the control of the
world today, and which has brought it to the tragic crisis of unprecedented hunger
and unemployment. I am opposed to the new deal because it strives to strengthen
and prolong production for private profit. At bottom I am for conserving the
full powers of every person on earth by expanding them to their individual limits.
Therefore I am for socialism, disarmament, and ultimately for abolishing the
State itself as an instrument of violence and compulsion. I seek social ownership
of property, the abolition of the propertied class and sole control by those who
produce wealth. Communism is the goal. It all sums up into one single purpose —
the abolition of the system of dog-eat-dog under which we live, and the substitu-
tion by the most effective non-violence possible of a system of cooperative owner-
ship and use of all wealth."
232 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Cited organizations referred to herein: (1) Cited as a Communist
or Communist-front organization by the Committee on Un-American
Activities and/or the Special Committee on Un-American Activities;
(2) Cited by the United States Attorney General.
All-American Anti-Imperialist League (1) and (2)
American Committee for Protection of Foreign Born (1) and (2)
American Committee for Struggle Against War (1)
American Congress for Peace and Democracy (1)
American Friends for Spanish Democracy (1)
American Friends of the Chinese People (1)
American League Against War and Fascism (1) and (2)
American League for Peace and Democracy (1) and (2)
American Student Union (1)
American Youth Congress (1) and (2)
Consumers' National Federation (1)
Frontier Films (i) .
International Labor Defense (1) and (2)
Labor Defender (1)
National Congress for Unemployment and Social Insurance (1)
New Masses (1) and (2)
New York Tom Mooney Committee (1)
North American Committee to Aid Spanish Democracy (1) and (2)
Russian Reconstruction Farms, Inc. (1)
United States Congress Against War (1) and (2)
Ruth Benedict
Shortly after her death, Dr. Ruth Fulton Benedict was eulogized
by Peter Stone in an article written for the Daily Worker on October
13, 1948 (p. 7).
Ruth Benedict was co-author of a pamphlet entitled "The Races
of Mankind" which was the subject of an investigation by the House
Committee on Military Affairs in 1944, due to the fact that some
fifty-five thousand copies were purchased by the War Department for
distribution among students of the Army orientation course.
It is to be noted that the Communist publication, the Daily Worker,
condemned the War Department's ban on the use of the pamphlet;
an article which appeared on the editorial page of the March 8, 1944,
issue of the publication claimed that —
it is difficult to reconcile such an act with the cause for which we are fighting.
(See page 6.)
From the same issue (page 4) , we find that —
The National CIO War Relief Committee will distribute the pamphlet * * * to
members of the House and Senate —
and that—
The CIO Committee began distribution of this pamphlet to members of armed
forces following the USO board's decision, upholding Chester I. Barnard's in-
sistence that the popularly written pamphlet be banned from YMCA-sponsored
USO units.
On February 25, 1938, Miss Benedict made a speech in the Depart-
ment of Agriculture Auditorium, comparing American civilization
with primitive tribes. The following report is taken from "Agricul-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 233
ture Exchange," a Department of Agriculture employee magazine, for
March 3, 1938:
No primitive tribe has gone as far as we. All the people, even be they slaves,
are taken care of. Rich and poor eat of the same food. This is in contrast to
our own society where an employer may Are his employees without assuming any
responsibility for their further welfare or existence * * *. Since no man can
have riches and its attendant power, suicide and murder are practically unknown.
Initiative is not destroyed; it is developed through group tribal incentive toward
bigger projects.
According to a news release of the National Federation for Consti-
tutional Liberties dated December 26, 1941, the name of Ruth
Benedict appears as one of those who signed the release. The
National Federation for * * * has been cited as "one of the viciously
subversive organizations of the Communist Party" (Special Com-
mittee on Un-American Activities in reports of June 25, 1942; March
29, 1944; January 2, 1943); the Attorney General of the United States
cited the group as an organization "by which Communists attempt to
create sympathizers and supporters of their program"; and as sub-
versive and Communist. (Congressional Record, September 24, 1942,
page 7687; and press releases of December 4, 1947 and September 21,
1948; redesignated April 27, 1953.)
"In 1941, the Communists established a school in New York City
which was known as the School for Democracy (now merged with the
Workers School into the Jefferson School of Social Science)." (From
Report 1311 of the Special Committee * * * dated March 29, 1944.)
A brochure of the School for Democracy dated April 6, 1942, named
Miss Benedict as one of the lecturers; the catalogue of the School for
January 1942 named her as Guest Lecturer.
Ruth Benedict was a member of the National Committee of the
American Committee for Democracy and Intellectual Freedom,
according to a letterhead of September 22, 1939; she was named as
a member of the New York Committee of the organization on a
letterhead dated December 1, 1939; she signed an appeal on behalf
of anti-fascist refugees trapped in France, which was sent to Secretary
of State Cordell Hull by the organization, as reported in the Daily
Worker of July 22, 1940 (page 1, column 5) ; she signed an Open Letter
to Nicholas Murray Butler denouncing "pro war" policies, which
letter was sponsored by the organization (Daily Worker, October 7,
1940, page 3).
The American Committee for Democracy and Intellectual Freedom
was cited as a Communist-front organization which defended Com-
munist teachers (reports of June 25, 1942, and March 29, 1944, by
the Special Committee * * *).
A letterhead of the Council for Pan-American Democracy dated
July 11, 1940 named Miss Benedict as one of the members of that
organization's Executive Committee; she signed an Open Letter to
the President of Brazil to save Luiz Carlos Prestes, a Brazilian Com-
munist leader, which letter was sponsored by the Council for Pan-
American Democracy (New Masses, December 3, 1940, page 28).
The Council for Pan-American Democracy (known also as the Con-
ference on Pan-American Democracy) was cited by the Special Com--
mittee as a Communist-front organization which defended Luiz
Carlos Prestes, Brazilian Communist leader and former member of"
55647 — 54 XtS
234 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
the executive committee of the Communist International (report of
March 29, 1944; also cited in report of June 25, 1942); the Attorney
General cited the Council as subversive and Communist (press releases
of June 1 and September 21, 1948; redesignated April 27, 1953).
Ruth Benedict was one of those who signed a telegram to President
Roosevelt and Attorney General Jackson on behalf of the Interna-
tional Fur and Leather Workers Union defendants, sponsored by the
New York Conference for Inalienable Rights (Daily Worker, Sep-
tember 17, 1940, pages 1 and 5). The New York Conference * * *
was cited as a Communist-front organization which called a conference
for February 14, 1941 in New York City "to attack anti-sabotage
legislation and the Rapp-Coudert Committee investigating subversive
activities in the New York public-school system." (Special Com-
mittee * * * in report dated March 29, 1944; the Special Committee
also cited the union referred to above as being strongly entrenched
with Communist leadership.)
A statement by Miss Benedict is included in the pamphlet, "We
Hold These Truths," prepared and published by the League of
American Writers. The Attorney General found that the League of
American Writers was founded in 1935 "under Communist auspices"
and "in 1939 * * * began openly to follow the Communist Party
line as dictated by the foreign policy of the Soviet Union." (Con-
gressional Record, September 24, 1942, pages 7685 and 7686.) The
Special Committee cited the League as a Communist-front organiza-
tion in three reports (January 3, 1940; June 25, 1942; and March 29,
1944).
According to a pamphlet entitled "7% Million * * *," (page 19)
Ruth Benedict was a member of the Commission on Latin America
of the American League for Peace and Democracy, an organization
cited as subversive and Communist by the Attorney General (press
releases of June 1 and September 21, 1948); previously, the organiza-
tion had been cited as "designed to conceal Communist control, in
accordance with the new tactics of the Communist International"
(Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, pages 7683 and 7684).
The Special Committee * * * cited the organization as a Communist
front (reports of January 3, 1939; January 3, 1940; January' 3, 1941;
June 25, 1942; March 29, 1944).
The Daily Worker of August 23, 1948 (page 7), reported that Ruth
Benedict was delegate to the Intellectuals World Congress for Peace;
she was identified as an anthropologist. The World Congress of
Intellectuals was held in Wroclaw, Poland on August 25-28, 1948
and was cited by the Committee on Un-American Activities as
follows:
This bitter hatred for all western culture and the attempt to divorce writers,
scientists, and artists from their own native land and win their allegiance for the
Soviet Union is the underlying aim and theme of these scientific and cultural
conferences for world peace (House Report 1954, April 26, 1950, originally
released April 19, 1949.)
T. A. Bisson
Organization and affiliation Source
American Friends of the Chinese Letterhead, May 16, 1940.
People (1). Member, National
Advisory Board.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
235
Organization and affiliation
American League for Peace and
Democracy (1) and (2). Spon-
sor, "Boycott Japanese Goods
Conference."
American Student Union (1).
Convention speaker; Foreign
Policy Association.
Committee for a Democratic Far
Eastern Policy (2). Consult-
ant, "Far East Spotlight."
Member, Board of Directors;
Consultant.
Consultant
Committee for a Democratic Far
Eastern Policy (2) and Confer-
ence on American Policy in
China and the Far East (2).
Sponsor.
Friends of the Soviet Union (1)
and (2). Contributor, "Soviet
Russia Today".
National Conference on American
Policy in China and the Far
East (2). Co-chairman; for-
mer, Spec, advisor, Gov't. Sec-
tion GHQ, Supreme Command
Allied Powers, Japan.
National Chairman
Source
"Daily Worker," Jan. 11, 1938,
p. 2.
"The Student Almanac— 1939"
for the 4th Annual National
Convention, Dec. 26-30, 1938,
p. 32.
"Far East Spotlight," March
1949 (inside front cover); "Far
East Spotlight," June 1949,
p. 2.
Letterhead, May 28, 1948.
Letterheads, 1946 and 1947.
"Daily Worker," Jan. 16, 1948,
p. 7.
"Soviet Russia Today," Novem-
ber 1938, p. 15.
"Daily Worker," Jan. 1, 1948,
p. 3.
Open Letter for Closer Coopera-
tion with the Soviet Union (1).
Signer; Research Assoc, For-
eign Policy Association,
"Soviet Russia Today" (1) . Con-
tributor.
Author of "Japan in China" re-
viewed by Anna Louise Strong:
"He talked with Mao Tsetung
and other Communist leaders
last summer."
Signed statement* in defense of
Chinese Communist armies
(*Note: this statement imme-
diately preceded formation of
the Committee for a Demo-
cratic Far Eastern Policy).
His books, "Japan's War Econ-
omy" and "American Policy in
the Far East, 1931-41" recom-
mended.
"* * * Jan. 23-25, 1948, New
York City" Conf. Call.
"Soviet Russia Today," Septem-
ber 1939, p. 25.
"Soviet Russia Today," Novem-
ber 1940, p. 14.
"New Masses," June 14, 1938, p.
24.
"Daily Worker," Aug. 17, 1945,
p. 2.
'Spotlight on the Far East," Mar.
1947, p. 7.
236
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Organisation and affiliation
Referred to as having played an
important role in enlightening
the American reading public on
the Far East.
His book, "Prospects for Democ-
racy in Japan" favorably re-
viewed by Philip O. Keeney.
Wrote article of attack on Ameri-
can policy in Japan.
Photo
Record given
Contract as visiting political sci-
ence lecturer at University of
California terminated; was a
witness before the Senate In-
ternal Security Subcommittee
in 1952.
Paul Blan shard
Organization and affiliation
American Student Union (1)
Member of the Sponsoring Com-
mittee of a dinner.
Source
"Daily Worker," Aug. 3, 1945,
p. 11.
"Far East Spotlight," Feb. 1950 r
p. 13.
"Daily Worker," Apr. 5, 1948*,.
p. 8.
"Spotlight on the Far East," Feb,
1948, p. 6.
Congressional Record, March 30,.
1950, pp. 4433-4470.
"Daily People's World," July 8,.
1953, p. 6.
Consumers Union (1). Sponsor:
identified as Commissioner of
Accounts, New York City.
Bruce Bliven
Source
Announcement, "Are You an
Alumnus Without an Alma
Mater?" which appeared in
"The Student Advocate," pub-
lication of the American Stu-
dent Union issue of Feb. 1937,
p. 2.
Undated circular, "New Masses,"
Mar. 2, 1937, p. 28.
Contributions by Bruce Bliven have appeared in the following
issues of "New Masses": January 2, 1934 (p. 22); December 21, 1937
(p. 20); March 15, 1938 (p. 19); April 5, 1938 (p. 21); and April 12,.
1938 (p. 19).
In the report of March 29, 1944, the Special Committee on Un-
American Activities cited "New Masses" as the "nationally circulated
weekly journal of the Communist Party." The magazine was cited
also by the Attorney General of the United States as a "Communist
periodical" (Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, p. 7688).
Bruce Bliven, identified as an Editor of "New Republic" was a
member of the National Advisory Committee of the American Youth
Congress, as shown in the pamphlet, "Youngville, U. S. A.," (p. 62);
his name appeared on a letterhead of the American Youth Congress
(undated) among the members of the National Advisory Board. "The
Student Advocate" for February 1937 (p. 2) listed Bruce Bliven as a
member of the Sponsoring Committee for an "Alumni Homecoming'^
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 237
dinner scheduled for March 21st in New York City, by the American
Student Union.
The American Youth Congress was cited by the Special Committee
on Un-American Activities as "one of the principal fronts of the
Communist Party" and "prominently identified with the White House
picket line * * * under the immediate auspices of the American Peace
Mobilization" (Report of June 25, 1942, p. 16; also cited in Reports
of January 3, 1939, January 3, 1941, and March 29, 1944). The
Attorney General of the United States cited the American Youth Con-
gress as having been formed in 1934 and "controlled by Communists
and manipulated by them to influence the thought of American
youth" (Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, p. 7685); it was
included in the Attorney General's lists of subversive and Communist
organizations furnished the Loyalty Review Board and released to
the press by the U. S. Civil Service Commission, December 4, 1947
and September 21, 1948. The organization was- redesignated by the
Attorney General, April 27, 1953, pursuant to Executive Order No.
10450, and included on the April 1, 1954 consolidated list of organiza-
tions previously designated.
The American Student Union was cited as a Communist front
which was "the result of a united front gathering of young Socialists
and Communists" in 1937. The Young Communist League took
credit for creation of the American Student Union, and the Union
offered free trips to Russia. The Union claims to have led "as many
as 500,000 students out in annual April 22 strikes in the United
States." (Special Committee on Un-American Activities, Report of
January 3, 1939, p. 80; also cited in Reports of January 3, 1940,
June 25, 1942 and March 29, 1944.)
The "Daily Worker" of February 13, 1939 (p. 2) reported that
Bruce Bliven was a member of the Descendants of the American
Revolution; he was listed as a sponsor of the Descendants * * * on
the back page of a pamphlet entitled "Descendants of the American
Revolution."
The Special Committee on Un-American Activities cited the
Descendants of the American Revolution as —
a Communist-front organization set up as a radical imitation of the Daughters
of the American Revolution. The Descendants have uniformly adhered to the
line of the Communist Party. * * * The educational director * * * is one
Howard Selsam, an instructor at the Communist Partv's Workers School in
New York. (Report of June 25, 1942, pp. 18 and 19.)
"New Masses" for January 5, 1937 (p. 31) listed Bruce Bliven as a
member of the General Committee, American Friends of Spanish
Democracy, Medical Bureau. A letterhead of the American Friends
of Spanish Democracy dated February 21, 1938 listed him as a member
of the Committee, and the "Daily Worker" of April 8, 1938 (p. 4)
reported that he signed a petition of the American Friends * * * to
lift the arms embargo. The "Daily Worker" on February 27, 1937
(p. 2) reported that Mr. Bliven was a tag day sponsor of the North
American Committee to Aid Spanish Democracy. He was listed in
the booklet, "These Americans Say:" on p. 8, as one of the repre-
sentative individuals who advocated lifting the embargo on Spain;
the booklet was prepared and published by the Coordinating Com-
mittee to Lift the (Spanish) Embargo.
238 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The American Friends of Spanish Democracy was included in the
following citation made by the Special Committee on Un-American
Activities in the Report of March 29, 1944 (p. 82):
In 1937-38, the Communist Party threw itself wholeheartedly into the campaign
for the support of the Spanish Loyalist cause, recruiting men and organizing
multifarious so-called relief organizations * * * such as * * * American Friends
of Spanish Democracy.
In the same report (pp. 137 and 138), the Special Committee cited
the Coordinating Committee to Lift the (Spanish) Embargo as one of
a number of front organizations set up during the Spanish Civil
War by the Communist Party in the United States and through which
the party carried on a great deal of agitation. The North American
Committee to Aid Spanish Democracy was cited as a Communist
front by the Special Committee (Reports of January 3, 1940 and
March 29, 1944) and as Communist by the Attorney General of the
United States (press release of the U. S. Civil Service Commission,
April 27, 1949). This organization was redesignated by the Attorney
General, April 27, 1953, and included on the April 1, 1954 consolidated
list.
The "Daily Worker" of April 6, 1937 (p. 9) reported that Bruce
Bliven was a member of the Advisory Board of Frontier Films. His
name was carried on an October 3, 1936 letterhead among the members
of the Non-P artisan Committee for the Re-election of Congressman
Vito Marcantonio. A letterhead of March 16, 1937 listed him among
the members of the National Peoples Committee Against Hearst.
Both Frontier Films and the N on-Partisan Committee for the
Re-election of Congressman Vito Marcantonio were cited as Com-
munist fronts in the report of the Special Committee on Un-American
Activities dated March 29, 1944.
In the June 25, 1942 report of the Special Committee on Un-
American Activities, the National Peoples Committee Against Hearst
was cited as a "subsidiary" organization of the American League for
Peace and Democracy. The Special Committee, in its report of
January 3, 1939, cited the American League as "the largest of the
Communist 'front' movements in the United States." The League
was cited also as a Communist front by the Attorney General (Con-
gressional Record, September 24, 1942, pp. 7683 and 7684) and was
later included on the Attorney General's lists of subversive and
Communist organizations furnished the Loyalty Review Board (press
releases of June 1 and September 21, 1948). The organization was
redesignated by the Attorney General, April 27, 1953, pursuant to
Executive Order No. 10450, and included on the April 1, 1954 con-
solidated list.
A letterhead of the Conference on Pan-American Democracy dated
November 16, 1938 listed Bruce Bliven as a sponsor; he signed a Call
of the Conference on Pan-American Democracy, as shown in "News
You Don't Get," November 15, 1938 (p. 3). Mr. Bliven signed a
cable sponsored by the Prestes Defense Committee, as reported in the
"Daily Worker" of February 13, 1937 (p. 2).
The Conference on Pan-American Democracy was cited as sub-
versive and Communist by the Attorney General in lists furnished
the Loyalty Review Board and released to the press by the U. S.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 239
Civil Service Commission, June 1 and September 21, 1948. The
organization was redesignated by the Attorney General, April 27,
1953, pursuant to Executive Order No. 10450. The Special Com-
mittee cited the Conference as a Communist front which defended
Carlos Luiz Prestes, a Brazilian Communist leader and former mem-
ber of the executive committee of the "Communist International"
(Report of March 29, 1944, pp. 161 and 164). The Prestes Defense
Committee was cited as a "Communist organization" by the Special
Committee in the report of March 29, 1944 (p. 112).
In a pamphlet entitled "The People vs. H. C. L." dated December
11-12, 1937 (p. 2), Bruce Bliven was listed as a sponsor of the Con-
sumers National Federation, cited as a Communist front by the
Special Committee in the Report of March 29, 1944.
A statement released by the International Juridical Association
was signed by Bruce Bliven, as reported in the "Daily Worker" of
July 25, 1936 (p. 2).
The Special Committee, in its report of March 29, 1944 (p. 149),
cited the International Juridical Association as a Communist front.
In Report 3123 of the Committee on Un-American Activities dated
September 21, 1950, it was cited as a Communist front which "ac-
tively defended Communists and consistently followed the Communist
Party line."
The "Daily Worker" of March 9, 1938 (p. 5) reported that Bruce
Bliven was a sponsor of a conference of the Book and Magazine
Guild, Local 18, United Office and Professional Workers of America.
In Report 1311 of March 29, 1944 (pp. 18 and 19), the Special Com-
mittee cited the United Office and Professional Workers of America
as one of the CIO unions in which the Committee found Communist
leadership entrenched. The Union was expelled from the CIO on
charges of Communist domination by vote of the Executive Board,
February 15, 1950 (Press Release of the 12th CIO Convention,
November 20-24, 1950).
During testimony before the Committee on Un-American Activities
in public hearings on July 13, 1949, Rabbi Benjamin Schultz stated
that Bruce Bliven was "not a Communist." ("Communist Infiltra-
tion of Minority Groups," p. 437.)
It is noted that a sworn affidavit of Bruce Bliven, member of the
editorial board and managing editor of the "New Republic," is found
on page 3092 of the public hearings of the Special Committee on
Un-American Activities in which Mr. Bliven denied that "New
Republic" was a Communist publication.
Robert Brady
Organization and affiliation Source
American League for Peace and Letterhead of Baltimore Divi-
Democracy (1) (2). Member, sion, ALPD, May 18, 1939;
National Committee (shown as letterhead, ALPD, July 12,
a Professor in California). 1939; and pamphlet, "7% Mil-
lion" page 34.
See Also: Public Hearings, Special Committee on Un-American
Activities, vol. 3, page 1988; vol. 10, page 6278; Appendix V (1941),
pages 1661 and 1680.
240
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Robert A. Brady
Organization and affiliation Source
Harry Bridges Defense Committee Letterhead, Aug. 24, 1939.
(1). Member, Northern Divi-
sion, California Sponsoring
Committee.
"Hollywood Quarterly" [published Hollywood Quarterly, April,
by Hollywood Writers Mobili- 1947, No. 3, Vol. 11, p. 225;
and, Screen Writer, July 1947,
p. 41.
"Soviet Russia Today/' Sept.
1939, p. 25.
zation (2)]. Writer of article
(Professor, Univ. of Calif., Ber-
keley; author of "The Spirit and
Structure of German Fascism").
Open Letter for Closer Coopera-
tion with the Soviet Union (1).
Signer (Prof, of Economics,
Univ. of Calif.).
See Also: House Report No. 2748, Special Committee on Un-
American Activities, Jan. 2, 1943, page 5. Hearings Regarding
Communist Espionage in the United States Government, Committee
on Un-American Activities, July-Sept. 1948, page 626.
Theodore Brameld
Organization and affiliation
Signer of statement defending the
twelve Communist leaders.
Signer of appeal to President
Truman requesting amnesty for
leaders of the Communist Party
convicted under the Smith Act.
Signer of statement in defense of
the appointment of Simon W.
Gerson, a Communist, to the
staff of Stanley Isaacs.
American Committee for Protec-
tion of Foreign Born (1) and (2).
Signer of statement against de-
naturalization.
American League for Peace and
Democracy (1) and (2). Sup-
porter of the Boycott Japanese
Goods Conference.
Committee for Peaceful Alterna-
tives to the Atlantic Pact (1).
Signer of statement calling for
an international agreement to
ban the use of atomic weapons.
Mid-Century Conference for Peace
(1). Sponsor of conference,
May 29 and 30, 1950, Chicago,
111.
Source
"Daily Worker," Feb. 28, 1949,
p.-9.
"Daily Worker," Dec. 10, 1952,
p. 4.
"Daily Worker," Feb. 10, 1938,
p. 1.
"Daily Worker," Aug. 10, 1950,
p. 5.
"Daily Worker," Jan. 11, 1938,
p. 2 and Jan. 25, 1938, p. 2.
Statement attached to press re-
lease of the organization dated
Dec. 14, 1949, p. 12.
Conference Program (reprinted
in report of the Committee on
Un-American Activities, on the
Communist Peace Offensive,
Apr. 1, 1951, pp. 144-146).
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
241
Organization and affiliation
National Council of the Arts, Sci-
ences and Professions (1). Spon-
sor of the Cultural and Scientific
Conference for World Peace,
New York City, Mar. 25-27,
1949.
Sponsor of conference held
Oct. 9-10, 1948.
Source
Conference Program.
Signer of statement.
National Council of the Arts, Sci-
ences and Professions (1).
Signer of "Resolution Against
Atomic Weapons".
Independent Citizens Committee
of the Arts, Sciences and Pro-
fessions (1). Initiating sponsor.
Non-Partisan Committee for the
Re-Election of Congressman
Vito Marcantonio (1) . Member.
Refugee Scholarship and Peace
Campaign (1). Sponsor.
Signer
Leaflet, "To Safeguard These
Rights * * *," published by
the Bureau of Academic Free-
dom of the Council.
Congressional Record, July 14,
1949. p. 9620.
Mimeographed list of signers at-
tached to a letterhead of July
28, 1950.
Letterhead of Minn. Division
dated Sept. 28, 1946.
Letterhead dated Oct. 3, 1936.
Letterhead dated Aug. 3, 1939.
Brief on behalf of John Howard
Lawson and Dalton Trumbo
submitted by Cultural Workers
to the Supreme Court at the
October Term, 1949.
Pearl S. Buck
Pearl S. Buck contributed a review of John Steinbeck's book, "The
Moon is Down," to the March 24, 1942 issue of "New Masses" (p. 23).
"New Masses" was cited by the Special Committee on Un-American
Activities as the —
nationally circulated weekly journal of the Communist Party * * * whose
ownership was vested in the American Fund for Public Service (from Eeport 1311
of the Special Committee dated March 29, 1944; also cited in Reports of January
3, 1939 and June 25, 1942).
It was cited as a "Communist periodical" by the Attorney General of
the United States (Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, p. 7688).
The April 1943 issue of "Soviet Russia Today" (p. 31) listed Pearl
S. Buck as a sponsor of the "Soviet Russia Today" dinner celebrating
the 25th Anniversary of the Red Army, February 22, (1943), Hotel
Commodore, New York City. Jessica Smith, Editor of "Soviet
Russia Today," in a letter addressed "To Valentina Grizodubova,
Chairman of the Soviet Women's Anti-Fascist Committee, and to all
Soviet Women" stated:
So as you hold your meetings throughout the Soviet Union on March Eighth
International Woman's Day, accept these messages as representing the new spirit
that now fills the women of America, * * * ("Soviet Russia Today," March
1942, pp. 10 and 11) —
242 TAX-BTC^MPT FOUNDATIONS
in this connection, the publication published the following message
attributed to Pearl Buck, writer, Nobel Prize Winner 1938:
I send ray personal congratulations to the brave Soviet women, who are an en-
couragement to all women. We look to Russia with fresh hope and new under-
standing. We work together not only for victory in war but for a better world
to come.
It is noted that the west coast organ of the Communist Party, the
"Daily People's World" in the issue of March 9, 1942 (p. 5), pub-
lished the same statement by Mrs. Buck in an article entitled "Mes-
sages of Solidarity From U. S. to Women of the U. S. S. R."
The Special Committee on Un-American Activities, in its Report
of March. 29, 1944, cited "Soviet Russia Today" as a Communist
front; the Committee on Un-American Activities cited it as a "Com-
munist-front publication" in Report 1953 of April 26, 1950, originally
released October 23, 1949 (p. 108).
Pearl Buck was one of the sponsors of the Congress of American-
Soviet Friendship, as shown in "Soviet Russia Today" for December
1942 (p. 42); a letterhead of the Congress dated October 27, 1942,
listed her as a patron of the group. The Congress of American-
Soviet Friendship was cited as a "Communist-front" organization by
the Special Committee * * * in its Report of March 29, 1944 (p. 94).
"New Masses" for April 7, 1942 (p. 25, an advertisement) and the
"Sunday Worker" for March 22, 1942 (p. 8, an advertisement), named
Pearl S. Buck as a speaker at a meeting scheduled for April 8, (1942),
Manhattan Center, (New York City), under the auspices of the
Council on African Affairs. The United States Attorney General
included the Council on African Affairs on lists of subversive and
Communist organizations furnished the Loyalty Review Board and
released to the press by the U. S. Civil Service Commission, Decem-
ber 4, 1947 and September 21, 1948; the Council was redesignated by
the Attorney General pursuant to Executive Order 10450, April 27,
1953.
Mrs. Buck was named as a Representative Individual who advo-
cated lifting the embargo on arms to Spain, in a pamphlet entitled
"These Americans Say:" which was prepared and published by the
Coordinating Committee to Lift the (Spanish) Embargo. The Special
Committee * * *, in its Report of March 29, 1944, cited the Coordi-
nating Committee * * * as one of a number of front organizations,
set up during the Spanish Civil War by the Communist Party in the
United States and through which the party carried on a great deal of
agitation.
Pearl S. Buck was the author of "Talk About Russia With Masha
Scott," recommended by the Washington Cooperative Bookshop, as
shown in "Books on the USSR," a selected bibliography by Bessie
Weissman, issued by the Washington Cooperative Bookshop (p. 20):
The Washington Cooperative Book Shop, under the name The Book Shop
Association, was incorporated in the District of Columbia in 1938. * * * It
maintains a book shop and art gallery at 916 Seventeenth Street, Northwest,
Washington, D. C, where literature is sold and meetings and lectures held.
Evidence of Communist penetration or control is reflected in the following:
Among its stock the establishment has offered prominently for sale books and
literature identified with the Communist Party and certain of its affiliates and
front organizations * * * eertain of the officers and employees of the bookshop,
including its manager and executive secretary, have been in close contact with
local officials of the Communist Party of the District of Columbia (United States
Attorney General, Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, page 7688).
TAX-ffiXEMBT FQIWPtATiONS 243
The Book Shop was included on the Attorney General's lists of sub-
versive and Communist organizations furnished the Loyalty Review-
Board (press releases of December 4, 1947 and September 21, 1948;
redesignated, April 27, 1953, pursuant to Executive Order 10450).
The Special Committee * * *, in the Report of March 29, 1944, cited
the Book Shop as a Communist front.
On January 15, 1951, a letter from Mrs. Buck appeared in the
Washington "Evening Star" (p. A-10), in which she made the state-
ment that "The Communists in China know how heartily I oppose
their creed."
"New Times" was cited by the Committee on Un-American Activi-
ties as an "internationally circulated Communist publication" pub-
lished in Moscow. "Its purpose is obviously to guide the policy of
Communist Parties throughout the world . " Its pred ecessors were the
War. and the Working Classes, World News and Views, and Inprecorr
(Imprecorr). (Report 1920, May 11, 1948, pp. 23, 25, and 43.)
N. Sergeyeva, writing in the "New Times" for August 29, 1951
(pp. 10-12) stated:
"Asia and America" is a subject very much in vogue in the American press.
One of those who are racking their brains over the problem is the well-known
authoress Pearl S. Buck, who has the reputation of being an authority on China.
An article of hers that appeared in the Christian Century of June .27, is typical
of others. In order to acquaint our readers with her line of thought, we shall
reproduce the gist of her article in the form of a dialogue.
The article concluded with the following statement:
We beg the reader to forgive us for having expounded Pearl S. Buck's article
so freely. All the same, her trend of mind is very significant. She cannot help
seeing that American policy is a failure, and she ventures to say so more or less
coherently. She tries, it is true, to avoid drawing the conclusions, but at bottom
her remarks are a damning characterization of imperialist policy in Asia.
A review of Pearl Buck's book, "Kinfolk," published in 1949, is
found in the March 15, 1950 issue of "New Times" (pp. 27-32); ex-
cerpts from the review, written also by N. Sergeyeva, follow:
"Kinfolk," the latest in Pearl Buck's series of novels about modern China, is
a book that merits attention. In it this writer, who is considered an expert on
Chinese life and customs, attempts to deal with political, moral and psychological
problems of considerable interest at the present time. * * *
The daugher of an American missionary, and a missionary herself, Pearl Buck
lived in China for many years. A writer of undoubted ability, she attracted
attention in the thirties by her books about the life of the Chinese people, and
especially of the Chinese peasants. Her prewar novels * * * which were trans-
lated into Russian too, are widely known to the reading public.
However, there was always one big failing in Pearl Buck's books. This was her
attempt to ignore the tremendous political and social changes taking place in
modern China. Mrs. Buck is not a progressive-minded individual. Her literary
ability and gift of observation sometimes get the better of her prepossessions, and
the truth of life prevails over her false political views. And so, alien as she is to
the vanguard section of Chinese society, to the progressive forces of the people,
her books, particularly the earlier ones, were not without social significance.
They revealed the appalling poverty of the Chinese peasant, his want and land
hunger, the ruthless exploitation to which he was subjected, the bestial visage of
militarism. She gave some lifelike portraits of ordinary Chinese folk, very
moving in their beauty and integrity of character. The finest traits of the Chinese
people were embodied in these toilers of the soil, and they stood out the more
saliently against the background of the corrupt and decaying feudal system, the
brigandage of the militarists and the rapacity of the comprador bourgeoisie.
But even in these early writings, Pearl Buck's presentation of Chinese realities
was very one-sided, precisely because she tried to shut out the class struggle and
China's political life from the reader's view. While her books could help the
244 TAX-EXEMPtf FOUNDATIONS
thoughtful reader to understand the causes of the Chinese popular revolution,
this was so against her intention. She did not and would not understand the
essence of the profound processes taking place in the country. She would not
speak of the development of the popular revolution. She would not see the events
that were impending in China. And in. the Chinese people's great waiion .libera-
tion, Pearl Buck was not on their side.
While carefully studying the manners, customs, traditions, and psychology
of the Chinese people, Mrs. Buck completely ignored their political aspirations
and political life. That was her political contribution to the effort of American
big business to subjugate China.
In a China enveloped in the flames of civil war and waging a desperate, heroic
struggle against the foreign imperialists and the Chiang Kai-shek clique — a China
where new forms of social relations were being established under the guidance of
the Communist Party — Pearl Buck's characters lived in a seeming vacuum,
totally unaware of any of these events.
* * * In her political utterances and articles on world affairs, Pearl Buck
looks at China through the spectacles of U. S. aggressive imperialism. Even
today she seems to think that, provided dollars are handed out in sufficient
profusion, the march of history could be reversed and the old way of things
restored in China.
You will look in vain in Pearl Buck's novels for any mention of imperial-
ists. * * *
And in her latest book, written at the height of the people's victorious -libera-
tion movement, Pearl Buck still clings to her false conceptions, and attempts, in
spite of everything, to wall herself off from politics and ignore the changes in
China. By doing such monstrous violence to realities, she courts— and achieves —
utter failure. Her literary ability and craftsmanship are powerless to save her.
Mrs. Buck's new novel sets the seal on her bankruptcy, as artist and as "expert
on China" alike.
On November 28, 1952, the "Daily People's World" (p. 6M)
carried an unsigned review of Miss Buck's "The Hidden Flower,"
which stated:
Miss Buck could have shown her characters putting up a real fight against
prejudice, living happily together and bringing up their babies, as thousands of
mixed couples do, even in the U. S. The assumption is such a happy ending
might have landed her in trouble with the House un-American committee.
Raymond Leslie Btjell.
Organization arid affiliation Source
Coordinating Committee to Lift Booklet, "These Americans
the Embargo (1). His Indi- Say:/' p. 4.
vidual Statement on lifting the
Spanish embargo appears in the
organization's booklet.
World Youth Congress (1). Daily Worker, Mar. 28, 1938,
Sponsor. p. 3.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 245
Kenneth Burke .
Organization and affiliation Source
Committee of Professional Groups Letterhead, dated Sept. 22, 1936;
for Earl Browder and James W. Daily Worker, Sept. 2, 1936.
Ford, Communist candidates for
President and V-President (1).
Member.
Committee for Israel Amter's can- Daily Worker, Oct. 21, 1936.
didacy for President, N. Y. City
Board of Aldermen on Com-
munist party ticket. Member.
John Reed Club Writers School, Testimony, Walter S. Steele,
N. Y. City (1) (3). Lecturer. August 1938, Public Hearings,
Volume I, pp. 560-561.
Proposed national convention of Same. Daily Worker, Jan. 18,
American revolutionary writers, 1935.
to be affiliated with Inter-
national Union of Revolutionary
writers "as was the John Reed.
Club." Signer of Call.
A Call was issued for a Congress of American revolutionary
writers to be held in New York City, May 1, 1935, with the
proposal —
that to this Congress shall be invited all writers who have achieved
some standing in their respective fields; who have clearly indicated
their sympathy to the revolutionary cause; who do not need to be
convinced of the decay of capitalism, of the inevitability of revolution
* * * We believe such a Congress should create the League of American
Writers, affiliated with the International Union of Revolutionary
Writers.
This source named Kenneth Burke as one of those who
"have already responded to this call".
Congress of American Revolu- Daily Worker, Apr. 29, 1935;
tionary Writers (1) (2) (3). Daily Worker, July 7 and 9,
Speaker at First, Second, and 1937; Program Direction, May-
Third Congress; Signer of Call June, 1939; Congressional Rec-
for Third Congress. ord, Sept. 24, 1942, pp. 7685,
7686.
New Masses (1) (2) (3). Con- New Masses, June 15, 1937,
tributor Reviewed Kenneth Oct. 5, 1937, Feb. 8, 1939,
Fearing's "Dead Reckoning." Feb. 21, 1939.
Science and Society (1) (3). Con- Science and Society, vol. VIII
tributing Editor. No. 2.
The Worker Sunday edition of the Issues of the Worker Dec. 21,
Daily Worker (1) (3). Con- 1931, Dec. 21, 1935.
tributor.
The chief journalistic mouthpiece of the Communist Party * * *
founded in response to direct instructions from the Communist Inter-
national in Moscow. * * * No other paper or publication of any kind
in all American history has ever been loaded with such a volume of sub-
versive, seditious, and treasonable utterance as has this organ of the
246 TAX-EXEMt>T FOtH$©ATI01^S
American Communists. Special Committee, Report, March 29, 1944,
pp. 59, 60; Reports, January 3, 1939, p. 30; January 3, 1940, p. 7;
January 3, 1941, p. 14; and June 25, 1942, p. 4.
American Committee for Protec- Printed Program of 5th National
tion of Foreign Born (1) (2) (3). Conference, Atlantic City, N.J. ,
Sponsor. Mar. 29-30, 1941.
Book Union (2) (3). Member of Undated letterhead of Book
Advisory Council. Union, Inc. ; Special Committee
Report, Mar. 29, 1944, p. 96.
Edward C. Carter
A letterhead of the American Russian Institute, dated July 12, 1939,
named Edward C. Carter as a member of the Board of Directors of
that organization; an invitation to dinner issued by the American
Russian Institute for October 19, 1944, and dedicated to American-
Soviet Post-War Relations, named him as one of the sponsors and as
a member of the organization's Board of Directors.
The Attorney General of the United States cited the American
Russian Institute as Communist in letters released to the press April
27, 1949; redesignated pursuant to Executive Order 10450 in Con-
solidated List of April 1, 1954.
A letterhead of the Congress of American-Soviet Friendship, dated
October 27, 1942, contains the name of Edward C. Carter in a list of
patrons of that congress, cited as a Communist-front organization by
the Special Committee on Un-American Activities in Report 1311 of
March 29, 1944.
It was reported in the Daily Worker of March 17, 1938 (p. 2), that
Edward C. Carter spoke at a meeting at Mecca Temple Auditorium
on "The Soviet Union and Present World Affairs." His photograph
appeared in the Daily Worker on November 8, 1941 (p. 5). He was
identified in this source as Chairman of the Board, Russian War
Relief, Inc., and was being presented with a $5,000 check "to purchase
four portable X-ray machines and accessories." The Daily Worker
of June 28, 1945 (p. 4) reported that he had been invited to the }
U. S. S. R. on relief problems.
The New York Times of July 3, 1944 reported that Edward C.
Carter, President, Russian War Relief, was invited to speak at an
annual convention of the International Workers Order, Carnegie Hall,
New York City.
The Internationa! Workers Order has been cited as "one of the most
effective and closely knitted organizations among the Communist-
'front' movements". It has also been cited as "one of the strongest
Communist organizations." (Special Committee on Un-American
Activities in reports of January 3, 1939; January 3, 1940; June 25,
1942; and March 29, 1944; and a report of the Committee on Un-
American Activities dated June 26, 1949, respectively.) The At-
torney General cited the International Workers Order as subversive
and Communist and as "one of the strongest Communist organiza-
tions" (press releases of December 4, 1947 and September 21, 1948;
also included in consolidated list of April 1, 1954; and the Congres-
sional Record of September 24, 1942, p. 7688, respectively).
Edward C. Carter contributed to Soviet Russia Today, as shown
in the May 1938 issue (page 10) ; he was named in the September 1941
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 247
issue (p. 16), as Chairman, Medical Aid to Russia; he issued a state-
ment, published in Soviet Russia Today (September 1941, p. 29),
in support of the U. S. S. R. Soviet Russia Today has been cited as a
Communist-front publication (Special Committee on Un-American
Activities, reports of June 25, 1942 and March 29, 1944; and the
Committee on Un-American Activities, report of October 23, 1949).
Stuart Chase
Stuart Chase signed a letter of the American Friends of Spanish
Democracy to the President as shown in the "Daily Worker" of
February 7, 1938 (p. 4).
"In 1937-38, the Communist Party threw itself wholeheartedly
into the campaign for the support of the Spanish Loyalist cause,
recruiting men and organizing multifarious so-called relief organiza-
tions * * * such as * * * American Friends of Spanish Democracy."
(Special Committee on Un-American Activities, Report, March 29,
1944, p. 82.)
The Communist "Daily Worker" of January 21, 1938 (p. 2) named
Stuart Chase as a member of the Advisory Board of the organization
known as Descendants of the American Revolution; he was listed in
the February 13, 1939 issue of that newspaper (p. 2) as a member
of that organization; and a pamphlet entitled "Descendants of the
American Revolution" named him as one of its sponsors.
The Descendants of the American Revolution has been cited as a
"Communist front organization set up as a radical imitation of the
Daughters of the American Revolution. The Descendants have
uniformly adhered to the line of the Communist Party. * * * The
educational director * * * is one Howard Selsam, an instructor at
the Communist Party's Workers School in New York." (Special
Committee on Un-American Activities, Report No. 2277, dated June
25, 1942, pp. '18 and 19.)
The Russian Reconstruction Farms, Inc., was cited by the Special
Committee on Un-American Activities as "a Communist enterprise
which was directed by Harold Ware, son of the well-known Commu-
nist, Ella Reeve Bloor. It received funds from the Garland Fund."
(Report No. 1311, dated March 29, 1944, p. 76.) On a letterhead of
the Russian Reconstruction Farms, Inc., dated March 20, 1926,
Stuart Chase was listed as treasurer of the group.
He was a sponsor of two organizations which were cited by the
Special Committee on Un-American Activities in its Report No. 1311
of March 29, 1944: The Consumers National Federation (from a
pamphlet entitled, "The People vs. H. C. L.", dated December 11-12,
1937) ; and the Public Use of Arts Committee (as shown on an undated
letterhead of the group).
Stuart Chase was a member of the Reception Committee for the
four Soviet flyers who flew the "Land of Soviets" from Moscow to
New York in 1929; the reception was arranged under the auspices of
the Friends of the Soviet Union (see: pamphlet entitled, "Welcome,
'Land of Soviets' ").
The "Daily Worker" of March 2, 1937 (p. 2) listed Stuart Chase as
a member of the First American Delegation to the U. S. S. R. Stuart
Chase's activities in Moscow as a member of the unofficial American
labor delegation in 1927 are described in articles found in the "Daily
248 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
People's World/' April 3, 1953 (p. 7M) and the March 22, 1953 issue
of "The Worker" (p. 3). The March 8, 1937, issue of the "Daily
Worker" listed Stuart Chase as one of those who signed a "Call" for
the American Delegation to the U. S. S. R., sponsored by the Friends
of the Soviet Union.
Friends of the Soviet Union has been cited as "one of the most open
Communist fronts in the United States" whose purpose "is to propa-
gandize for and defend Russia and its system of government. * * *
(It) is a section of an international movement directed from Moscow."
The Friends admit that they "Penetrate our industrial sections."
(Special Committee on Un-American Activities, reports of January 3,
1939, January 3, 1940, June 25, 1942, and March 29, 1944.) Friends
of the Soviet Union was cited as subversive by the Attorney General
of the United States in letters to the Loyalty Review Board, released
December 4, 1947, June 1, and September 21, 1948. The organization
was redesignated by the Attorney General, April 27, 1953, and in-
cluded on the April 1, 1954 consolidated list of organizations previously
designated pursuant to Executive Order No. 10450.
. During testimony of Benjamin Gitlow, former general secretary of
the Communist Party of the United States, before the Special Com-
mittee on Un-American Activities on September 11, 1939, the following
reference was made to Stuart Chase:
Then the party, upon instructions of the Communist International, started the
work of organizing what was to be known as an impartial delegation of American
trade unionists, who were not Communists, who would visit Soviet Bussia, travel
over the country, investigate conditions, and submit an impartial, unbiased
report to the American people on what were the actual conditions in Soviet
Bussia. And all this preliminary organization work and how to constitute the
committee and how to organize it, was done by the Communist Party in the
United States. And the money involved for expenses, that was first raised through
the furriers' union by havingthem take $500 out of their treasury, which was
later supplied by Moscow, because the traveling expenses and all *>f the expenses
involved in the organization of the delegation was paid by Moscow, and when its
report was printed, the payment for printing the report also came from Moscow.
Following the above statement, the Honorable Joe Starnes requested
Mr. Gitlow to supply names of the members who went on that trip.
The name of Stuart Chase appeared on the list, identified as follows:
Director, Labor Bureau, Inc., and certified public accountant, M.assachusetts
Institute of Technology and Harvard University, author, Tragedy of Waste, etc.
(See: Vol, 7, pp. 4699 and 4700, Public Hearings before the Special Committee
on Un-American Activities.)
The name of Stuart Chase appears in a list of sponsors of a Dinner-
Forum on "Europe Today," arranged under the auspices of the
American Committee to Save Refugees, the Exiled Writers Com-
mittee of the League of American Writers, and the United American
Spanish Aid Committee.
The American Committee to Save Refugees was cited as a Com-
munist front organization by the Special Committee on Un-American
Activities in its report of March 29, 1944.
The League of American Writers was cited as subversive and
Communist by the Attorney General in letters released June 1, 1948,
and September 21, 1948. The organization was redesignated April 27,
1953, and included on the April 1, 1954 consolidated list. The organi-
zation was cited previously by the Attorney General as "founded
under Communist auspices in 1935" (Congressional Record, September
24, 1942, pp. 7685 and 7686). The Special Committee on Un-American
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 249
Activities, in its reports of January 3, 1940, June 25, 1942 and March
29, 1944 cited the League of American Writers as a Communist front
organization.
The United American Spanish Aid Committee was cited as Com-
munist by the Attorney General in a letter released July 25, 1949.
The organization was redesignated April 27, 1953, and included on the
April 1, 1954 consolidated list. The Special Committee on Un-
American Activities, in its report of March 29, 1944 (pp. 82 and 138),
cited the United American Spanish Aid Committee as a Communist
front organization.
According to an article which appeared in the "Daily Worker" of
February 13, 1937 (p. 2), Stuart Chase was one of those who signed the
cable which was sent to the President of Brazil by the Prestes Defense
Committee, "defending Luiz Carlos Prestes, leading Brazilian Com-
munist and former member of the executive committee of the Com-
munist International." (Cited by the Special Committee on Un-
American Activities in Report 1311 of March 29, 1944, p. 112.)
Mr. Chase was shown in the October 1927 issue of "New Masses"
(p. 3) as Contributing Editor of that publication; in the January 1928
issue (p. 5) he was listed as a contributor.
"Probably no one who is acquainted even superficially with the
New Masses Magazine would deny that it is the weekly publication
of the Communist Party." (Report No. 2277 of Jane 25, 1942, by
the Special Committee on Un-American Activities.) The publication
was cited several times in the Special Committee's report No. 1311
(pages 127, 139, 166, 75). The Attorney General cited the publica-
tion as a "Communist periodical" (Congressional Record, September
24, 1942, p. 7688).
Another Communist magazine to which Stuart Chase contributed
was "The Liberator," cited by the Special Committee on Un-
American Activities in Report No. 2277 of June 25, 1942. (See:
"The Liberator," June 1918, p. 24; July 1922, p. 11; and August
1922, p. 23.)
Stuart Chase was the subject of an article by Ted Tinsley in the
March 14, 1952 issue of the "Daily People's World" (Magazine
Section, p. 2). The following is quoted from that article: "For a
time Stuart Chase was left of center. Now he chases from centerfield
to right, patting his glove and waiting to catch the next theory on the
fly."
Evans Clark
Organization and affiliation Source
Conference on Pan American De- Letterhead, Nov. 16, 1938; testi-
mocracy (1) (2). Sponsor. mony of Walter S. Steele,
public hearings, Committee on
Un-American Activities, July
21, 1947, p. 136.
Consumers National Federation "The People vs. H. C. L." a pam-
(1). Sponsor. phlet, p. 2, Dec. 11-12, 1937.
Russian Soviet Government Bu- "Revolutionary Radicalism,"
reau. Member of Staff. Part 1, Vol. 1, p. 655 (Report
of the Joint Legislative Com-
mittee of the State of New
York Investigating Seditious
* Activities— 1920).
55647—54 17
250 tax-exempt foundations
Henry Steele Commager
Organization and affilation Source
Committee of Welcome for the Daily Worker, Sept. 22, 1948.
"Red" Dean of Canterbury,
Very Reverend Hewlett John-
son, D. D., 1948. Dean John-
son was originally invited to
visit the U. S. by the National
Council of American-Soviet
Friendship, for a country- wide
tour under its auspices. (1) (2)
(3). Member.
Wrote article "Who is Loyal to America" for Harpers, September
1947, which was praised by Samuel Sillen in the Daily Worker of
September 4, 1947, who said:
Mr. Commager * * * writes in sharp warning and protest against the current
"loyalty" agitation in which he sees the reversal of the American heritage. The
article by this influential historian is one of the most important statements to
appear in an American publication this year.
Wrote in New York Times Magazine, Sunday, November 1950,
which was featured in an article in the Daily Worker of November 29,
1950, entitled "Leading Historian Warns: 'We Are Moving Away
From Americanism.' " Following are excerpts:
In the nation's embarking on "imperialistic adventures" and its attack on free-
dom of expression and association we are moving from "Americanism toward un-
Americanism," Henry Steele Commager, prominent Columbia University histo-
rian, declared Sunday in an article in the New York Times Magazine * * ** "Not
only the McCarran Act, but a hundred state and local laws and ordinances testify
to our readiness to penalize dissent and nonconformity," he wrote, erroneously
attributing to the people the actions of the pro-fascist minority. Taking a crack
at the Attorney General's list and the McCarran Act, he said "we are no longer
willing to take our chances with voluntary organizations — those organizations
which from the days of the Mayflower Compact to the present have furnished the
real machinery of our democracy — but require that they be vacuum-cleaned in
advance * * *" He hit out at the persecution of progressive teachers and the
idea that Communists not be allowed to teach by declaring that "we demand that
they conform to a prearranged pattern." Closely connected with this attitude
toward war and peace, he said, is the deeply ingrained tradition of supremacy of
ci vil over military authority. That principle, he suggested, has gone by the boards,
as witness support for MacArthur's "attempt to determine American policy
toward Formosa and — by implication — toward China."
Aaron Copland
Organization and affiliation Source
All Eisler Program, Town Hall, Release dated Feb. 28, 1948.
February 28, 1948. Sponsor.
Aaron Copland signed a petition to the Attorney General
in behalf of Hans Eisler, a Communist, according to the
Daily Worker, December 17, 1947.
Signed a protest against a ban on a Communist speech,
according to Daily Worker, October 23, 1936.
Signed a statement to President Roosevelt, defending the
Communist Party, according to the Daily Worker, March
5, 1941.
American Committee for Democ- Attachment to letterhead of or-
racy and Intellectual Freedom ganization, dated Jan. 17, 1940.
(2) (3). Signer of petition spon- *
sored by organization.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
251
Organization and affiliation
American Committee for Protec-
tion of Foreign Born (1) (2) (3)
"one of the oldest auxiliaries of
Communist Party in the United
States." Sponsor, 5th Nat'l.
Conference, Atlantic City, N. J.,
March 1941.
N. Y. Committee for Protection
of Foreign Born (1) (2) (3).
Sponsor.
United Nations in America Din-
ner, sponsored by American
Committee (1) (2) (3). Sponsor.
American League Against War
and Fascism (1) (2) (3) later
again known as American
League for Peace and Democ-
racy (1) (2) (3). Judge of song
contest under auspices of N. Y.
City Division.
Artists Front to Win the War (2)
(3). Sponsor.
Citizens Committee for Harry
Bridges (1) (2) (3). Committee
member and/or sponsor.
Committee of Professional Groups
for Browder and Ford (1).
Member.
Coordinating Committee to Lift
the Embargo (1) (3). (Set up
during the Spanish Civil War by
the Communist Party.) Listed
as representative Booklet in-
dividual in.
American Music Alliance of
Friends of the Abraham Lincoln
Brigade (1) (3). Entertained
by Copland.
Frontier Films (1) (3). Member
of Advisory Board.
Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Com-
mittee (1) (2) (3). Sponsor of
"The Century of the Common
Man" dinner.
National Committee for Peoples
Rights (formerly known as the
National Committee for the De-
fense of Political Prisoners) (1)
(2) (3) "substantially equivalent
to International Labor Defense,
legal arm of the Communist
PartjV' Member.
Source
Program.
Letterhead, Jan. 2, 1941.
Invitation to dinner, Apr. 17,
1943.
New Masses, Nov. 16, 1937.
Program, Oct. 16, 1942, Daily
Worker, Oct. 7, 1942.
Letterhead, dated Sept. 11, 1941.
Letterhead, dated Sept. 22, 1936,
Daily Worker, Sept. 2, 1936.
"These Americans Say!"
Daily Worker, Mar. 26, 1938.
Daily Worker, Apr. 6, 1937.
Leaflet "News You Don't Get"
dated Nov. 15, 1938. Letter-
head, Oct. 31, 1935.
252
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Organization and affiliation
National Council of American-
Soviet Friendship. Sponsor.
Signer, statement calling for
conference with Soviet
Union, sponsored by NCA-
SF.
Signer of statement in praise
of Henry Wallace's open
letter to Stalin, in May
1948.
Signer, letter to Mayor of
Stalingrad, released by Na-
tional Council.
Musicians Committee of Na-
tional Council. Vice Chair-
man.
American-Soviet Cultural
Conference, November 18,
1945 (1) (2) (3). Speaker.
Rational Council of Arts, Sciences
and Professions (1). Signer,
letter in support of Henry A.
/ Wallace.
Speaker
Cultural and Scientific Conference
for World Peace (1). Sponsor
and speaker.
National Federation for Consti-
tutional Liberties (1) (2) (3).
Signer, appeal by NFCL for
"immediate dismissal of charges
against Sam Adams Darcy,
Communist leader * * *."
Signer, Open Letter to Presi-
dent of U. S., urging recon-
. sideration of order deport-
ing Harry Bridges, spon-
sored by NFCL.
Source
Call to the Congress of American-,
Soviet Friendship, Nov. 6-8,
1943; letter dated Mar. 13,
1946; memorandum issued by
organization Mar. 18, 1946.
Daily Worker, June 21, 1948.
Pamphlet "How to End the Cold
War and Build the Peace,"
issued by National Council.
Soviet Kussia Today, June 1943»
Report to members of NCA-SF
by Director, Mar. 7, 1945.
Testimony, Walter S. Steele,
Public Hearings, July 21, 1947.
Daily Worker, Oct. 19, 1948.
Daily Worker, Feb. 28, 1949.
Conference program, Daily
Worker Feb. 21, 1949, Mar.
13, 1949.
Daily Worker, Dec. 19, 1940.
New Masses Benefit (1) (2) (3).
Entertainer.
Non-Partisan Committee for Re-
Election of Congressman Vito
Marcantonio (1) (3). Member.
Open Letter in Defense of Harry
Bridges (1). Signer.
Pamphlet, published by NFCL,
"600 Prominent Americans Ask
President to Rescind Biddle
Decision"; Letter referred to
fact it is equally essential that
the Attorney General's ill-ad-
vised, arbitrary and unwar-
ranted findings relative to the
Communist Party be re-
scinded."
New Masses, Feb. 1, 1938.
Letterhead, dated Oct. 3, 1936.
Daily Worker, July 19, 1942.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 253
Organisation and affiliation Source
Reichstag Fire Trial Anniversary Advertisement appearing in N. Y.
(1) (3). Signer of Declaration. Times, Dec. 22, 1943.
Scnappes Defense Committee (1) Undated letterhead, and pamph-
(2) (3). Sponsor. let "In the Case of Morris U.
Schappes."
"The First of May". Composed Testimony of Hans Eisler, Sept.
and written By Copeland. 24, 25 and 26, 1947.
The dark epoch of fascism makes it clear to each honest artist that
close cooperation with the -working masses is the only way leading to
creative art. Only in a revolutionary struggle will an artist find his
own individuality. * * * Similar developments can be observed in
America where the recognized composer, Aaron Copeland, has com-
posed a mass song "The First of May". * * * Revolutionary music
is now more powerful than ever. Its political and artistic importance
is growing daily.
In an interview with Eisler appearing in the Evening
Moscow June 27, 1935, he stated:
I am extremely pleased to report a considerable shift to the left
among the American artistic ihtelligensia. I don't think it would be
an exaggeration to state that the best people in the musical world of
America (with very few exceptions) share at present extremely pro-
gressive ideas.
Their names? They are Aaron Copeland, * * *
American Council on Soviet Rela-
tions. Signer, Statement to the
President of the U. S. urging
declaration of war on Finland.
Geobge S. Counts
George S. Counts was a sponsor of the National Congress for
Unemployment and Social Insurance, as shown on a list of members
of the New York City Sponsoring Committee dated December 1.2,
1934. The National Congress for Unemployment and Social Insur-
ance held January 5-7, 1935, in Washington, D. C, and headed by
Herbert Benjamin, a leading Communist, was cited as a Communist
front by the Special Committee on Un-American Activities in Report
1311 of March 29, 1944 (pp. 94 and 116).
A letterhead of the American League Against War and Fascism
dated August 22, 1935, listed George S. Counts as a member of the
National Executive Committee. The same information was shown
in the "Daily Worker" of August 17, 1934, and on the "Call to the
Second U. S. Congress Against War and Fascism, September 28, 29,
and 30, 1934, Chicago, Illinois" (p. 2). The U. S. Attorney General
cited the American League Against War and Fascism as subversive
and Communist in letters furnished the Loyalty Review Board and
released to the press by the U. S. Civil Service Commission, December
4, 1947, and September 21, 1948; it had been cited, previously, by the
Attorney General as a Communist front (Congressional Record,
September 24, 1942, p. 7683). The Special Committee on Un-
American Acitivities cited the American League Against War and
Fascism as "organized at the First United States Congress Against
War which was held in New York City, September 29 to October 1,
1933. Four years later at Pittsburgh, November 26-28, 1937, the
name of the organization was changed to the American League for
254 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATION'S
Peace and Democracy. * * * It remained as completely under the
control of Communists when the name was changed as it had been
before." (Keport 1311, March 29, 1944, p. 53; also cited in Reports,
January 3, 1939; January 3, 1940; and June 25, 1942.)
George S. Counts was a member of the National Committee for the
Defense of Political Prisoners (letterhead, October 31, 1935) and a
member of the National Committee for People's Rights (letterhead,
July 13, 1938; "News You Don't Get," November 15, 1938).
The National Committee for the Defense of Political Prisoners,
"substantially equivalent to International Labor Defense, legal arm
of the Communist Party," changed its name "in January 1938 to
National Committee for People's Rights * * * no substantial change
was made in its set-up or functions." (U. S. Attorney General,
Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, p. 7686.) The National
Committee for theDefense of Political Prisoners was cited as subversive
and Communist by the Attorney General in lists furnished the Loyalty
Review Board (press releases of December 4, 1947 and September 21,
1948). Both the National Committee for the Defense * * * and
the National Committee for People's Rights were cited as Communist
fronts by the Special Committee on Un-American Activities in Re-
ports of June 25, 1942 (pp. 20) and March 29, 1944 (p. 48 and 182).
The National Committee for People's Rights was cited by the Com-
mittee on Un-American Activities as being among a "maze of organi-
zations" which were "spawned for the alleged purpose of defending
civil liberties in general but actually intended to protect Communist
subversion from any penalties under the law" (Report 1115, September
2, 1947, p. 3).
In a pamphlet entitled "The People vs. H. C. L. ? " of December
11-12, 1937 (p. 2). George Counts was shown as a sponsor of the Con-
sumers National Federation which was cited as a Communist-front
organization by the Special Committee on Un-American Activities
in Report 1311, March 29, 1944 (p. 155).
George S. Counts was one of those who signed a petition of the
American Friends of Spanish Democracy to lift the arms embargo
("Daily Worker," April 8, 1938, p. 4); he was one of the sponsors
of the Conference on Pan American Democracy, as shown on a letter-
head of that organization dated November 16, 1938. He was a
sponsor of a Citizens' Rally held under the auspices of the American
Committee for Democracy and Intellectual Freedom, April 13, 1940
in New York City (leaflet, "Citizens Rally").
The American Friends of Spanish Democracy was cited as a Com-
munist front by the Special Committee on Un-American Activities
in Report 1311 of March 29, 1944.
The Conference on Pan-American Democracy (known also as
Council for Pan American Democracy) has been cited as a Com-
munist front which defended Carlos Luiz Prestes, a Brazilian Com-
munist leader and former member of the executive committee of the
Communist International (Special Committee on Un-American
Activities in Report 2277, June 25, 1942 and Report 1311, March 29,
1944). It has also been cited as subversive and Communist by the
U. S. Attorney General (press releases of the U. S. Civil Service Com-
mission dated June 1 and September 21, 1948).
The American Committee for Democracy and Intellectual Freedom
was cited as a Communist front which defended Communist teachers
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 255
(Special Committee on Un-American Activities, Reports of June 25,
1942 and March 29, 1944).
George S. Counts was a member of the Advisory Board of the
.American Committee for Protection of Foreign Born, as shown on
letterheads of the organization dated January 1940 and April 27,
1938 and on the "Call to the Third Annual Conference" of the group.
He was a sponsor of the American Committee for Protection of For-
eign Born, according to a letterhead announcing the fourth Annual
Conference which was held at the Hotel Annapolis, Washington,
D. C, March 2-3, 1940.
The American Committee for Protection of Foreign Born was cited
as "one of the oldest auxiliaries of the Communist Party in the
United States" in Report 1311 of the Special Committee on Un-
American Activities. It had previously been cited by the Special Com-
mittee in Report 2277 of June 25, 1942. The American Committee
* * * has been cited as subversive and Communist by the U. S.
Attorney General in lists furnished the Loyalty Review Board (press
releases of June 1 and September 21, 1948).
A pamphlet entitled "Presenting the American Student Union"
(back cover) shows that George S. Counts was a member of the
Advisory Board of this organization, cited as a Communist front by
the Special Committee * * * in Reports of January 3, 1940; June 25,
1942; and March 29, 1944.
He was a member of the National Committee of the Student Con-
gress Against War, according to a pamphlet issued by the organiza-
tion, "Fight War" (p. 4):
During the Christmas holidays of 1932, the Student Congress Against War was
convened at the University of Chicago. This gathering was held at the direct
instigation of the (Amsterdam) World Congress Against War. The Chicago Con-
gress was completely controlled by the Communists of the National Student
League. * * * The gathering ended its sessions by adopting the program of. the
(Amsterdam) World Congress Against War which, as has been pointed out, called
for "the turning of imperialist war into civil war." For many years, the latter
slogan represented one of the chief objectives of the Communist movement
throughout the world. (Special Committee on Un-American activities, Eeport
1311, March 29, 1944, p. 119.)
George S. Counts was a sponsor of the New York Tom Mooney
Committee, as shown on an undated letterhead of the Committee.
For many years, the Communist Party organized widespread agitation around
the Mooney case, and drew its members and followers into the agitation (Eeport
1311, March 29, 1944, p. 154, Special Committee * * *).
A booklet entitled "These Americans Say:" (p. 8) listed George S.
Counts as a representative individual who advocated lifting the em-
bargo against Spain; the booklet was published by the Coordinating
Committee to Lift the Embargo, cited as one of a number of front
organizations set up during the Spanish Civil War by the Communist
Party (Report 1311 of the Special Committee * * * pp. 137 and 138).
George S. Counts, identified as the editor of "Social Frontier,"
endorsed the Reorganization Plan of Commonwealth College, as shown
in "Fortnightly," August 15, 1937 (p. 3). Commonwealth College at
Mena, Arkansas, was cited as Communist by the U. S. Attorney
General in a list furnished the Loyalty Review Board (press release of
April 27, 1949). The Special Committee * * * cited it as a "Com-
munist enterprise" (Report of March 29, 1944, p. 76 and 167).
256 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATION'S
In Public Hearings before the Special Committee on Un-American
Activities, Mr. Walter S. Steele testified that Dr. George Counts was
one of those who headed the American Russian Institute, New York,
New York (Vol. I, p. 344). The American Russian Institute (New
York) was cited as Communist by the U. S. Attorney General in a list
furnished the Loyalty Review Board (press release of April 27, 1949).
Dr. George S. Counts, identified as Associate Director of the Inter-
national Institute of Teachers College, Columbia University, was the
chief speaker at the first membership mass meeting of the New York
branch of the Friends of the Soviet Union held in New York City,
April 11, 1930, as shown in the "Daily "Worker" of April 8, 1930 (p. 1).
He spoke on "Educational and Social Planning in the Soviet Union."
In the' same article it was reported that "Dr. Counts has just returned
from a 6,000 mile trip through the Soviet Union. He was a member
of the technical staff of the American trade union delegation that
visited the U. S. S. R. in 1927."
The Friends of the Soviet Union, predecessor of the American
Council on Soviet Relations, was cited as Communist by the U, S.
Attorney General in lists furnished the Loyalty Review Board (press
releases of December 4, 1947, June 1, and September 21, 1948). The
Special Committee * * * cited the Friends of the Soviet Union as
"one of the most open Communist fronts in the United States," whose
purpose "is to propagandize for and defend Russia and its system of
government." It "is a section of an international movement directed
from Moscow." The Friends admit "they penetrate our industrial
sections" (Report, January 3, 1939; also cited in Reports, January 3,
1940; June 25, 1942; and March 29, 1944).
In Public Hearings before the Special Committee on Un-American
Activities, September 11, 1939, Benjamin Gitlow, former General
Secretary of the Communist Party of the United States, submitted
the names of the members of the American Trade Union Delegation
to the Soviet Union in 1927. (See reference in- first paragraph of this
page.) Mr. Gitlow gave the following testimony concerning the dele-
gation and listed "George S. Counts, Ph. D., professor of education,
Teachers' College; director of International Institute of Education"
as a member of the Technical and Advisory Staff of the delegation :
Mr. Gitlow. * * * In order to win the trade unions' support of Soviet Russia,
and particularly to mobilize them behind a campaign for recognition of Soviet
Russia, the Communist International instructed the American party to organize
a delegation of trade unionists who would be invited to visit the Soviet Union,
travel, and see for themselves, and draw up a report. The report should be used
for propaganda purposes among trade unionists, and the trade-union leaders,
who would be brought to Moscow, an effort would be made to win them over for
the campaign of recognition in support of the Soviet Union.
$ $ afc 9f: * $ ifc
Then the party, upon instructions of the Communist International, started the
work of organizing what was to be known as an impartial delegation of American
trade unionists, who were not Communists, who would visit Soviet Russia, travel
over the country, investigate conditions, and submit an impartial, unbiased report
to the American people on what were the actual conditions in Soviet Russia.
And all this preliminary organization work and how to constitute the com-
mittee and how to organize it, was done by the Communist Party in the United
States. And the money involved for expenses, that was first raised through the
furriers' union by having them take S500 out of their treasury, which was later
supplied by Moscow, because the traveling expenses and all of the expenses in-
volved in the organization of this delegation was paid by Moscow, and when its.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 257
report was printed, the payment for printing the report 'also came from Moscow.
But Moscow paid about five times what it cost to print the report, and the rest
of the money went into the party treasury.
Well, I can say that the delegation was split into three parts, and in 2 weeks'
time they had to cover thousands of miles. Every place where they stopped they
were met by a reception committee. They were given banquets. They were
taken on sightseeing tours and they had no time to investigate actual conditions.
They had what you call one wild party from the day they landed in Russia to the
day they got out of Russia.
At the same time the technical staff surrounding the delegation, the staff of
economists, so-called, and experts, who were supposed to advise the delegation on
what they were seeing and to explain it to them — these people were all party
people. And these were the people who actually wrote the report and when they
wrote the report, their report first was 0. K.'d by the Communist International
and later on the American Communist Party again went over the report with a
fine comb to see that nothing detrimental to Russia would slip into the report.
* * * (Public Hearings, Volume 7, pp. 4699-4701.)
On August 19, 1949, the Committee on Un-American Activities
issued the "Review of the Scientific and Cultural Conference for
World Peace," in which the conference which was arranged by the
National Council of the Arts, Sciences and Professions was cited as a
"gathering at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New York City on March
25, 26 and 27, 1949," which "was actually a supermobilization of
the inveterate wheelhorses and supporters of the Communist Party
and its auxiliary organizations." The same Review (p. 13) contains
the following reference to Professor Counts:
In an open letter to the Conference signed by Prof. George S. Counts, of Teach-
ers' College, Columbia University, and Sidney Hook, well-known philosopher,
they pointed out the plight of. culture under Soviet system represented by Fadayev
and his associates. We quote the letter in part:
"Over the last three decades the Soviet dictatorship has mercilessly imprisoned,
exiled, or executed distinguished men of letters in that country. These were not
just ordinary individuals of mediocre attainment. They were men of stature
renowned throughout the civilized world to those who know literature and poetry.
"Not one of these men is to be found anywhere in the Soviet Union. They
have disappeared without a trace. Some we know are dead. Some are perhaps
dragging out their last days in a Siberian prison camp."
Addressing themselves to Dr. Harlow Shapley, the Conference chairmen, the
writers asked:
"when the delegates from the Soviet Union appear at your Conference, to
make inquiry of them as to what has happened to the purged artists, writers,
and critics of the Soviet Union. What has happened to Kornilov, Kyrilov,
Boris Pasternak, Babel, Ivan Katayev, Orlov and Pilnyak?"
The "Daily Worker" of January 6, 1953 (p. 5) published an editorial,
"Dr. Counts is Afraid," which stated:
Dr. George S. Counts, many of whose associates in the Liberal Party and the
labor movement are demanding clemency for Ethel and Julius Rosenberg, sought
to dissipate the growing movement against the planned cold-war twin-murder
with a redbaiting blast in yesterday's newspapers. Counts spoke for the
American Committee for Cultural Freedom, a misnamed group sponsored by the
XT. S. State Department.
The Rosenbergs are guilty, announced Counts, because "the Daily Worker
didn't even bother to inform its readers that the trial was taking place." Are we
to believe that henceforth juries will adjudge guilt or innocence on the basis of
the Daily Worker's news selection? However, the record will reveal that the
Daily Worker did report the trial.
"This preeminent fact of guilt," Counts threatens, "must be openly acknowl-
edged before any appeal for clemency can be regarded as having been made in
good faith." Here Counts repeats the Justice Department's immoral invitation
258
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
to the Rosenbergs to become stool-pigeons. The Rosenbergs insist upon their
right to proclaim their innocence. And those who have read the record of the
case agree with them.
This gruesome effort of Counts to smother the Rosenberg clemency movement
with a blanket of redbaiting indicates the extent and the power of that move-
ment. * * *
Malcolm Cowley
Organization and affiliation
Communist Party Mass Meeting
(New York District). Speaker.
Call for support of Communist
Party National Elections and
its candidates, Foster and Ford.
Signer of Call and later state-
ment.
Protest Against Attack on Right
of Communist Party to Use
Ballot. Signer, Open Letter to
President.
League of Professional Groups for
Foster and Ford. Member.
Mother Ella Reeve Bloor 45th
Anniversary Banquet. Sponsor.
Mother Bloor Celebration Com-
mittee, honoring 75 th birthday
in 1937. Ella Reeve Bloor was
a well-known Communist leader.
Sponsor.
Committee for I. Amster's Candi-
dacy. Amster was Communist
Party candidate for president
N. Y. City Board of Aldermen.
Member.
Letter upholding Simon W. Ger-
son, avowed Communist, as
confidential assistant to
Borough president of Manhat-
tan (forced to resign in 1940)
(3). Signer.
American Committee for Democ-
racy and Intellectual Freedom
(1) (3). Signer, petition attached
to letterhead Jan. 17, 1940.
American Committee for Struggle
Against War (1) (3). Chairman.
American League Against War
and Fascism (1) (2) (3). Mem-
ber, national committee.
Member, National executive
committee.
Member, editorial committee
of "Fight"— official pub-
lication of League.
Contributor
Source
Daily Worker, Apr. 7, 1933.
Daily Worker, Sept. 14, 1932;:
Daily Worker, Nov. 6, 1933.
Daily Worker, July 23, 1940.
Culture and Crisis, p. 32.
Program, Jan. 24, 1936.
Undated letterhead.
Daily Worker, Oct. 21, 1936;
New Masses, Nov. 1938; Daily
Worker, Nov. 3, 1936.
Daily Worker, Feb. 10, 1938.
"The Struggle Against War," June
1933.
Call to the Second U, S. Con-
gress against War and Fascism,
Sept. 28, 29, and 30, 1934,
Chicago.
Letterhead, Aug. 22, 1935.
"Fight", January 1934.
December 1933, issue.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 259
Organization and affiliation Source
American League for Peace and Letterheads dated Sept. 22 and
Democracy (successor to Amer- 26, 1938 and Mar. 21, 1939.
ican League Against War and
Fascism) (1) (2) (3). Member
of Advisory Board — N. Y. City
Division.
Endorsed 5th N. Y. City Con- Daily Worker, Mar. 4, 1939.
ference.
Writers and Artists Committee of Letterhead of American League*
American League (1) (2) (3). Apr. 6, 1939.
Member. ;
American Friends of Spanish De- New Masses, Jan. 5, 1937.
mocracy (1) (3). Member of ";
General Committee.
Medical Bureau. Sponsor New Masses, Mar. 16, 1937.
Send-Off Dinner for Ambu-
lance Corps (given by
American Writers and Art-
ists Committee). Sponsor.
American Society for Technical New Masses, Jan. 26, Feb. 16,
Aid to Spanish Democracy (1). 1937.
Member, Board of Directors.
North American Committee to Aid New Masses, Sept. 28, 1937.
Spanish Democracy (1) (2) (3).
Sponsor.
American Relief Ship for Spain (1) Letterhead, Sept. 3, 1938.
(3). Sponsor.
Spanish Refugee Relief Campaign Pamphlet "Children in Concen-
(1) (3). Sponsor. tration Camps."
Conference on Pan American De- "News You Don't Get", Nov.15,
mocracy (1) (2) (3). Signer of 1938. Letterhead dated Nov.
"Call." Sponsor. 16, 1938.
Defended Carlos Luiz Prestes, Brazilian Communist
Leader, and former member of the executive committee of
the Communist International.
Descendants of the American Rev- Daily Worker, Feb. 13, 1939.
olution (1) (3). Member, Spon- Pamphlet issued by organiza-
sor. tion.
Set up as a radical imitation of the Daughters of the Ameri-
can Revolution, which has uniformly adhered to the line of
the Communist Party * * * Special Committee Report,
June 25, 1942.
Friends of the Soviet Union Prede- Soviet Russia Today, December
cessor of American Council on 1933.
Soviet Relations (1) (2) (3).
Endorsed National Committee.
Frontier Films (1) (3). Member Daily Worker, Apr. 6, 1937.
of Advisory Board.
260
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Organization and affiliation
Golden Book of American Friend-
ship with, the Soviet Union
(1) (3). Signer.
Open Letter to American Liberals
(1) (3). Signer.
International Labor Defense Pris-
oners' Relief Fund (1) (2) (2)
(3). Member.
Signer of petition to Japanese
Ambassador issued by ILD.
Sponsor of Christmas Drive
Sponsor of Summer Milk Drive _ _
Source
Soviet Russia Today, November,
1937.
Soviet Russia Today, March
1937.
"Labor Defender", publication of
I. L. D., July 1931.
Daily Worker, Mar. 19, 1938.
"Equal Justice," publication of
ILD, November 1938.
"Equal Justice," publication of
ILD, June 1939.
" Cited as' the "legal arm of the Communist Party" by Attor-
ney General (Congressional Record, September 24, 1943,
p. 7686); redesignated by Attorney General April 1, 1954.
John Reed Clubs (1 ) (3) . Member
National Committee for Defense
of Political Prisoners (1) (2) (3).
Member.
Predecessor of National Com-
mittee for Peoples Rights
(1) (2) (3). Member.
National Congress for Unemploy-
ment and Social Insurance (1)
(3). Signer of "Call"; Sponsor.
National People's Committee
Against Hearst (1) (3). (Sub-
sidiary of American League for
Peace and Democracy). Mem-
. ber. •
National Student League (1) (2)
(3) . Signer of Call for Support.
Congress of American Revolution-
ary Writers (1). Signer of Call.
League of American Writers (1)
(2) (3). Member; Member of
Executive Committee; Vice
President.
Daily Worker, May 21, 1930.
Letterhead, dated Oct. 31, 1935.
Letterhead, dated July 13, 1938
"News You Don't Get", Nov.
15, 1938.
Unemployment Insurance Re-
view, Volume 1 (1935) p. 3;
Leaflet, "Call to a National
Congress for Unemployment
and Social Insurance," headed
by Herbert Benjamin, leading
Communist.
Letterhead, Mar. 16, 1937.
Daily Worker, Sept. 28, 1932.
Daily Worker, Jan. 18, 1935.
Bulletin of League; Daily
Worker, Apr. 30, 1935; Letter-
heads, dated Dec. 29, 1938 and
July 7, 1939.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
261
Organization and affiliation Source
American Writers' Congress Spon- Daily Worker, Apr. 29, 1935.
sored by League of American
Writers (1) (2) (3). Addressed
1st Congress "What the Revo-
lutionary Movement Can Give
to The Writer."
Elected delegate to Inter- Daily Worker, June 8, 1937.
national Congress of Writers
in Madrid, June 20, 1937;
speaker at American
Writers' Congress, June
4-6, 1937; elected vice
president.
Signed call of 3rd American Direction, May-June 1939.
Writers' Congress.
Chairman of arrangements Program.
3rd American Writers' Con-
gress.
Speaker at general delegates Program, 3rd American Writers'
session of that congress. Congress.
Earl Browder, general secretary of the Communist Party was
a speaker at the second biennial American Writers Congress
in 1937, sponsored by the League of American Writers
Book Union Bulletin, August
1938.
Daily Worker, Dec. 18, 1934.
Book Union (1) (3). Member,
editorial Board.
International Publishers — Anni-
versary Reception of (1) (2) (3).
Attended dinner:
Daily Worker (1) (2) (3). Con-
tributor.
Soviet Russia Today (1) (3).
Member, editorial Board.
Contributing editor
Veterans of the Abraham Lincoln
Brigade (1) (2) (3). Signer,
protest to President and At-
torney General against attacks
against Abraham Lincoln
Brigade.
Defense of Hans Eisler. Com-
municated with State Depart-
ment in behalf of Eisler.
Issues of Apr. 6, 1933; Sept. 30,
1933; Nov. 6, 1933; Dec. 21,
1935. Photograph in issue of
Sept. 21, 1934. Reported as
a witness for Alger Hiss issue
of June 24, 1949.
Issues of December 1938, January
1939.
June 28, 1932.
Daily Worker, Feb. 21, 1940.
Testimony of George S. Messer-
smith (Hearings Regarding
Hans Eisler, pp. 127-129).
262 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Reference to Malcolm Cowley in "International Litera-
ture, " published by State Publishing House, Moscow,
Russia, official organ of International Union of Revolution-
ary Writers:
Two gatherings held in one evening in New York City were a clear
indication of the radicalization of the American Intellectuals as a
whole. About 2,000 professionals, artists, writers., and scientists gath-
ered as a public demonstration of the support of the American intel-
lectuals to the Communist candidates in the recent election. * * *
Malcom Cowley, literary editor of the New Republic, explained
his reasons for acceptance of a revolutionary position: "It wasn't
the depression that got me," Cowley said. "It was the boom; I saw
my friends writing tripe demanded by the present order, stultified
and corrupted and unable to make real use of their talents. After
that I had to discover the reason for this state of affairs which comes
from the very nature of the ruling class that lives by exploiting
everyone else."
Organization and affiliation Source
New Republic. Editor ; Report of House Un-American
Activities Committee, No. 2277,
June 25, 1942; No. 2748, Jan.
2, 1943.
Our investigation has shown that a steady barrage against Congress
comes * * * from the New Republic, one of whose editors, Malcolm
Cowley, was recently forced out of an $8,000 Government job by the ex-
posure of his Communist activities * * *
Parenthetically, it may be said that Malcolm Cowley, one of the edi-
tors of the New "Republic, published a volume of poetry in February of
this year in which volume he described enthusiastically the capture of
the Capitol in Washington by a revolutionary mob.
On January 15, 1942, the chairman of the committee, in a speech on
the floor of the House, called attention to the presence in the Office of
Facts and Figures, of one Malcolm Cowley, chief information analyst,
at a salary of $8,000 per annum. The chairman inserted in his speech
the record of Malcolm Cowley which showed 72 affiliations with the Com-
munist Party and its front organizations. Several weeks later, Mr. Cow-
ley resigned his position with the Federal Government.
Lauchlin Currie
On August 13, 1948, Lauchlin Currie appeared before the Committee
on Un-American Activities at his request to answer false statements
and misleading suggestions which had been made concerning him in
prior testimony before this committee. His name was first brought
into, the picture in testimony of Elizabeth Bentley, July 31, 1948
(p. 519), as follows:
Mr. Stripling. * * * Are there any other names, Miss Bentley, of the Sil-
vermaster group that you have not mentioned?
Miss Bentley. Just one. The man was not a Communist but he did give
information. Lauchlin Currie.
Mr. Stripling. What type of information did he give?
Miss Bentley. Well, being in the position he was in, he had inside information
on Government policy.
Mr. Stripling. Was he a secretary to the President of the United States?
Miss Bentley. I believe that was his title. I am not sure. * * *
Mr. Stripling. He was employed in the White House, was he not?
Miss Bentley. Yes.
Mr. Stripling. What m"ormation did he furnish? What type?
Miss Bentley. He furnished inside information on this Government's attitude
toward China, toward other governments. He once relayed to us the information
that the American Government was on the verge of breaking the Soviet code,
various things.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 263
Lauchlin Cunie's testimony (mentioned above) is quoted, in part,
as follows:
Mr. Ctjekib. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is
Lauchlin Currie; I reside at 165 Gaylor Road, Scarsdale, N. Y.
*******
First, some facts concerning my background and history. I was born in 1902
in Nova Scotia, Canada. My father, a Canadian citizen, was of Scottish descent.
My mother, nee Alice Eisenhauer, also a Canadian citizen, is of German descent.
In 1911 and again in 1918 my family spent the year in the United States where
I attended school. I took my undergraduate university work at London Uni-
versity and then came to Harvard in 1925 where I did my graduate work and
received my Ph. D. and remained as a teacher of economics. Shortly after coming
to Harvard I took out my first papers applying for United States citizenship.
My naturalization was completed in 1934. While at Harvard I was offered a
position in the Treasury Department. In 1934 I accepted it and came to Wash-
ington, where I worked under Mr. Marriner Eccles until he was made Chairman
of the Federal Peserve Board later in that year. I went with him to the Board as
assistant director of research.
In 1939 I was appointed by President Foosevelt as Administrative Assistant
to the President with special duties in the field of economics. I retained that
position until 1945, during which time I was sent twice to China to confer with
Generalissimo Chiang-Kai-shek. During part of this period, in 1943-44, I con-
currently held the office of Deputy Administrator of the Foreign Economic Ad-
ministration. In early 1945, on behalf of the Secretary of State, I headed a war-
time trade and financial mission to Switzerland.
In 1945 I resigned from Government service to enter private business and I am
now president of lauchlin Currie & Co., engaged in the export-import business,
with offices at 565 Fifth Avenue, New York.
My name has been brought into the proceedings before this committee through
the testimony of Miss Elizabeth Bentley and Mr. N. Gregory Silvermaster.
Miss Bentley admitted to you that she had never met me and had never seen me
and had never had any communication with me. The statements made by her
about me were, as noted by Congressman Bankin. heresay three times removed.
I, on my part, wish to assert unequivocally that I never met, saw, nor had any
communication with Miss Bentley. The first time I ever heard her name was
when I learned of the testimony which she gave the committee.
I understand that there is no accusation that I am or ever have been a Com-
munist Nevertheless, I welcome this opportunity to state again under oath,
as I did before the Federal grand jury, convened in the Eastern District of New
York to investigate the charges similar to those before this commictee, that I am
not and never have been a Communist, a member of the Communist Party, a
believer in the tenets or doctrines of communism and that I have never been
affiliated with any organization or group sympathetic with the doctrines of
communism or engaged in furthering that cause, I have never had any reason
to believe that any friends of mine or even acquaintances or associates were
Communists. (Public Hearings, pages 852-853.)
Robert E. Cushman
In the dissenting opinion of J. Edgerton in the "Decision of the
U. S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in re Edward
Barsky et al., appellants v. United States of America, appellee"
(March 18, 1948, p. 15), the following footnote appears:
Professor Cushman says: "The opprobrious epithet 'un-American' was applied
to all those who indulged in any open criticism of our existing institutions, our
so-called American way of life, or of Mr. Dies. * * * Good loyal American citi-
zens who ought to know better were persuaded to give their support to the sup-
pression of free speech and free press on the grotesque theory that they were
thereby showing their loyalty to the basic principles of American democracy.
Bigotry was made not merely respectable but noble. By the skillful use of labels,
or slogans. American public opinion was inoculated with the dangerous idea
that true Americanism consists in the stalwart defense of the status quo and the
suppression of those dangerous and disloyal people who are unpatriotic enough
to want to criticize it or suggest any change in it."
264
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Organization and affiliation
League of Workers Theaters of the
United States Workers' Theater
was official, later name changed
to The New Theatre (1) (3).
Contributing Editor.
New Theatre League. Sponsor,
Reunion Dance Apr. 18, 1941.
Moscow University Summer
School. Advisory Committee.
Cultural and Scientific Conference
for World Peace, New York
City, Mar. 25-27, 1949, under
auspices of National Council of
the Arts, Sciences, and Profes-
sions (1). Sponsor.
Daily Worker (1 ) (2) (3 )
Vera Micheles Dean
Organization and affiliation
Golden Book of American Friend-
ship with the Soviet Union (1).
Signer.
National Council of American-
Soviet Friendship (1) and (2).
Books by Mrs. Dean listed as
source material in the Bibliog-
raphy on the Soviet Union
issued by the Committee on
Education of the National
Council of American-Soviet
Friendship.
"The United States and Russia"
by Vera Dean reviewed.
Named as author of a favorable
survey on Bulgaria, Czecho-
slovakia and Poland.
Participated in International As-
sembly of Women held at Kort-
right, New York, October 21,
1946 "* * * apparently arranged
at the initiative of a group of
well-known American non-Com-
munist women. The Russians
were invited to send a delegation
but gave no answer. * * * Fifty-
six nations were represented
by 150 foreign delegates and
fifty Americans. Following the
traditional 'boring from within'
tactics, foreign Communist
women delegates participated,
as well as outstanding pro-
Soviet Americans."
Source
Issues of January, 1934, May and
October 1934 of "New
Theatre."
Leaflet "Meet the People of the
Progressive Theatre,"
Testimony of Walter S. Steele,
Public Hearings, Aug. 17, 1938.
Conference "Call" and Program;
Daily Worker Feb. 21, 1949.
Photograph appeared Dec. 23,
1940.
Source
"Soviet Russia Today," Novem-
ber 1937, p. 79.
Testimony of Walter S. Steele,
Committee on Un-American
Activities, July 21, 1947, p. 63.
"New Masses," Dec. 23, 1947,
p. 19.
"Daily Worker," May 3, 1948,
p. 8.
Committee on Un-American Ac-
tivities, Report of the Congress
of American Women, Oct. 23,
1949.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
265
Agnes DeMille
(1) indicates that the organization and/or publication has been
officially cited by the Special Committee and/or the Committee on
Un-American Activities; (2) indicates that it has been cited by the
Attorney General of the United States.
Organization and affiliation
National Council of American-
Soviet Friendship (1) and (2).
Chairman, Dance Committee.
Joint Anti-Fascist "Refugee Com-
mittee (1) and (2). National
Sponsor, Spanish Refugee Ap-
peal of the JAFRC. Name
shown in these four sources as
Agnes George DeMille.
Independent Citizens' Committee
of the Arts, Sciences and Profes-
sions (1). Initiating sponsor.
Artists' Front to Win the War (1).
Sponsor.
Rabbi David de Sola Pool
# *
Source
Report of the Director to Mem
hers of National Council
Also Walter S. Steele's testi-
mony before this committee
July 21, 1947, p. .66.
Letterhead of February 26, 1946
letterhead of Feb. 3, 1948
letterhead of Apr. 28, 1949
and letterhead of May 18
1951.
Letterhead of Nov. 26, 1946.
Program of the Artists' Front
* * *, Oct. 16, 1942, p. 4.
(1) Cited by Special and/or Com. on Un-American Activities; (2)
Cited by Attorney General of the United States.
Organization and affiliation
American Committee for Protec-
tion of Foreign Born (1) and (2).
Sponsor, National Conference
in Cleveland, Ohio, October 25-
26, 1947. Name shown in
source as Rev. David de Sola
Pool.
Sponsor
Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Com-
mittee (1) and (2). National
Sponsor.
Greater New York Emergency
Conference on Inalienable
Rights (1). Panel speaker at
conference February 12, 1940.
American Committee for Yugo-
slav Relief (1) and (2). Mem-
ber, Sponsors Committee.
Endorsed appeal
Signed statement against the
Hobbs Bill.
Signed statement to President
Truman against "police state
bill" (McCarran Act). Econ-
omist.
/Source
Program and call for the con-
ference.
Letterhead <jf Dec. 11-12, 1948.
Letterhead of Apr. 28, 1949.
Program of the conference.
Photostat of letterhead dated
Aug. 6, 1945.
Daily Worker, Apr. 26, 1947, p. 2.
Daily Worker, Jan. 30, 1950, p. 4.
Daily Worker, Sept. 21, 1950,
pp. 1 and 9.
55647— 54r-
-18
266 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Bernard DeVoto
Joseph North wrote in the Daily Worker of December 29, 1949
(page 7), that "DeVoto has written some millions of words in his time,
but few had more point than those of his in Harper's recently which
drew instant fire from J. Edgar Hoover. As a nation, DeVoto said,
'we are dividing into the hunted and the hunters.' 'We know,' he
continued, 'that the thing stinks to heaven and that it is an avalanching
danger to our society.' " Mr. North further quoted Mr. DeVoto as
having concluded the FBI "has invaded areas of thought and behavior
which are entirely improper for it to enquire into" and "holds ideas
about what constitutes dangerous or subversive activity that are
unacceptable to our form of government."
Dr. W. E. B. DuBois
The Worker (Sunday edition of the Communist publication, the
Daily Worker) on April 27, 1947 reported that —
almost 100 Negro leaders, headed by W. E. B. DuBois, Paul Robeson and Poscoe
Dunjee, last week called upon Piesident Truman "to repudiate decisively" steps
to "illegalize the Communist Party." * * * "As Negro Americans * * * we
cannot be unmindful that this proposal to outlaw the Communist Party comes
precisely when our Federal government professes grave concern over the demo-
cratic rights of peoples in far distant parts of the world." * * * (page 8 of The
Worker).
Dr. DuBois sponsored a statement attacking the arrest of Commu-
nist Party leaders ("Daily Worker, August 23, 1948, page 3); he spon-
sored a "Statement by Negro Americans" on behalf of the Communist
leaders (The Worker of August 29, 1948, page 11) ; he filed a brief in
the Supreme Court on behalf of the twelve Communist leaders (Daily
Worker, January 9, 1949, page 3); he signed statements on behalf of
Communist leaders, as shown in the following sources : Daily Worker,
January 17, 1949 (page 3); February 28, 1949 (page 9); Daily People's
World, May 12, 1950 (page 12); Daily Worker September 19, 1950
(page 2) ; and in 1952, he signed an appeal to President Truman,
requesting amnesty for leaders of the Communist Party convicted
under the Smith Act (Daily Worker, December 10, 1952, page 4).
Dr. DuBois was one of the sponsors of the National Non-Partisan
Committee to Defend the Rights of the Twelve Communist leaders,
as shown on the back of their letterhead dated September 9, 1949.
A statement on behalf of Eugene Dennis, a Communist, contained
the signature of Dr. DuBois, identified as an educator (Daily Worker
of May 5, 1950, p. 2) ; he signed a telegram of the National Committee
to Win Amnesty for Smith Act Victims, greeting Eugene Dennis on
his 48th birthday (Daily Worker, August 11, 1952, p. 3); Eugene
Dennis was formerly Secretary General of the Communist Party.
The Daily Worker of August 2, 1949 (p. 2), disclosed that Dr.
DuBois endorsed Benjamin J. Davis, Jr., well-known Communist
leader; he was Honorary Chairman of the Committee to Defend
V. J. Jerome, Chairman, Cultural Commission of the Communist
Party, U. S. A. (letterhead dated June 24, 1952). A leaflet of the
Civil Rights Congress (dated March 20, 1947) named Dr. DuBois as
having defended Gerhart Eisler, Communist. He was one of the
sponsors of the Committee to Defend Alexander Tractenberg, former
member of the National Committee of the Communist Party (Daily
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 267
People's "World of April 17, 1952, p. 7; and the Daily Worker of April
18, 1952, p. 6).
The Daily Worker of February 16, 1948 (page 16), reported that
some —
eighty leading New York civic leaders, trade unionists and professionals yesterday
joined Dr. William Jay Schieffelin, president emeritus of the Citizens Onion, to
demand the prompt seating of Simon W. Gerson to the City Council seat made
vacant by the death of Councilman Peter V. Cacchione, Brooklyn Commu-
nist * * * The civic leaders' statement is directed to Mayor O'Dwyer and City
Council majority leader Joseph T. Sharkey. It is a reprint of a letter to the New
York Times by Dr. Schieffelin in which he eharges that the real reason for the
refusal to seat Gorman (sic. Gerson) is "the current anti-Communist hys-
teria." * * *
Dr. DuBois was named as having signed the statement. (See also
advertisement in New York Times of February 19, 1948, page 13.)
Dr. DuBois was a member of a committee formed to protest the
arrest of Pablo Neruda, Communist Chilean Senator and world famous
poet; he signed a statement of the organization in support of Neruda.
(Daily "Worker of April 7, 1948, p. 13, and April 10, 1950, p. 2, re-
spectively.) He was sponsor of a reception and testimonial for Harry
Sacher, defense attorney for the Communist leaders (Daily Worker of
December 5, 1949, p. 2).
When Earl Browder (then general secretary, Communist Party)
was in Atlanta Penitentiary serving a sentence involving his fraudulent
passports, the Communist Party's front which agitated for his release
was known as the Citizens' Committee to Free Earl Browder (Special
Committee * * * in Report 1311 of March 29, 1944); the Attorney
General of the United States had cited the Citizens' Committee as
Communist (Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, page 7687,
and press release of April 27, 1949). Dr. DuBois was a member of
the Citizens' Committee * * * in 1942, as shown on their letterhead
dated February 11, 1942; he sponsored a dinner of the group, according
to the Daily Worker of February 5, 1942, and signed the call to the
National Free Browder Congress, as shown in the Daily Worker of
February 25, 1942,. pages 1 and 4.
A 1950 letterhead of the American Committee for Protection of
Foreign Born carries the name of Dr. W. E. B. DuBois in a list of
sponsors of that organization; the same information appears on an
undated letterhead of the group, distributing a speech of Abner Green
at the Conference of December 2-3, 1950; a letterhead of the Mid-
west Committee for Protection of Foreign Born dated April 30, 1951,
names him as a National Sponsor of the organization. He signed
the group's statement opposing the Hobbs Bill (Daily Worker, July 25,
1950, page 4); he signed their statement opposing denaturalization
(Daily Worker of August 10, 1950, p. 5); and signed a telegram
prepared and dispatched by the organization to the Attorney General
of the United States, protesting holding nine non-citizens without
bail under the McCarran Act (Daily Worker of November 24, 1952,
page 3).
The Special Committee cited the American Committee for Pro-
tection of Foreign Born as "one of the oldest auxiliaries of the Com-
munist Party in the United States" (report of March 29, 1944; also
cited in report of June 25, 1942); the Attorney General cited the
organization as subversive and Communist (press releases of June 1
268 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
and September 21, 1948, and it was redesignated on April 27, 1953,
pursuant to Executive Order 10450.
For years, the Communists have put forth the greatest efforts to capture
the entire American Labor Party throughout New York State. They succeeded
in capturing the Manhattan and Brooklyn sections of the American Labor Party
but outside of New York City, they have been unable to win control (Special
Committee's Eeport 1311 of March 29, 1944).
Dr. DuBois spoke at a state conference, of the American Labor
Party (Daily Worker of December 12, 1950, page 5); he spoke at a
dinner, April 18th, opening the presidential campaign in New York
City (Daily Worker of April 14, 1952, page 8, an advertisement;
and the Daily Worker of April 21, 1952, page 1); he spoke at an elec-
tion rally io Madison Square Garden, May 13th, held under the aus-
pices of the American Labor Party (Daily Worker of May 8, 1952,
page 8, an advertisement; and May 14, 1952, page 1) ; and he spoke
at an election rally in Madison Square Garden, October 27th (Daily
Worker of October 22, 1952, page 8, an advertisement; and October
29, 1952, page 2).
The Daily Worker of March 29, 1948 (page 7), named Dr. DuBois
as a member of the Executive Board and of the Policy Committee,
Council on African Affairs; he signed the Council's petition to the
United Nations as shown in the Daily Worker of June 5, 1950 (page
4); and drafted their statement against the policy of the United
States in Korea (Daily Worker of July 25, 1950, page 3); the
Attorney General cited the Council on African Affairs as subversive
and Communist (press releases of December 4, 1947 and September
21, 1948) and redesignated it on April 27, 1953 pursuant to Executive
Order 10450.
The Attorney General cited the Jefferson School of Social Science
as an "adjunct of the Communist Party" (press release of December
4, 1947); the Special Committee reported that "at the beginning of
the present year, the old Communist Party Workers School and the
School for Democracy were merged into the Jefferson School of
Social Science" (Report 1311 of March 29, 1944),. Dr. DuBois was
honored at the Jefferson School, as shown in the Daily Worker on
February 1, 1951 (page 2); it was announced in the Daily Worker
on January 2, 1952 (page 7), that Dr. DuBois was scheduled to con-
duct a seminar on "Background of African Liberation Struggles" at
the Jefferson School; the January 26, 1952 issue of the same publica-
tion (page 7), named him as a faculty member of that school.
In a report of the Special Committee, dated March 29, 1944, the
National Council of American-Soviet Friendship was cited as having
been, in recent months, the Communist Party's principal front for all
things Russian (report dated March 29, 1944); Dr. DuBois signed a
statement of the National Council in 1947 (Daily Worker, October 17,
1947, page 4); he signed the organization's statement protesting the
Iron Curtain, as reported in the Daily People's World on May 20,
1948 (page 5); he signed a statement of the Council, praising Henry
Wallace's Open Letter to Stalin in May 1948 (from a pamphlet en-
titled "How to End the Cold War and Build the Peace," page 9); he
signed their statement calling for a conference with the Soviet Union
(Daily Worker, June 21, 1948, page 3); he signed their Roll Call for
Peace (Daily Worker of August 31, 1948, page 5); he sent greetings
through the National Council on the Thirty-First Anniversary of the
TAX-EXEMPT FOtfNDATIONS 269
Russian Revolution (Daily Worker, November 10, 1948, page 11);
he signed the Council's appeal to the United States Government to
end the cold war and arrange a conference with the Soviet Union
(leaflet entitled "End the Cold War— Get Together for Peace," dated
December 1948); he spoke at the Congress on American-Soviet Rela-
tions, December 3-5, 1949, arranged by the National Council * * *
and signed the Council's letter to the American people, urging that a
unified democratic Germany be established (Daily People's World,
August 13, 1952, pages 4 and 6).
A letterhead of the Conference on Peaceful Alternatives to the At-
lantic Pact, dated August 21, 1949, lists the name of Dr. W. E. B.
DuBois as having signed an Open Letter of the organization, ad-
dressed to Senators and Congressmen, urging defeat of President Tru-
man's arms program; he answered a questionnaire of the Committee
for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy in favor of recognition of the
Chinese Communist government, as shown in Far East Spotlight for
December 1949-January 1950 (page 23).
The Conference for Peaceful Alternatives * * * was cited as a
meeting called by the Daily Worker in July 1949, to be held in Wash-
ington, D. C, and as having been instigated by "Communists in the
United States (who) did their part in the Moscow campaign" (Com-
mittee on Un-American Activities in Report 378 on the Communist
"Peace" Offensive dated April 1, 1951). The Committee for a
Democratic Far Eastern Policy has been cited as Communist by the
Attorney General (press release of April 27, 1949).
A page of signatures from the Golden Book of American Friendship
with the Soviet Union, "sponsored by American Friends of the Soviet
Union, and signed by hundreds of thousands of Americans", was
published in the November 1937 issue of Soviet Russia Today (page
79); the Golden Book was to be presented to President Kalinin at
the Twentieth Anniversary Celebration. The page carried the title:
"I hereby inscribe my name in greeting to the people of the Soviet
Union on the 20th Anniversary of the establishment of the Soviet
Republic" and a fascimile of the name, W. E. B. DuBois, appeared
on that page.
The Golden Book * * * was cited as a "Communist enterprise"
signed by "hundreds of well-known Communists and fellow travelers"
(Special Committee on Un-American Activities in Report 1311 of
March 29, 1944).
A letterhead of the New York Committee to Win the Peace, dated
June 1, 1946, contains the name of W. E. B. DuBois in a list of New
York Committee Members. The National Committee to 'Win the
Peace, with which the New York Committee is affiliated, was cited
as subversive and Communist by the U. S. Attorney General (press
releases of December 4, 1947 and September 21, 1948) and it was
redesignated on April 27, 1953 pursuant to Executive Order 10450.
Dr. DuBois sponsored a petition of the American Council for a
Democratic Greece, as disclosed by the Daily People's World of
August 23, 1948 (page 2); he signed a statement of the same organi-
zation, condemning the Greek government, as reported in the Daily
Worker of September 2, 1948 (page 7). The American Council for
a Democratic Greece has been cited as subversive and Communist,
an organization formerly known as the Greek-American Council
(U. S. Attorney General in press releases of June 1 and September 21,
270 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
1948). The organization was redesignated by the Attorney General
on April 27, 1953 pursuant to Executive Order 10450.
Dr. DuBois was a sponsor of a conference of the National Council
of the Arts, Sciences and Professions, October 9-10, 1948, as shown
in a leaflet entitled "To Safeguard These Rights * * *," published
by the Bureau of Academic Freedom of the National Council; a let-
terhead of the National Council (received for files January 1949)
named him as a Member-at-Large of that organization; he was named
as Vice Chairman of the group on the leaflet, "Policy and Program
Adopted' by the National Convention, 1950"; a letterhead of the same
organization's Southern California Chapter, dated April 24, 1950,
lists him as a Member-at-Large of the National Council; he was
elected vice-Chairman of the group in 1950 (Daily Worker, May 1,
1950, page 12); a letterhead of the group dated July 28, 1950 named
him as a vice-Chairman of the group; he endorsed a conference on
equal rights for Negroes in the arts, sciences and professions, sponsored
by the New York Council of the Arts, * * . * (Daily Worker, Novem-
ber 9, 1951, page 7); the call to the conference contained the same
information. A letterhead of the National Council, dated December
7, 1952, named him as Vice-Chairman.
The call to a Scientific and Cultural Conference for World Peace,
issued by the National Council of the Arts, Sciences and Professions
for New York City, March 25-27, 1949, as well as the conference
program (page 12), and the Daily Worker of February 21, 1949 (page
9), named Dr. DuBois as one of the sponsors of that conference; he
was a member of the Program Committee of the Conference, Honorary
Chairman of the panel at Cultural and Scientific Conference (program,
page 7), and spoke on "The Nature of Intellectual Freedom" at that
conference (page 78 of the edited report of the conference entitled
"Speaking for Peace.")
The National Council of the Arts, * * * was cited as a Communist-
front organization by the Committee on Un-American Activities in
its Review of the Scientific and Cultural Conference for World Peace,
released April 19, 1949; in the same review, the Scientific and Cultural
Conference was cited as a Communist front which "was actually a
supermobilization of the inveterate wheelhorses and supporters of the
Communist Party and its auxiliary organizations."
The Daily People's World of October 28, 1947 (page 4), named
Dr. DuBois as one of the sponsors of a National Conference of the
Civil Rights Congress in Chicago, November 21-23, 1947; he spon-
sored their Freedom Crusade (Daily Worker, December 15, 1948,
page 2); the Call to a Bill of Rights Conference, called by the Civil
Rights Congress for July 16-17, 1949 in New York City, named him
as one of the sponsors of that conference; the program of the National
Civil Rights Legislative Conference, January 18-19, 1949, called by
the Civil Rights Congress, lists him as one of the conference sponsors ;
he was chairman of a conference of the Congress, as reported in The
Worker of January 2, 1949 (page 5) ; Dr. DuBois was defended by the
Civil Rights Congress (Daily Worker, February 13, 1951, page 3) ; he
signed the organization's Open Letter to J. Howard McGrath, U. S.
Attorney General, on behalf of the four jailed trustees of the Bail
Fund of the Civil Rights Congress of New York (advertisement
"paid for by contributions of signers" which appeared in the Evening
Star on October 30, 1951, page A-7); he participated in the organiza-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 271
tion's Sixth Anniversary Dinner in New York City/March 26, 1952
(Daily Worker, March 28, 1952, page 4).
The Civil Rights Congress was formed in 1946 as a merger of two
other Communist-front organizations, the International Labor Defense
and the National Federation for Constitutional Liberties; it is "dedi-
cated not to the broader issues of civil liberties, but specifically to the
defense of individual Communists and the Communist Party" and
"controlled by individuals who are either members of the Communist
Party or openly loyal to it" (Report 1115 of the Committee on
Un-American Activities dated September 2, 1947); the Attorney
General cited the Congress as subversive and Communist (press-
releases of December 4, 1947 and September 21, 1948) and it was
redesignated on April 27, 1953 pursuant to Executive Order 10450.
Dr. DuBois spoke in Washington, D. C, on May 9, 1947, under
the auspices of the Washington Book Shop, as shown by a leaflet
of the Book Shop, cited as subversive and Communist by the At-
torney General; it had previously been cited by the Attorney General
as follows: "Evidence of Communist penetration or control is re-
flected in the following: Among its stock the establishment has offered
prominently for sale books and literature identified with the Com-
munist Party and certain of its affiliates and front organizations * * *"
(press releases of December 4, 1947, and September 21, 1948; and the
Congressional Record of September 24, 1942, page 7688, respectively).
The Special Committee cited the Washington Book Shop as a Com-
munist-front organization (report of March 29, 1944).
The Workers Book Shop catalogue for 1948 (page 5), advertised
Dr. DuBois' "The World and Africa" for sale; the 1949-1950 catalogue
(page 11) advertised his "Black Folk Then and Now"; The Worker
for March 1, 1953 (page 16) carried an advertisement of Dr. DuBois'
books, "The Battle for Peace" and "Black Reconstruction" on sale
at the Workers Bookshop, New York City. The Workers Book-
shops are a chain of Communist bookshops which are official outlets
for Communist literature.
As shown on the following sources, Dr. Dubois was a member of
the Advisory Council of Soviet Russia Today: Letterhead of the pub-
lication dated September 8, 1947; a letterhead of September 30, 1947;
and an undated letterhead received April 1948. The Daily People's
World of November 6, 1952 (page 7), reported that Dr. DuBois had
written an article for the November issue of New World Review.
Soviet Russia Today has been cited as a Communist-front publication
by the Special Committee in reports of March 29, 1944, and June 25,
1942; the Committee on Un-American Activities also cited it as a
Communist-front publication in a report dated October 23, 1949.
Soviet Russia Today changed its name to New World Review, ef-
fective with the March 1951 issue.
The Daily Worker of July 6, 1951 (page 7), reported that Dr.
DuBois was author of the pamphlet, "I Take My Stand for Peace,"
published by the New Century Publishers, "official Communist
Party publishing house which has published the works of William Z.
Foster and Eugene Dennis, Communist Party chairman and execu-
tive secretary, respectively * * *" (Committee on Un-American
Activities in its report of May 11, 1948).
In 1947, 1948 and 1950, Dr. DuBois was Contributing Editor on
the staff of New Masses magazine (New Masses, July 22, 1947,
272 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
page 2; Masses & Mainstream, March 1948, Vol. 1, No. 1; and issue
of August 1950, page 1) ; he contributed articles to'the following issues
of New Masses and Masses & Mainstream: New Masses for Septem-
ber 10, 1946 (page 3) and June 10, 1947 (page 20); Masses & Main-
stream for April 1951 (pages 10-16); and February 1952 (pages 8-14).
In 1940, Dr. DuBois signed New Masses Letter to President
Roosevelt as shown in New Masses for April 2, 1940 (page 21); he
was honored at a dinner in New York City, January 14, 1946, arranged
by New Masses and at which awards were made for greater inter-
racial understanding (Daily "Worker of January 7, 1946, page 11,
columns 1 and 2): he endorsed New Masses, as reported in the Daily
Worker of April 7, 1947 (page 11); he sponsored a plea for financial
support of New Masses, as disclosed in the issue of that publication
for April 8, 1947 (page 9); he received the New Masses award for
his contribution in promoting democracy and inter-racial unity at
the publication's Second Annual Awards Dinner (New Masses of
November 18, 1947, page 7); the February 1953 issue of Masses &
Mainstream carried a chapter from Dr. DuBois' book, "The Soul of
Black Folk," written fifty years ago (Daily Worker, February 23,
1953, page 7); he was author of "In Battle for Peace," described as
the story of his 83d birthday, and which was published by Masses &
Mainstream (The Daily Worker of June 18, 1952, page 7; Daily
People's World of September 17, 1952, page 7; the Daily Worker of
September 23, 1952, page 7; and The "Worker of December 21, 1952,
page 7).
The Attorney General of the United States cited New Masses as a
"Communist periodical" (Congressional Record of September 24,
1942, page 7688) ; the Special Committee cited it as a "nationally
circulated weekly journal of the Communist Party" (report of March
29, 1944; also cited in reports of January 3, 1939 and June 25, 1942).
Beginning with the March 1948 issue, New Masses and Mainstream
(Marxist quarterly) consolidated into what is now known as Masses
& Mainstream, with the announcement that "here, proudly, in pur-
pose even if not in identical form, is a magazine that combines and
carries forward the thirty-seven-year-old tradition of New Masses
«,nd the more recent literary achievement of Mainstream. We have
regrouped our energies, not to retire from the battle but to wage it
with fresh resolution and confidence" (Masses & Mainstream for
March 1948, page 3).
A letterhead of the Committee to Secure Justice in the Rosenberg
Case, dated March 15, 1952, carries the name of Dr. W. E. B. DuBois
in a list of sponsors; he joined in a request of that Committee for a
new trial for Ethel and Julius Rosenberg (Daily Worker of June 12,
1952, page 6) ; he participated in a rally October 23 in New York City,
to demand clemency for the Rosenbergs (Daily Worker, October 27,
1952, page 8) ; he signed an amicus curiae brief presented to the
Supreme Court in Washington, D. C, urging a new trial for the
Rosenbergs (Daily Worker of November 10, 1952, page 3): and the
Daily People's World of November 13, 1952, page 8). He wrote an
article entitled "A Negro Leader's Plea to Save Rosenbergs" (The
Worker of November 16, 1952, page 3M); and the Daily Worker of
January 21, 1953 (page 7), reported that he had urged clemency for
the Rosenbergs.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 273
The Daily Worker of April 11, 1949 (page 5), reported that Dr.
DuBois was a member of the Sponsoring Committee of the World
Peace Congress in Paris; he was co-Chairman of the American Spon-
soring Committee of the Congress, as disclosed on a leaflet entitled
"World Congress for Peace, Paris," April 20-23, 1949; he was proposed
as a candidate for the World Peace Prize, awarded by the World Peace
Congress (Daily People's World of December 7, 1951, page 4) ; he was
a member of the Executive Committee of the World Peace Congress
(Daily Worker of September 14, 1950, page 5); he was one of the
sponsors of the Second World Peace Congress in Sheffield, England
(Daily W 7 orker of October 19, 1950, page 3); he was elected to the
Presiding Committee of the World Peace Congress (Daily Worker of
November 17, 1950, page 1); he was a member of the World Peace
Council of that Congress (Daily Worker of November 24, 1950, page
9) ; a mimeographed letter dated December 1, 1950, contains his name
in a list of sponsors of the American Sponsoring Committee for
Representation at the World Peace Congress.
Dr. DuBois was a member of the United States Sponsoring Com-
mittee of the American Intercontinental Peace Conference (Daily
Worker of December 28, 1951, page 2, and February 6, 1952, page 2) ;
the Peace Conference was called by the World Peace Council, formed
at the conclusion of the Second World Peace Congress in Warsaw;
he was awarded the International Peace Prize for "six world figures"
by the World Peace Council (Daily People's World of January 29,
1953, page 7; and The Worker of February 8, 1953, page 5).
The Daily Worker of June 20, 1950 (page 2), reported that Dr.
DuBois signed the World Peace Appeal ; the same information appears
on an undated leaflet of the enterprise, received by this Committee
September 11, 1950. A mimeographed list of individuals who signed
the Stockholm World Appeal to Outlaw Atomic Weapons, received
for filing October 23, 1950, contains the name of Dr. DuBois. He
was Chairman of the Peace Information Center where the Stockholm
peace petition was made available (Daily Worker of May 25, 1950 r
page 2; and August 16, 1950, page 5).
The World Peace Congress which was held in Paris, France, April
20-23, 1949, was cited as a Communist front among the "peace"
conferences which "have been organized under Communist initiative
in various countries throughout the world as part of a campaign
against the North Atlantic Defense Pact" (Committee on Un-Ameri-
can Activities in reports of April 19, 1949; July 13, 1950; and April 1,
1951). The World Peace Council was formed at the conclusion of
the Second World Peace Congress in Warsaw and was "heralded by
the Moscow radio as the expression of the determination of the peoples
to take into their own hands the struggle for peace" (Committee on
Un-American Activities in a report dated April 1, 1951).
The World Peace Appeal was cited as a petition campaign launched
by the Permanent Committee of the World Peace Congress at its-
meeting in Stockholm, March 16-19, 1950; it "received the enthusias-
tic approval of every section of the international Communist hier-
archy" and was "lauded in the Communist press, putting every
individual Communist on notice that he 'has the duty to rise to this
appeal' * * *" (Committee on Un-American Activities in its report
of April 1, 1951).
274 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The American Peace Crusade, organized in January 1951, was cited
as an organization which "the Communists established as a new instru-
ment for their 'peace' offensive in the United States" (Committee on
Un-American Activities in its reports of February 19, 1951 and April 1,
1951); Dr. DuBois was one of the sponsors of the Crusade (Daily
Worker of February 1, 1951, page 2) ; minutes of the Sponsors Meeting
which was held in Washington, D. C., March 15, 1951 (page 4), named
him as one of the initiators of the Crusade and also as having been
proposed as Co-Chairman of that meeting; he was a sponsor of the
American People's Congress and Exposition for Peace which was held
in Chicago, June 29-July 1, 1951, called by the American Peace
Crusade to advance the theme of world peace (Daily Worker, April 22,
1951, page 2; May 1, 1951, page 11; the American Peace Crusader,
May 1951, pages 1 and 4; the Daily Worker of May 9, 1951, page 4;
Daily Worker of June 11, 1951, page 2; a leaflet of the Congress;
Daily Worker of July 1, 1951, page 3; a leaflet entitled "An Invitation
to American Labor to Participate in a Peace Congress * * *"; the
Call to the American People's Congress * * *"; the Daily Worker of
July 3,- 1951, page 2). He signed a petition of the Crusade, calling
on President Truman and Congress to seek a big-power pact (Daily
Worker, February 1, 1952, page 1) ; he attended a meeting of Delegates
Assembly for Peace, called by the Crusade and held in Washington,
D. C, April 1 (Daily Worker, April 3, 1952, page 3); he was one of
the sponsors of a Peace Referendum jointly with the American Peace
Crusade to make the end of the Korean war a major issue in the 1952
election campaign (Daily People's World of August 25, 1952, page 8).
Dr. DuBois issued a statement on the death of Stalin which read
in part as follows: "Let all Negroes, Jews and foreign-born who have
suffered in America from prejudice and intolerance, remember Joseph
Stalin" (Daily Worker of March 9, 1953, page 3); the Daily Worker
of January 18, 1952 (page 8), reported that he had renewed his fight
for a passport in order to attend the American Intercontinental Peace
Conference in Rio de Janeiro; it was reported in the Washington
Evening Star on May 10, 1952 (page B-21), that Dr. DuBois was
refused admission to Canada to attend the Canadian Peace Congress
because he refused to undergo an examination by the Canadian
Immigration service. On September 14, 1952, the Worker (page M6),
reported that Dr. DuBois had experienced passport difficulties when
leaving the United States.
Irwin Edman
Irwin Edman, educator, was one of the sponsors of the Cultural and
Scientific Conference for World Peace, arranged by the National
Council of the Arts, Sciences and Professions and held in New York
City, March 25-27, 1949. (See: Conference "Call"; Conference
Program, p. 12; and Daily Worker, February 21, 1949, p. 2.)
The Congressional Committee on Un-American Activities described
the Scientific and Cultural Conference as "actually a supermobiliza-
tion of the inveterate wheelhorses and supporters of the Communist
Party and its auxiliary organizations". (Review of Scientific and
Cultural Conference, dated April 19, 1949, p. 1.) The National
Council of the Arts, Sciences and Professions was cited as a Com-
munist-front organization in the Committee's report, page 2.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 275
The "Daily Worker", January 18, 1939, page 7, named Irwin Edman
as a Committee Sponsor of the League of American Writers. The
U. S. Attorney General cited the League of American Writers as sub-
versive and Communist in his letters to the Loyalty Review Board
(released June 1, 1948 and September 21, 1948, also included in the
Consolidated list of April 1, 1954). It was cited as a "Communist
front" by the Special Committee * * * (Reports of Jan. 3, 1940, p. 9;
June 25, 1942, p. 19'; March 29, 1944, p. 48.) "The League of American
Writers, founded under Communist auspices in 1935 * * * in 1939
* * * began openly to follow the Communist Party line as dictated by
the foreign policy of the Soviet Union * * *. The overt activities of
the League of American Writers in the last 2 years leave little doubt of
its Communist control". (The U. S. Attorney General, Congressional
Record, Sept. 24, 1942, pp. 7685 and 7686.)
The booklet, "These Americans Say:" (p. 8) named Irwin Edman
as a representative individual of the Coordinating Committee to
Lift the Embargo.
The Special Committee on Un-American Activities cited the
Coordinating Committee to Lift the Spanish Embargo as "One of a
number of front organizations, set up during the Spanish Civil War
by the Communist Party in the United States and through which
the party carried on a great deal of agitation". (Report, March 29,
1944, pp. 137 and 138).
Irwin Edman was a member of the Committee of 102 Writers and
Artists which protested the arrest of Pablo Neruda, Communist
Chilean Senator and World famous poet. (Daily Worker, April 7,
1948, page 13).
The "Daily Worker", February 16, 1948 (p. 16) reported that
Professor Irwin Edman, Columbia University, signed a statement to
the Mayor and City Council in behalf of the Communist, Simon
Gerson. An advertisement in the New York "Times", February 19,
1948 (p. 13) named bim as a supporter of the Citizens Committee to
Defend Representative Government, supporting the seating of Gerson,
Communist.
Clakk M. Eichelbeeger
Clark M. Eichelberger was named in the New York Times (De-
cember 3, 1938), as a member of the Committee for Concerted Peace
Efforts; a letterhead of the same organization, dated September 21,
1938, contains the name of Clark M. Eichelberger as Acting Chair-
man of the group; on March 16, 1939, the New York Times (page 11),
disclosed that he was Chairman of the organization's Executive
Committee. He spoke at a meeting of the Massachusetts Committee
for Concerted Peace Efforts in Boston, as reported by the Daily
Worker on June 10, 1938 (page 2), and again on June 11, 1938 (page
2); he spoke at a public meeting in Carnegie Hall, February 13, 1939,
to "Revise the Neutrality Act," as shown on a leaflet advertising the
meeting which was held under the auspices of the Committee for
Concerted Peace Efforts.
In a report by the Special Committee on Un-American Activities,
dated March 29, 1944, the Committee for Concerted Peace Efforts
was cited as an organization with the same aims as the American
Congress for Peace and Democracy, a Communist front advocating
collective security prior to the signing of the Stalin-Hitler pact.
276 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
In the same report, the Special Committer cited the Committee
for Peace Through World Cooperation as an organization with the
same aims as the American League for Peace and Democracy, a Com-
munist front which beat the drums for collective security against
Fascist aggressors in accordance with current Communist Party line.
Mr. Eichelberger was a member of the Committee for Peace * * *,
as shown on page 2 of the Daily Worker for March 23, 1938; the same
information appeared in New Masses for April 5, 1938 (page 27), in
connection with a rally held by the Committee for Peace * * * in
Madison Square Garden, April 4, 1938. He was named in the Daily
Worker of March 29, 1938 (page 4), as having endorsed the Com-
mittee for Peace through World Cooperation.
Fight magazine for April 1938 (page 57), named Clark M. Eichel-
berger as one of the sponsors of a meeting of the American League
for Peace and Democracy which was held in Madison Square Garden.
The Attorney General of the United States cited the American
League for Peace and Democracy as having been established "in an
effort to create public sentiment on behalf of a foreign policy adapted
to the interests of the Soviet Union"; and as being subversive and
Communist. (Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, pages 7683
and 7684; and press releases of June 1 and September 21, 1948,
respectively.) The Special Committee on Un-American Activities
cited the American League for * * * as "the largest of the Com-
munist 'front' movements in the United States" (reports of January
3, 1939 and March 29, 1944; also cited in reports of January 3, 1940;
January 3, 1941; June 25, 1942; and January 2, 1943).
The Attorney General also cited the American Youth Congress
as having "originated in 1934 and * * * controlled by Communists
and manipulated by them to influence the thought of American
youth"; he also cited it as subversive and Communist. (Congres-
sional Record, September 24, 1942, page 7685; and press releases of
December 4, 1947 and September 21, 1948, respectively.) The Special
Committee cited the American Youth Congress as "one of the prin-
cipal fronts of the Communist Party" and prominently identified
with the "White House picket line" (reports of June 25, 1942; January
3, 1939; January 3, 1941; and March 29, 1944).
In a pamphlet entitled "Youngville, U. S. A.," published in 1937
by the American Youth Congress, it is noted that "the following men
and women, prominent in the political, social, cultural, educational and
religious life of the nation, are firm believers in the cardinal Youth
Congress idea— youth organization for mutual youth interest along
democratic lines. They subscribe to the Declaration of the Rights
of Youth adopted by the Congress and have consented to give some
of their valuable time and advice to the central organization of Young
America. * * * They are serving in their purely personal capacities
because they have a deep interest in American youth and have had
long experience with its problems. * * *" Included in the list of
members of the National Advisory Committee of the American Youth
Congress is the name of Clark M. Eichelberger, identified as Director,
League of Nations Association. (See page 63 of the pamphlet.) The
same information appears on the organization's letterhead concerning
their Fourth Annual Conference which was held in Milwaukee, Wis-
consin, July 4, 1937.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 277
Mr. Eichelberger was one of the sponsors of the World Youth
Congress which was held in 1938 at Vassar College (Daily Worker
March 28, 1938, page 3); the Special Committee cited the World
Youth Congress as a "Communist conference" (reports of March
29, 1944 and January 3, 1939).
The American Student Union was cited as a Communist front —
which was "the result of a united front gathering of young Socialists
and Communists" in 1937. The Young Communist League took
credit for creation of the organization. (Special Committee's reports
of January 3, 1939; January 3, 1940; June 25, 1942; and March 29,
1944.) Dr. Eichelberger spoke at the Fourth National Convention
of the American Student Union, December 26-30, 1938, as disclosed
in the Student Almanac for 1939 (a publication of the organization).
The Daily Worker of June 2, 1938 (page 5), reported that Clark M.
Eichelberger supported a meeting of the Medical Bureau and North
American Committee To Aid Spanish Democracy, one of the groups
organized during 1937 and 1938 when the Communist Party cam-
paigned for support of the Spanish Loyalist cause. (From a report
■of the Special Committee dated March 29, 1944.)
On January 17, 1950, the New York Times (page 12), reported that
Clark M. Eichelberger was the fifty-fourth defense witness for Alger.
Hiss, tried and convicted for perjury. The article stated that "Mr.
Eichelberger is a director of the American Association for the United
Nations and appeared for the defense without a subpoena. Mr.
Eichelberger testified that the reputation of Mr. Hiss for loyalty,
integrity and veracity was 'excellent'. "
Henry Pratt Fairchild
The name of Henry Pratt Fairchild is found in this Committee's
Keport No. 1954, "Review of the Scientific and Cultural Conference
for World Peace," April 19, 1949, in connection with officially-cited
organizations, on pages 2, 7, 9, 11, 18, 21-29, 31, 32, 35, 37, 38, 40,
42, 43, 46-56, 58 and 60; a copy of the report is enclosed for your
information. Further references to Prof. Fairchild are given below:
As shown by the "Daily People's World" of February 27, 1952 (page
2), Prof. Henry Pratt Fairchild was a sponsor of an emergency con-
ference dedicated to the defense of Communists arrested under the
Smith Act and scheduled to be held in New York on March 16; the
same information appeared in the "Daily Worker" on February 25,
1952 (page 1) and March 6, 1952 (page 8). A photostatic copy of an
undated letterhead of the Emergency Civil Liberties Committee,
which was received for files September 21, 1951, was signed by Henry
Pratt Fairchild; the letter announced the formation of the organiza-
tion to oppose the Smith Act. Prof. Fairchild was reported to be a
sponsor of a two-day conference and forum of the Emergency Civil
Liberties Committee on "The Bill of Rights-Sublime Risk of Free
Men," in New York City, January 30-31 ("Daily Worker" of January
20, 1953, page 3 and "Daily People's World" of January 22, 1953,
page 2) . A letterhead of the National Committee to Win Amnesty
for the Smith Act Victims dated May 22, 1953 carried Prof. Fair-
child's name as a sponsor. He signed an appeal to President Truman
requesting amnesty for leaders of the Communist Party convicted
under the Smith Act, as shown by the "Daily Worker," December 10,
1952 (page 4).
278 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Prof. Fairchild was a signer of a statement calling for the end of the
war in Korea ("Daily Worker," May 21, 1951, page 1). He was a
signer of a statement for world peace submitted to the State Depart-
ment ("Daily Worker," November 19, 1951, page 1). According to
the "Daily Worker" of March 10, 1952 (page 1), Prof. Fairchild
signed an open letter to President Truman to halt the rearming of
Germany. He signed a letter to President Truman asking that he
act on germ warfare ("Daily People's World," June 9, 1952, page 6).
He was reported in the "Daily Worker" of March 5, 1951 (page 4)
to have signed a letter to President Truman to recognize the seating of
the People's Republic of China in the United Nations.
The "Daily Worker" of February 1, 1951 (p. 2) listed Prof.
Henry Pratt Fairchild, New York University, as a sponsor of the
American Peace Crusade; he was listed as an initial sponsor on the
Crusade's letterheads of February 1951 and February 25, 1953. He
was a sponsor of the American People's Congress and Exposition for
Peace of the American Peace Crusade, according to the leaflet,
"American People's Congress * * * invites you to participate in a
National Peace Competition"; "The Call to the American People's
Congress * * * "; and the "Daily Worker," June 11, 1951 (p. 2).
The American People's Congress and Exposition for Peace was held
in Chicago, 111., June 29, 30, and July 1, 1951. According to the
"Daily Worker," May 1, 1951 (p. 11), Professor Fairchild was a
sponsor of the American Peace Crusade's contest for songs, essays
and paintings advancing the theme of world peace.
The American Peace Crusade was cited by the Committee on Un-
American Activities as an organization which "the Communists
established" as "a new instrument for their 'peace' offensive in the
United States" (Report 378, on the Communist "Peace" Offensive,
April 25, 1951, p. 51).
An advertisement ("Paid for by contributions of signers") in the
Washington "Evening Star," October 30, 1951 (p. A-7), named
Prof. Henry Pratt Fairchild as a signer of an "Open Letter to J.
Howard McGrath" in behalf of the four jailed trustees of the Bail
Fund of the Civil Rights Congress of New York.
The Civil Rights Congress was cited as subversive and Communist
by the United States Attorney General in letters furnished the Loy-
alty Review Board and released December 4, 1947, and September
21, 1948; it was redesignated by the Attorney General pursuant to
Executive Order 10450 of April 27, 1953. This Committee, on Sep-
tember 2, 1947, released a report on the Civil Rights Congress in
which it was cited as having been "dedicated not to the broader
issues of civil liberties, but specifically to the defense of individual
Communists and the Communist Party" and "controlled by individ-
uals who are either members of the Communist Party or openly
loyal to it" (Report No. 1115, p. 19).
Professor Fairchild was shown as a national sponsor of the Spanish
Refugee Appeal of the Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee on
letterheads of that organization dated May 18, 1951 and January 5,
1953. He signed a petition sent to President Truman by the Span-
ish Refugee Appeal * * * "to bar military aid to or alliance with
fascist Spain" (mimeographed petition attached to letterhead of
May 18, 1951).
TAX-EXEMPT " FOUNT) ATIONS 270
The Special Committee on Un-American Activities cited the Joint
Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee as a Communist front in the report
of March 29, 1944 (page 174). The Attorney General cited the
organization as subversive and Communist (press releases of Decem-
ber 4, 1947 and September 21, 1948; redesignated pursuant to Exec-
utive Order 10450).
The "Daily Worker" of October 22, 1951 (page 8) reported that
Prof. Henry Pratt Fairchild would speak at a conference of the Na-
tional Council of American-Soviet Friendship on October 27 in New
York City. It was reported in the "Daily Worker" of INlovember
5, 1951 (page 8) that he would speak at a USA-USSR world peace
rally to be held on November 15 in New York City by the National
Council * * * He was shown as Secretary of the National Council
of American-Soviet Friendship in the July 28, 1952 issue of the "Daily
Worker" (page 3).
The Special Committee * * *, in its report of March 29, 1944
(page 156), cited the National Council of American-Soviet Friendship
as "the Communist Party's principal front for all things Russian."
The Attorney General cited the National Council as subversive and
Communist (press releases of December 4, 1947 and September 21,
1948; redesignated pursuant to Executive Order 10450, April 27,
1953).
"We Join Black's Dissent," a reprint of an article from the "St.
Louis Post-Dispatch," June 20, 1951, by the National Council of
the Arts, Sciences and Professions, named Prof. Henry Pratt Fair-
child as a supporter of a rehearing of the case of the Communist
leaders before the Supreme Court. He was Chairman of the "Restore
Free Speech" rally held by the National Council, New York City,
July 25, 1951, as shown by the "Daily Worker," July 23, 1951 (page
3) . He was listed as one who would speak at a meeting calling for the
right to advocate peace which was to be held under auspices of the
National Council, New York City, September 28, 1951, as shown
by the September 26, 1951 issue of the "Daily Worker" (page 8).
He signed the statement, "We Uphold the Right of All Citizens to
Speak for Peace * * *," as shown by the handbill, "Halt the De-
famers Who Call Peace Un-American!" which announced the Sep-
tember 28 meeting of the National Council referred to above.
Prof. Fairchild was listed as a sponsor of a conference on Equal
Rights for Negroes in the Arts, Sciences and Professions which was to
be held in New York City on November 10 by the New York Council
of the National Council ("Daily Worker," November. 1, 1951, page
7; November 9, 1951, page 7; and "A Call to a Conference on Equal
Rights * * *"). He took part in "A Tribute to Jo Davidson" held
under auspices of the National Council * * *, New York City, Janu-
ary 30, 1952 (handbill, "Memorial Meeting for Jo Davidson"). Iden-
tified as Secretary of the National Council * * *, Prof. Fairchild
signed "An Appeal for Peace" to the President and Congress, accord-
ing to the "Daily Worker," March 25, 1952 (page 2). He participated
in a meeting for Academic Freedom Against the Entertainment Black-
list held in New York City, October 10, 1952 by the National Council,
as advertised in the October 8, 1952 issue of the "Daily Worker"
(page 6). A letterhead of the National Council (photostat dated
December 7, 1952) carries the name of Prof. Henry Pratt Fairchild
as Secretary of the group. The "Daily Worker" of March 30, 1953
280 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
(page 6) reported that he served as Chairman of a clemency meeting
for the Rosenbergs held March 29, New York City, by the National
Council.
The "Daily Worker" of May 1, 1953 (page 2) reported that Prof.
Fairchild had been elected national chairman of the National Council
at a national convention which concluded its sessions in New York City,
April 26. A mimeographed handbill, "Free Cedric Belfrage," carried
his name as a speaker at a "Guardians of Liberty Rally," June 5,
New York City, sponsored by the National Council and the "National
Guardian"; the same information was revealed in the "Daily Worker"
on June 3, 1953 (page 8). Identified as Chairman of the National
Council, Prof. Fairchild was named as a speaker at a Peace Rally
of the organization held in New York City, September 27, 1953
("Daily Worker," September 15, 1953, page 6; September 21, 1953,
page 2; and September 29, 1953, page 3).
The Committee on Un-American Activities cited the National
Council of the Arts, Sciences and Professions as a Communist front
in the enclosed report.
The "Daily Worker" of June 20, 1950 (page 2) reported that Henry
Pratt Fairchild signed the World Peace Appeal; he was listed as an
endorser of the World Peace Appeal on an undated leaflet entitled
"Prominent Americans Call For * * *" (received September 11, 1950).
He was shown as a sponsor of the World Congress for Peace, American
Sponsoring Committee, on a leaflet, "World Congress for Peace,
Paris," April 20-23, 1949. He was shown as a sponsor of the Ameri-
can Continental Congress for Peace in Mexico City, September 5-10,
1949, as shown on the "Call" to the Congress. He was a sponsor of
the U. S. Sponsoring Committee for Representation at the Congress
of the Peoples for Peace, Vienna, a meeting of the World Peace Coun-
cil, as shown on a leaflet, "Let's Talk It Over!" and in the "Daily
Worker" (October 31, 1952, page 2) and "Daily People's World"
(November 5, 1952, page 2).
The World Peace Appeal was cited as a petition campaign launched
by the Permanent Committee of the World Peace Congress at its
meeting in Stockholm, March 16-19, 1950; as having "received the
enthusiastic approval of every section of the international Communist
hierarchy"; as having been lauded in the Communist press, putting
"every individual Communist on notice that he 'has the duty to rise
to this appeal' "; and as having "received the official endorsement
of the Supreme Soviet of the IT. S. S. R., which has been echoed by the
governing bodies of every Communist satellite country, and by all
Communist Parties throughout the world." (Committee's Report
378, April 25, 1951, page 34.)
The Committee, in Report 378, April 25, 1951, cited the American
Continental Congress for Peace in Mexico City as "another phase in
the Communist 'peace' campaign, aimed at consolidating anti-Ameri-
can forces throughout the Western Hemisphere."
The World Peace Congress (Paris, April 20-23, 1949) was cited by
this Committee as a Communist front among the " 'peace' con-
ferences" which "have been organized under Communist initiative in
various countries throughout the world as part of a campaign against
the North Atlantic Defense Pact." The World Peace Council was
cited as having been formed at the conclusion of the Second World
Peace Congress in Warsaw and which was heralded by the Moscow
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 281
radio as "the expression of the determination of the peoples to take
into their own hands the struggle for peace," (Report 378, April 25,
1951, pages 16 and 38, respectively.)
The "Daily Worker" of July 9, 1952 (page 6) reported that Prof.
Henry Pratt Fairchild signed an open letter of the National Com-
mittee to Repeal the McCarran Act; the letter was made to the
Platform Committees of the Republican and Democratic Parties and
urged that they include in the 1952 platforms "a plank calling for
repeal of the McCarran Act." The same organization also released
an open letter to Members of the Eighty-Third Congress urging
support of legislation to repeal the McCarran Act, as shown on an
undated official letterhead (received January 1953) which listed Henry
Pratt Fairchild as having signed the letter (page 2).
Prof. Fairchild was among the guests who were present and intro-
duced at the 17th annual education conference of the Teachers Union
of New York held March 28 at the Hotel Commodore ("Daily
Worker," March 30, 1953, pages 3 and 8).
James T. Farrell
James T. Farrell contributed to the following issues of the Daily
Worker: November 29, 1934, p. 5; May 3, 1935, p. 2; and December
21, 1935, p. 3. This publication was cited as the "Official Communist
Party, U. S. A. organ" by the Committee on Un-American Activities
in Report No. 1920, May 11, 1948, p. 44.
The "Call for Congress of American Revolutionary Writers on
May 1" listed James T. Farrell as one of the signers of the "Call."
The same information was reported in the Daily Worker of January 18,
1935 (p. 5) and was shown in material presented to the Special
Committee on Un-American Activities by Mr. Walter S. Steele in
connection with his public testimony before the Committee on
August 17, 1938 (Public Hearings, Vol. 1, page 561). The Congress
of American Revolutionary Writers was cited as subversive and
Communist by the Attorney General in letters to the Loyalty Review
Board released December 4, 1947, and September 21, 1948, and
included in consolidated list released April 1, 1954.
The Daily Worker of April 29, 1935 (p. 1) reported that James T.
Farrell participated in the First American Writers Congress at Mecca
Temple, New York, N. Y., April 26-27, 1935. The Walter Steele
material referred to above (p. 562) shows that James T. Farrell was
elected at that congress to the national council of the League of
American Writers. This information was also reported in the Daily
Worker of April 30, 1935.
The League of American Writers was cited as subversive and
Communist by the Attorney General in letters to the Loyalty Review
Board released June 1 and Sept. 21, 1948, and included in consolidated
list released April 1, 1954. The Attorney General (Cong. Record,
September 24, 1942, pp. 7685-6) stated the League was "founded
under Communist auspices in 1935 * * * in 1939 * * * began openly
to follow the Communist Party line as dictated by the foreign policy
of the Soviet Union. * * *" This organization was cited as a Com-
munist front by the Special Committee on Un-American Activities,
Report of January 3, 1940, p. 9. According to the March 29, 1944,
Report (p. 82) of the Special Committee on Un-American Activities,
Earl Browder, general secretary of the Communist Party, was a speaker
55647 — 54 1&
282 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
at the second biennial American Writers Congress in 1937; the Con-
gress was sponsored by the League of American Writers.
A. letterhead of the National Committee for the Defense of. Political
Prisoners dated October 31, 1935, carried the name of James T.
Farrell as a member of that organization. The National Committee
for * * * was cited as subversive and Communist by the Attorney
General in letters to the Loyalty Review Board released December
4, 1947, and September 21, 1948; also included in consolidated list
released April 1, 1954, and as "Substantially equivalent to Inter-
national Labor Defense, legal arm of the Communist Party * * *
(it) caters to financially and socially prominent liberals * * *"
(Cong. Record, September 24, 1942, p. 7686).
The December, 1930, issue of New Masses (which was cited by the
Attorney General as a "Communist periodical" Cong. Record, Sep-
tember 24, 1942, p. 7688) shows James T. Farrell as a contributor
(p, 18), and the June 19, 1934, issue contains his contribution to
the New Masses Symposium (page 30).
James T. Farrell contributed to Partisan Review, publication of the
John Reed Clubs, as shown by the February-March, 1934 (p. 16) and
January-February, 1935 (p. 20) issues. The Special Committee
on * * * Report of March 29, 1944, p. 175, indicates these clubs
were "Named after the founder of the American Communist Party."
An undated letterhead of Book Union, Inc., lists James T. Farrell
as a member of its advisory council. Writings by James T. Farrell
were included in the anthology, "Proletarian Literature in the United
States," Book Union's first book selection according to the undated
circular, "Triple Combination Offer." This circular also showed
that applications and payments were to be sent to New Masses and
that the "triple offer" consisted of a copy of "Proletarian Literature,"
a membership in Book Union, and a 12-weeks' subscription to New
Masses. The Special Committee on * * * in its March 29, 1944,
Report (p. 96) found Book Union to be "Distributors of Communist
literature."
The folder, "Mother Ella Reeve Bloor 45th Anniversary Banquet,"
January 24, 1936, lists James Farrell as a sponsor. "Mother Bloor"
was one of the outstanding women leaders of the Communist Party
in the United States.
Other references to James T. Farrell may be found in the following
publications of this Committee, copies of which are enclosed for your
use :
Hearings Regarding Communist Infiltration of Hollywood Motion-
Picture Industry — -Part 3, May and June 1951, p. 596
Hearings Regarding Communist Infiltration of the Hollywood Motion-
Picture Industry— Part 8, May 1952, pp. 3482 and 3487
Howard Fast
The Committee's "Review of the Scientific and Cultural Con-
ference for World Peace," dated April 19, 1949 (p. 2), named Howard
Fast as one of the sponsors of the Conference which was arranged by
the National Council of the Arts, Sciences and Professions. The
same Review showed that Mr. Fast participated in the World Congress
of Intellectuals in Wroclaw (Breslau) Poland, August 25 to 28, 1948.
He was an American Sponsor of the World Peace Congress held in
Paris, April 20-23, 1949 (ibid.).
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 283
The Scientific and Cultural Conference for World Peace was cited
as a Communist-front organization which was "actually a super-
mobilization of the inveterate wheelhorses and supporters of the
Communist Party and its auxiliary organizations" (Review of the
Scientific and Cultural Conference, page 1); the National Council of
the Arts, * * *, was also cited in the same Review as a Communist-
front organization.
* * * bitter hatred for all western culture and the attempt to divorce writers,
scientists, and artists from their own native land and win their allegiance for the
Soviet Union is the underlying aim and theme of these scientific and cultural
conferences for world peace.
The World Congress of Intellectuals was a forerunner of the"
Scientific and Cultural Conference. The World Peace Congress in
Paris (April 20-23, 1949) was cited as a Communist front among the
"peace" conferences which "have been organized under Communist
initiative in various countries throughout the world as part of a
campaign against the North Atlantic Defense Pact." (From the
Committee's Review of the Scientific and Cultural Conference.) A
copy of this report is enclosed; and your attention is called to pages
3, 9-11, 19, 20, 22, 24, 25, 27, 28, 31, 33-45, 47-51, 54-56, 58 and 60
which refer to Howard Fast.
In a report of this Committee, dated April 16, 1946, Howard Fast-
was named as a member of the Executive Board of the Joint Anti-
Fascist Refugee Committee; while an officer, he was cited for contempt
of Congress for refusal to produce records of the organization as
subpoenaed by the Committee. The Washington "Post" of April 1,
1947 (p. 1), reported that he was indicted April 1, 1947; and was
convicted June 27, 1947 (Washington "Star" of June 28, 1947, pages
1 and 6). The District of Columbia Court sentenced Mr. Fast to*
three months in jail and a $500 fine ("PM" of July 17, 1947, page 5).
He appealed the decision but "on May 29, 1950, the Supreme Court
refused to review the conviction for contempt of Congress of * * *
members of the Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee and on June
7, 1950, they went to jail" (Annual Report of the Committee for the
Year 1950, page 34).
The "Daily Worker" of September 1, 1950 (pages 2 and 9), reported
that Howard Fast, novelist, was released from Federal prison at Mill
Point, West Virginia, after completing three months sentence for
contempt of the House of Representatives.
The Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee was cited as a Com-
munist-front organization by the Special Committee on Un-American
Activities, March 29, 1944 (page 174). On December 4, 1947 and
September 21, 1948, lists of organizations cited by the Attorney
General of the United States were released to the press by the U. S.
Civil Service Commission ; the Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee
was one of the organizations shown on the list as subversive and
Communist and it was subsequently redesignated by the Attorney
General on April 27, 1953 pursuant to Executive Order No. 10450..
Howard Fast signed a statement of the Civil Rights Congress,
protesting the jailing of Communist leaders, as shown in the "Daily-
Worker" of June 6, 1949 (p. 2); he spoke at a meeting of the Civil
Rights Congress in behalf of the Communist leaders, according to>
the "Daily Worker" of June 8, 1949 (p. 3) ; he spoke again before the-
same group, as reported in the "Daily Worker" on June 28, 1949 (p. 9).
284 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The Civil Rights Congress published Mr. Fast's book, "Peekskill
USA" as was shown in the "Daily Worker" on March 23, 1951 (p. 11)
and April 30, 1951 (p. 11). The October 3, (1951) issue of the same
publication reported that the Civil Rights Congress had published
the second in a series of "Crisis Papers" by Mr. Fast (p. 7).
In a pilgrimage of the Civil Rights Congress, on behalf of the Martins-
ville Seven, Howard Fast led the New York Council of the Arts,
Sciences and Professions; the so-called "Martinsville seven" were
"Negro youth and men * * * charged with the rape of a white woman
in 1949, tried and convicted" ("Daily Worker" of January 29, 1951,
The Civil Rights Congress was "an organization formed in April
1946 as a merger of two other Communist-front organizations (Inter-
national Labor Defense and the National Federation for Constitu-
tional Liberties) ; it was "dedicated not to the broader issues of civil
liberties, but specifically to the defense of individual Communists and
the Communist Party" and "controlled by individuals who are either
members of the Communist Party or openly loyal to it" (Committee
tm Un-American Activities in Report 1115 of September 2, 1947).
The U. S. Attorney General cited the Civil Rights Congress as sub-
versive and Communist (letters to the Loyalty Review Board, re-
leased to the press December 4, 1947 and September 21, 1948). The
organization was redesignated on April 27, 1953 pursuant to Executive
Order 10450.
The "Daily Worker" of September 12, 1949 (p. 4), reported that
Howard Fast spoke before the New York State Communist Party;
the "Daily Worker" of January 18, 1950 (p. 11), reported that he was
Chairman of a meeting on the Soviet Communist Party resolutions
on the arts.
The following statement by Mr. Fast appeared in the "Daily
Woker" on November 10, 1949 (p. 10):
In the Communist Party is enshrined the future and the hope of mankind * * *
There is no nobler, no finer product of man's existence on this earth than the
Communist Party.
Howard Fast signed the World Peace Appeal, as shown in the
"Daily Worker" of June 20, 1950 (p. 2). An interim statement by
the Committee on Un-American Activities, July 13, 1950, revealed
that "though labeled as a 'peace petition,' the document (World
Peace Appeal) is actually intended to be the entering wedge for a
campaign of civil disobedience and defiance of our Government, in
the interests of the war effort of a foreign nation" (p. 3). The Com-
mittee on Un-American Activities again cited the World Peace Appeal
as a petition campaign launched by the Permanent Committee of the
World Peace Congress in a meeting at Stockholm, March 16-19, 1950
(Report on the Communist "Peace" Offensive, April 25, 1951, p.
34) ; the report further stated that the Appeal "received the enthusi-
astic approval of every section of the international Communist
hierarchy" and as having been lauded in the Communist press, put-
ting "every individual Communist on notice that he 'has the duty to
rise to this appeal' "; and as having "received the official endorsement
of the Supreme Soviet of the U. S. S. R."
The "Daily Worker" of April 6, 1951 (p. 4), reported that the State
Department had refused to grant Howard Fast a passport to Prague,
Czechoslovakia, to attend the opening of his play, "Thirty Pieces of
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 285
Silver." The September 26, 1951 issue of the "Daily Worker" (p. 4),
reported that the State Department had refused to grant him a pass-
port to attend the second anniversary celebration of the Chinese
People's Kepublic and that he claimed the Department of State was
making "him a sort of house prisoner within the continental border
of the United States."
The "Daily Worker" of February 25, 1953 (p. 7), reported that
a Czech translation of "Haym Solomon" by Howard Fast was in
publication, according to a recent announcement in Prague.
Howard Fast was a signer of an appeal to President Truman re-
questing amnesty for leaders of the Communist Party convicted under
the Smith Act as shown by the December 10, 1952 issue of the "Daily
Worker" (p. 4).
The "Daily Worker" of September 10, 1952 (p. 8), reported that
Howard Fast was the American Labor Party Congressional candidate
in the 23d Congressional District, New York. According to the
September 15, 1952 issue of the "Daily Worker" (p. 3), Howard Fast,
American Labor Party candidate for Congress from the 23d Con-
gressional District in the Bronx, called on President Truman to order a
cease-fire in Korea. The Special Committee * * *, in its report of
March 29, 1944 (p. 78), cited the American Labor Party as follows:
For years, the Communists have put forth the greatest efforts to capture the
entire American Labor Party throughout New York State. They succeeded in
capturing the Manhattan and Brooklyn sections of the American Labor Party but
outside of New York City they have been unable to win control.
Howard Fast was a signer of an Open Letter of the American Peace
Crusade to the President demanding an immediate cease-fire in Korea
and that the prisoner issue be settled later ("Daily Worker," March
11, 1953, p. 8). The Congressional Committee * * *, in its statement
issued on the March of Treason, February 19, 1951, and House Report
No. 378, on the Communist "Peace" Offensive, April 25, 1951 (p. 51),
cited the American Peace Crusade as an organization which "the
Communists established" as "a new instrument for their 'peace'
offensive in tjhe United States" and which was heralded by the "Daily
Worker" "with the usual bold headlines reserved for projects in line
with the Communist objectives." On January 22, 1954, the United
States Attorney General cited the American Peace Crusade as sub-
versive and Communist, pursuant to Executive Order 10450.
The "Daily Worker" of November 10, 1952 (p. 3) reported that
Howard Fast was a signer of an amicus curiae brief presented to the
Supreme Court, Washington, D. C, urging a new trial for Ethel and
Julius Rosenberg. He participated in a march to Sing Sing in a demon-
stration for the Rosenbergs ("Daily People's World," December 23,
1952, p. 1); and he wrote an article on his trip to Sing Sing in behalf
of the Rosenbergs ("Daily People's World," December 31, 1952,
p. 7). The "Daily Worker" of January 21, 1953 (p. 7) reported that
Howard Fast was one of those who urged clemency for the Rosenbergs.
A letterhead of the Committee of Professional Groups for Browder
and Ford, dated September 22, 1936, listed Kenneth Fearing as a
member of that organization. The Committee of Professional Groups
for Browder and Ford has been cited as a Communist-front organiza-
tion which operated when those two candidates were running for
President and Vice President, respectively, on the Communist Party
ticket. (From Report 1311 of the Special Committee on Un-American
Activities dated March 29, 1944, pages 48 and 181.)
286 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The "Daily Worker" of May 21, 1930 reported that Kenneth Fear-
ing was a member of the John Reed Club; the same information is
found in the "New York Times" of May 19, 1930. He contributed
to the November-December 1934 (p. 54) and January-February 1935
(p. 29) issues of the Partisan Review, a publication of the John
Reed Club of New York.
The John Reed Clubs of the United States were named after the
founder of the American Communist Party (report of the Special
Committee * * * dated March 29, 1944, p. 175).
Kenneth Fearing contributed articles to the "Daily Worker" and
to its Sunday edition, "The Worker", as shown in the following issues
of that publication: August 27, 1934; July 23, 1935 (p. 5); December
24, 1931 (p. 3); December 21, 1935 (p. 3); and January 23, 1936 (p.
5). His photograph appeared in the issue of May 20, 1935 (p. 5).
The Daily Worker has been cited as the official organ of the Com-
munist Party, U. S. A., by the Committee on Un-American Activities
in Report No. 1920 of May 11, 1948 (page 44); also cited by the
Special Committee * * * in report dated March 29, 1944 (pages 59
and 60; also cited in reports of January 3, 1939, page 30; January 3,
1940, page 7; January 3, 1941, page 14; and June 25, 1942, page 4).
New Masses magazine for September 1930 (page 3) named Kenneth
Fearing as one of its Contributing Editors; he contributed to the
following issues of the publication: September 1927 (pages 9 and 29);
January 28 (page 5); June 1928 (page 22); September 1930 (page 11);
September 6, 1938 (page 20); and November 8, 1938 (page 10). His
book of poetry, Stranger at Coney Island, was reviewed by Eda Lou
Walton in the January 1949 issue of Masses & Mainstream (pages
81-83).
The Special Committee * * * cited New Masses as a "nationally
circulated weekly journal of the Communist Party * * * whose
ownership was vested in the American Fund for Public Service"
(report dated March 29, 1944, pages 48 and 75; also cited in reports of
January 3, 1939, page 80; and June 25, 1942, pages 4 and 21). The
Attorney General of the United States cited New Masses as a "Com-
munist periodical" (Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, page
7688).
The Bulletin of the League of American Writers (issue for the
Summer, 1938, page 4), named Kenneth Fearing as one of the members
of the League; he signed the Call to the Third American Writers
Congress of the League, as shown in Direction for May-June 1939
(page 1).
The Attorney General cited the League of American Writers as
having been founded under Communist auspices in 1935 and "in
1939" it "began openly to follow the Communist Party line"; it was
subsequently cited as subversive and Communist. (Congressional
Record, September 24, 1942, pages 7680 and 7685; and press releases
on June 1 and September 21, 1948, respectively; also included in con-
solidated list dated April 1, 1954.)
The Special Committee * * * cited the league as a Communist-
front organization (report of January 3, 1940; also cited in reports
of June 25, 1942, and March 29, 1944).
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 287
Soviet Russia Today published (in the issue of September 1939,
page 25) , the text of an Open Letter —
calling for greater unity of the anti-fascist forces and strengthening of the front
against aggression through closer cooperation with the Soviet Union, released on
August 14 by 400 leading Americans.
Kenneth Fearing, identified as a Poet, was one of the "400 leading
Americans" who signed the letter which urged —
Americans of whatever political persuasion to stand firmly for close cooperation
in this sphere between the United States and Soviet Russia, and to be on guard
against any and all attempts to prevent such cooperation in this critical period
in the affairs of mankind.
The Open Letter described above was known as the Open Letter for
Closer Cooperation With the Soviet Union and was issued by "a group
of Communist Party stooges" (from Report of the Special Commit-
tee * * * dated June 25, 1942, page 21).
Harold Glasser
Summarized from the Committee on Un-American Activities report,
"The Shameful Years", (House Report No. 1229, January 8, 1952,
pp. 58-61), as follows:
THE SILVERMASTEB-PERLO GROUPS
In order for their espionage apparatus to function as an over-all unit it was
necessary for the Russians to establish contact within the various departments
and bureaus of the United States Government. The success with which this was
accomplished was attested to in testimony given the Committee by Elizabeth
T. Bentley in Julv 1948.
Miss Bentlev stated that for more than 11 years she had engaged in Communist
Party activity* as well as Soviet espionage. In 1938 she became acquainted with
Jacob Golos, * * *
* * * She testified that under the direction of Golos, until his death in 1943,
she acted as courier and in a liaison capacity between individuals engaged in
Soviet espionage and Golos.
Even after Golos died in November 1943, she continued to act in the same
capacity under the direction of Earl Browder, then head of the Communist Party
U. S. A. This arrangement continued until late in 1944, * * *
* * * ' * * * *
Miss Bentlev has stated that all the individuals working in the apparatus were
under the direction of the NKVD. These espionage groups with which she was
working were composed primarily of individuals employed in the Government in
Washington, D. C. The head of the most important and active group with which
Miss Bentley had contact was Nathan Gregory Silvermaster. * * *
* * * * * * *
The head of another important group contacted by Elizabeth Bentley was
Victor Perlo, then an employee of the War Production Board. She first met the
members of this group at the apartment of John Abt, then general counsel for
the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America-CIO. Abt was later to figure
in the testimony of Whittaker Chambers as will be shown later in this report.
Another person mentioned by Bentley, who was to figure in the Chambers
testimony, was Alger Hiss. Bentley stated that members of the Perlo group had
informed her that "Hiss" of the State Department had taken Harold Glasser of
the Treasury Department and two or three others, and had turned them over
to the direct control of Soviet representatives operating in this country.
The members of the Perlo group who were named by Miss Bentley were:
* * * * * . * *
Harold Glasser, Treasury Department; loaned to Government of Ecuador;
loaned to War Production 'Board; adviser on North African Affairs Committee
in AlgieTs, North Africa;
288
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Certain of these individuals have denied the allegations concerning themselves
either through a personal appearance before the committee or by communica-
tion with the committee.
*******
Norman Bursler, * * *, Harold Glasser, * * *, have not appeared before the
committee to affirm or deny the charges made concerning them.
Other references to this matter may be found in the following
publications of the Committee on Un-American Activities:
Hearings Regarding Communist Espionage in the United States
Government, July-September 1948, pages: 515, 575, 592, 654,
686, 702, 821, 860, 885, 900, 902, 903, 910, 917, 921, 1273, 1350,
1351
Hearings Regarding Communism in the United States Government —
Part 1, April-June, 1950, and July-August, 1948, pages: 1727,
1739, 1748, 1751, 2933, and 2943
Annual Report for the Year 1950, page 9
Methods of Communist Infiltration in the United States Govern-
ment, May and June 1952, pages: 3406, 3407, 3412, and 3442
Walter .Gellhorn
Organization and affiliation
National Lawyers Guild (1).
Member of the Committee on
Administrative Law and Agen-
cies of the Guild; identified as
from New York City.
Member; identified with Co-
lumbia University, New
York City.
International Juridical Associa-
tion (1). Member, National
Committee.
Signer of Statement
National Emergency Conference
for Democratic Rights (1).
Member, Board of Sponsors.
Non-Partisan Committee for the
Reelection of Congressman Vito
Marcantonio (1). Member.
"Security, Loyalty, and Science"
by Dr. Walter Gellhorn re-
viewed.
Martha Graham
Organization and affiliation
American League for Peace and
Democracy (1) and (2). Mem-
ber, Theatre Arts Committee.
National Council of American-So-
viet Friendship (1) and (2). Vice
Chairman, Dance Committee.
Source
July 1937 News-Letter, p. 2.
1939 Membership List.
Leaflet, "What is the I. J. A.?"
"Daily Worker," July 25, 1936,
p. 2.
Press release dated Feb. 23, 1940.
Letterhead dated Oct. 3, 1936.
"Daily Worker," Nov. 23, 1950
(p. 8), "Daily People's World,"
Nov. 28, 1950, p. 7 and Feb.
6, 1951, p. 9.
Source
Letterhead, Apr. 6, 1939 (photo-
stat).
Report of the Director to the
Members, NCASF, Mar. 7,
1945.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
289
Organization and affiliation
Medical Bureau and North Ameri-
can Committee to Aid Spanish
Democracy (1). Sponsor.
Member, Theatre Arts Com-
mittee.
Moetimee Graves
Organization and affiliation
Citizens' Committee to Free Earl
Browder (1) and (2). Sponsor
in Washington.
National Council of American-So-
viet Friendship (1) and (2).
Sponsor.
Member of Sponsoring Com-
mittee of the National
Council's Committee on
Education.
Open Letter for Closer Coopera-
tion with the Soviet Union (1).
Signer.
Washington Committee for Aid to
China (1). Chairman.
Spoke at meeting of the group
at the First Baptist Church,
Washington, D. C, Feb. 11,
1941.
American Russian Institute (2).
Member of Board of Directors
and sponsor of dinner dedicated
to American-Soviet Post-War
Relations, New York, N. Y.,
Oct. 19, 1944.
Horace Gregory
Organization and Affiliation
Communist Party (1) and (2).
Signed Call for support of the
Communist Party National
Elections and its candidates.
Member, Committee of Pro-
fessional Groups for (Earl)
Browder and (J as.) Ford,
candidates for President
and Vice President of the
United States on the Com-
munist Party ticket.
Source
Letterhead, Michigan Chapter,
Feb. 2, 1939.
Letterhead, July 6, 1938.
Source
Advertisement in the Washing-
ton "Post," May 11, 1942, p. 9.
Letterhead dated March 13, 1946,
a memorandum of the organi-
zation issued March 18, 1946,
and the "Call" to the Congress
of American-Soviet Friendship,
Nov. 6-8, 1943, p. 4.
Bulletin of the Committee on
Education, June 1945, p. 22,
and the Proceedings of the
Conference on Education
About the Soviet Union, Oct.
14, 1944, New York City (in-
side back cover).
"Soviet Russia Today," Septem-
ber 1939, p. 25.
Leaflet, "China Aid News," June
1940; mimeographed form let-
ter dated Apr. 15, 1941.
Leaflet, "Stop Shipments to Ja-
pan."
Invitation to dinner.
Source
Daily Worker, Sept. 14, 1932,
p. 1, c. 2.
Daily Worker, Sept. 2, 1936, p. 2;
letterhead of Sept. 22, 1936;
pamphlet, Culture and the
Crisis, p. 32.
290 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Organization and affiliation Source
National Committee for People's Letterhead of July 13, 1938; and
Rights (1) and (2). Member. leaflet, "News You Don't
Get," dated Nov. 15, 1938.
League of American Writers (1) Daily Worker, Apr. 30, 1935.
and (2). Member, National
Committee.
Congress of American Revolution- Daily Worker, Jan. 18, 1935",
ary Writers (2). Signed Call p. 5.
to the congress.
New Masses (1) and (2). Con- New Masses, September 1930,
tributing Editor. p. 3; December 1930, p. 3;
June 8, 1937, p. 13; Sept. 7,
1937, p. 9; Sept. 14, 1937, p. 9;
Nov. 2, 1937, p. 13; Jan. 11,
1938, p. 25
Contributed to the following... New Masses, February 1928, p.
13; September 1928, p. 6;
Mar. 2, 1937, p. 23; Apr. 14,
1937, p. 8; Apr. 20, 1937, p. 25;
Aug. 3, 1937, p. 26; Oct. 12,
1937, p. 17; and Dec. 7, 1937,
p. 11.
Golden Book of American Friend- Soviet Russia Today, November
ship With the Soviet Union (1). 1937, p. 79.
Signed the Golden Book.
Albert Guerard
According to the following sources, Prof. Albert L. Guerard was
a sponsor of the American Committee for Protection of Foreign Born:
A letterhead of the organization dated December 11-12, 1948; an
undated letterhead received by this committee July 11, 1950; an
undated letterhead distributing a speech by Abner Green at a con-
ference held December 2-3, 1950; a 1950 letterhead; the Daily Worker
of April 4, 1951 (page 8); a letterhead of the Midwest Committee
for Protection of Foreign Born, dated April 30, 1951, which named
him as a National Sponsor of the organization; a photostatic copy
of an undated letterhead of the Twentieth Anniversary National
Conference which was held in Chicago, Illinois, December 8-9, 1951;
the Daily Worker of April 29, 1953 (page 6), in which source he was
identified with Brandeis University, Waltham, Mass., and which
source also gave the name as Prof. Albert Guerard, without a middle
initial; and Exhibit 52 of Matthew Cvetic, presented during his
testimony before this committee.
- The program and call to a National Conference of the American
Committee for Protection of Foreign Born in Cleveland, Ohio, October
25-26, 1947, named Prof. Albert Guerard as one of the sponsors of
that conference; According to the Daily Worker of April 8, 1953
(page 2), Prof. Albert L. Guerard, Waltham, Mass., signed an Open
Letter of the American Committee * * *, addressed to the Congress
of the United States, calling for repeal of the Walter-McCarran Law,
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 291
He was among the "one hundred and thirty" who "joined with the
American Committee ■ * * * in signing a scroll presented to the
Rt. Rev. Arthur W. Moulton" (honorary chairman of the American
Committee) on his 80th birthday (Daily Worker of May 5, 1953,
page 8). He was a sponsor of the National Conference to Repeal
the Walter-McCarran Law and Defend Its Victims, called by the
American Committee * * * for Chicago, Illinois, December 12-13,.
1953 (Daily Worker of October 1, 1953, page 2).
The Attorney General of the United States cited the American
Committee for Protection of Foreign Born as subversive and Com-
munist (press releases of June 1 and September 21, 1948; consolidated
list released April 1, 1954); the Special Committee on Un-American
Activities cited it as "one of the oldest auxiliaries of the Communist
Party in the United States" (report of March 29, 1944).
Prof. Albert L. Guerard, identified with Stanford University, Calif. r
signed an appeal addressed to the President of the United States,
requesting amnesty for leaders of the Communist Party convicted
under the Smith Act (Daily Worker, December 10, 1952, page 4).
An undated leaflet of the Citizens' Committee to Free Earl Browder
named Prof. Albert Guerard of Stanford University as having appealed
to the President of the United States "for justice in the Browder
case." The Attorney General cited the Citizens' Committee * * *
as Communist (Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, page 7687;
press release of April 27, 1949; and consolidated list of April 1, 1954);
the Special Committee * * * cited the organization as a Communist
front (report of March 29, 1944.
Also cited in the report of the Special Commit tee * * * (dated March
29, 1944) was the National Free Browder Congress; Albert Guerard
signed the call to that congress, as reported in the Daily Worker of
February 25, 1942 (pages 1 and 4).
On September 11, 1942, the National Federation for Constitutional
Liberties published in pamphlet form, an Open Letter which the
organization had sponsored, signed by "600 Prominent Americans"
who asked the President of the United States to reconsider the order
of the Attorney General for deportation of Harry Bridges, Communist
Party member. The Open Letter further stated that "It is equally
essential that the Attorney General's ill-advised, arbitrary, and unwar-
ranted findings relative to the Communist Party be rescinded."
Among the "600 Prominent Americans" who signed the letter,
dated July 11, 1942, was Prof. Albert Guerard, Stanford University.
The same information appeared in the Daily Worker on July 19,
1942 (page 4).
The Daily Worker of November 25, 1953 (page 2), reported that
Prof. Albert L. Guerard, General Literature Emeritus, Stanford,
California, was one of 134 professionals who signed a statement on
behalf of the Jefferson School of Social Science, cited as "an adjunct
of the Communist Party" by the Attorney General (press release of
December 4, 1947; and consolidated list released on April 1, 1954).
The Special Committee . . . also cited the School (report of March
29, 1944).
292
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
John Houseman
Organization and affiliation
Daily Worker (1) . Writer of article
- on the theatre.
Friends of the Abraham Lincoln
Brigade (1). Sponsor.
National Sponsor.
Hollywood Independent Citizens
Committee of the Arts, Sciences
and Professions (1). Member,
Executive Council.
Hollywood Writers Mobilization
(2). Third Vice-Chairman, Ex-
ecutive Council.
Member, Advisory Committee
on Radio of the "Holly-
wood Quarterly" pub. by
Hollywood Writers Mobi-
lization.
Contributed to Hollywood
Quarterly.
Member of Panel on Propa-
ganda Analysis at the
Writers Congress held
October 1-3, 1943, under
auspicies of H. W. M. and
University of California.
New Theatre League (1). Spon-
sor of drive to raise funds for
Artef Theatre. Artref Theatre
was described in this article as
"proudest and outstanding
member" of New Theatre
League.
Theatre Arts Committee (affiliated
with Medical Bureau and North
American Committee to Aid
Spanish Democracy — cited by
1 ; and American League for
Peace and Democracy, cited by
1 and 2. Member, Advisory
Council.
Source
Daily Worker, Sept. 18, 1937, p.
7.
Letterhead, Sept. 13, 1937; Infor-
mation submitted by Walter S.
Steele in connection with his
testimony given in public hear-
ings before Special Committee
on Un-American Activities,
Aug. 17, 1938, p. 569; testi-
mony of Mr. Steele, Public
Hearings, July 21, 1947, p. 29.
Letterhead of Mar. 23, 1939,
introduced into Public Hear-
ings of the Special Committee
on Un-American Activities dur-
ing testimony of Mrs. Walter
Owens Selby, Apr. 12, 1940,
pp. 7728-7729.
Letterhead, Oct. 2, 1945.
Letterhead, Oct. 10, 1945.
Hollywood Quarterly, April 1947,
No. 3, vol. II.
Hollywood Quarterly, January
1947, p. 161.
Program of the Writers Congress,
1943.
Daily Worker, Jan. 21, 1938, p. 9.
Undated letterhead.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 293
Organization and affiliation Source
Was reported to film independently Daily Worker, Sept. 26, 1950, p.
a film on the Centralia mine 11.
disaster of 1947.
Langston Hughes
The Daily Worker of September 14, 1932, named Langston Hughes
as one of those who signed a "Gall for support of the Communist
Party National Elections and its Candidates." The same publication
(in the issue of February 7, 1949, page 2), reported that "Langston
Hughes, Negro people's poet, defends the Communist leaders on trial
and warns the Negro people that they too are being tried, in his column
in the current issue of the 'Chicago Defender'. " The article further
quoted Mr. Hughes as declaring that "If the 12 Communists are sent
to jail, in a little while they will send Negroes to jail simply for being:
Negroes and to concentration camps just for being colored."
Langston Hughes contributed to the Communist Party Yearbook:
of 1937 (page 79), which is entitled "Ohio Marches Toward Peace and
Progress." He contributed to the March, April and July (1925)
issues of the Workers Monthly, official organ of the Workers Party
(as the American section of the Communist International was known
at the time).
In sworn testimony of Dr. Theodore Graebner, Concordia Seminary,
St. Louis, Missouri, before the Special Committee on Un-American
Activities on December 9, 1938 (Volume 4, page 3008), we find the
following statement:
It is proper also that outside the state of Minnesota our people know that
Langston Hughes, the Communist Poet, wrote:
''Good Morning, Revolution:
You're the very best friend
I ever had.
We gonna' pal around together from now onl"
and more directly the Workers' Song
"Put one more S in the U. S. A.
To make it Soviet.
The U. S. A. when we take control
Will be U. S. S. A. then."
The following poem which was written by Langston Hughes was
quoted by Mr. Steve Gadler of St. Paul, Minn., during his sworn
testimony before the Special Committee on Un-American Activities
(Volume 2, page 1366):
Listen, Christ,
You did alright in your day, I reckon —
But that day's gone now.
They ghosted you up a swell story too,
Called it Bible—
But it's dead now
The popes and the preachers've
Made too much money from it.
Kings, generals, robbers, and killers-
Even to the Tzar and the Cossacks.
Even to Rockefeller's church.
Even to the Saturday Evening Post.
You ain't no good no more;
They've pawned you
Till you've done wore out.
Goodbye,
Christ Jesus, Lord, God Jehovah,
294 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Beat it on away from here now.
Make way for a new guy with no religion at all —
A real guy named
Marx Communist, Lenin Peasant, Stalin Worker, ME —
I said, Mel
Go ahead on now,
You're getting in the way of things, Lord.
And please take Saint Ghandi with you when you go
And Saint Pope Pius
And Saint Aimee McPherson,
And big black Saint Becton of the Consecrated Dime.
And step on the gas, Christ!
Move!
Don't be so slow bout movin'!
The world is mine from now on —
And nobody's gonna sell ME
To a king, or a general,
Or a millionaire,
The Daily People's World of January 20, 1950 (page 2, Section 2),
published Hughes' Ballad of Lenin, part of which is as follows:
Comrade Lenin of Russia
High in a marble tomb,
Move over, Comrade Lenin,
And give me room.
I am Ivan, the peasant,
Boots all muddy with soil
I fought with you, Comrade Lenin,
Now I have finished my toil.
* * *
I am Chico, the Negro,
Cutting cane in the sun.
I lived for you, Comrade Lenin,
Now my work is done.
* * *
I am Chang from the foundries
On strike in the streets of Shanghai
For the sake of the Revolution
I fight, I starve, I die.
Comrade Lenin of Russia
Rises in the Marble tomb
On guard with the fighters forever—
The world is our room!
In 1937 and 1938, "the Communist Party threw itself whole-
heartedly into a campaign in support of the Spanish Loyalist cause,
recruiting men and organizing multifarious so-called relief organiza-
tions" such as Friends of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade, Veterans of
the Abraham Lincoln Brigade, etc. (Report 1311 of the Special
Committee * * * dated March 29, 1944.)
Langston Hughes endorsed the drive of Friends of the Abraham
Lincoln Brigade to bring the wounded boys back home, as shown in
a circular entitled "and tell the folks that I'll be home if * * *" He
is listed as a sponsor of the organization on letterheads dated Sep-
tember 10 and 22, 1938. He has contributed to various issues of
"Volunteer for Liberty," official organ of Veterans of the Abraham
Lincoln Brigade: September 6, 1937 (page 1); October 11, 1937 (page
16); November 15, 1937 (page 3); June 15, 1938 (page 15); January
17, 1949 (Introduction in Bound Volume) ; and his photograph appeared
in the February 28, 1938 issue of the same publication. The Daily
^Worker of February 15, 1949 (page 13), also reported that Mr. Hughes
had contributed to "Volunteer for Liberty."
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 29.5
On two occasions, Langston Hughes sent "greetings" to the Inter-
national Labor Defense, as shown in an official program of a conference
held in New York, and Equal Justice for June 1939 (page 3). The
International Labor Defense has been cited as being "essentially the
legal defense arm of the Communist Party of the United States."
It is the American section of M. O. P. R., or Red International of
Labor Defense, often referred to as the Red International Aid. Its
international congresses meet in Moscow. (See reports of the Special
'Committee on Un-American Activities dated January 3, 1939 ; January
3, 1940; June 25, 1942; March 29, 1944.) It was again cited by the
Committee on Un-American Activities on September 2, 1947 in
Report 1115.) The Attorney General of the United States cited the
group as the "legal arm of the Communist Party" (Congressional
Record, September 24, 1942, page 7686; and as subversive and Com-
munist (press releases of June 1 and September 21, 1948; redesignated
April 27, 1952; also included in consolidated list of April 1, 1954).
Langston Hughes is reported to have spoken before and entertained
an organization known as International "Workers Order on several
occasions. (See: Daily Worker for March 1, 1938, page 2; March 4,
1938, page 10; April 23, 1938, page 8; May 14, 1938, page 8). He
contributed to the following issues of New Order, official publication
of the English and youth sections of the International Workers
Order: June 1936 (page 8), and January 1937 (page 2).
The International Workers Order was cited as "one of the most
effective and closely knitted organizations among the Communist
'front' movements. It claims a membership of 1 50,000 bound together
through an insurance and social plan * * * It has contributed large
sums of money to Communist Party campaigns, and * * * regularly
sponsors Communist Party endorsed candidates for public office."
(Special Committee * * * in reports of January 3, 1939; January 3,
1940; June 25, 1942; and March 29, 1944.) The Attorney General
of the United States has cited the group as Communist (Congressional
Record, September 24, 1942, page 7688; and press releases of December
4, 1947 and September 21, 1948; redesignated April 27, 1943; also
included in consolidated list of April 1, 1954).
The Bulletin of the League of American Writers named Langston
Hughes as Vice President of the League; the same information is
revealed by a letterhead of the organization dated December 29, 1938,
and by another letterhead of July 7, 1939. The Daily Worker of
April 30, 1935, lists him as a member of the National Committee of
that organization. He signed the Call to the Fourth Congress of the
organization which was held in New York City, June 6-8, 1941 (New
Masses, April 22, 1941); in a pamphlet of the organization entitled
"We Hold These Truths," he has contributed an article concerning
anti-Semitism; he also signed a statement of the organization on
behalf of the second front (Daily Worker, September 14, 1942).
The League of American Writers was "founded under Communist
auspices in 1935 * * * The overt activities of the League in the last
two years leave little doubt of its Communist control" (the Attorney
General in Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, page 7686);' it
was cited as a "Communist-front organization" by the Special Com-
mittee * * * in ^hree reports: January 3, 1940; June 25, 1942; and
March 29, 1944. The League was cited as subversive and Com-
munist by the Attorney General (press releases of June 1 and Septem-
296 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
ber 21, 1948; redesignated April 27, 1953; also included in consolidated
list of April 1, 1954).
A leaflet of March 2, 1944, lists Langston Hughes as a sponsor of the
American Youth for Democracy; he was listed in Spotlight of April
1944 as a national Sponsor of that organization. American Youth for
Democracy was cited as "the new name under which the Young Com-
munist League operates and which also largely absorbed the American
Youth Congress." (Report 1311 of the Special Committee on Un-
American Activities dated March 29, 1944.) Attorney General of the
United States cited the group as subversive and Communist (press
releases of December 4, 1947 and September 21, 1948; redesignated
April 27, 1953; also included in consolidated list of April 1, 1954); the
organization was the subject of a separate report by the Committee on
Un-American Activities (April 17, 1947), and was called "a front
formed in October 1943 to succeed the Young Communist League and
for the purpose of exploiting to the advantage of a foreign power the
idealism, inexperience, and craving to join which is characteristic of
American college youth."
Letterheads dated February 26, 1946, and May 18, 1952, of the
Spanish Refugee Appeal of the Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee
list Langston Hughes as one of the national sponsors of that group.
Another letterhead of the organization, dated April 28, 1949, lists him
as one of the sponsors of the group. The Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee
Appeal was cited by the Special Committee * * * as a Communist-
front organization (report of March 29, 1944) ; it was also cited by the
Attorney General as subversive and Communist (press releases of
December 4, 1947 and September 21, 1948; redesignated April 27,
1953; also included in consolidated list of April 1, 1954).
Langston Hughes was one of the sponsors of the National Council of
American-Soviet Friendship, as shown on a memorandum issued by
the Council on March 18, 1946, and a Call to the Congress of American-
Soviet Friendship, Nov. 6-8, 1943. The National Council * * * was
cited as subversive and Communist by the Attorney General (press
releases of June 1 and September 21, 1948; redesignated April 27, 1953 ;
also included in consolidated list of April 1, 1954); it was cited by the
Special Committee * * * in a report dated March 29, 1944 as having
been, "in recent months, the Communist Party's principal front for
all things Russian."
The January 1943 Message of the National Federation for Consti-
tutional Liberties, addressed to the House of Representatives of the
United States, was signed by Langston Hughes (from a leaflet attached
to an undated letterhead of the group). The National Federation
was cited as "one of the Communist Party's fronts set up during the
period of the Soviet-Nazi Pact" (report of the Special Committee
dated June 25, 1942) ; the Attorney General cited it as "part of what
Lenin called the solar system of organizations, ostensibly having
no connection with the Communist Party, by which Communists at-
tempt to create sympathizers and supporters of their program * * *"
(Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, page 7687.) It was
subsequently cited by the Attorney General as subversive and
Communist (press release of December 4, 1947; redesignated April 27,
1953; included in consolidated list of April 1, 1954.
Langston Hughes has contributed to New Masses magazine over
a period of years: February 1928 (page 13) ; December 1930 (page 23) ;
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 297
August 1931 (page 15); February 1932 (page 10); December 15, 1936
(page 34); January 11, 1938 (page 39) ; September 28, 1943 (page 14);
February 15, 1944 (page 10). He sponsored a protest meeting on
behalf of Howard Fast, held in New York City under the auspices
of New Masses and Mainstream magazines, as shown in an advertise-
ment in the publication "PM" for October 16, 1947 (page 5). He
contributed to the Winter 1947 issue of Mainstream; and to the
February 1949 issue of Masses & Mainstream (pages 53 and 78).
According to the Sunday Worker of January 25, 1948 (page 13),
the first issue of Masses & Mainstream appeared in March 1948; this
article announced that it was to be a "new monthly cultural magazine"
and a merger of the two magazines formerly known as New Masses
and Mainstream. New Masses was cited as a Communist periodical
by the Attorney General (Congressional Record of September 24,
1942, page 7688); it was also cited by the Special Committee as the
"nationally circulated weekly journal of the Communist Party * * *
whose ownership was vested in the American Fund for Public Service"
(Report 1311 of March 29, 1944); also cited in reports of January 3,
1939 and June 25, 1942 of the Special Committee.
Langston Hughes was one of the sponsors of the Scientific and
Cultural Conference for World Peace, held in New York City, March
25-27, 1949, under the auspices of the National Council of the Arts,
Sciences and Professions (from the Conference Program, page 12;
conference Call; and the Daily Worker of February 21, 1949, page 9).
The Scientific and Cultural Conference * * * was cited as a Com-
munist front which "was actually a supermobilization of the inveterate
wheelhorses and supporters of the Communist Party and its auxiliary
organizations" (report of April 1, 1951 of the Committee on Un-
American Activities) .
Identified as a poet, Langston Hughes of New York City signed a
statement calling for international agreement to ban the use of atomic
weapons, as shown by a statement attached to a press release of
December 14, 1949 (page 12). The statement was released by the
Committee for Peaceful Alternatives to the Atlantic Pact which the
Committee on Un-American Activities cited as having been set up to
further the cause of "Communists in the United States doing their
part in the Moscow campaign" (report dated April 25, 1951).
The works of Langston Hughes have been favorably reviewed by
and/or advertised in the Communist publication, the Daily Worker,
as follows; June 6, 1949 (page 11); The Worker (Sunday edition of
the Daily Worker, December 4, 1942, page 8; February 13, 1949
(page 13) ; September 4, 1949 (page 12) ; the Daily Worker, April 22,
1951 (page 7, section 2); and January 8, 1951, page 11.
The following books by Langston Hughes have also been advertised
by the Workers Book Shop in the 1949-1950 Catalogue: "Shakespeare
in Harlem" ; "The Weary Blues" ; "Fields of Wonder" ; "The Big Sea" ;
"Not Without Laughter"; and "The Poetry of the Negro." The
Workers Book Shop "carry all books and pamphlets recommended
in 'The Guide to Reading on Communism' " (back cover of the Guide).
From the same source it is noted that
What we have attempted to do here is list the minimum required readings for
an understanding of the fundamental theoretical and practical questions facing
the international as well as the American revolutionary movement.
55647 — 54 20
298 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The Honorable Albert W. Hawkes (Senator, New Jersey), included
in a speech delivered on the floor of the Senate, April 1, 1948, a record
of Langs ton Hughes' Communist and Communist-front activities
(Congressional Record, April 1, 1948, pages 4011-4012).
The West Coast Communist publication, the Daily People's
World for April 16, 1948 (page 5), reported that —
intimidation and hysteria which caused cancellation of scheduled appearances
in six American cities within the past two months is no coincidence of reaction
as far as Langston Hughes is concerned.
In the same article, Hughes is quoted as having claimed:
I'm no radical on the platform. I read some of my poems, and answer a few
questions. And I happen to believe in a democracy where persons are treated
equally regardless of race or religion.
The article relates that —
Hughes has been speaking and writing for the last 15 years but finds the pattern
of reaction is stronger this year than ever before.
In the Annual Report of the Committee on Un-American Activities
for the Year 1951 (dated February 17, 1952), a chapter was devoted
to the Complicity of American Communists in the Destruction of
Freedom in the Far East; it was brought out that —
Even more interesting was the identification of American citizens who had con-
tributed greatly to the cause of world communism and until this time had gone
undisclosed. This list of traitors to the United States and the rest of the free
world reads as follows: Agnes Smedley, Miyagi Yotoku, Willie Lehman, Albert
Edward Stewart, * * * Langston Hughes * * *. The list set forth above is
not by any means complete * * *" (See page 23 of the Annual Report of 1951.)
During testimony of Manning Johnson before the Committee,
regarding Communist Activities in the New York Area, July 8, 1953,
a photostatic copy of Fight magazine for December 1935 (page 2),
was received in evidence as Manning Johnson Exhibit No. 11; the
page referred to contained names of the members of the National
Executive Committee, American League Against War and Fascism
and included Langston Hughes. (See Committee's Investigation of
Communist Activities in the * * * Part 7, page 2173.) At this
point, Mr. Johnson was asked by Committee Counsel "how many of
these names he recognizes as people whom he knew to be members of
the Communist Party," whereupon Mr. Johnson answered:
Dr. Harry F. Ward, Earl Browder, Israel Amter, Max Bedacht, Fred Biedenkapp,
Ella Reeve Bloor, Harry Bridges, Winifred ChappelL H. W. L. Dana, Margaret
Forsyth, Gilbert Green, Clarence Hathaway, A. A. Heller, Donald Henderson,
Roy Hudson, Langston Hughes * * * (Ibid., page 2174.)
The American League Against War and Fascism, referred to above,
has been officially cited by the Attorney General of the United States
as a Communist organization (Congressional Record, September 24,
1942, page 7683); and as subversive and Communist (press releases of
December 4, 1947 and September 21, 1948; redesignated April 27,
1953; also included in consolidated list of April 1, 1954); it was also
cited by the Special Committee on Un-American Activities as being
"completely under the control of Communists" (report of March 29,
1944; also cited in reports of January 3, 1939; January 3, 1940, and
June 25, 1942).
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 299
ROBERT M. HUTOHINS
Dr. Robert M. Hutchins, Chancellor, University of Chicago, was
named as a member of the Commission for Academic Freedom of the
National Council of the Arts, Sciences and Professions in the Septem-
ber 13, 1948 issue (page 6) of the Communist newspaper, Daily-
Worker. He was listed as a sponsor of a conference held by the
National Council of the Arts, Sciences and Professions, October 9-10,
1948, in the leaflet, "To Safeguard These Rights * * *", which was
published by the Bureau on Academic Freedom of the National
Council (*f the Arts, Sciences and Professions.
The National Council of the Arts, Sciences and Professions was cited
as a Communist-front organization by the Committee on Un-American
Activities in House Report No. 1954, April 26, 1950, page 2.
Dr. Robert Maynard Hutchins testified before the Seditious Activi-
ties Investigation Commission, State of Illinois, 1949 (Volume II,
p. 17, of the Commission's report).
The Daily Worker of April 28, 1949, p. 9, featured an article by
Gunnar Leander entitled: "Chancellor Hutchins in the Witchhunter's
Den," parts of which read as follows:
Sen. Paul Broyles suddenly found himself in the defendant's box during his
own inquisition into subversive activities in Chicago colleges this week. Chancellor
Robert M. Hutchins of the University of Chicago, leading an entourage of
distinguished witnesses, turned prosecutor in telling off Broyles that his task as a
legislator "is to eliminate those social and economic evils and those political
injustices which are the sources of discontent and disaffection."
Hutchins turned the tide of the entire state witchhunt as he declared before the
Illinois Subversive Activities Commission:
"As is well known, there is a Communist Club among the students of the
University (of Chicago). Eleven students belong to it,. The Club has not sought
to subvert the government of the state. Its members claim that they are interested
in studying Communism, and some of them, perhaps all of them, may be sym-
pathetic toward Communism. But the study of Communism is not a subversive
activity."
Dr. Hutchins' photograph accompanied the article.
The Daily People's World, west coast organ of the Communist
Party, in its issue of April 17, 1950, page 2, reported the following:
Chancellor Robert Hutchins, head of the University of Chicago, has informed
the National Committee to Defeat the Mundt Bill he has filed a statement with
the House Committee on Un-American Activities denouncing the Mundt-Nixon
bill as foolish, stupid and dangerous.
The Hutchins statement follows:
"I should like to be recorded as among the numerous citizens of all political
parties and all points of view who are united in believing that the Mundt-Nixon
bill is foolish, stupid and dangerous. I hope that Congress will display its intel-
ligence, and its faith in freedom and democracy by overwhelmingly defeating
the measure."
The Daily Worker, June 25, 1951, p. 2, reported that Professor
Robert M. Hutchins, former chancellor of the University of Chicago
and now associate director of the Ford Foundation, opposed the
Supreme Court decision upholding the conviction of the 11 Commu-
nist leaders.
The Annual Report of the Committee on Un-American Activities
for the Year 1949 (House Report 1950, April 26, 1950) contained the
following comment on these Communist leaders (p. 16):
On July 20, 1948, 12 leaders of the Communist Party of the United States
were indicted by a Federal grand jury in New York on charges of conspiring to
"teach and advocate the overthrow or destruction of the Government of the
300 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
United States by force and violence." Eleven of them were convicted on those
charges in Federal court on October 14, 1949.
On November 25, 1952, Dr. Hutchins appeared before the Select
Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations and Comparable
Organizations (House of Representatives). The following is quoted
from his testimony (pp. 263-298 of the printed hearings):
The Chairman. * * * I had put in my hand some days ago a document which
consisted of evidence taken by a select committee set up by the Legislature of
Illinois investigating communism in certain schools, and in the body of that
report I find testimony that you gave * * *
I quote from what purports to have been your testimony given in that investiga-
tion, and here you are quoted to have said * * *.
"The fact that some Communists belong to, believe in, or even dominate some
of the organizations to which some of our professors belong does not show that
these professors are engaged in subversive activities. All that such facts would
show would be that these professors believe in some of the objects of the organiza-
tion, and so forth,"
* * * I am wondering if since 1949 your thinking has undergone any sort of a
change as regards what we should do in an endeavor to combat the spread of
this Communist ideology in our own country? * * *
Mr. Hutchins. * * * My testimony in this case was directed to the proposition
that members of the faculty whom we knew, who had worked loyally, for the
university and for the country, many of whom had been cleared by Government
agencies, were not disqualified to be members of the faculty by reason of member-
ship in this organization * * *.
*K H* * "P * sp Sp
My view is, and has been, that it is necessary to resist the threat of Communist
aggression by military means, that without this we may be overwhelmed by the
tremendous masses of the Red Army.
It is also my impression that along with this effort, which is now consuming
the greater part of the resources of this country, that are dedicated to govern-
mental purposes, along with this effort we must maintain and develop the basic
sources of our strength, and the basic sources of our strength are the western
tradition of freedom, freedom of thought, freedom of discussion, and freedom
of association.
We have then, as we have had for the last several years, the very delicate
problem of balancing security and freedom.
The Chairman. Doctor, you were asked this question in this investigation:
"Do you consider that the Communist Party in the United States comes
within the scope of a clear and present danger?"
You are charged with having answered:
"I don't think so."
Do you still adhere to that view?
Mr. Hutchins. The Supreme Court has decided that question.
The Chairman. I know, but I am not talking about the Supreme Court;
I am talking about your views now. The Supreme Court is not running the
(Ford) foundation; you are, so far as the educational work of the Ford people
are concerned.
Mr. Hutchins. Well, you were asking me what my attitude toward the Com-
munist Party would be as an officer of the foundation?
The Chairman. That is right.
Mr. Hutchins. Well, as an officer of the foundation, I would not support the
Communist Party. What the definition of "clear and present danger" is, I am not
at all sure. * * *
* * * ■ * * * *
As far as I am concerned, the Communist Party is a clear danger. Whether it
is in this country an immediate danger so that every day we should think that
here is something really dangerous that is going to overwhelm us, I do not know.
It certainly is^dangerous. * * *
An article injthe New York Times (April 20, 1950, p. 4) reported
the following:
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
301
A movement to set up at colleges throughout the country a fund to assist any
University of California faculty members discharged in the current loyalty oath
controversy was disclosed today by Dr. Robert M. Hutchins, chancellor of the
University of Chicago.
* * * Dr. Hutchins reported that the council of the University Senate, faculty
representative body at his institution, had voted yesterday approval in principle
of voluntary contributions by faculty members of 2 per cent of their salaries for a
year to such fund. * * *
The money would be used for assistance of University of California faculty
members whose income might be cut off and thus would, Dr. Hutchins said,
"remove financial considerations from the decision to be made by the faculty
members" on subscribing or refusing to subscribe to a declaration disavowing
Communist affiliations.
Such a declaration was tentatively prescribed by the University of California
Regents as a condition of employment a year ago. * * *
(Dr. Hutchins) said he considered the proposed oath discriminatory, unnecessary
and a result of failure to understand that "a university should be a center of
independent thought and criticism."
He did not, he added, consider Communist affiliations in themselves grounds
for exclusion from teaching. * * *
Alvin Johnson
Organization and affiliation
American Friends of Spanish
Democracy (1). Signer of letter
to the President; identified as
Director of the New School for
Social Research.
Spanish Refugee Relief Campaign
(1). Sponsor.
Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Com-
mittee (1) and (2). Name ap-
peared on invitation to dinner on
"The Century of the Common
Man," Hotel Astor, New York
City, Oct. 27, 1943.
American Committee for Democ-
racy and Intellectual Freedom
(1). Sponsor of Citizens' Rally,
Carnegie Hall, New York City,
Apr. 13, 1940.
Consumers Union (1 ) . Sponsor. _
Non-Partisan Committee for the
Reelection of Congressman Vito
Marcantonio (1). Member.
Public Use of the Arts Committee
(1). Sponsor.
Greater New York Emergency
Conference on Inalienable
Rights (1). Sponsor.
Wrote letter to Hanns Eisler on
June 20, 1938 in which he stated
that "I personally have no prej-
udice against Communists * * *"
Source
"Daily Worker," Feb. 16, 1938,
p. 2.
Booklet, "Children in Concen-
tration Camps",
Invitation to dinner.
Leaflet announcing rally.
Undated circular; "New Masses,"
Mar. 2, 1937, p. 28.
Letterhead, Oct. 3, 1936.
Undated letterhead.
Printed program of conference
held Feb. 12, 1940.
Testimony of Investigator Don-
ald Appell of the Committee on
Un-American Activities, Sept.
25, 1947, pp. 81 and 82.
302 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Rufus M. Jones
A letterhead of Russian Reconstruction Farms, dated March 20,.
1926, lists one Rufus Jones (with no middle initial shown), as one of
the members of the Advisory Board of that organization, cited by the
Special Committee on Un-American Activities as a "Communist
enterprise directed by Harold Ware (son of the well-known Com-
munist Ella Reeve Bloor)" (Report 1311 of March 29, 1944, p. 76).
Dr. Rufus M. Jones, Chairman, Friends Service Committee, Phila-
delphia, is listed as a member of the Editorial Board of the Protestant
Digest on a letterhead of that publication dated December 27, 1939;
he was one of the sponsors of the "Protestantism Answers Hate"
dinner-forum which was held under the auspices of the Protestant
Digest Association in New York City, February 25, 1941 (leaflet
announcing the forum). The "Protestant Digest" was cited by the
Special Committee on * * *, as a "magazine which has faithfully
propagated the Communist Party line under the guise of being a
religious journal."
The Daily Worker of March 28, 1938 (p. 3), revealed that Rufus
M. Jones was one of the sponsors of the World Youth Congress; as
shown in the Special Committee's Report 1311, dated March 29, 1944,
the World Youth Congress was cited as a Communist conference held
in the summer of 1938 at Vassar College (also cited in report of
January 3, 1939).
The "Call" to the Congress of Youth, fifth national gathering of
the American Youth Congress in New York City, July 1-5, 1939,
contained the signature of Rufus M. Jones, as was shown on page 3
of the "Proceedings" of the Congress.
The American Youth Congress "originated in 1934 and * * * has
been controlled by Communists and manipulated by them to influence
the thought of American youth" (The Attorney General of the United
States, Congressional Record, Sept. 24, 1942, p. 7685). The organi-
zation was cited as subversive and Communist by the Attorney
General of the United States (press releases of December 4, 1947 and
September 21, 1948; also included in consolidated list released April 1,
1954); it was cited as a Communist-front organization in reports of
the Special Committee * * *, dated January 3, 1939; January 3,.
1941; June 25, 1942; and March 29, 1944.
Dr. Rufus M. Jones of the American Friends Service Committee'
was among those who signed a statement of the National Council of
American-Soviet Friendship, protesting the "Iron Curtain" (Daily
People's World of May 20, 1948, p. 5) ; the National Council * * *
was cited as having been, "in recent months, the Communist Party's
principal front for all things Russian." (See Report 1311 of the
Special Committee * * * dated March 29, 1944). The Attorney
General of the United States cited the National Council * * * as
subversive and Communist (press releases of December 4, 1947 and
September 21, 1948; also included in consolidated list released April 1,
1954).
Dr. Jones, of Haverford, Pennsylvania, was one of the sponsors of
a Congress on Civil Rights, founding meeting of the Civil Rights
Congress, which was held in Detroit, Michigan, April 27-28, 1946
(from the "Summons to a Congress on Civil Rights"). The Civil
Rights Congress was the subject of a special report by the Committee
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
303
on Un-American Activities, issued September 2, 1947, in which the
organization was cited as being "dedicated not to the broader issues of
civil liberties, but specifically to the defense of individual Communists
and the Communist Party" and controlled by "individuals who are
either members of the Communist Party or openly loyal to it." The
Attorney General of the United States cited the Civil Rights Congress
and its various affiliates as subversive and Communist (letters to the
Loyalty Review Board, released to the press December 4, 1947 and
September 21, 1948; also included in consolidated list released April
1, 1954). •
The Call to a National Conference on American Policy in China and
the Far East, which was held in New York City, January 23-25, 1948,.
contained the name of Dr. Rufus M. Jones, Haverford College, in the
list of sponsors of that conference; he was named as a sponsor of the
same conference in the "Daily Worker" of January 1, 1948 (page 3),
being identified in this source as leader of American Religious Society
of Friends. The National Conference on American Policy * * * (a
conference called by the Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern
Policy) , was cited as Communist by Attorney General of the United
States in a list released to the press July 25, 1949.
Matthew Josephson
Organization and affiliation
Communist Party (1) and (2).
Signed call for support of the
Communist Party National Elec-
tions and its candidates.
Communist Party (1) and (2).
Signed statement defending
Communist Party; i. d. as Histo-
rian.
Communist Party (1) and (2).
Signed statement condemning
"punitive measures directed
against the Communist Party";
i. d. as; historian.
League of Professional Groups for
Foster and Ford (1) cited as
Committee of * * *. Member.
National Committee for the De-
fense of Political Prisoners (1)
and (2). Member.
National Emergency Conference
for Democratic Rights (1).
Signed Open Letter of organi-
zation.
National Committee for People's
Rights (1) and (2). Member.
Non-Partisan Committee for the
Re-election of Congressman Vito
Marcantonio. (1). Member.
/Source
Daily Worker, Sept. 14, 1932, p. 1,
c. 2.
Daily Worker, Apr. 16, 1947, p. 2.
The Sunday Worker, Apr. 20,
1947, p. 8.
Leaflet, "Culture and the Crisis/ f
p. 32.
Letterhead, Oct. '31, 1935.
Daily Worker, May 13, 1940, pp.
1 and 5.
Leaflet, "News You Don't Get,"
Nov. 15, 1938. Also letterhead
dated July 13, 1938.
Letterhead, Oct. 3, 1936.
304
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Organization and affiliation
Civil Rights Congress (1) and (2).
Signed statement defending
Communist Party; i. d. as his-
torian.
National Council of the Arts,
Sciences and Professions (1).
Signed statement in support of
Henry A. Wallace, i. d, as a
writer.
Sponsor of Cultural and Scien-
tific Conference for World
Peace, New York City,
March 25-27, 1949. i. d.
as a writer.
To speak at Writing & Pub-
lishing Forum of New York
Council of the Arts, Sciences
and Professions, March 1,
1953, at ASP Center.
American Committee for Democ-
racy and Intellectural Freedom
(1). Signed petition of organi-
zation.
New Masses (1) & (2). Illustrator.
Contributor
Source
Daily Worker, Apr. 16, 1947, p. 2.
Daily Worker, Oct. 19, 1948, p. 7.
Conference "Call." Also Daily
Worker, Feb. 21, 1949, p. 9.
Also conference program, p. 12.
Calendar of Events, February-
March 1953.
Mimeographed sheet attached to
letterhead dated Jan. 17, 1940.
New Masses, May 1932, p. 6.
New Masses, Apr. 20, 1937, p. 16;
June 8, 1937, p. 22; Nov. 25,
1947, p. 15.
Letterhead, Nov. 18, 1936; New
Masses, Jan. 5, 1937, p. 31.
Soviet Russia Today, November
1937, p. 79.
Soviet Russia Today, September
1939, p. 25.
Letterhead, Feb. 21, 1938.
Medical Bureau, American Friends
of Spanish Democracy (1).
Member, General Committee.
Golden Book of American Friend-
ship with the Soviet Union (1).
Signed Golden Book.
Open Letter for Closer Coopera-
tion with the Soviet Union (1).
Signed Open Letter.
American Friends of Spanish De-
mocracy (1). Member of Com-
mittee.
League of American Writers (1)
and (2). Member, Executive
Committee; Signed Statement
of League.
Daily Worker (1 ) . Contributor
Prob\ Horace M. Kallen
The "Daily Worker" of February 16, 1938 (page 2) listed the
name of Prof. Horace M. Kallen, New School for Social Research,
among those who signed a letter to the President and the Foreign
Affairs Committee of both Houses of Congress "urging that the
Neutrality Act be amended so as to render it inapplicable to Spain";
Daily Worker, Apr. 30, 1935.
Daily Worker, Sept. 14, 1942,
p. 7 ; and Daily People's World,
Sept. 23, 1942, p. 5.
Daily Worker, Dec. 24, 1931,
p. 3; Dec. 21, 1935, p. 3.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 305
the letter was sponsored by the American Friends of Spanish Democ-
racy.
The Program of a Dinner-Forum on "Europe Today," held in
New York City, October 9, 1941, under auspices of the American
Committee to Save Refugees, the Exiled Writers Committee of the
League of American Writers, and the United American Spanish Aid
Committee, contains the name of Horace M. Kallen on the list of
the committee of sponsors.
As reported in the "Daily Worker" on February 21, 1940, Prof.
Horace M. Kallen signed a letter to President Roosevelt and Attorney
General Jackson protesting the attacks upon the Veterans of the
Abraham Lincoln Brigade.
"In 1937-38, the Communist Party threw itself wholeheartedly
into the campaign for the support of the Spanish Loyalist cause,
recruiting men and organizing multifarious so-called relief organ-
izations * * * such as * * * the Veterans of the Abraham Lincoln
Brigade, United American Spanish Aid Committee, * * * American
Friends of Spanish Democracy * * *" (Report 1311 of the Special
Committee on Un-American Activities, March 29, 1944, page 82).
The Attorney General of the United States cited the United American
Spanish Aid Committee as Communist in a list furnished the Loyalty
Review Board (press release of the U. S. Civil Service Commission
dated July 25, 1949; redesignated pursuant to Executive Order
10450 of April 27, 1953). The Attorney General also cited the
Veterans of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade as subversive and Com-
munist in lists to the Loyalty Review Board (press releases of Decem-
ber 4, 1947 and September 21, 1948; redesignated pursuant to
Executive Order 10450).
The American Committee to Save Refugees and the League of
American Writers were cited as Communist fronts by the Special
Committee on Un-American Activities in the Report released March
29, 1944.
The League of American Writers, founded under Communist auspices in
1935 * * * in 1939 * * * began openly to follow the Communist Party line as
dictated by the foreign policy of the Soviet Union. * * * The overt activities
of the League of American Writers in the last 2 years leave little doubt of its
Communist control (United States Attorney General, Congressional Record,
September 24, 1942, pages 7685 and 7686).
The League was subsequently cited by the Attorney General as
subversive and Communist (press releases of June 1 and September
21, 1948; redesignated pursuant to Executive Order 10450).
In a booklet, "These Americans Say." (page 9), prepared and
published by the Coordinating Committee to Lift the Embargo,
Horace Kallen was listed among the Representative Individuals who
advocated lifting the Spanish embargo. The Coordinating Com-
mittee * * * was cited by the Special Committee on Un-American
Activities as one of a number of front organizations, set up during
the Spanish Civil War by the Communist Party in the United States
and through which the party carried on a great deal of agitation (Re-
port of March 29, 1944).
Horace M. Kallen was a member of the Advisory Board of Film
Audiences for Democracy, as shown in "Film Survey" for June 1939
(page 4) ; he was also shown to be a member of the Advisory Board of
Films for Democracy ("Films for Democracy," April 1939, page 2).
306 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Film Audiences for Democracy and Films for Democracy were cited
as Communist fronts by the Special Committee * * * in the .Report
of March 29, 1944.
A pamphlet, "The People vs. H. C. L.," dated December 11-12,
1937 (page 2), carried the name of Horace M. Kallen as a sponsor of
the Consumers National Federation which the Special Committee
* * * cited as a Communist front in the Report of March 29, 1944
(page 155).
Horace Kallen, Harvard, was shown to be a member of the Spon-
soring Committee for an "Alumni Homecoming" Dinner, under
auspices of the American Student Union, March 21, 1937, New York
City ("The Student Advocate, February 1937, page 2, and a leaflet,
"The American Student Union Invites You * * *".)
The Special Committee cited the American Student Union as a
Communist front which was "the result of a united front gathering
of young Socialists and Communists" in 1937. The Young Commu-
nist League took credit for creation Of the American Student Union,
and the Union offered free trips to Russia. It claims to have led as
many as 500,000 students out in annual April 22 strikes in the United
States (Report of January 3, 1939, page 80).
The Program of the Greater New York Emergency Conference on
Inalienable Rights, dated February 12, 1940, listed Dr. Horace V.
Kallen as a sponsor of the Conference. The Special Committee cited
the Greater New York Emergency Conference * * * as a Communist
front which was succeeded by the National Federation for Constitu-
tional Liberties (Report of March 29, 1944); in a later report, this
Committee cited the Conference as among a "maze of organizations"
which were —
spawned for the alleged purpose of defending civil liberties in general but actually
intended to protect Communist subversion from any penalties under the law
(Report 1115, September 2, 1947, page 3).
An undated form letter of the New York Tom Mooney Committee
listed the name of H. M. Kallen as a sponsor. The New York Tom
Mooney Committee was cited as a Communist front by the Special
Committee * * *
For many years, the Communist Party organized widespread agitation around
the Mooney case, and drew its members and followers into the agitation (Report
of March 29, 1944).
George F. Kennan
Organization and affiliation Source
New World Review (1). Author Daily People's World, June 23,
of book, "American Diplo- 1952, p. 7.
macy— 1900-1950," reviewed by
Jessica Smith in July issue.
Author of "American Diplo- New World Review, June 1952,
macy, 1900-1950, and the p. 59.
Challenge of Soviet Power"
reviewed by Jessica Smith
in New World Review.
Attacked witchhunting of com- New York Times, May 28, 1950,
munists. p. 17.
Spoke on Communist China. New York Times, May 9, 1950,
Name shown in this source as p. 16.
George Frost Kennan.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 307
Dr. William Kilpatrick
Professor William H. Kilpatrick was one of the sponsors of the
American Committee for Protection of Foreign Born, as shown on a
letterhead of that organization, dated May 15, 1940; a letterhead of its
Fourth Annual Conference which was held in Washington, D. C,
March 2-3, 1940; and a booklet published by the organization under
the title, "The Registration of Aliens." Prof. William H. Kilpatrick
of Columbia University was also a sponsor of the organization's
Fifth National Conference, as revealed by the program of the con-
ference which was held in Atlantic City, N. J., March 29, 1941.
The Attorney General of the United States cited the American
Committee for Protection of Foreign Born as subversive and Com-
munist in letters furnished the Loyalty Review Board and released to
the press by the U. S. Civil Service Commission, June 1, 1948, and
September 21, 1948. The Special Committee on Un-American
Activities, in its report dated March 29, 1944 (p. 155), cited the
American Committee as "one of the oldest auxiliaries of the Com-
munist Party in the United States."
As shown on a program of the Greater New York Emergency
Conference on Inalienable Rights, February 12, 1940, Professor
William Kilpatrick was a member of the General Committee of that
conference. He signed the "Call for a National Emergency Confer-
ence, May 13-14, 1939, Hotel Raleigh, Washington, D. C." Both
the "Legislative Letter" of the National Emergency Conference for
Democratic Rights (Volume 1, No. 4), dated February 15, 1940, and
a press release of the conference, dated February 23, 1940, show
Professor William H. Kilpatrick as a member of its Board of Sponsors.
The Greater New York Emergency Conference on Inalienable
Rights, the National Emergency Conference and the National Emer-
gency Conference for Democratic Rights were cited as Communist
fronts bv the Special Committee on Un-American Activities in Report
1311 of "March 29, 1944. The Greater New York Emergency Con-
ference on Inalienable Rights was cited by the Committee on Un-
American Activities as among a "maze of organizations" which were —
spawned for the alleged purpose of defending civil liberties in general but actually
intended to protect Communist subversion from any penalties under the law
(Report No. 1115, September 2, 1947, page 3).
It will be remembered that during the days of the infamous Soviet-Nazi pact,
the Communists built protective organizations known as the National Emergency
Conference, the National Emergency Conference for Democratic Bights, which
culminated in the National Federation for Constitutional Liberties.
(Congressional Committee on Un-American Activities, Report 115,
September 2, 1947, page 12.)
Freda Kirchwey
Organization and Affiliation Source
All-American Anti-Imperialist Letterhead, Apr. 11, 1928.
League (1) and (2). Member,
National Committee.
American Committee for Democ- Mimeographed sheet attached to
racy and, Intellectual Freedom letterhead of Jan. 17, 1940.
(1). Signer of petition.
308
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Organization and affiliation
American Committee for Yugoslav
Relief (1) and (2). Member,
Sponsors Committee.
Endorsed appeal
American Friends of the Chinese
People (1). Member, National
Advisory Board .
American Friends of Spanish De-
mocracy (1). Member of Com-
mittee.
American Fund for Public Service
(1). Member, Board of Direc-
tors.
American Student Union (1).
Member, Advisory Board.
Committee for a Democratic Far
Eastern Policy (2). Member,
Board of Directors.
Coordinating Committee to Lift
the Embargo (1). Named as
a "representative individual"
who advocated lifting the em-
bargo on the sale of arms to
Spain.
Descendants of the American
Revolution (1). Member, Ad-
visory Board.
Films for Democarcy (1). Mem-
ber, Advisory Board.
Film Audiences for Democracy
(1). Member, Advisory Board.
Greater New York Emergency
Conference on Inalienable
Rights (1). Sponsor.
League of Women Shoppers (1).
Sponsor.
Sponsor, New Jersey League. .
Sponsor, New York League. __
National Emergency Conference
for Democratic Rights (1).
Member, Board of Sponsors.
Signer of Open Letter :
National People's Committee
Against Hearst (1). Member.
National Federation for Consti-
tutional Liberties (1) and (2).
Signer of message.
Source
Photostat of letterhead, Aug. 6,
1945.
Daily Worker, Apr. 26, 1947 r
p. 2.
Letterhead, May 16, 1940.
Letterhead, Feb. 21, 1938; letter-
head, Nov. 18, 1936; "New
Masses,'* Jan. 5, 1937, p. 31.
Photostat of letterhead dated
Sept. 8, 1930.
Pamphlet, "Presenting the Amer-
ican Student Union," back
cover.
"Far East Spotlight," June 1948,
and a letterhead dated May
28, 1948; letterheads dated
1946 and 1947.
Booklet, "These Americans Say:
'Lift the Embargo Against
Republican Spain'."
"Daily Worker," Jan. 21, 1938,
p. 2; a pamphlet, "Descend-
ants of the American Revolu-
tion," back cover.
April 1939 issue of "Films for
Democracy," p. 2.
"Film Survey," June 1939, p. 4.
Program of the Conference, Feb.
12, 1940.
Letterhead, Apr. 19, 1940, letter-
head, Oct. 7, 1935.
Letterhead, July 7, 1941.
Letterhead, Jan. 25, 1940 (photo-
stat).
Press Release, Feb. 23, 1940.
"Daily Worker," May 13, 1940,
pp. 1, 5.
Letterhead, Mar. 16, 1937.
Leaflet, attached to .undated let-
terhead.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 309
Organization and affiliation Source
''New Masses" (1) and (2). Owner- "New Masses," June 1928, p. 23.
Executive Board member "New Masses," Oct. 1927, p. 3.
Contributing Editor " New Masses," June 1928, p. 3.
Contributor "New Masses," June 6, 1944, p.
21.
North American Committee to Aid "New Masses," Oct. 5, 1937, p. 26.
Spanish Democracy (1) and (2).
Sponsor.
Schappes Defense Committee (1) New York "Times," Oct. 9, 1944,
and (2). Signer of Open Letter p. 12.
of the group to Governor Dewey
asking pardon for Morris U.
Schappes.
Union of Concerted Peace Efforts "Daily Worker," Jan. 11, 1938,
(1). Signer of manifesto. p. 2.
"Woman Today" (1). Member, "Woman Today," October 1936.
Advisory Board.
Southern Conference for Human Letterhead, Dec. 5, 1946.
Welfare (1). Member of a com-
mittee.
Spanish Refugee Relief Campaign Back cover of folder entitled
(1). Sponsor. "Children in Concentration
Camps."
World Congress of Intellectuals "Daily Worker," Aug. 23, 1948,
(1). American delegate. p. 7; Aug. 27, 1948, p. 4.
Intervened for Hanns Eisler "Daily Worker," Sept. 26, 1947,
p. 12.
Sponsor of banquet for Mother Program, Jan. 24, 1936, p. 9.
Bloor, prominent Communist.
Urged clemency for Rosenbergs. __ "Daily Worker," Jan. 21, 1953,
p. 7.
References Congressional Record, June 23,
1942; June 10, 1946.
Philip Klein
A statement urging the President and Congress to defend the rights
of the Communist Party was signed by Philip Klein, New York, New
York, as shown in the "Daily Worker" of March 5, 1941 (p. 2).
A public statement sponsored by the American Committee to Save
Refugees was signed by Philip L. Klein, as shown in "For the Rescue
of Refugees" by Lloyd Frankenberg, published by the organization.
Mr. Klein was listed among signers in the field of "Science and Educa-
tion." The American Committee to Save Refugees was cited as a
Communist front in Report 1311 of the Special Committee on Un-
American Activities dated March 29, 1944.
Professor Philip Klein was named as a sponsor of the Greater New
York Emergency Conference on Inalienable Rights in the program of
the conference which was held February 12, 1940. He signed the
"Call" for the National Emergency Conference held at the Hotel
Raleigh, Washington, D. C, May 13 and 14, 1939. An Open Letter
issued by the National Emergency Conference for Democratic Rights
was signed by Philip Klein, as shown in the "Daily Worker" of May
13, 1940 (pp. 1 and 5).
310 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The Greater New York Emergency Conference on Inalienable
Rights, the National Emergency Conference, and the National
Emergency Conference for Democratic Rights were cited as Com-
munist fronts in Report 1311 of the Special Committee on Un-Amer-
ican Activites dated March 29, 1944 and Report 1115 of the Com-
mittee on Un-American Activities dated September 2, 1947.
Dr. Philip Klein, New York School for Social Work, New York,
signed an appeal of the National Federation for Constitutional Liber-
ties for the dismissal of the charges against Sam Adams Darcy, a
Communist leader, as shown in the "Daily Worker" of December 19,
1940 (p. 5). An Open Letter of the National Federation for Con-
stitutional Liberties urging "reconsideration of the order of Attorney
General Biddle for Mr. Bridges' deportation" and that the "ill-
advised, arbitrary, and unwarranted findings relative to the Com-
munist Party be rescinded" was published in the "Daily Worker"
on July 19, 1942 (p. 4); the letter was later published in pamphlet
form by the National Federation * * * under the title "600 Promi-
nent Americans Ask President to Rescind Biddle Decision" (first
printing, September 11, 1942). Philip Klein, New York School of
Social Work, was shown as a signer of the open letter in each source.
The National Federation for Constitutional Liberties was cited as
subversive and Communist by the U. S. Attorney General in lists
furnished the Loyalty Review Board and released to the press by the
U. S. Civil Service Commission, December 4, 1947 and September 21,
1948. The organization was redesignated by the Attorney General,
April 27, 1953, pursuant to Executive Order No. 10450, and included
on the April 1, 1954 consolidated list of organizations previously
designated pursuant to Executive Order No. 10450. It was "part
of what Lenin called the solar system of organizations, ostensibly
having no connection with the Communist Party, by which Commu-
nists attempt to create sympathizers and supporters of their program"
(Attorney General, Congressional Record, September 24, 1942,
p. 7687). The Special Committee on Un-American Activities cited
the National Federation * * * as "one of the viciously subversive
organizations of the Communist Party" (Report of March 29, 1944,
p. 50) ; it was cited by the Committee on Un-American Activities as
"actually intended to protect Communist subversion from any penal-
ties under the law" (Report 1115, September 2, 1947, p. 3).
Dr. Philip Klein was listed as a sponsor of "Social Work Today"
in the December 1937 issue of the publication (p. 2); in the same issue
(p. 5), a portion of a chapter of a "forthcoming book" by Philip
Klein, New York School of Social Work, was published. Also in the
same issue (p. 16), he was named as one of the delegates who attended
a New York State Conference held by "Social Work Today"; a carica-
ture of him appeared in this connection. Philip Klein was listed as
a member of the Editorial Board and as a Cooperator-Sponsor in the
June-July 1940 issue of "Social Work Today" (p. 2); he was listed as
a "Social Work Today" Cooperator for 1940 in the January 1941
issue of the publication (pp. 16-18). Philip Klein, instructor, New
York School of Social Work, was one of the signers of "Meeting Social
Need: A Program for Peace" of the "Social Work Today" National
Conference of Social Work, according to the June-July 1940 (p. 17)
issue of the publication.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 311
In Report 1311 of the Special Committee on Un-American Activities
dated March 29, 1944, "Social Work Today" was cited as "a Com-
munist magazine."
Professor Philip Klein was a sponsor of the Cultural and Scientific
Conference for World Peace held in New York City, March 25-27,
1949, under the auspices of the National Council of the Arts, Sciences
and Professions, as shown in the Conference "Call" and Conference
Program (p. 12). He signed a protest against the dismissal of Com-
munist teachers, issued by the National Council of the Arts, Sciences
and Professions, as shown in an advertisement which appeared in
"The Nation," February 19, 1949 (p. 215).
The Cultural and Scientific Conference for World Peace was the
subject of a Review prepared and released by the Committee on Un-
American Activities, April 19, 1949, in which the conference was cited
as a "supermobilization of the inveterate wheelhorses and supporters
of the Communist Party and its auxiliary organizations." In the
same Review, the National Council of the Arts, Sciences and Profes-
sions was cited as a Communist front.
Otto Klineberg
On March 5, 1941 (page 2), the Daily Worker featured in a full-
page spread, the names of several hundred persons who signed a
statement addressed to the President and Congress of the United
States, defending the Communist Party against alleged persecution.
The statement called attention to "a matter of vital significance to
the future of our nation. It is the attitude of our government toward
the Communist Party" and further urged all members of Congress
"to oppose any legislation, direct or indirect, that would take away
from Communists those constitutional guarantees which must be
kept open for all if in the future they are to be available for any."
The name of Prof. Otto Klineberg, New York City, appeared in the
list of persons who signed the statement.
Prof. Klineberg was one of the sponsors of a Citizens Rally April
13, 1940, arranged by the American Committee for Democracy and
Intellectual Freedom in Carnegie Hall, New York City, as shown in a
leaflet announcing the rally. The American Committee for * * *
has been cited as a Communist-front group which defended Commu-
nist teachers (reports of the Special Committee on Un-American
Activities dated June 25, 1942 and March 29, 1944).
A letterhead of the American Committee for Protection of Foreign
Born, a booklet entitled "The Registration of Aliens," and a letter-
head of their Fourth Annual Conference which was held March
2-3, 1940, contain the name of Otto Klineberg in lists of sponsors
of that organization. The program of the Fifth National Conference
of the group which was held in Atlantic City, N. J., March 29-30,
1941, named Prof. Klineberg as a panel speaker and as a sponsor
of the conference; he was identified in that source as a professor at
Columbia University.
The Attorney General of the United States cited the American
Committee for Protection of Foreign Born as subversive and Com-
munist (press releases of June 1 and September 21, 1948; redesignated
April 27, 1953). The Special Committee * * * cited the organiza-
tion as "one of the oldest auxiliaries of the Communist Party in the
United States" (report of March 29, 1944; also cited in report dated
June 25, 1942).
312 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Prof. Klineberg was identified as a "representative individual"
who advocated lifting the embargo against Spain in a booklet entitled
"These Americans Say: * * *" (page 9), prepared and published by
the Coordinating Committee to Lift the Embargo, cited as one of a
number of front organizations which was set up during the Spanish
Civil War by the Communist Party and through which the party
carried on a great deal of agitation. (From a report of the Special
Committee * * * dated March 19, 1944.)
It was reported in New Masses of December 3, 1940 (page 28),
that Otto Klineberg had signed an Open Letter to save Luiz Carlos
Prestes which was sent by the Council for Pan American Democracy
to the President of Brazil. The Council (also known as Conference)
for Pan American Democracy was cited as a Communist-front organ-
ization which defended Carlos Luiz Prestes, a Brazilian Communist
leader and former member of the executive committee of the Com-
munist International. (From the Special Committee's report of
March 29, 1944; also cited in their report of June 25, 1942.) The
Attorney General cited the organization as subversive and Com-
munist (press releases of June 1 and September 21, 1948; redesignated
April 27, 1953).
The Daily Worker of May 13, 1940 (pages 1 and 5), reported that
Otto Klineberg had signed an Open Letter of the National Emergency
Conference for Democratic Rights, cited as a Communist-front group
by the Special Committee * * * (report of March 29, 1944); in a
report of the Committee on Un-American Activities, released Sep-
tember 1, 1947, it was noted that —
during the days of the infamous Soviet-Nazi pact, the Communists built protec-
tive organizations known as the National Emergency Conference, the National
Emergency Conference for Democratic Rights, which culminated in the National
Federation for Constitutional Liberties.
"Characteristics of the American Negro" and "Race Differences,"
written by Otto Klineberg, were advertised for sale by the Communist
Workers Book Shop in 1948 (pages 10 and 12 of the 1948 Catalogue,
respectively); both books were also advertised in their 1949-1950
Catalogue (pages 11 and 13).
Harry Laidlee
Organization and affiliation Source
American Student Union (1). Announcement in "The Student
Member of sponsoring commit- Advocate," February 1937.
tee of Alumni Homecoming din-
ner.
U. S. Congress Against War (1) "The Struggle Against War,"
and (2). Member, Arrange- August 1933, p. 2; "Call to the
ments Committee; identified U. S. Congress Against War,"
as Director, League for Indus- Sept. 1-4, 1933, New York
trial Democracy. City, p. 3.
Consumers National Federation Pamphlet, "The People vs.
(1). Sponsor. H. C.L., Dec. 11-12, 1937,p. 3.
Golden Book of American Friend- "Soviet Russia Today," Novem-
ship with the Soviet Union (1). ber 1937, p. 79.
Signer.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 313
Organization and affiliation Source
Sent greetings to Mother Ella Souvenir book containing greet-
Reeve Bloor, well-known Com- ings, p, 24.
munist Party member, on the
occasion of her seventy-fifth
birthday.
Open Road, Inc. Leader of The Folder, "The Land of the Sov-
Intelligent Student's Tour of iets" which reveals that The
Socialism; identified as Execu- Open Road has "the technical
tive Director, League for Indus- assistance in the U. S. S. R.
trial Democracy, and author of of Intourist (The Soviet State
numerous economic and social Tourist Company) and with
studies. the cultural assistance of the
U. S. S. R. Society for Cultural
Relations With Foreign- Coun-
tries (Voks)."
Included in a list of "A Few of Booklet, published in February
the One Hundred and 1937.
Eighty-One Who Have Led
Groups Served by The
Open Road."
Corliss Lamont
On March 5, 1941 (page 2), the Daily Worker featured in a full-page
spread the names of several hundred persons who defended the Com-
munist Party against alleged persecution; the statement was addressed
to the President and the Congress of the United States and called
attention to "a matter of vital significance to the future of our na-
tion * * * the attitude of our government toward the Communist
Party * * *" Corliss Lamont was named as one of those who signed
the statement.
, The Daily Worker of February 28, 1949 (page 9), reported that
Corliss Lamont had signed a statement in defense of the twelve
leaders of the Communist Party, eleven of whom were convicted
October 14, 1949, of conspiracy to teach and advocate the violent
overthrow of the United States Government (New York Times,
October 15, 1949, page 5). An advertisement which appeared in the
Washington Post on May 24, 1950 (page 14), listed Mr. Lamont as
having signed a petition to the Supreme Court for a reconsideration of
its refusal to hear the appeal of the "Hollywood Ten".
On May 8, 1936, the Daily Worker (page 5), reported that Corliss
Lamont was chairman of a Symposium on John Reed ; he was chairman
of a meeting held in New York City, October 20, 1940, to commemo-
rate the death of John Reed in Moscow, according to New Masses of
October 8, 1940 (page 2); reference to his being a speaker at this
meeting appeared in the Daily Worker of October 14, 1940 (page 7).
John Reed was founder of the American Communist Party.
According to the program of the banquet January 24, 1936 (page 9),
Mr. Lamont was a sponsor of the Mother Bloor Banquet held in
honor of Ella Reeve Bloor, prominent Communist leader.
It was reported in the Daily Worker of April 28, 1938 (page 4),
that Mr. Lamont was one of the signers of the Statement by American
Progressives on the Mpscow Trials.
5S647— 54—— 21
314 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The Daily Worker of October 30, 1944 (page 8), reported that
Corliss Lamont spoke at the celebration of the Twenty-Seventh
Anniversary of the Soviet Union.
Soviet Russia Today for March 1937 (pages 14-15) and the Daily
Worker of February 9, 1937 (page 2), showed Mr. Lamont to be one
of those who signed an Open Letter to American Liberals, published
in March 1937 "by a group of well-known Communists and Communist
collaborators. * * * The letter was a defense of the Moscow purge
trials" (Special Committee on Un-American Activities in report
dated June 25, 1942, page 21).
According to Soviet Russia Today for September 1939 (page 25),
Corliss Lamont signed the Open Letter for Closer Cooperation with
the Soviet Union, cited by. the Special Committee * * * as having
been issued by a group of "Communist Party stooges" (Report of
June 25, 1942, page 21).
Corliss Lamont signed an Open Letter in Defense of Harry Bridges,
according to the Daily Worker of July 19, 1942 (page 4). This
Open Letter was cited as a Communist front by the Special Com-
mittee * * * in its report of March 29, 1944 (pages 87, 112, 129,
and 166).
The Call to a National Congress for Unemployment and Social
Insurance (page 3), listed Mr. Lamont as a sponsor of that congress
which was held January 5-7, 1935, in Washington, D. C, and cited
as a Communist front, headed by Herbert Benjamin, a leading Com-
munist (Special Committee * * * in report of March 29, 1944, pages
94 and 116).
A letterhead of the National People's Committee Against Hearst,
dated March 16, 1937, listed Corliss Lamont as a member of the
National People's Committee. * * '* In its report of June 25, 1942
(page 16), the Special Committee cited the National People's Com-
mittee as a "subsidiary" organization of the American League for
Peace and Democracy, which it described as the largest of the Com-
munist "front" movements in the United States.
According to the Daily Worker of July 23, 1934 (page 2), Corliss
Lamont was a guarantor of loans to the Herndon Bail Fund of the
International Labor Defense. The Daily Worker of April 30, 1937
(page 3), named him as a trustee for Herndon bail under auspices of
the ILD. "The International Labor Defense * * * was part of an
international network of organizations for the defense of Communist
lawbreakers" (Committee on Un-American Activities in Report 1115
of September 2, 1947, pages 1 and 2). The Special Committee cited
the ILD as "the legal defense arm of the Communist Party of the
United States" (Reports of January 3, 1939; January 3, 1940; June
25, 1942; and March 29, 1944); it was cited by the Attorney General
of the United States as subversive and Communist (press releases of
June 1 and September 21, 1948; redesignated April 27, 1953; pre-
viously cited as the "legal arm of the Communist Party", Congres-
sional Record, September 21, 1942, page 7686).
Corliss Lamont was a member of the Committee of the League of
American Writers, as reported in the Daily Worker of January 18,
1939 (page 7); he signed a statement of the League in behalf of a
second front, according to the Daily Worker of September 14, 1942,
page 7, and the Daily People's World of September 23, 1942, page 5.
He signed the Call to the Fourth Congress of the League of American
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 31i5
Writers, held June 6-8, 1941, in New York City (New Masses of
April 22, 1941, page 25, and a leaflet, "In Defense of Culture"). The
League was cited as subversive and Communist by the Attorney
General and as having been founded under Communist auspices in
1935, and in 1939 "began openly to follow the Communist Party line
as dictated by the foreign policy of the Soviet Union" (press releases
of June 1 and September 21, 1948; redesignated April 27, 1953; and
Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, pages 7684 and 7686).
The League was also cited by the Special Committee in reports of
January 3, 1940; June 25, 1942; and March 29, 1944.
Mr. Lament was listed as a member of the Editorial Board of the
Book Union on an undated letterhead and in Book Union Bulletin for
August 1936 (page 1), and August 1938 (page 1). Book Union was
cited by the Special Committee in a report dated March 29, 1944
(page 9®).
Pamphlets entitled On Understanding Soviet Russia and Socialist
Plaimiiig in the Soviet Union, written by Corliss Lamont, were listed
in the Guide to Readings on Communism, issued by the Workers Book
Shops (pages 14 and 15).
In am advertisement of the Workers Library Publishers which ap-
peared in The Communist International of April 1936 (inside back
cover), Religion in Soviet Russia by Corliss Lamont was advertised.
A review of Soviet Russia and Religion by Corliss Lamont appeared
in The Communist International for August 1936 (page 1093).
The Workers Library Publishers was cited as an "official Commu-
nist Party publishing house" by the Special Committee in Report 1311
of March 29; 1944; also cited in report dated June 25, 1942; the Com-
mittee on Un-American Activities cited the group in Report 1920 of
May 11, 1948.
Soviet Russia and Religion, written by Mr. Lamont, was listed in
an undated catalogue of the International Publishers (page 61); Mr.
Lamont attended the tenth anniversary reception of International
Publishers, according to the Daily Worker of December 18, 1934
(page 5).
The Special Committee * * * reported that the International
Publishers was an "official publishing house of the Communist Party
in the United States," and a medium through which "extensive Soviet
propaganda is subsidized in the United States" (reports of January 3
1940; June 25, 1942; and March 29, 1944). It was cited as "the Com-
munist Party's publishing house" by the Attorney General (Congres-
sional Record, September 24, 1942, page 7686; and the Committee on
Un-American Activities, Report 1920 of May 11, 1948).
A pamphlet entitled Soviet Russia and the Postwar World, written
by Mr. Lamont, was listed in New Century Publishers Catalog for
1946 (page 14). The Committee on Un-American Activities cited
New Century Publishers as —
an official Communist Party publishing house which has published the works of
William Z. Poster and Eugene Dennis, Communist Party chairman and executive
secretary, respectively, as well as the theoretical magazine of the party known as
Political Affairs and the Constitution of the Communist Party, USA (Report
of May 11, 1948, pages 7 and 35).
The following issues of Soviet Russia Today contain contributions
from Corliss Lamont: May 1935 (page 6); June 1935 (page 26);
February 1936 (page 32); January 1938 (page 14); February 1939
316 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
(page 29); June 1939 (page 30); October 1939 (page 18); November
1939 (page 19); February 1940 (page 33); May 1940 (page 11); August
1940 (page 8); October 1940 (page 30), November 1940 (page 8);
December 1940 (page 12); February 1941 (page 8); April 1941 (page
7); June 1941 (page 8); July 1941 (page 7); October 1941 (page 8);
November 1941 (page 7); January 1942 (page 29); February 1942
(page 9); May 1942 (page 6); July 1942 (page 20); January 1943 (page
28) ; March 1943 (page 31) ; March 1947 (page 13) ; June 1947 (page 3) ;
September 1947 (page 22); November 1947 (page 8); arid December
1947 (page 23). According to the Daily People's World of November
6, 1952 (page 7), he contributed to the November issue of New World
Review, successor to Soviet Russia Today.
Soviet Russia Today was cited as a Communist-front publication
by the Special Committee in report dated March 29, 1944; also cited
in report of June 25, 1942. It was also cited by the Committee on
Un-American Activities in a report dated April 26, 1950 (page 108).
Corliss Lamont was listed as a member of the Editorial Council of
Soviet Russia Today in issues of January 1939 (page 3); January 1940
(page 3); and March 1942 (page 3). He was also shown as a member
of the Advisory Council of the same publication, on letterheads of
September 8, 1947; September 30, 1947; and an undated letterhead
(received in April 1948). In New Masses of February 27, 1934 (page
31), Corliss Lamont was named as chairman of a dinner-dance to be
held March 2, 1934 under the auspices of Soviet Russia Today. As
shown in Soviet Russia Today for September 1936 (page 3), he was a
lecturer of the Soviet Russia Today Lecture Bureau ; he was one of the
sponsors of Soviet Russia Today Dinner celebrating the Twenty-Fifth
Anniversary of the Red Army, according to Soviet Russia Today,
April 1943 (page 31). It was reported in the Daily Worker of Novem-
ber 13, 1949 (page 4) that he was a contributor to the issue of Novem-
ber 1949 of Soviet Russia Today. Mr. Lamont's Peoples of the Soviet
Union was approved by the Soviet Russia Today Book Club, according
to The Worker for February 8, 1948 (p. 7, Southern Edition).
According to the Daily Worker of July 5, 1934 (page 5), Mr.
Lamont endorsed that newspaper; he protested an attack on the
publication, as shown in the issue of January 25, 1936 (page 2); he
contributed to the following issues of the paper: August 24, 1937
(page 7); December 24, 1931 (page 3); and December 21, 1935 (page
3). The Daily Worker has been cited as the official organ of the
Communist Party, U. S. A. (Report 1920 of the Committee on
Un-American Activities dated May 11, 1948.)
Mr. Lamont contributed to the following issues of New Masses:
February 1932 (page 26); April 1932 (page 18); August 20, 1935 (page
15); May 11, 1937 (page 25); November 2, 1937 (page 23); November
30, 1937 (page 19); July 26, 1938 (page 21); September 20, 1938 (page
19); November 14, 1939 (page 6); May 7, 1940 (page 4); May 28,
1940 (page 12); July 9, 1940 (page 10); July 16, 1940 (page 10);
July 23, 1940 (page 13); October 8, 1940 (page 17); April 1, 1941
(page 26); June 17, 1941 (page 19); July 15, 1941 (page 12); November
11, 1941 (page 3); March 10, 1942 (page 21); June 22, 1943 (page 9);
February 1, 1944 (page 29); March 7, 1944 (page 23); April 11, 1944
(page 24); May 2, 1944 (page 22). The book, USSR; a Concise
Handbook, to which Mr. Lamont contributed, was favorably reviewed
in New Masses of June 24, 1947 (page 22).
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 317
The Special Committee on Un-American Activities cited New
Masses as the "nationally circulated weekly journal of the Commu-
nist Party" (Report of March 29, 1944, pages 48 and 75; reports of
January 3, 1939, page 80; June 25, 1942, pages 4 and 21). The
United States Attorney General cited it as a "Communist periodical"
(Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, page 7688).
According to the Daily Worker of February 26, 1940 (page 4), he
attended the defense rally held by New Masses. It was shown in
New Masses of April 2, 1940 (page 21), that he was a member of the
initiating committee of New Masses Letter to the President, protest-
ing the questioning of its editors and employees by a Special Grand
Jury convened in Washington, D. C, to investigate "alleged military
espionage" and requesting that the President exert his influence to
"end this attack on freedom of the press"; New Masses of April 14,
1942 (page 25) named him as a sponsor of the "New Masses Anti-
Cliveden Rally" and a sponsor of the same rally; he sponsored a plea
for financial support of New Masses, according to the issue of April
8, 1947 (page 9).
Corliss Lamont was speaker at a meeting held under the* auspices
of Friends of the Soviet Union, as shown in International Press Cor-
respondence, Volume 14, No. 11, February 23, 1934 (page 305). He
was shown to be a signer of a Manifesto issued by the organization in
International Press Correspondence, Volume 15, No. 50, November
2, 1935 (page 1443). Friends of the Soviet Union was later known
as American Friends of the Soviet Union. Corliss Lamont was re-
ported to be chairman of a meeting held by American Friends of the
Soviet Union (Daily Worker of January 29, 1938, page 8). The fol-
lowing issues of the Daily Worker named him as chairman of the
organization: February 2, 1938 (page 3); March 7, 1938 (page 1);
and May 14, 1938 (page 2). He was listed as chairman of the organi-
zation in New Masses, December 21, 1937 (page 8). It was reported
in Soviet Russia Today for June 1935 (page 30), that Corliss Lamont,
national chairman of Friends of the Soviet Union, was speaker at
a protest meeting held in Scranton, Pennsylvania, under auspices of
the group. A report of the Special Committee * * * dated January
3, 1939 said;
The Friends of the Soviet Union is possibly one of the most open Communist
"fronts" in the United States. It is headed by the former Columbia University
professor, Corliss Lamont, son of the Wall Street banker, J. P. Morgan's partner.
Young Lamont has long been a close friend of the Communist regime and a
supporter of the system of government existing in Russia.
The Daily Worker of February 16, 1938 (page 2), listed Mr. Lamont
as a signer of a letter to the President, issued by American Friends of
Spanish Democracy. He was a member of the Executive Committee
of this organization, as shown by a letterhead dated February 21,
1938. New Masses of January 5, 1937 named him as a member of
the General Committee, American Friends of Spanish Democracy,
Medical Bureau (page 31); a letterhead dated November 18, 1936,
listed him as a member of the Executive Committee of the Medical
Bureau.
American Friends of Spanish Democracy was cited by the Special
Committee in its report of March 29, 1944 (page 82), as follows:
In 1937-1938, the Communist Party threw itself wholeheartedly into the cam-
paign for the support of the Spanish Loyalist cause, recruiting men and organizing
318 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
multifarious so-called relief organizations * * * such as * * * American Friends
of Spanish Democracy.
Corliss Laraont was a participant in a Roundtable Conference, held
May 24-25, 1940, under auspices of the American Council on Soviet
Relations, as shown in the Summary of Proceedings, dated July 15,
1940. He was chairman at a rally held by the American Council on
Soviet Relations as shown in the Daily Worker of July 2, 1941 (pages
1 and 2), and was speaker under the auspices of the organization
(New Masses, November 11, 1941, page 31).
The American Council on Soviet Relations was cited as a Com-
munist-front organization by the Special Committee (report of March
29, 1944, page 174) and by the Attorney General (Congressional
Record, September 24, 1942, page 7688; letters to the Loyalty Review
Board, released June 1, 1948 and September 21, 1948).
A letterhead dated August 22, 1935, showed Corliss Lamont to be a
member of the National Executive Committee of the American League
Against War and Fascism. He contributed to the December 1933
issue (page 5) of Fight magazine, official organ of the American League
Against War and Facism.
The American League Against War and Fascism was organized at
the First United States Congress Against War which was held in
New York City, September 29 to October 1, 1933. Four years later,
the name of the organization was changed to the American League
for Peace and Democracy * * * "It remained as completely under
the control of Communists when the name was changed as it had been
before." (Special Committee * * * in report dated March 29, 1944;
also cited in reports of January 3, 1939; January 3, 1940; June 25,
1942). The league was cited as Communist by the Attorney General
(in re Harry Bridges, May 28, 1942, page 10; Congressional Record,
September 24, 1942, page 7683; letters to the Loyalty Review Board
in 1947 and 1948).
Mr. Lamont was a member of the National Committee of the
Student Congress Against War, as shown in the pamphlet entitled
"Fight War" (page 4).
During the Christmas holidays of 1932, the Student Congress Against War
convened at the University of Chicago. This gathering was held at the direct
instigation of the (Amsterdam) World Congress Against War. The Chicago
Congress was completely controlled by the Communists of the National Student
League (Special Committee * * * in report of March 29, 1944).
According to "The Struggle Against War" for June 1933 (page 2),
Mr. Lamont was a member of the American Committee for Struggle
Against War which was cited as a Communist-front organization by
the Special Committee on Un-American Activities (report of March 29,
1944).
, Corliss Lamont was a member of the Committee of Sponsors for a
Dinner-Forum on "Europe Today" held October 9, 1941, under
auspices of the American Committee to Save Refugees, the Exiled
Writers Committee of the League of American Writers and the United
American Spanish Aid Committee, as shown by the invitation to the
dinner-forum.
The American Committee to Save Refugees was cited as a Com-
munist front by the Special Committee * * * (report of March 29,
1944; citation of the League of American Writers appears on page 2
of this report). Citation of American Friends of Spanish Democracy
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 319
(shown above) also applies to the United American Spanish Aid Com-
mittee. The Attorney General cited this organization as Communist
(press release of July 25, 1949).
According to the Catalogue and Program (January 1942), Mr.
Lamont was a guest lecturer at the School for Democracy.
In 1941, the Communists established a school in New York City which was known
as the School for Democracy (now merged with the Workers School into the
Jefferson School of Social Science).
It was "established by Communist teachers ousted from the public
school system of New York City" (Special Committee * * * in report
of March 29, 1944).
It was reported in the Daily Worker of July 19, 1942 (page 4) that
Corliss Lamont signed an Open Letter of the National Federation for
Constitutional Liberties, denouncing the Attorney General's charges
against Harry Bridges and the Communist Party. A leaflet attached
to an undated letterhead showld him to be a signer of the organization's
January 1943 Message to the House of Representatives.
The Special Committee * * * cited the National Federation for
Constitutional Liberties as "one of the viciously subversive organiza-
tions of the Communist Party" (report of March 29, 1944; also cited
in reports of June 25, 1942; January 2, 1943). Report 1115 of the
Committee on Un-American Activities dated September 2, 1947
stated that the National Federation was "spawned for the alleged
purpose of defending civil liberties in general but actually intended
to protect Communist subversion from any penalties under the law."
It was cited by the Attorney General (Congressional Record, Sep-
tember 24, 1942, page 7687; and press releases of December 4, 1947
and September 21, 1948).
It was shown in the Certificate of Incorporation of the People's
Radio Foundation, November 27, 1944 (page 6) that Corliss Lamont,
450 Riverside Drive, New York, was a director. In a photostatic
copy of an application made by this same organization for a broad-
casting station construction permit, July 27, 1945, Corliss Lamont
was named as a stockholder and director until the first annual meeting
of stockholders (pages 13 and 26).
People's Radio Foundation, Inc., was cited by the Attorney Gen-
eral as subversive and Communist (press releases of December 4,
1947 and September 21, 1948).
According to the Daily Worker of April 22, 1947 (page 4), Corliss
Lamont signed a statement condemning the revocation of the charter
of the Queens College Chapter of the American Youth for Democracy.
In a letter to the Loyalty Review Board, Attorney General McGrath
stated that this was an organization for young Communists (letter
released August 30, 1950). The organization had been cited previ-
ously in 1947 and 1948, in letters from a former Attorney General to
the Loyalty Review Board . The Special Committee on Un-American
Activities cited the organization in its report of March 29, 1944 and
a citation also appeared in Report No. 271 of April 17, 1947 of the
Committee on Un-American Activities.
It was shown in a photostatic copy of the Certificate of Incorpora-
tion filed in New York State February 15, 1943, that Mr. Lamont
was a subscriber to this certificate, and director until the first annual
meeting of the National Council of American-Soviet Friendship, Inc.
He was shown to be chairman of the National Council of American-
320 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Soviet Friendship in the Daily Worker, October 25, 1943 (page 3)
and was so listed on letterheads of the group dated February 8, 1946
and March 13, 1946. He was shown as a member of the Board of
Directors of the National Council of American-Soviet Friendship on
letterheads dated January 23, 1948; April 30, 1949; January 10,
1950; and February 21, 1950. It was reported in the Daily Worker
of November 3, 1947 (page 5) that he spoke at a rally held at St.
Nicholas Arena, November 9, 1947, under the auspices of the National
Council. The Daily Worker of January 31, 1949 (page 5), also
named him as speaker at a meeting held under the auspices of that
organization. He delivered an address at a rally held in Madison
Square Garden, New York City, May 29, 1946, under the auspices
of that organization, according to a pamphlet entitled "We have
seen America." He was chairman at the Assembly on American-
Soviet Relations held June 17, 1947, by the National Council of
American-Soviet Friendship, as reported in The Worker of June 15,
1947 (page 10). He spoke at the Congress on American-Soviet
Relations held by this same group December 3-5, 1949, as shown
in the program.
Mr. Lamont was a member of the Sponsoring Committee of the
National Council of American -Soviet Friendship's Committee on
Education, according to the Bulletin of the committee issued June
1945 (page 22). He was one of the signers of a statement in praise of
Wallace's Open Letter to Stalin, which was circulated by the Council
in May 1948, according to a pamphlet entitled "How to End the Cold
War and Build the Peace" (page 9). He signed a statement of this
organization, as reported in the Daily Worker of February 17, 1949
(page 4). The Daily Worker of April 14, 1952 (page 8, an advertise-
ment), announced that Dr. Lamont was to speak at a symposium
of the Council on The Future of Germany and World Peace, April
23, at the Yugoslav- American Home, New York City. The Daily
Worker of November 6, 1952 (page 8, an advertisement) and of
November 17, 1952 (page 8), named him as a speaker at a rally of
the Council November 13 th in New York City, on USA-USSR
Cooperation for Peace.
The Special Committee on Un-American Activities reported that
the National Council of American-Soviet Friendship was the Com-
munist Party's principal front for all things Russian (report of March
29, 1944); the Attorney General cited it as subversive and Commun-
ist (press releases of December 4, 1947 and September 21, 1948;
redesignated April 27, 1953).
Mr. Lamont was named as Chairman of the Congress of American-
Soviet Friendship on a letterhead dated October 27, 1942. The
Congress was cited as a Communist-front organization by the Special
Committee in its report of March 29, 1944.
According to the Daily People's World of May 15, 1952 (page 7)
and May 27, 1952 (page 3), Corliss Lamont was named speaker for
the American Russian Institute at its Sixth Annual Banquet, May 23,
in Los Angeles. It was reported in the Daily People's World of
May 26, 1952 (page 7), that he was to discuss the recent economic
conference in Moscow, May 27, for the American-Russian Institute.
The Attorney General cited this organization as Communist (press
release of April 27, 1949; redesignated April 27, 1953).
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 321
Under auspices of the Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee,
Corliss Lamont was a member of the National Reception Committee
for Madame Irene Joliot-Currie, according to an invitation to a
dinner held in New York City, March 31, 1948; he signed an Open
Letter to the President on Franco Spain, which letter was released
by the Spanish Refugee Appeal of the Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee
Committee, as shown on a mimeographed letter attached to a letter-
head of April 28, 1949.
The Special Committee cited the Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Com-
mittee as a "Communist-front organization headed by Edward K.
Barsky" (report of March 29, 1944, page 174). It was cited as sub-
versive and Communist by the Attorney General (press releases of
December 4, 1947 and September 21, 1948; redesignated April
27, 1953).
As shown in the Conference call and the printed program (page 13),
Mr. Lamont was a sponsor of the Cultural and Scientific Conference
for World Peace which was held in New York City, March 25-27, 1949,
under the sponsorship of the National Council of the Arts, Sciences
and Professions; he was listed as having signed a statement of the
Council (Congressional Record, July 14, 1949, page 9620), and he
signed a Resolution Against Atomic Weapons, prepared and released
by the Council, according to a mimeographed list of signers of the
resolution attached to a letterhead of July 28, 1950. The following
issues of the Daily Worker named him as speaker at a mass meeting
of the Council in Carnegie Hall, March 10th: March 4, 1952 (page 3) ;
March 7, 1952 (page 8); March 10, 1952 (page 7); and March 12,
1952 (page 3).
The National Council of the Arts, Sciences and Professions was
cited as a Communist-front organization by the Committee on Un-
American Activities (Report No. 1954 of April 26, 1950, originally
released April 19, 1949, page 2).
According to the Daily Worker of July 25, 1950 (page 4), Corliss
Lamont of New York signed a statement against the Hobbs Bill
(statement prepared and released by the .American Committee for
Protection of Foreign Born) . The Special Committee on Un-American
Activities cited the American Committee as "one of the oldest auxil-
iaries of the Communist Party in the United States" (Report dated
March 29, 1944; also cited in a report dated June 25, 1942). The
Attorney General cited the organization in letters to the Loyalty
Review Board as subversive and Communist (press release of Septem-
ber 21, 1948; redesignated April 27, 1953).
Mr. Lamont was one of the sponsors of the American Continental
Congress for World Peace which was held September 5-10, 1949, as
shown in the call to that congress and the printed program which is
in Spanish (page 7). This congress was cited as "another phase in
the Communist 'peace' campaign, aimed at consolidating anti-
American forces throughout the Western Hemisphere" (report on the
Communist "Peace" Offensive, April 1, 1951, page 21, by the
Committee on Un-American Activities).
Encouraged by its success in drawing dupes into its campaign, the Committee
for Peaceful Alternatives to the Atlantic Pact launched a more ambitious project
under the high-sounding title of the Mid-Century Conference for Peace. This
was held at the St. James Methodist Church in Chicago on May 29 and 30, 1950.
* * * In plain terms, the conference was aimed at assembling as many gullible
322 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
persons as possible under Communist direction and turning them into a vast
sounding board for Communist propaganda. * * * The sponsors of the Mid-
Century Conference included a number of the usual supporters of Communist
fronts such as * * * Corliss Lamont * * * (Report on the Communist "Peace"
Offensive, pages 58 and 59) .
In June 26, 1946, Corliss Lamont was cited for contempt of Congress
in the House of Representatives for refusal to supply information and
records of the National Council of American-Soviet Friendship
requested by this committee. (See: Washington Star, June 27, 1946.)
The Grand Jury did not indict him. However, Richard Morford,
executive director of the National Council * * *, who had custody
of the records, was cited at the same time for contempt of Congress
because of his refusal to produce records of the organization, as
subpoenaed by the Committee on Un-American Activities. He was
indicted and later convicted (Daily Worker, June 29, 1950, page 2),
and it was reported in the Daily Worker of August 30, 1950 (p. 3) f
that he had begun his jail sentence.
The Daily Worker of June 10, 1952 (page 2), said:
Former Representative Vito Marcantonio, State Chairman of the American
Labor Party, announced today that at a meeting of the American Labor Party
State Executive Committee, held on June 3, the nomination of Corliss Lamont
as the ALP candidate for United States Senator from the State of New York was
unanimously recommended to all ALP clubs and to the ALP State convention,
which will take place August 28, 1952.
For years, the Communists have put forth the greatest efforts to capture the
entire American Labor Party throughout New York State. They succeeded in
capturing the Manhattan and Brooklyn sections of the American Labor Party
but outside of New York City they have been unable to win control (Special
Committee on Un-American Activities, Report dated March 29, 1944, page 78).
A pamphlet entitled "Are We Being Talked Into War?" which was
written by Dr. Corliss Lamont, was reviewed in the Daily People's
World of April 4, 1952 (page 6, magazine section), and it was de-
scribed therein as a pamphlet "that traces the development of the
propaganda drive for war against the Soviet Union." The review
said that —
Dr. Lamont's well-documented little pamphlet shows just how the war makers
and war propagandists have tried to incite the people for war through the years
* * * In contrast, Lamont cited the "fundamental attitude" of the Soviet
Union as represented by the law passed by the Supreme Soviet in 1951 "outlawing
war propaganda through the USSR."
An article by Barbara Schaeffer in the Daily Worker of September
14, 1952 (pages 3 and 6), said, in part:
The very term Iron Curtain w r as fashioned by that right hand man of Hitler,
Goebbels, The United States passport division has given meaning to the term
* * * Among those harassed when trying to leave the United States: * * *
Corliss Lamont, writer.
In speaking of Mr. Lamont's difficulties, the article stated that he —
Reported this spring to a meeting of the Emergency Civil Liberties Committee
that he had been asked for a "complete reorientation of his views" in order to get
a passport.
"Soviet Civilization" by Mr. Lamont was reviewed by Robert
Friedman in the Daily Worker of November 28, 1952 (page 7). The
article said:
A survey of the basic concepts of Soviet socialist society and an account of the
specific Soviet achievements in every field of endeavor, Dr. Lamont's book is the
work of an American patriot because it calmly, logically, factually destroys many
of the anti-Soviet misconceptions on which the whole fight-Russia propaganda is
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 323
predicated. Laraont concludes his book with the predication that "the objective
verdict of coming generations will be that the Soviet Russians, during their first
35 years, laid the foundations of a great new civilization of enduring achievement
and high promise, ranking in world historical significance with the outstanding
civilizations of the past."
Mr. Friedman's review also appeared in the Daily People's World
December 15, 1952 (page 7).
Oscar Lange
Organization and affiliation Source
American Slav Congress (1) and Committee on Un-American Ac-
(2). Delegate to Third Ameri- tivities, Report on American
can Slav Congress, Manhattan Slav Congress, June 26, 1949,
Center, New York City, Sep- pp. 24, 95.
tember 20, 21, 22, 1946; speaker;
identified as Polish Ambassador
and later U. N. representative.
Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Com- "Daily Worker," Apr. 1, 1949, p.
mittee (1) and (2). Speaker. 5; "The Worker," Mar. 20,
1949, p. 10; and a Postal Card,
"Caucus for Peace."
National Council of American- Press release dated Feb. 22, 1946.
Soviet Friendship (1) and (2).
Speaker at the George Washing-
ton's Birthday and Red Army
Day Celebration Dinner, Febru-
ary 21, 1946, New York City.
Sponsor of Chicago Council- _ Undated leaflet entitled "Speak-
ers on Russia," issued by the
Chicago Council in lP$5(p. 12).
Reference Testimony of Dr. Robert May-
nard Hutchins before the Sedi-
tious Activities Investigation
Commission, State of Illinois,
1949 (vol. II, p. 25).
Reference. Washington "Star" of Nov. 29,
1949, p. Bl.
Owen Lattimore
A pamphlet entitled a Conference on Democratic Rights named
Owen Lattimore as one of the sponsors of that conference which was
called by the Maryland Association for Democratic Rights (affiliated
with the National Emergency Conference for Democratic Rights) for
June 14-15, 1940. The Special Committee on Un-American Activities
cited the National Emergency Conference * * * as a Communist-
front organization in a report dated March 29, 1944.
Owen J. Lattimore was one of the speakers at a discussion meeting
in Washington, D. C, February 11, 1941, held under the auspices of
the Washington Committee for Aid to China, as shown on a leaflet
entitled Stop Shipments to Japan ; he was identified in this connection
as author of Inner Asian Frontiers of China and Director of the School
of International Affairs, Johns Hopkins Institute. The Washington
Committee for * * * was also cited by the Special Committee * * *
as a Communist-controlled organization (report dated March 29,
1944).
324 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The program of the Writers Congress which was held in 1943 under
the joint auspices of the University of California and the Hollywood
Writers' Mobilization from October 1 to 3, named Owen Lattimore as
one of the speakers. The Attorney General of the United States cited
the Hollywood Writers Mobilization as subversive and Communist
(press releases of December 4, 1947 and September 21, 1948; redes-
ignated April 27, 1953).
Mr. Lattimore spoke at a meeting of the Washington Book Shop,
April 6, 1945, as shown on a mimeographed circular of the organiza-
tion, first cited by the Attorney General in 1942 as follows: "Evidence
of Communist penetration or control is reflected in the following:
Among its stock the establishment has offered prominently for sale
books and literature identified with the Communist Party * * * "
(Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, page 7688; subsequently
cited as subversive and Communist in press releases of December 4,
1947 and September 21, 1948; redesignated April 27, 1953) ; the Special
Committee * * * cited the Washington Book Shop as a Communist-
front organization in its report of March 29, 1944; redesignated pur-
suant to Executive Order 10450 by the Attorney General, April 1, 1954.
The New York Times, in reviewing Mr. Lattimore's book, The
Situation in Asia, stated that "often he seems to feel that Russian
policy is sounder, more astute and/or more progressive than that
adopted by the U. S." (New York Times Book Review, April 10,
1949, page 5.)
Mr. Lattimore's Solution in Asia (Little, Brown), was recommended
by Spotlight on the Far East for March 1947 (page 7), official pub-
lication of the Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy; it
was favorably reviewed by Harriet Moore for Soviet Russia Today
in the JuM 1945 issue (page 27).
The (Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy was cited by
the Attorney General as Communist (press release of April 27, 1949;
redesignated April 27, 1953; redesignated pursuant to Executive
Order 10450, April 1, 1954. Soviet Russia Today has been cited as
a Communist-front publication (Special Committee * * * in reports
of June 25, 1942 and March 29, 1944); subsequently cited by the
Committee on Un-American Activities as a Communist front pub-
lication (report of October 23, 1949, page 108).
Rob F. Hall, writer for the Communist Daily Worker, defended
Mr. Lattimore in an article which appeared in that publication on
April 3, 1950 (page 7); Mr. Hall quoted Mr. Lattimore with approval
in an article which appeared in the Daily Worker June 28, 1950
(page 7); Joseph Starobin reviewed Mr. Lattimore's book, The
Situation in Asia, for the Daily Worker of May 24, 1949 (page 8).
Mr. Lattimore was interviewed by the Daily Worker, as shown in
the issue of September 5, 1945 (page 8).
On May 3, 1950 (page 2), the Daily People's World defended
Mr. Lattimore; on May 4, 1950, the following editorial comment
appeared in the same publication (pages 7 and 12): "The latest
example of the encroachment upon the rights of all is the hounding
of Owen Lattimore * * * this man, along with the Communists and
just about everybody else in the world except a small gang of fanactics
in Washington, believes that Chiang Kai-shek is washed up." The
Daily People's World has been cited as "the official organ of the
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 325
Communist Party on the West coast" by the Special Committee * * *
(report of March 29, 1944; also cited in report of January 3, 1941).
Owen Lattimore was a witness in the State Department Employee
Loyalty Investigation by a subcommittee of the Committee on
Foreign Relations in the United States Senate, March-June 1950
(pages 417^86, 799-871, 873-921 of the hearings). A review of
charges made against Mr. Lattimore, a review of his testimony, and
conclusions of the subcommittee concerning the charges are shown
in Report No. 2108 of the Committee on Foreign Relations (pages
48-71, 160, and 161).
On December 17, 1952, the Washington Star reported (page A-3)
that "Owen Lattimore, long center of stormy charges of Communist
influence in the Government, will appear in court Friday to answer a
Federal grand jury indictment accusing him of perjury. The seven-
count indictment, handed down yesterday, charges the 52-year-old
specialist on Far Eastern affairs with lying under oath while testifying
before the Senate Internal Security subcommittee * * *" The same
information was reported by the Times-Herald and Washington Post
on December 17th (pages 1 of both publications). His photograph
appeared in the Star and the Post in this connection.
The Worker (Sunday edition of the Daily Worker) reported on
September 14, 1952 (page M6) that Owen Lattimore, a Far East
expert, had experienced difficulties when trying to leave the United
States.
Max Lerner
On June 2, 1949, the Daily Worker (p. 2) reported that Max
Lerner, identified as columnist for the New York Post, had asserted
that the trial against the leaders of the Communist Party "has no
business being in court. I don't see how anyone with a rudimentary
knowledge of the history of Communist movements can doubt the
basic Tightness of William Z. Foster's plea, in his long manifesto, that
violence cannot be pinned on the American Communists and that
under American conditions the attempt to use it would be fantastic."
A "Statement of 450 leading 'figures in America, urging the Presi-
dent and Congress to uphold the Constitutional rights of the Com-
munist Party of the United States," was published in the Communist
"Daily Worker" on March 5, 1941 (p. 2, col. 4) ; the statement called
"attention (to) a matter of vital significance to the future of our
nation. It is the attitude of our government toward the Communist
Party * * *" and urged "all members of Congress to oppose any
legislation, direct or indirect, that would take away from Com-
munists those constitutional guarantees which must be kept open
for all if in the future they are to be available for any." Max Lerner
of Massachusetts was one of those who signed the statement.
Mr. Lerner was named in the "Daily Worker" of June 17, 1937
(p. 2) as having signed a statement, demanding pardon for German
Communists; on July 23, 1940 (p. 1) the "Daily Worker" reported
in an article datelined Washington, D. C, July 22, that "a strongly-
worded protest against the nation-wide attack on the right of the
Communist Party to use the ballot was made here yesterday by 65
leading educators, writers, churchmen, lawyers, trade unionists and
civic leaders. The 65 liberals demanded that President Roosevelt
and Attornev General Robert Jackson take immediate action to
326 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
safeguard the constitutional liberties of Communists." The open
letter was made public by the National Chairman of the National
Emergency Conference for Democratic Rights, and was signed by
Max Lerner, identified with "The Nation."
The American League for Peace and Democracy, established in
1937, issued a statement on the international situation which appeared
in "New Masses" on March 15, 1938 (p. 19), together with a list of
persons who signed the statement, including the name of Max Lerner.
The American League for Peace and Democracy was established
in the United States in 1937 as successor to the American League
against War and Fascism
in an effort to create public sentiment on behalf of a foreign policy adapted to the
interests of the Soviet Union. It was designed to conceal Communist control, in
accordance with the new tactics of the Communist International. (From the
Attorney General's citation which appeared in the Congressional Record of
September 24, 1942, pages 7683 and 7684.)
The Attorney General cited the American League * * * as subver-
sive and Communist (letters to the Loyalty Review Board, released
to the press June 1 and September 21, 1948; also included in con-
solidated list released April 1, 1954); the Special Committee cited
the American League as "the largest of the Communist 'front' move-
ments in the United States * * * (and) nothing more nor less than
a bold advocate of treason" (reports of January 3, 1939, and March
29, 1944; also cited in reports of January 3, 1940; January 3 y 1941;
and June 25, 1942; and January 2, 1943).
Mr. Lerner was one of the sponsors of the American Congress for
Peace and Democracy which was held in Washington, D. C, January
6-8, 1939 ("Call") and at which time the American League for Peace
and Democracy was formed. The American Congress was cited
as "a Communist front advocating collective security against the
Fascist aggressors prior to the signing of the Stalin Hitler pact"
(Special Committee * * * in Report 1311 of March 29, 1944).
The American Committee for Protection of Foreign Born is "one
of the oldest auxiliaries of the Communist Party in the United States"
(reports of the Special Committee dated June 25, 1942, and March 29,
1944); it was cited as subversive and Communist by Attorney General
(press releases of June 1 and September 21, 1948; also included in
consolidated list released April 1, 1954. Max Lerner was one of the
sponsors of the Fourth Annual Conference of the organization, held
in Washington, D. C, March 2-3, 1940, as shown on a letterhead
of that conference; a letterhead of the group dated September 11,
1941, named him as one of the sponsors of the American Committee;
he was a sponsor of the organization's national "American All" week
which was celebrated October 21-28, 1941 (undated letterhead
announcing "American All" week); he was a guest of honor at a
United Nations in America Dinner, arranged by the organization in
New York City, April 17, 1943 (from the invitation to dinner).
Professor Max Lerner of Williams College was named in "The
Student Almanac," official publication of the American Student
Union, as a speaker at the Fourth National Convention of that organ-
ization ("The Student Almanac" for 1939, page 32). The American
Student Union was cited as a Communist-front organization by the
Special Committee * * * (reports of January 3, 1940, June 25, 1942:
and March 29, 1944).
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 327
A letterhead of the Conference on Pan American Democracy, dated
November 16, 1938, lists Max Lerner as one of the sponsors of that
organization, known also as the Council for Pan-American Democracy
and cited as a Communist front by the Special Committee (reports of
June 25, 1942, and March 29, 1944). It was cited as subversive and
Communist by the Attorney General (press releases of June 1 and
September 21, 1948; also included in consolidated list released April 1,
1954).
Max Lerner was a committee member of the Medical Bureau,
American Friends of Spanish Democracy, as shown on a letterhead of
that organization dated November 18, 1936; he was a member of the
general committee of American Friends of Spanish Democracy, as
shown in "New Masses" for January 5, 1937 (p. 31), and a letterhead
of the group dated February 21, 1938; he was identified in a booklet
entitled "These Americans Say: * * *" as a representative individual
who advocated lifting the arms embargo against Loyalist Spain; the
booklet was prepared and published by the Coordinating Committee
to Lift the (Spanish) Embargo.
American Friends of Spanish Democracy and the Coordinating
Committee to Lift the (Spanish) Embargo were cited as among a
number of so-called relief groups set up by the Communist Party
when it was campaigning for the support of the Spanish Loyalist cause
in 1937 and 1938 (Report 1311 of the Special- Committee dated March
29, 1944).
The "Daily Worker" of April 6, 1937 (p. 9) reported that Max
Lerner was a member of the Advisory Board of Frontier Films, an
organization cited as a Communist front by the Special Committee in
its report of March 29, 1944. He was among those who signed a
petition in support of Simon W. Gerson, a Communist, according to the
petition and list of persons who signed it, which was released by the
League of American Writers as it appeared in the "Daily Worker" of
March 10, 1938 (p. 1). The League of American Writers was cited as
a Communist front in three reports of the Special Committee * * *
(January 3, 1940, June 25, 1942 ; and March 29, 1944). The Attorney
General stated that the League was founded under Communist
auspices in 1935 and in 1939 began openly to "follow the Communist
Party line as dictated by the foreign policy of the Soviet Union"
(Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, pages 7685 and 7686),
The organization was cited by the Attorney General as subversive and
Communist in lists furnished the Loyalty Review Board (press re-
leases of June 1 and September 21, 1948; also included in consolidated
list released April 1, 1954).
A leaflet attached to a letterhead of the American Committee for
Democracy and Intellectual Freedom, dated January 17, 1940,
contains the name of Max Lerner, identified as Professor, Williams
College, in a list of individuals who signed a petition of the group.
The American Committee * * * has been cited as a Communist
front which defended Communist teachers (reports of the Special
Committee * * * dated June 25, 1942 and March 29, 1944).
The Communist-front enterprises, cited as such by the Special
Committee on Un-American Activities (report of March 29, 1944),
were the Golden Book of American Friendship with the Soviet Union
(reprinted in "Soviet Russia Today" for November 1937, page 79),
and. the Open Letter for Closer Cooperation with the Soviet Union
328 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
which was printed in "Soviet Russia Today" for September 1939
(pages 24-26) ; in both instances, Max Lerner was named as having
signed.
The Special Committee on Un-American Activities cited both the
Non-Partisan Committee for the Reelection of Congressman Vito
Marcantonio and the Prestes Defense Committee as Communist-front
organizations; the latter group was further described as "defending
Luiz Carlos Prestes, leading Brazilian Communist and former member
of the executive committee of the Communist International" (Report
1311 of March 29, 1944) ; Max Lerner signed a cable which was sent
by the Prestes Defense Committee, as shown in the "Daily Worker"
of February 13, 1937 (p. 2); he was a member of the Non-Partisan
Committee for * * * as disclosed by an official letterhead of the
group dated October 3, 1936.
The National Emergency Conference for Democratic Rights was
another of the Communist fronts cited in Report 1311 of the Special
Committee *' * * Professor Lerner was listed as a member of the
Board of Sponsors, National Emergency Conference for Democratic
Rights, according to a press release of February 23, 1940. He was
named by the "Daily Worker" of May 13, 1940 (pp. 1 and 5), as
having signed an Open Letter of the organization.
The pamphlet, "The People vs. H. C. L.," published by the Con-
sumers National Federation, December 11-12, 1937 (page 3), reveals
that Max Lerner was a sponsor of that organization; on March 29,
1944, the Special Committee on Un-American Activities reported
that "the Consumers National Federation was a Communist Party
front which included a large number of party members and fellow
travelers as its sponsors."
Mr. Lerner signed an Open Letter to New Masses, concerning the
American Committee for the Defense of Leon Trotsky, according to
the February 16, 1937, issue of "New Masses" (p. 2); his photograph
appeared in connection with his contribution to the July 13, 1943, issue
of "New Masses" (pp. 3 and 9). The Attorney General cited "New
Masses" as a "Communist periodical" (Congressional Record, Sep-
tember 24, 1942, p. 7688); the Special Committee on Un-American
Activities cited "New Masses" as a "nationally circulated weekly
journal of the Communist Party * * * whose ownership was vested
in the American Fund for Public Service." (See Report 1311 of
March 29, 1944, pages 48 and 75).
"Soviet Russia Today" for March 1937 (pp. 14-15) and the "Daily
Worker" of February 9, 1937 (p. 2) both named Max Lerner as having
signed an Open Letter to American Liberals, cited as a Communist-
front enterprise by the Special Committee in its report of June 25, 1942.
Mr. Lerner was a member of the Sponsors Committee of the United
Office and Professional Workers of America, Local 16, for the Fifth
Annual Stenographers' Ball, as shown on a letterhead of that organi-
zation dated February 1, 1940; the "Daily Worker" of March 9, 1938
(p. 5) named Max Lerner as a sponsor of the conference of the Book
and Magazine Guild, Local 18, United Office and Professional Workers
of America.
J-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 329
The Special Committee on Un-American Activities cited the United
Office and Professional Workers of America "as strongly entrenched
with Communist leadership" (reports of January 3, 1940 and March
29, 1944).
Alfred Baker Lewis
Organization and affiliation Source
National Federation for Constitu- "Daily Worker," July 19, 1942,
tional Liberties (1) and (2). p. 4.
Signer of Open Letter sponsored
by the organization denouncing
U. S. Attorney General Biddle's
charges against Harry Bridges
and the Communist Party.
See also: Vol. 17, public hearings, Special Committee on Un-Ameri-
can Activities, September-October 1944, pp. 10299, 10301, 10306
10340, 10347, 10348; Report No. 2277, Special Committee * * '*, Sub
versive Activities Aimed at Destroying Our Representative Form of
Government, June 25, 1942, pp. 11, 21.
See also: Congressional Record, Jime 23, 1942 and October 13, 1942.
A. A. Liveright
A. A. Liveright, identified as executive director of the American
Council on Race Relations, was one of the sponsors of a congress on
Civil Rights, as shown on the "Urgent Summons to a Congress on
Civil Rights, Detroit, April 27-28, 1946," for the purpose of organiz-
ing "an offensive against the rising Fascist aggression in the United
States." The Civil Rights Congress has been cited as subversive and
Communist by the United States Attorney General (letters to tbe
Loyalty Review Board, released December 4, 1947, and September 21,
1948; redesignated April 27, 1953, pursuant to Executive Order 10450;
included in consolidated list of cited organizations April 1, 1954). In
Report No. 1115, September 2, 1947, pp. 2 and 19, the Committee on
Un-American Activities stated that the Civil Rights Congress was.
"dedicated not to the broader issues of civil liberties, but specifically
to the defense of individual Communists and the Communist Party"
and "controlled by individuals who are either members of the Com-
munist Party or openly loyal to it."
The Communist Daily Worker of April 3, 1950, p. 4, named Alex. A.
Liveright, American Council on Race Relations, Chicago, as one of
those who signed a statement of the National Committee to Defeat
the Mundt Bill, cited as "a registered lobbying organization which
has carried out the objectives of the Communist Party in its fight
against anti-subversive legislation" (report of the Committee on
Un-American Activities released December 7, 1950).
In its issue of January 1941 (pp. 16-18), Social Work Today listed
A. A. Liveright, Illinois, among the "cooperators" for 1940, with a
contribution of $5. The issue of February 1942 (pp. 51-54) named
him as a "cooperator" for 1941. Social Work Today was cited by
the Special Committee on Un-American Activities as a Communist
magazine (report of March 29, 1944, p. 129).
55647 — 54 22
330 tax-exempt foundations
Dr. Isadore Lubin
Organization and affiliation Source
Friends of the Soviet Union (1) "Daily Worker/' Mar. 19, 1930,
and (2). Speaker, Washington, p. 2.
D. C.
Quotation: "One more depression "Washington Post", June 25,
in the United States, with its 1947, p. 2.
equivalent of low production
output and mass unemployment,
will be enough evidence to starv-
ing Europeans that the free en-
terprise system cannot meet
their needs for improved stand-
ards of living."
See also: Public Hearings, Special Committee on Un-American
Activities, Vol. 3, October-November 1938, pp. 2369, 2374.
Robert S. Lynd
On December 14, 1939, "the day before the 148th Anniversary of
the Bill of Rights," a statement signed by "65 prominent citizens
was sent to the American press." The release stated that "we
recognize particularly that serious efforts are being made to silence
and suppress the Communist Party. We regard as significant the
fact that precisely now Earl Browder, its General Secretary, has been
indicted on data which the government has evidently had for years.
We observe that a charge four years old has just now been revived
against another official of the Communist Party, Sam Adams Darcy.
Similarly, a minor technicality was invoked in order to rule all Com-
munist candidated off the New York City ballot. * * *" The state-
ment related that "we feel compelled to speak out sharply and boldly
at this moment * * * When forces exist, as we believe they do now
exist, whose objectives effect * * * is the destruction of civil liber-
ties blindness to facts becomes dangerous, pious protestation of
liberalism, becomes mockery, and failure to speak out courageously
becomes criminal * * *" The statement was signed by Robert S.
Lynd, identified as a professor at Columbia University.
Professor Lynd was one of the sixteen "distinguished Americans"
who "denounced the trend toward disciplinary action against lawyers
who defend 'political minorities, racial minorities and labor organiza-
tions.' " The statement pointed out that such actions "may destroy
the right to fair trial and adequate legal counsel as guaranteed by
the Sixth Amendment to the American Constitution." The statement
was a defense of the five lawyers who defended the eleven leaders of
the Communist Party; the lawyers were cited for contempt by Judge
Medina. (From the Daily Worker of February 1, 1950, page 3.)
An invitation issued by the American Russian Institute to a dinner
dedicated to American-Soviet Post-War Relations, New York City,
October 19, 1944, named Professsor Lynd as a member of that organi-
zation's Board of Directors. On December 12, 1947, the Daily Worker
reported that the Board of Superintendents were planning to eliminate
a course for teachers on culture in the Soviet Union which was spon-
sored by the American Russian Institute ; the same article revealed
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 331
that Prof. Kobert S. Lynd of Columbia University was a member of
the Board of Directors of the Institute.
The Call of the National Council of American-Soviet Friendship,
Inc., to a Congress to be held November 6-8, 1943, a letterhead of the
National Council dated March 13, 1946, and a Memorandum issued
by the Council March 18, 1946, named Prof. Lynd as one of the spon-
sors of the organization; he was a member of the Sponsoring Com-
mittee of the organizations' Committee on Education, as shown on
the proceedings of a conference on Education About the Soviet Union,
October 14, 1944, in New York City; a bulletin issued by the Com-
mittee on Education, June 1945 (page 22), also named him as a mem-
ber of the Sponsoring Committee * * *. The New York Times of
May 19, 1943 (page 17-C), reported that he had signed the National
Council's Open Letter to the American People; he signed the organiza-
tion's Open Letter to the Mayor, of Stalingrad, as revealed by Soviet
Russia Today for June 1943 (page 21); he signed the organization's
appeal to the United States Government to end the cold war and ar-
range for a conference with the Soviet Union (leaflet entitled "End the
Cold War— Get Together for Peace," p. 9) ; on February 17, 1949,
the Daily Worker named Prof. Lynd as having signed a statement
of the Council urging President Truman to have an interview with
Premier Stalin.
As shown in the November 1937 issue of Soviet Russia Today
(page 79), Robert S. Lynd was one of those who signed the Golden
Book of American friendship with the Soviet Union, cited as a "Com-
munist enterprise" signed by "hundreds of well-known Communists
and fellow travelers" (Special Committee on Un-American Activities
in report of March 29, 1944).
The program of the Fifth National Conference of the American
Committee for Protection of Foreign Born which was held in Atlantic
City, New Jersey, March 29-30, 1941, named Prof. Lynd as one of
the sponsors of that organization; he was identified with Columbia
University. Prof. Lynd signed a statement of the Committee for
Peaceful Alternatives to the Atlantic Pact, calling for International
Agreement to Ban Use of Atomic Weapons (statement attached to a
press release dated December 14, 1949, page 13).
A letterhead of the American Committee for Democracy and
Intellectual Freedom dated December 1, 1939 named Robert S. Lynd
as a member of the New York Committee of that organization; he
signed a petition of the group, as shown in a mimeographed sheet
attached to a letterhead dated January 17, 1940; he was one of the
sponsors of a Citizens' Rally in New York City, April 13, 1940, held
under the auspices of the American Committee * * *, as shown on a
leaflet announcing the rally; he signed an appeal of the same organiza-
tion which was sent to Secretary Hull on behalf of anti-fascist refugees
trapped in France (Daily Worker of July 22, 1940, page 1, column 5) ;
he also signed the organization's Open Letter to Nicholas Murray
Butler, president of Columbia University, denouncing his "pro-war"
stand (Daily Worker of October 7, 1940, page 3; October 12, 1940,
page 4; and New Masses October 15, 1940, page 17).
Robert S. Lynd signed the letter of the American Friends of Spanish
Democracy which was addressed to the President of the United States
(Daily Worker of February 7, 1938, page 4) ; and he also signed their
332 TAX-EXEMPT WUNDATIONS
petition to lift the arms embargo against Spain (Daily Worker of
April 8, 1938, page 4).
A letter of the Veterans of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade, addressed
to the President and Attorney General of the United States was signed
by Prof. Lynd. The letter protested "attacks upon the Veterans of
the * * * and condemning the war hysteria now being whipped up
by the Roosevelt administration" (Daily Worker of February 21
1940).
According to a mimeographed letter, attached to a letterhead of
the Spanish Refugee Appeal of the Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Com-
mittee, dated April 28, 1949, Robert S. Lynd signed an Open Letter
of the group which was addressed to the President of the United States;
he signed the organization's petition to the President "to bar military
aid to or alliance with fascist Spain" (mimeographed petition attached
to a letterhead dated May 18, 1951)..
New Masses for December 3, 1940 (page 28), revealed that Robert
S. Lynd signed an Open Letter of the Council for Pan American
Democracy (also known as the Conference for * * * ), addressed to
the President of Brazil, urging him to save Luis Carlos Prestes.
Robert Lynd was a member of the Provisional Sponsoring Com-
mittee of the National Emergency Conference, as shown on a letter-
head of the organization dated May 19, 1939; he was a member of the
Board of Sponsors of the National Emergency Conference for Demo-
cratic Rights, as shown on the organization's Legislative Letter of
February 15, 1940 and a press release of February 23, 1940; he signed
the Group's Open Letter, as shown in the Daily Worker of May 13,
1940 (pages 1 and 5).
The Call to a Conference on Constitutional Liberties in America,
June 7, 1940, named Robert S. Lynd as one of the sponsors of that
conference. The National Federation for Constitutional Liberties
was formed at this conference and later merged with the Internationa]
Labor Defense to form the Civil Rights Congress. The Daily Worker
of December 29, 1948 (page 2), revealed that Prof. Lynd was one of the
sponsors of the Civil Rights Congress of New York State; he was
identified with Columbia University.
Prof. Lynd was one of the sponsors of a conference of the National
Council of the Arts, Sciences and Professions, October 9-10, 1948, as
shown in a pamphlet, "To Safeguard These Rights * * * "published
by the Bureau of Academic Freedom of the National Council * * * ;
he signed the organization's statement for negotiations with the
U. S. S. R., as reported in the Daily Worker of August 7, 1950 (page 8) ;
he was a sponsor of the Cultural and Scientific Conference for World
Peace, called by the National Council * * * in New York City,
March 25-27, 1949 (conference call and the program, page 13; also
the Daily Worker of February 21, 1949, page 2); he supported a re-
hearing of the case of the Communist leaders before the United States
Supreme Court, as shown in "We Join Black's Dissent," a reprint of
an article from the St Louis Post-Dispatch of June 20, 1951, by the
National Council * * * .
An undated letterhead of Frontier Films named Robert Lynd as a
member of the Advisory Board of the organization. He signed an
Open Letter of the League of American Writers, addressed to Secre-
tary Cord ell Hull and the Pan-American Conference (Daily Worker,
July 31, 1940, page 7).
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 333
"In March 1937, a group of well-known Communists and Commu-
nist collaborators published an Open Letter bearing the title, Open
Letter to American Liberals. The letter was a defense of the Moscow
purge trials" (Special Committee on Un-American Activities in
report of June 25, 1942). The Daily Worker of February 9, 1937
(page 2) and Soviet Russia Today for March 1937 (pages 14-15),
revealed that Robert S. Lynd of Columbia University signed the
Open Letter to American Liberals.
On May 11, 1937, the Daily Worker reported that Robert Lynd
has signed a statement of the American League Against War and
Fascism, protesting Franco spies (page one of the Daily Worker) ;
he opposed an amendment barring American Youth for Democracy
and declared "I'm glad the (Schultz) amendment was stopped and
that I went on record against it" (Daily Worker, November 21, 1947,
p. 5); the amendment "could have empowered college faculties to
outlaw so-called 'subversive' student groups."
The Daily Worker of March 5, 1941 (page 4) reported that Prof.
Lynd had signed a letter to the President of the United States, urging
him to recognize seating the People's Republic China in the United
Nations ; he was a member of the Planning Committee of the National
Committee to Repeal the McCarran Act (letterhead of May 25, 1951) ;
a member of the National Committee (Daily Worker, May 14, 1951,
page 8) ; a sponsor of same group (Daily Worker of December 27,
1950, page 9) ; and he signed the National Committee's Open Letter
to the President, urging him to "call a halt to building of concentra-
tion camps in the United States" (Daily Worker, January 28, 1952,
page 3).
The organizations, unions and publications referred to in this memo-
randum have been cited by (1) the Special Committee on Un-Ameri-
can Activities and/or the Committee on Un-American Activities; and
(2) the Attorney General of the United States, as follows:
American Committee for Democracy and Intellectual Freedom (1)
American Committee for Protection of Foreign Born (1) and (2)
American Friends of Spanish Democracy (1)
American League Against War and Fascism (1) and (2)
American Russian Institute (2)
Civil Rights Congress (1) and (2)
Committee for Peaceful Alternatives to the Atlantic Pact (1)
Council for (or Conference on) Pan American Democracy (1) and (2)
Cultural and Scientific Conference for World Peace (1)
Daily Worker (1)
Frontier Films (1 )
Golden Book of American Friendship with the Soviet Union (1)
International Labor Defense (1) and (2)
League of American Writers (1) and (2)
National Council of American Soviet Friendship (1) and (2)
National Council of the Arts, Sciences and Professions (1)
National Federation for Constitutional Liberties (1) and (2)
Soviet Russia Today (1)
Spanish Refugee Appeal of the Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee
(1) and (2)
Veterans of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade (1) and (2)
334 tax-exempt foundations
Kenneth MacGowan
A letterhead of the Hollywood Writers Mobilization dated October
10, 1945 listed Kenneth Macgowan among the members of the organi-
zation's Executive Council. He was listed as Editor of the "Holly-
wood Quarterly," publication of the Hollywood Writers Mobiliza-
tion, in the issue of April 1947.
On October 1-3, 1943, the Hollywood Writers Mobilization and the
University of California held a Writers Congress, the program of
which listed Kenneth Macgowan as a member of the Advisory Com-
mittee; a member of the Seminar on The Documentary Film; and a
member of the Committee of the Panel on Pan-American Affairs.
The Attorney General of the United States cited the Hollywood
Writers Mobilization as subversive and Communist in letters to the
Loyalty Review Board and released by the U. S. Civil Service Com-
mission, December 4, 1947 and September 21, 1948. The organiza-
tion was redesignated by the Attorney General, April 27, 1953, pur-
suant to Executive Order No. 10450, and included on the April l r
1954 consolidated list of organizations previously designated.
Kenneth Macgowan was an instructor at the Peoples Educational
Center, as shown by the pamphlet for the Pall Term 1946 (p. 14).
The School's Winter 1947 Catalogue listed him as a lecturer on pro-
duction in the course on Motion-Picture Direction and gave the follow-
ing biographical note: "Dramatic critic from 1910 to 1923; play pro-
ducer from 1923 to 1931; motion-picture producer since 1932 * * *
Head of theater arts department at U. C. L. A."
The Attorney General cited the People's Educational Center as
Communist and subversive in letters released June 1 and September
21, 1948. The organization was redesignated by the Attorney Gen-
eral, April 27, 1953, pursuant to Executive Order No. 10450, and
included on the April 1, 1954 consolidated list of organizations pre-
viously designated.
A letterhead of the Hollywood Independent Citizens Committee
of the Arts, Sciences and Professions listed Kenneth MacGowan as a;
member of the Executive Council (letterhead dated October 2, 1945).
The Committee on Un-American Activities, in its Review of the
Scientific and Cultural Conference for World Peace, April 19, 1949
(p. 2), cited the Independent Citizens Committee of the Arts, Sciences
and Professions as a Communist-front organization.
An advertisement in the "Daily People's World," May 2, 1947
(p. 8), listed Kenneth MacGowan as a sponsor of the Los Angeles
Chapter of the Civil Rights Congress.
The Attorney General of the United States cited the Civil Rights
Congress as subversive and Communist in letters released December
4, 1947 and September 21, 1948. The organization was redesignated
by the Attorney General, April 27, 1953, pursuant to Executive Order
No. 10450, and included on the April 1, 1954 consolidated list of or-
ganizations previously designated. The Committee on Un-American
Activities, in its report of September 2, 1947 (pp. 2 and 19), cited the
Civil Rights Congress as an organization formed in April 1946 as a
merger of two other Communist-front organizations (International
Labor Defense and the National Federation for Constitutional Liber-
ties) ; "dedicated not to the broader issues of civil liberties, but specifi-
cally to the defense of individual Communists and the Communist
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 335
Party" and "controlled by individuals who are either members of the
Communist Party or openly loyal to it."
Robert M. MacIver
In a booklet entitled "Can You Name Them?" the name of .Robert
M. MacIver, Professor of Sociology, Columbia University, is listed
on page 3 as one of the endorsers of the American Committee for
Democracy and Intellectual Freedom, cited by the Special Committee
on Un-American Activities as a Communist front which defended
Communist teachers (Reports of June 25, 1942 and March 29, 1944).
A leaflet published by the American Committee to Save Refugees
and entitled "For the Rescue of Refugees," contains the name of
Robert M. MacIver among the signers of a public statement of the
organization.
The American Committee to Save Refugees was cited as a Com-
munist front by the Special Committee on Un-American Activities
in Report 1311 of March 29, 1944 (pages 49, 112, 129, 133, 138, 167
and 180).
It was reported in the "Daily Worker" of April 8, 1938 (page 4)
that Prof. R. M. MacIver, Columbia University, was one of the
signers of a petition to lift the arms embargo which was sponsored
by the American Friends of Spanish Democracy.
In 1937-38, the Communist Party threw itself wholeheartedly into the cam-
paign for the support of the Spanish Loyalist cause, recruiting men and organizing
multifarious so-called relief organizations * * * such as * * * American Friends
of Spanish Democracy. (Special Committee on Un-American Activities, Report
1311, March 29, 1944, page 82.)
According to the Daily Worker of April 10, 1953, page 6, Dr.
Robert M. MacIver along with Prof. Robert S. Lynd, both identified
as being professors at Columbia University, presented a statement to
200 faculty members on April 6, 1953, in which they called the recent
stand of the Association of American Universities favoring "coopera-
tion" with the witchhunting committees "the most serious blow that
education has received."
Archibald MacLeish
A letterhead of the American League for Peace and Democracy,
dated April 16, 1939, revealed that Mr. MacLeish was a member of
the Writers and Artists' Committee of that organization which was
cited as subversive and Communist by the U. S. Attorney General in
letters to the Loyalty Review Board, released to the press June 1 and
September 21, 1948.
The American League * * * was established in the United States
in 1937 as successor to the American League Against War and Fas-
cism —
in an effort to create public sentiment on behalf of a foreign policy adapted to
the interests of the Soviet Union * * * The American League * * * was de-
signed to conceal Communist control, in accordance with the new tactics of the
Communist International (U. S. Attorney General, Congressional Record, Sep-
tember 24, 1942, pages 7683 and 7684).
The American League was the —
largest of the Communist "front" movements in the United States; it was formerly
known as the American League Against War and Fascism, and, at the time of its
inception, as the United States Congress Against War (Special Committee on
336 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Un-American Activities in reports of January 3 ; 1939 and March 29, 1944; also
cited in reports of January 3, 1940; January 3, 1941; June 25, 1942; and January
2, 1943). • J
Mr. MacLeish was chairman of the opening session of the American
Writers Congress, June 4-6, 1937, and also spoke before the Congress
("Daily Worker" of June 5, 1937, pages 1 and 4); he was elected vice-
President of the organization during that Congress ("Daily Worker"
June 8, 1937, page 3).
The American Writers Congress was cited by the Special Com-
mittee on Un-American Activities as having been sponsored by the
League of American Writers; Earl Browder, general secretary of the
Communist Party, spoke at the second biennial American Writers
Congress in 1937. (From the Special Committee's report of March
29, 1944.)
The League of American Writers was cited as subversive and
Communist by the U. S. Attorney General (lists released to the press
June 1 and September 21, 1948); the "League * * * was founded
under Communist auspices in 1£)35 (and) in 1939 began openly to
follow the Communist Party line as dictated by the foreign policy
of the Soviet Union" (U. S. Attorney General, Congressional Record,
September 24, 1942, pages 7685 and 7686). The League was also
cited as a Communist-front oiganization by the Special Committee
on Un-American Activities (reports of January 3, 1940; June 25, 1942;
and March 29, 1944).
"The Bulletin" of the League of American Writers (page 7), named
Mr. MacLeish as a member of that group; he spoke at a meeting of
the League, as shown in "New Masses" of April 20, 1937 (page 32);
he was a member of the National Council of the League ("The Bulle-
tin," Summer 1938, page 2); and a committee sponsor of the League,
as shown in the "Daily Worker" of January 18, 1939 (page 7).
A pamphlet, "Youngville, U. S. A." (page 63), and an undated
official letterhead of the American Youth Congress, both list the name
of Archibald MacLeish as a member of the National Advisory Board
of that org ani ation. The American Youth Congress was cited as
subversive and Communist by the U. S. Attorney General (press
releases of December 4, 1 947 and September 21 , 1948) . The Congress
"originated in 1934 and * * * has been controlled by Communists
and manipulated by them to influence the thought of American youth"
(U. S. Attorney General, Congressional Record, September 24, 1942,
page 7685; also cited in re Harry Bridges, May 28; 1942, page 10).
It was also cited as "one of the principal fronts of the Communist
Party" and "prominently identified with the White House picket
line * * * under the immediate auspices of the American Peace
Mobilisation" (Special Committee on Un-American Activities in
its report of June 25, 1942; also cited in reports of January 3, 1939;
January 3, 1941; and March 29, 1944).
As shown in the "Daily Worker" of April 6, 1937 (page 9), Archibald
MacLeish was a member of the Advisory Board of Frontier Films,
cited as a Communist front organization by the Special Committee
in its report of March 29, 1944.
A letterhead of the Independent Citizens Committee of the Arts,
Sciences and Professions, dated May 28, 1946, listed Archibald
MacLeish as vice-Chairman of that organization, cited as a Com-
munist-front group by the Committee on Un-American Activities in
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 337
its Review of the Scientific and Cultural Conference for World Peace,
March 26, 1950 (page 2); it was also cited in the Committee's report
on the Communist "Peace" Offensive dated April 25, 1951 (pages
11 and 12).
Mr. MacLeish was a member of American Friends of Spanish
Democracy, as shown on a letterhead of that organization dated
November 18, 1936. He was one of the sponsors of Friends of the
Abraham Lincoln Brigade, as disclosed by a letterhead of that or-
ganization dated September 10, 1938. A letterhead of the Medical
Bureau and North American Committee to Aid Spanish Democracy,
dated July 6, 1938, named him as a member of the organization's
Writers and Artists Committee; he was named in the "Daily Worker"
of January 12, 1938 (page 7), as one of the sponsors of that organiza-
tion; the same information was shown in the pamphlet entitled "One
Year in Spain" (page 12), and in the "Daily Worker" of February 27,
1937 (page 2). He was one of the sponsors of "Tag Day," held in
New York City under the auspices of the North American Committee
to Aid Spanish Democracy, as shown in the "Daily Worker" of Febru-
ary 27, 1937 (page 2).
During 1937 and 1938, the Communist Party campaigned for sup-
port of the Spanish Loyalist cause, recruiting men and setting up
so-called relief organizations such as American Friends of Spanish
Democracy, Friends of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade, and the Medical
Bureau and North American Committee to Aid Spanish Democracy.
(From Report 1311 of the Special Committee * * * dated March 29,
1944.)
In a booklet entitled "These Americans Say: ^Lift the Embargo
Against Republican Spain,' " material for which was compiled and
published by the Coordinating Committee to Lift the Embargo,
Archibald MacLeish, identified as a writer, was named as a "repre-
sentative individual" who advocated lifting the embargo on the sale
of arms to Spain. The Coordinating Committee * * * was set up
during the Spanish Civil War by the Communist Party in the United
States, and was used by the Communist Party to carry on a great deal
of agitation. (Report 1311 of the Special Committee * * *)
The booklet, "Children in Concentration Camps" (on the back
cover), lists the name of Archibald MacLeish as one of the sponsors of
the Spanish Refugee Relief Campaign, publishers of the booklet; a
letterhead of the organization dated November 16, 1939, also named
him as national sponsor of the Medical Aid Division of the Spanish
Refugee Relief Campaign, cited by the Special Committee * * * as a
front organization of the Communist Party (report of January 3,
1940, page 9).
Carey McWilliams
Organization and affiliation Source
Anne Kinney (aka Jane Howe) Executive hearings of the Corn-
testified that Carey McWilliams mittee on Un-American Activ-
was never a member of the Com- ities, released to the public in
munist Party. "Investigation of Communist
Activities in the Los Angeles
Area— Part 5," pp. 867-900.
338
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Organization and affiliation
Louis Budenz testified that Carey
McWilliams was a member of
the Communist Party.
Mr. McWilliams denied Mr.
Budenz' charge and was quoted
as saying: "This statement is
categorically false. I have
never been a member of the
Communist Party."
City government of San Francisco,
California, cancelled permission
for the use of the War Memorial
building for a meeting at which
Carey McWilliams had been
scheduled to speak.
Speech by Mr. McWilliams in
Portland, Oregon, banned in
1950 after Capt. William
Browne, chief of detectives for
the Portland police department
and head of the American Le-
gion's subversive activities com-
mittee told the school authori-
ties that McWilliams was sub-
versive, citing the California
Tenney Committee report.
Opposed to loyalty oath
Source
Select Committee to Investigate
Tax-Exempt Foundations and
Comparable Organizations
(House of Representatives),
Dec. 23, 1952, p. 721.
Washington "Post," Dec. 25,
1952, p. 25.
"Daily People's World," Oct. 14,
1952, p. 3.
"Daily People's World," Jan. 31,
1950, p. 2.
Sent message of encouragement to
attorneys defending 14 persons
being tried under the Smith
Act.
Protested the decision of the Su-
preme Court upholding the con-
viction of 1 1 Communist leaders
under the Smith Act.
Signer of statement in behalf of
lawyers defending Communists.
Signer of statement asking parole
for Hollywood cases.
"Daily Workers," Sept. 28, 1950,
p. 4; "Daily People's World,"
Apr. 20, 1949, p. 3; May 17,
1950, p. 3; Aug. 30, 1950, p.
10; Nov. 22, 1950, p. 2; Jan.
18, 1951, p. 9.
"Daily People's World," June 10,
1952, p. 3.
"Daily People's World," June 28,
1951, p. 6.
"Daily Worker," Feb. 1, 1950,
p. 3.
"Daily Worker," Dec. 22, 1950,
p. 3.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
339
Organization and affiliation
Statements by Mr. Mc Williams on
Communist cases have appeared
in the following.
Signer.
Signer of statement opposing
Mundt anti-Communist bill.
Civil Rights Congress (1) and (2).
Signer of statement condemning
persecution of Gerhart Eisler.
National Federation for Constitu-
tional Liberties (1) and (2).
Signer of an open letter spon-
sored by group urging the Presi-
dent to reconsider the order of
the Attorney General for the de-
portation of Harry Bridges, and
to rescind the Attorney Gen-
eral's "ill-advised, arbitrary, and
unwarranted findings relative
to the Communist Party."
International Longshoremen's and
Warehousemen's Union (1).
Chairman of meeting to hear
Harry Bridges and his code-
fendants.
International Longshoremen's and
Warehousemen's Union (1)
and Bridges, Robertson, Schmidt
Defense Committee (2). Chair-
man of dinner in honor of Harry
Bridges, J. R. Robertson, and
Henry Schmidt.
Bridges, Robertson, Schmidt De-
fense Committee (2). Partici-
pant at meeting and reception
in honor of Harry Bridges in
New York City, Dec. 10, 1952.
Signer of ''strongly worded protest
against the nation-wide attack
on the right of the Communist
Party to use tbe ballot * * *"
Source
"Daily Worker," Dec. 31, 1948,
p. 3; Feb. 28, 1949, p. 9;
June 10, 1949, p. 4; Oct.
19, 1949, p. 11; Oct. 30, 1949,
p. 6 (Southern edition of the
Sunday Worker) ; Narodna
Volya (Bulgarian language or-
gan of the Communist Party),
Mar. 25, 1949, p. 4.
Brief submitted in behalf of
John Howard Lawson and
. Dalton Trumbo in the Su-
preme Court of the United
States, October 1949.
"Daily Worker," May 4, 1948,
p. 11; "Daily People's World,"
May 12, 1948, p. 3.
"Daily Worker," Feb. 28, 1947,
p. 2.
"The Worker," July 19, 1942,
magazine sec, p. 4.
"Daily People's World," Apr.
18, 1950, p. 10.
"Daily People's World," Oct.
2, 1952, p. 3; see also "Daily
People's World," Oct. 14,1952,
p. 2.
Printed program.
"Daily Worker," July 23, 1940,
p. 1.
340
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIOlSrS
Organisation and affiliation
Open Letter to American Liberals
(1). Signer.
American Committee for Protec-
tion of Foreign Born (1) and (2).
Chairman.
Schneiderman-Darcy Defense
Committee (1) and (2). En-
dorser.
International Workers Order (1)
and (2). Endorser of meeting.
International Labor Defense (1)
and (2). Sent greetings.
National Federation for Constitu-
tional Liberties (1) and (2>.
Vice chairman.
National Federation for Constitu-
tional Liberties (1) and (2).
Member, executive committee.
Signer of statement hailing
the War Department's or-
der on commissions for
Communists.
Signer of statement opposing
the use of injunctions in
labor disputes.
Civil Rights Congress (1) and (2).
Sponsor of Freedom Crusade.
National Lawyers Guild (1).
Member, Committee on Labor
Law and Social Legislation.
Associate editor of Lawyers
Guild Review.
Addressed luncheon meeting.
Spoke at banquet May 4 at
Hotel Commodore.
American Slav Congress (1) and
(2). Sponsor of testimonial
dinner, Oct. 12, 1947.
American Peace Crusade (1) and
(2). Member of council.
Source
"Soviet Russia Today," March
1937, pp. 14, 15.
Booklet, "The Regis tsa4iGn of
Aliens" (back cover); "New
Masses," June 4, 1940, p. 2;
a letterhead dated June 11,
1940; "Daily Worker," Sept.
11, 1940, p. 3; Sept. 30, 1940,
p. 3; Oct. 5, 1940, p. 2; Oct. 8,
1940, p. 5.
Leaflet, Censored News.
Circular announcing public rally,
Apr. 28, 1940.
Program of Third Biennial Na-
tional Conference.
Pamphlet, National Federation
for Constitutional Liberties;
letterhead of Nov. 6, 1940;
program, "Call National Ac-
tion Conference for Civil
Rights."
Letterhead, July 3, 1942.
"Daily Worker," Mar. 18, 1945,
p. 2.
Advertisement "New York
Times," Apr. 1, 1946, p. 16.
"Daily Worker," Dec. 15, 1948,
p. 11.
News-Letter, July 1937, p. 2.
May-June 1948 issue of Lawyers
Guild Review, p. 422.
"Daily People's World," Oct. 27,
1953, p. 6.
"Daily Worker," May 6, 1954,
p. 3.
Invitation and program.
"New Masses," Aug. 6, 1940,
p. 23.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
341
Organization and affiliation
American Peace Mobilization (1)
and (2). Member, National
Council.
American Continental Congress
for Peace (1). Sponsor.
Committee for a Democratic Far
Eastern Policy (2). Sponsor.
National Council of the Arts,
Sciences and Professions (1).
Signer of statement.
Cultural and Scientific Conference
for World Peace (1). Sponsor.
Washington Book Shop Associa-
tion (1) and (2). Book, Facto-
ries in the Field listed as divi-
dend for members of association.
Southern California Country
by Mr. McWilliams, listed
as dividend.
Speaker
"New Masses" (1) and (2). Con-
tributor.
"A Mask for Privilege" by
Mr. McWilliams, reviewed
favorably.
Workers Book Shop. Brothers
Under the Skin by Mr. McWil-
liams advertised and sold.
"Wijch Hunt" by Mr. McWil-
liairis reviewed favorably.
League of American Writers (1)
and (2). Signer of Call to the
Fourth American Writers Con-
gress.
Member of panel on minority
groups at 1943 congress.
People's Institute of Applied
Religion (2). Member, Inter-
national Board and sponsor.
Spanish Refugee Relief Campaign
(1). Local sponsor.
Source
"Daily Worker," Sept. 3, 1940,
p. 4.
"Daily People's World," Aug. 18,
1949, p. 2.
Letterheads dated 1946, 1947,
and 1948; "Daily People's
World," Feb. 26, 1946, p. 3.
Letterhead received January
1949.
"Daily Worker," Mar. 12, 1949,
p. 12 and conference program,
p. 15.
Bookplate, publication of group,
issue of December 1939, p. 19.
Bookshopper, May 23, 1946.
Leaflet dated Dec. 15, 1947.
"New Masses," June 4, 1940,
p. 9; July 1j6, 1940, p. 12;
Sept. 26, 1944, p. 32.
"Political Affairs," July 1948,
p. 665; "The Bookshopper,"
July 1948, p. 4; "The Worker,"
Dec. 19, 1948, p. 10, magazine
section.
Workers Book Shop Catalog,
1948, p. 10; Catalog, 1949-50,
p. 11.
"Daily People's World," Dec. 7,
1950, p; 9; Jan. 15, 1951, p. 7;
"Daily Worker," Dec. 24, 1950,
p. 6, sec. 2.
Leaflet, "In Defense of Culture";
"New Masses," Apr. 22, 1941,
p. 25.
Program.
Letterhead, Jan. 1, 1948.
Undated letterhead.
342 tax-exempt foundations
Norman Mailer
Organization and affiliation Source
National Council of the Arts, Daily Worker, Sept. 21, 1948,
Sciences and Professions (1). p. 7.
Member.
Speaker, New York State Adv. in New York Star, Oct. 5,
Council of the Arts, 1948, p. 6.
Sciences.
Speaker at Academic Free- Adv. in New York Star, Oct. 8,
dom Rally in behalf of dis- 1948, p. 10.
missed teachers.
Signed statement in support Daily Worker, Oct. 19, 1948, p. 7.
of Henry A. Wallace; i. d.
as author of "The Naked
and the Dead."
Sponsor, dinner held by org. Program dated Oct. 28, 1948.
in honor of Henry A. Wal-
lace, Oct. 28, 1948, New
York City.
Signed Call Upon the Film Variety Dec. 1, 1948, p. 21 (an
Industry to Revoke Black- advertisement).
list; call issued by Theatre
Div. of the National Council.
Signed statement of org Daily Worker, Dec. 29, 1948, p. 2.
Signed statement of org New York Star, Jan. 4, 1949, p. 9
(an adv.).
Sponsor of conference; i. d. Daily Worker, Jan. 10, 1949, p.
as author. 11.
Signed statement of org Letterhead rec'd. Jan. 1949.
Speaker Daily People's World, July 26.
1949, p. 5.
Speaker, Cultural and Scien- Conference program, p. 8.
tific Conference for World
Peace, New York City,
Mar. 25-27, 1949; i. d. as
author, "The Naked and
the Dead."
Sponsor, Cultural and Scien- Conference program, p. 13.
tific Conference.
Sponsor, Cultural and Scien- Daily Worker, Feb. 21, 1949,
tific Conference. * * * i. p. 9.
d. as a writer.
Sponsor, Cultural and Scien- Conference "Call."
tific Conference.
Spoke on "The Only Way for Speaking of Peace, the edited
Writers" at Cultural and report of conference, p. 82.
Scientific Conference.
Participated in Cultural and Speaking of Peace, p. 141.
Scientific Conference * * *;
biography.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
343
Organization and affiliation
Civil Rights Congress (1) and (2).
Sponsor of Freedom Crusade.
Sponsor, Freedom Crusade;
protests indictment of 12
Communist leaders.
Sponsor, Freedom Crusade. _
Source
Daily Worker, Dec. 15, 1948,
p. 11.
Daily Worker, Dec. 31, 1948,
p. 3.
Program and Conference (Used as
Part of Cvetic Exhibit 52
during his testimony before
this committee).
Leaflet of Freedom Crusade,
program and conference (Part
of Cvetic Exhibit 52).
Masses & Mainstream, Aug. 1948,
p. 70.
The Worker, December 19, 1948,
p. 10, magazine section.
Sponsor, National Civil Rights
Legislative Conference, Jan.
18 and 19, 1949; i. d. from
New York City.
Masses & Mainstream ( 1 ) . Author
of "The Naked and the Dead,"
reviewed by Charles Humboldt.
Author of "The Naked and
the Dead," recommended
by The Worker; photograph
appeared in connection with
article.
Author of "Naked and the
Dead" film adaptation by
War Dept.
Daily Worker (1). Author of
"Barbary Shore" (Rinehart);
critically reviewed by Robert
Friedman.
Daily People's World (1) . Author
of "Barbary Shore"; reviewed
critically by Robt. Friedman.
Supported Simon Gerson, a
Communist.
Signed brief on behalf of John
Howard Lawson and Dal-
ton Trumbo submitted by
the Cultural Workers to the
Supreme Court of the U.S.,
Oct. 1949 Term.
Albert Maltz
The Daily Worker of March 5, 1941, p. 2, reported that Albert
Maltz, Long Island, N. Y., was one of those who signed a statement
to the President defending the Communist Party. The Daily
Worker of May 4, 1936, p. 2, reported that a play written by Mr.
Maltz was given for the benefit of the Communist Party. The Daily
Worker of July 21, 1940, p. 1, reported that "The Underground
Stream" by Albert Maltz, the story of a Communist organizer in the
Detroit automobile industry, was to run in serial form in the publi-
cation. A book by Albert Maltz was advertised in the May 1938
issue of the "Communist International."
The Daily Worker of April 28, 1938, p. 4, reported that Albert
Maltz was one of the signers of a statement by American Progressives
on the Moscow trials.
Daily Worker, May 26, 1950, p.
11.
Daily Worker, June 10, 1951, p.
7.
Daily People's World, June 15,
1951, p. M6.
Daily Worker, Oct. 18, 1948, p. 4.
Brief.
344 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Albert Maltz was one of those who signed a statement urging the
dismissal of the charges against the Communist prisoners, as shown
by the Daily People's World of November 6, 1948, p. 3; and the
Daily Worker of January 17, 1949, p. 3, reported that he signed a
statement in behalf of the twelve Communist leaders. He was shown
as a sponsor of the National Non-Partisan Committee to Defend the
Rights of the Twelve Communist leaders (back of letterhead of
September 9, 1949), and he signed a statement of the Committee for
Free Political Advocacy, an organization which defended the twelve
Communist leaders (Narodna Volya, March 25, 1949, p. 4, and Daily
Worker, February 28, 1949, p. 9). The Daily Worker of May 16,
1952, p. 3, reported he was a sponsor of a conference scheduled for
June 14 at St. Nicholas Arena in New York City by the National
Conference to Win Amnesty for Smith Act Victims ; he was shown as
a sponsor of the National Committee to Win Amnesty for the Smith
Act Victims on a letterhead of May 22, 1953, and signed a telegram
greeting Eugene Dennis on his 48th birthday, under auspices of that
Committee, as reported in the Daily Worker on August 11, 1952, p. 3.
According to the Daily Worker of December 10, 1952, p. 4, he signed
an appeal to President Truman requesting amnesty for leaders of the
Communist Party convicted under the Smith Act. The Daily
People's World of July 24, 1953, p. 6, listed his name as having signed
an appeal for broad participation in the amnesty campaign launched
in behalf of individuals serving sentences under the Smith Act.
An undated leaflet of the American Committee for Protection of
Foreign Born listed Albert Maltz as a member of the Board of Direc-
tors of that organization. The Program and Call for the National
Conference of the American Committee for Protection of Foreign
Born held in Cleveland, Ohio, October 25 and 26, 1947, listed him as
a sponsor of the conference. He was shown to be a sponsor of the
American Committee on a photostatic copy of an undated letterhead
of the 20th Anniversary National Conference * * *, U. E. Hall,
Chicago, Illinois (December 8-9, 1951).
The Daily Worker of June 17, 1949, p. 7, reported that Albert
Maltz spoke for the American Labor Party.
Albert Maltz contributed to the November 1933 issue of Fight, p. 8,
the publication of the American League Against War and Fascism.
Albert Maltz was a sponsor of a testimonial dinner given by the
American Slav Congress, New York, N. Y., October 12, 1947, as
shown by the Invitation issued by the Congress and the Program of
the Dinner.
The Daily People's World of May 28, 1948, p. 3, reported that Albert
Maltz spoke for the American Youth for Democracy.
The Program of the Artists' Front to Win the War, dated October
16, 1942, p. 5, listed Albert Maltz as a sponsor of that organization.
Albert Maltz spoke at the California Labor School, according to the
July 22, 1948, issue of the Daily People's World, p. 5, and was the
guest of honor of the School, according to the April 7, 1949, issue of
the same publication, p. 5.
The Daily Worker of June 20, 1949, p. 5, reported that Albert Maltz
spoke for the Civil Rights Congress in behalf of the Communist
leaders. The Daily People's World of May 2, 1947, in an advertisement
on p. 8, listed Albert Maltz as a sponsor of the Los Angeles Chapter
of the Civil Rights Congress. He signed an Open Letter to J. Howard
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 345
McGrath in behalf of the four jailed trustees of the Bail Fund of the
Civil Rights Congress of New York (advertisement in the Washington
Evening Star of October 30, 1951, p. A-7, "paid for by contributions
of signers").
Albert Maltz was a sponsor of the Conference on Constitutional
Liberties in America, as shown by the program leaflet of the conference
dated June 7, 1940, p. 4. A letterhead of the National Federation for
Constitutional Liberties dated November 6, 1940, and the program,
"Call National Action Conference for Civil Rights" listed Mr. Maltz
as a sponsor of the National Federation * * *. He signed statements
and messages of the organization, as shown by the booklet, "600
Prominent Americans," p. 25; a news release of the organization dated
December 26, 1941; a leaflet attached to an undated letterhead of the
organization; the Daily Worker of July 19, 1942, p. 4; and the Daily
Worker of December 19, 1940, p. 5.
Albert Maltz contributed to the Daily Worker, as shown by the
December 24, 1931, p. 3, December 21, 1935, p. 3, and November 9,
1947, pi. 8, issues of the publication. Equality issues of February
1940, p. 18, and June 1940, p. 35, listed Mr. Maltz as a contributor.
He was listed as a member of the Editorial Council of Equality in the
July 1939, p. 2, June 1940, p. 3, and July 1940, p. 2, issues.
The Daily Worker of April 6, 1937, p. 9, listed Mr. Maltz as a staff
member of Frontier Films.
International Publishers listed Albert Maltz in a catalog, p. 14, as
one of the authors whose works they published, and the Daily Worker
of March 1, 1950, p. 11, reported that the International Publishers had
published "The Citizen Writer" by Mr. Maltz.
New Masses, August 27, 1940, p. 21, reported that Albert Maltz
was a sponsor of the Plays for Children Contest of the International
Workers Order, Junior Section. Mr. Maltz participated in a program
of the Jewish People's Fraternal Order of the International Workers
Order, as shown by the Daily People's World of September 5, 1947,
p. 5. Mr. Maltz spoke at a meeting of the IWO defending Leon
Josephson, Eugene Dennis and Gerhart Eisler, Communists as shown
in the Daily People's World of February 13, 1948, p. 3. The Daily
People's World of May 19, 1948, p. 5, reported that he spoke at a
meeting of the Jewish People's Fraternal Order, IWO, Silver Lake
Lodge No. 488.
Albert Maltz' play, "Rehearsal," was produced for the Jefferson
School of Social Science, according to the April 15, 1949, issue of the
Daily Worker, p. 7.
Letterheads of the Spanish Refugee Appeal of the Joint Anti-
Fascist Refugee Committee dated February 26, 1946, April 28, 1949,
and May 18, 1951, list Albert Maltz as a sponsor of the organization.
He spoke for the organization, as shown by the Daiy Worker, April
1, 1948, p. 4; The Worker, October 31, 1947; and the Daily Worker,
May 17, 1948, p. 2. A mimeographed letter attached to a letterhead
of the organization dated April 28, 1949, listed his name as a signer
of an Open Letter to President Truman on Franco Spain; in 1951,
he signed the organization's petition to President Truman "to bar
military aid to or alliance with fascist Spain" (mimeographed peti-
tion attached to letterhead of May 18, 1951).
The Daily Worker of April 29, 1935, pp. 1' and 2, reported that
Albert Maltz read "The Working Class Theatre" at the American
55647—54 23
346 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Writers' Congress, Mecca Temple, New York, N. Y., April 26-27,
1935. "Direction," May-June, 1939, p. 1, listed Mr. Maltz as one
of those who signed the Call to the Third American Writers Congress,
and the Program of the Congress listed him as Co-Chairman of the
Arrangements Committee. A leaflet, "In Defense of Culture,"
listed his name as one of those who signed the Call to the 4th American
Writers Congress, New York, N. Y. ; June 6-8, 1941.
The Bulletin of the League of American Writers, p. 12, listed
Albert Maltz as a member of the National Board of the League; and
the Daily Worker of April 30, 1935, listed his name as a member of
the Executive Committee of the organization. New Masses, June 17,
1941, p. 9, and the Daily Worker of September 14, 1942, p. 7, listed
Mr. Maltz as Vice President of the League. Mr. Maltz contributed
to the pamphlet, "We Hold These Truths," p. 70, which was pub-
lished by the League; and the Daily Worker of March 26, 1938, p. 5,
reported that he was one of those who signed a telegram to Governor
Lehman which was sponsored by the League. Albert Maltz signed
the Call to the Fourth Congress, League of American Writers, June
6-8, 1941, according to New Masses, April 22, 1941, p. 25, and he was-
one of those who signed a statement of the League in behalf of a
second front, as shown by the Daily Worker of September 14, 1942,
p. 7.
The League of Women Shoppers defended Albert Maltz, according
to the April 8, 1948, issue of the Daily Worker, p. 5.
Albert Maltz contributed to New Masses, issues of December 15,
1936, p. 37; January 26, 1937, p. 25; and August 17, 1937, p. 16.
He signed a letter to the President sent by New Masses, as shown by
the April 2, 1940, issue of that publication, p. 21; and he spoke at a
symposium, New Masses Theatre Night, May 26, 1941, Manhattan
Center, as shown by the May 27, 1941, issue of the periodical, p. 32.
The Daily Worker of April 7, 1947, p. 11, listed Albert Maltz as an
endorser of the New Masses; and the Daily Worker of October 6,
1947, p. 11, reported that he spoke at a meeting held under the joint
auspices of New Masses and Mainstream. An advertisement in
PM of October 16, 1947, p. 5, listed his name as a sponsor of a Protest
Meeting for Howard Fast held by Masses and Mainstream in New
York, N. Y., October 16, 1947. "The Journey of Simon McKeever"
by Mr. Maltz was reviewed by Phillip Bonosky in the June 1949
issue of Masses and Mainstream, p. 72. He sent congratulations to
Masses and Mainstream on its fifth anniversary (issue of March
1953, p. 54) and contributed an article to the November 1951 issue
of the publication, p. 42.
Albert Maltz was a sponsor of the National Conference on American
Policy in China and the Far East, as shown by the Call to the con-
ference which was held in New York, N. Y., January 23-25, 1948.
The pamphlet, "How to End the Cold War and Build the Peace,"
p. 9, listed his name as one of those who signed a statement of the
National Council of American-Soviet Friendship in praise of Wal-
lace's onen letter to Stalin, May 1948. The Daily People's World
of October 23, 1943, p. 3, reported that he was on the motion picture
committee to organize Hollywood participation in the local observance
of the Congress of American-Soviet Friendship, November 16, at
the Shrine Auditorirm.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 347
A letterhead, which was received by the Committee in January
1949, listed Albert Maltz as a member-at-large of the National Council
of the Arts, Sciences and Professions; the same information was shown
on a letterhead of the organization's Southern California Chapter (a
photostat dated April 24, 1950). Mr. Maltz was shown to be a
member of the Board of Directors of the National Council * * * on
letterheads of July 28, 1950, and December 7, 1952, and on a leaflet,
"Policy and Program Adopted by the National Convention 1950."
An undated ballot of the Southern California Chapter of the National
Council (to be counted February 9, 1951) listed his name as a member
of the organization's Film and Theater Division and as a candidate
for Executive Board. The Daily Worker of April 11, 1951, p. 8,
reported that he was an honor guest at a meeting of the National
Council. He signed a statement of the Council attacking espionage
investigations, as shown by the Daily Worker of August 18, 1948,
p. 2; he signed the Council's statement protesting curbs on lawyers
in political trials, as shown in the Daily Worker of March 10, 1952j
p. 3. A statement in support of Henry A. Wallace, sponsored by the
Council, was signed by Mr. Maltz, as shown in the Daily Worker of
October 19, 1948, p. 7 ; and he was a sponsor of a dinner held by the
Council in honor of Henry A. Wallace, October 28, 1948, Hotel
Commodore, New York City, as shown on the Program.
Mr. Maltz was a sponsor of the Cultural and Scientific Conference
for World Peace held under auspices of the National Council * * *
in New York, N. Y., March 25-27, 1949, as shown by the Conference
Program (p. 13) and the Conference Call.
Mr. Maltz spoke at a meeting of the National Lawyers Guild in
Washington, D. C, on "Legislative Investigation? or Thought
Control Agency?' 5 , October 20, 1947, p. 3.
New Theatre, May 1935, p. 8, listed Albert Maltz as a contributor
to that publication of the New Theatre League and New Dance
League. The New Theatre League produced "Black Pit" by Maltz,
as shown by the January 8, 1936, issue of the Daily Worker, p. 3;
and the Daily Worker of June 10, 1938, p. 7, reported that Maltz was
the guest of the New Theatre League.
Albert Maltz was one of those who signed the Open Letter in
Defense of Harry Bridges, as shown by the Daily Worker of July 19,
1942, p. 4; and he was a member of the International Board and a
sponsor of the People's Institute of Applied Religion, Inc., as shown
by a letterhead dated January 1, 1948. Mr. Maltz issued a statement
in support of the USSR which appeared in the September 1941 issue
of "Soviet Russia Today", p. 30; and he was one of those who signed
a statement in defense of the members of the National Board of the
Spanish Refugee Appeal, as shown by the Daily People's World, June
25, 1948, p. 5.
Albert Maltz was one of those who signed a letter to Governor
Thomas E. Dewey which was sponsored by the Schappes Defense
Committee, as shown by the New York Times of October 9, 1944,
p. 12. He signed a letter to President Roosevelt protesting attacks
on the Veterans of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade, as shown by the
Daily Worker of February 21, 1940; and he was a public sponsor of
the Veterans Against Discrimination of the Civil Rights Congress of
New York, as shown by a letterhead of that organization dated May
11, 1946.
348 TAX-EXEMPT FOtJNDATlONS
"Way Things Are" by Albert Maltz was published by fee New-
Century Publishers, as shown by the 1946 catalogue- (p. 30). The
Workers Bookshop advertises books by Albert Malta, as shown by
the advertisement of "The Journey of Simon McKeever" in the 1M&-
1950 catalogue of the bookshop, p. 3 ; and that of "The Citizen Writer"
on a leaflet of the Annual Sale, Workers Bookshop, March 10 to April
1, 1950. "The Citizen Writer" was published by International Pub-
lishers, as shown in the Daily Worker, issues of November 21, IS49 1 ,
p. 11, and March 1, 1950, p. 11. "The Journey of Simon MeKwver"'
was recommended by The Worker (issue of December 4, Wt% p.. § r
sec. 2, Southern Edition).
Albert Maltz testified in public hearings before the Committee on.
Un-American Activities, October 21-30, 1947, as shown in the* he airings,
(p. 363). The Daily People's World of October 30, 1947, p. I, repented
that Maltz was cited for contempt of Congress for refusing to answer
questions of the Committee. He was one of the persons cited for
eontempt of Congress who agreed to waive a jury trial and abide* by
the decision of the trial case, the Lawson-Trumbo case. The* Wash-
ington Post of April 11, 1950, p. 1, reported that the Supreme- Cbmrt
upheld the decision of the lower court and that Lawson and Tnamboi
were sentenced to pay $1,000 fines and serve a year in jaill The Daily
Worker of April 4, 1951, p. 3, reported that Albert Maltz had beem
released from the Federal prison at Mill Point, West Yirginiia, after
serving his sentence for contempt; he had started sewing bjs term
June 29, 1950.
CITATIONS
(1) Cited by Committee and/or Special Committee* on Un-A\mer£ean
Activities; (2) Cited by the United States Attorney General.
American Committee for Protection of Foreign Bona (1) and (2)
American Labor Party (1)
American League Against War and Fascism (1) aaad (2)
American Slav Congress (1) and (2)
American Writers Congress (1)
American Youth for Democracy (1) and (2)
Artists Front to Win the War (1)
California Labor School (2)
Civil Bights Congress (1) and (2)
Conference on Constitutional Liberties in America (1) and (2)
Daily Worker (1)
Equality (1)
International Publishers (1)
International Workers Order (1) and (2)
Jefferson School of Social Science (1) and (2)
Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee (1) and (2)
League of American Writers (1) and (2)
League of Women Shoppers (1)
Masses and Mainstream (1)
National Conference on American Policy in China and the Far
East (2)
National Council of American-Soviet Friendship (1) and (2)
National Council of the Arts, Sciences and Professions (1)
National Federation for Constitutional Liberties (1) and (2)
,«E8NEXEMPT f^UPJATIONS
349
National Lawyers Guild (1)
New Century Publishers (l)
New Masses (1) and (2)
New Theatre (1)
New Theatre League (1)
Open Letter in Defense of Harry Bridges (1)
People's Institute of Applied Religion, Inc. (2)
Sehappes Defense Committee (1) and (2)
Scientific and Cultural Conference for World Peace (1)
Veterans Against Discrimination of the Civil Rights Congress (2)
Veterans of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade (1) and (2)
Perry Miller
Organization and affiliation
Samuel Adams School for Social
Science (2). Teacher of course
on "The Literature of Indus-
trialism"; biographical notes
shown on page 23 of source, i. d.
as Dr.
Member of Faculty
Source
Catalogue for Spring Term, 1947
(pp. 15 & 23); photostat of
this used as Struik Exhibit 5,
July 24, 1951.
Gardner Murphy
Organisation and affiliation
National Federation for Constitu-
tional Liberties (1) and (2).
Signed Press release.
American League for Peace and
Democracy (1) and (2). Mem-
ber of Psychologists Committee.
American Committee for Protec-
tion of Foreign Born (1) and (2).
Sponsor.
National Council of the Arts, Sci-
ences and Professions (1).
Sponsor, Cultural and Scientific
Conference for World Peace,
March 25-27, 1949. i. d. as Edu-
cator.
Greater New York Emergency
Conference on Inalienable
Rights (1). Sponsor.
Conference on Pan American De-
mocracy (1) and (2% Sponsor.
Testimony of Mr. Walter S.
Steele before this committee
July 21, 1947, p. 52.
Source
Press release dated Dec, 26, 1941.
Letterhead dated Apr. 6, 1939.
Letterhead of June 11, 1940
(written in Spanish); Program of
the Fifth National Conference,
Atlantic City, N. J., Mar. 29-
30, 1941 ; and a booklet entitled
"The Registration of Aliens."
Daily Worker, Feb. 21, 1949, p. 2;
also conference program, p. 15.
Program of the conference, Feb.
12, 1940.
Letterhead, Nov. 16, 1938; signed
call to the conference as shown
in "News You Don't Get" for
Nov. 15, 1938, p. 3.
350 TAX-EXEMS'T tOTTNBATiONS
Organisation and affiliation Source
Coordinating Committee to Lift Booklet entitled "These Ameri-
the Embargo (1). Representa- cans Say: * * *" (p. 9).
tive Individual who advocated
lifting the arms embargo against
Spain.
Medical Bureau and North Ameri- Letterhead dated July 6, 1938.
can Committee to Aid Spanish
Democracy (1). Psychologists'
Committee.
American Friends of Spanish De- Daily Worker, Apr. 8, 1938, p. 4
mocracy (1). Signed petition
to lift arms embargo.
Civil Rights Congress (1) and (2). Advertisement ("paid for by con-
Signed an "Open Letter to J. tributions of signers"), Eve-
Howard McGrath" on behalf of ning Star, Oct. 30, 1951, p. A-7.
the four jailed Trustees of the
Bail Fund of the Civil Rights
Congress of New York., i. d. as
a teacher, New York.
Henry Murray
Organization and affiliation Source
Daily Worker (1). Marched Daily Worker, Apr. 28, 1924, p. 4.
in May Day Parade, Joliet,
Illinois.
National Council of the Arts, Conference program, p. 15.
Sciences and Professions
( 1 ) . Sponsor, Cultural and
Scientific Conference for
World Peace, New York
City, March 25-27, 1949.
Name shown in this source
as Henry A> Murray.
Reported to be witness in behalf of
Alger Hiss. Name shown in
source as Dr. Henry A. Murray.
Washington Times-Herald, Jan.
13, 1950, p. 5.
Ray Newton
"The Struggle Against War," August 1933 (p. 2) reported that
Ray Newton was a member of the Arrangements Committee for the
United States Congress Against War of the American Committee for
Struggle Against War. A letterhead of the United States Congress
Against War dated November 1, 1933 carried the name of Ray Newton
as a member of the Arrangements Committee.
The American Committee for Struggle Against War was cited as a
Communist front which was formed in response to directives from a
World Congress Against War held in Amsterdam in August 1932 under
the auspices of the Communist International by the Special Committee
on Un-American Activities in its report dated March 29, 1944 (pp. 47
and 119). The Special Committee on Un-American Activities cited
the United States Congress Against War as "convened in St. Nicholas
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 351
Arena, New York City, on September 29, 1933 * * * it was com-
pletely under the control of the Communist Party. Earl Browder was
a leading figure in all its deliberations. In his report to the Commu-
nist International, Browder stated: 'The Congress from the beginning
was led by our party quite openly.' " (Special Committee on Un-
American Activities, Report, March 29, 1944, p. 119.) The Attorney
General of the United States cited the organization as follows: "The
American League Against War and Fascism was formally organized
at the First United States Congress Against War and Fascism held in
New York City, September 29 to October 1, 1933. * * * The program
of the first congress called for the end of the Roosevelt policies of
imperialism and for the support of the peace policies of the Soviet
Union, for opposition to all attempts to weaken the Soviet Union.
* * * Subsequent congresses in 1934 and 1936 reflected the same
program." (Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, p. 7683.)
Milton Mayer
Material concerning Milton Mayer and the Great Books Founda-
tion was entered in Committee files at the request of the Honorable
Richard Nixon in a letter addressed to the Chairman, September 25,
1951. This material contains a letter addressed to Senator Nixon,
September 13, 1951, by Charles F. Strubbe, Jr., President of the
Great Books Foundation, concerning Milton Mayer and the Founda-
tion. A copy of this letter and the letterhead on which it was
written is enclosed for your information.
The reference in the letter to the " 'Syracuse story,' in which Mr.
Mayer was accused of advocating 'tearing down the flag' " may be
found in the Congressional Record of March 6, 1947 (page 1720),
where the Honorable Bertrand Gearhart read an article from the
Syracuse (New York) Post Standard of February 16, 1947. This
article reported that Milton Mayer, professor at the University of
Chicago, had addressed a meeting of One Worlders in Syracuse,
as follows:
We must haul down the American flag. And if I wanted to be vulgar and
shocking, I would go even further, and say haul it down, stamp on it, and spit on it.
Attached to Mr. Strubbe's letter is a photostatic copy of a letter
dated March 14, 1947, from District Attorney William H. Powers, to
the Assistant Counsel to the Governor of New York, which states:
* * * in connection with the complaint from Mr. Gridley Adams of the United
States Flag Foundation, I wish to report that an investigation of this episode
indicates no crime was committed, or insult intended to the flag. The objectional
remarks occurred at a Forum held on February 15, 1947, at the Osedaga Hotel in
Syracuse, New York, as part of the program of the Institute of International
Relations, which is sponsored by the American Friends Service Committee and
the Syracuse Peace Council. The subject of the Forum was "world government,"
a concept apparently opposed by Mr. Mayer.
The attention focused on his statement illustrates the misunderstanding that
can arise when a question is taken out of its context. What Mr. Mayer appar-
ently meant was that the persons advocating world government would "haul
down the American Flag, etc." which is obviously exactly contrary to advocating
such a practice.
Also attached to the file are photostats of a certification of Mr.
Bower's signature by the Onondaga County Clerk, May 1, 1951, and
clippings of articles reporting on Mr. Bower's investigation which
352 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
appeared in the Syracuse Post-Standard on March 19, 1947, and the
Syracuse Herald-Journal of the same date.
In an article datelined Whittier, July 4, the Daily People's World
of July 5, 1950 (page 4), reported that—
the U. S. policy in Korea today "seems dangerously like the totalitarianism we
are supposed to be fighting, Milton Mayer told one of the final sessions of the
Institute of International Relations sponsored by the Quakers here * * *
Emphasizing that he was himself a rabid anti-Communist, Mayer said he failed
to see how war in Korea was going to eliminate communism * * *"
Reinhold Niebuhr
A letterhead of the Fourth Annual Conference, American Commit-
tee for Protection of Foreign Born, held at the Hotel Annapolis in
Washington, D. C, March 2-3, 1940, showed Dr. Reinhold Niebuhr
to be one of the sponsors of that conference. The American Commit-
tee for Protection of Foreign Born was cited as subversive and Com-
munist by the United States Attorney General in letters furnished
the Loyalty Review Board and released to the press by the U. S.
Civil Service Commission, June 1 and September 21, 1948; the organi-
zation was redesignated by the Attorney General pursuant to Execu-
tive Order 10450 of April 27, 1953. The Special Committee on Un-
American Activities cited the American Committee * * * as "one of
the oldest auxiliaries of the Communist Party in the United States"
(Report 1311 of March 29, 1944).
Dr. Niebuhr endorsed the American Congress for Peace and De-
mocracy, as shown on the "Call to Action" by the Congress for Janu-
ary 6-8, 1939, in Washington, D. C; a letterhead of the American
League for Peace and Democracy, dated July 12, 1939, named him
as a member of the National Committee of that organization; the
"Daily Worker" of January 18, 1938 (page 2) reported that he was
one of those who signed a resolution urging passage of the Anti-
Lynching Bill, which resolution was sponsored by the American League
for Peace and Democracy. Dr. Niebuhr was one of the sponsors of
the Boycott Japanese Goods Conference of the American League
* * *, as shown in the January 11, 1938 issue of the "Daily Worker"
(page 2) . It is also shown on a. letterhead of the China Aid Council
of the League, dated May 18, 1938, that Dr. Niebuhr was a sponsor
of the CounciL He was chairman of a Mass Reception at the opening
session of the United States Congress Against War, as shown on the
printed program of the Congress.
The American Congress for Peace and Democracy has been cited
as a Communist-front organization advocating collective security
against the Fascist aggressors prior to the signing of the Stalin-Hitler
pact ; the American League for Peace and Democracy was formed at
this Congress. (From a report of the Special Committee * * *
dated March 29, 1944.)
The American League for Peace and Democracy was "established
in the United States in 1937 as successor to the- American League
Against War and Fascism in an effort to create public sentiment on
behalf of a foreign policy adapted to the interests of the Soviet
Union * * * (It) was designed to conceal Communist control in ac-
cordance with the new tactics of the Communist International"
(United States Attorney General, Congressional Record, September
24, 1942, pages 7683 and 7684); the Attorney General included the
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 353
American League * * * on lists of subversive and Communist or-
fanizations furnished the Loyalty Review Board (press releases of
une 1 and September 21, 1948) and redesignated it pursuant to
Executive Order 10450 of April 27, 1953. The Special Committee
cited the American League as "the largest of the Communist 'front'
movements in the United States" (Reports of January 3, 1939; March
29, 1944; January 3, 1940; January 3, 1941; June 25, 1942; and
January 2, 1943). The American League Against War and Fascism
was formally organized at the First United States Congress Against
War and Fascism which was held in New York City, September 29-
October 1, 1933 (United States Attorney General, Congressional
Record, September 24, 1942, page 7683); the Special Committee cited
the United States Congress Against War as ' 'completely under the
control of the Communist Party" (Report of March 29, 1944).
A letterhead of the American Friends of Spanish Democracy, dated
February 21, 1938, named Dr. Niebuhr as a member of the Executive
Committee of that organization, cited by the Special Committee as
a Communist-front group (Report of March 29, 1944).
Dr. Niebuhr was one of the sponsors of a mass rally of the American
Labor Party, as shown on a handbill entitled "Protest Brutal Nazi
Persecutions!" The Special Committee cited the American Labor
Party as follows: "For years the Communists have put forth the
greatest efforts to capture the entire American Labor Party through-
out New York State. They succeeded in capturing the Manhattan
and Brooklyn sections of the American Labor Party but outside of
New York City, they have been unable to win control" (Report of
March 29, 1944).
A leaflet entitled "Presenting the American Student Union" named
Dr. Niebuhr as a member of the Advisory Board of the American
Student Union ; he spoke at the Fourth National Convention of the
organization, as shown in the "Student Almanac" for 1939 (page 32);
he was a member of the Sponsoring Committee of the "Alumni
Homecoming" dinner arranged by the American Student Union in
New York City, March 21, 1937, according to a photostat of a leaflet
announcing the dinner.
The American Student Union has been cited as a Communist-front
organization which was "the result of a united front gathering of
young Socialists and Communists" in 1937; the Young Communist
League took credit for creation of the Union, and the Union offered
free trips to Russia. The Union claims to have led as many as
500,000 students out in annual April 22 strikes in the United States.
(From a Report of the Special Committee * * * dated January 3,
1939, page 80.)
Dr. Niebuhr was one of the sponsors of the Consumers National
Federation, as shown in the organization's pamphlet, "The People vs.
H. C. L." (page 3), dated December 11-12, 1937. The Consumers
National Federation was cited as a Communist-front organization in
Report 1311 of the Special Committee * * *, dated March 29, 1944.
In a booklet entitled "These Americans Say: 'Lift the Embargo
Against Republican Spain,' " material for which was compiled and
published by the Coordinating Committee to Lift the (Spanish)
Embargo, the Rev. Reinhold Niebuhr was named as a "representa-
tive" clergyman who advocated lifting the embargo on the sale of
arms to Spain, "a well-meant but tragically mistaken effort to legislate
354
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
neutrality." The Coordinating Committee to Lift the Embargo has
been cited as one of a number of front organizations, set up during the
Spanish Civil War by the Communist Party in the United States and
through which the party carried on a great deal of agitation. (From
the Special Committee's Report of March 29, 1944.)
The organization, American Friends of the Chinese People, has been
cited as a Communist-front group by the Special Committee in its
Report of March 29, 1944; a letterhead of the organization, dated
May 16, 1940, carried the name of Reinhold Niebuhr in a list of
members of the National Advisory Board.
Ernest Minor Patterson
Organization and affiliation
American Committee for Democ-
racy and Intellectual Freedom
(1). Member, National Com-
mittee (shown as Ernest M.).
Member, Executive Commit-
tee (shown as Prof. Ernest
M. ; University of Pennsyl-
vania).
Signer of Open Letter to Nich-
olas Murray Butler de-
nouncing his "pro-war"
stand.
American Committee for Protec-
tion of Foreign Born (1) (2).
Sponsor.
New York Conference for Inalien-
able Rights (1). Signer of tele-
gram to President Roosevelt and
Attorney General Jackson in be-
half of the International Fur
and Leather Workers Union de-
fendants.
Philadelphia Citizens Committee
to Free Earl Browder [Citizens
Committee to Free Earl Brow-
der (1) (2)]. Signer of Letter
to the President.
Paul Radin
Source
Letterhead, Sept. 22, 1939.
Letterhead, Dec. 21, 1939.
Daily Worker, Oct. 7, 1940, p. 3.
Letterhead, June 11, 1940; Let-
terhead, Mar. 29, 1941; Pro-
gram, Fifth National Confer-
ence, Atlantic City, N. J., Mar.
29-30, 1941; and, booklet,
"The Registration of Aliens,"
back cover.
Daily Worker, Sept. 17, 1940, pp.
1 and 5.
The Worker, Mar. 15, 1942, p. 4.
(1) Cited by Special and/or Committee on Un-American Activities;
(2) Cited by United States Attorney General.
Organization and affiliation
California Labor School (2). In-
structor; Member of faculty;
lecturer; biographical note.
Speaker; chairman at lecture..
Source
Yearbook and catalog, "Cali-
fornia Labor School" 1948, pp.
21, 38.
Dailv People's World, Aug. 9,
1948, p. 5.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 355
Organization and affiliation Source
League of American Writers (1) The Bulletin, Summer, 1938, p. 4:
and (2). Member.
Open Letter for Closer Coopera- Soviet Russia Today, September
tion with the Soviet Union (1). 1939, p. 25.
Signed Open Letter.
Science and Society (1). Con- New Masses, Apr. 27, 1937, p. 26.
tributor.
Washington Book Shop (1) and Membership list on file with this
(2). Member; address shown as committee.
1442 Fairmont Street, N. W.,
Washington, D. C.
Elizabeth F. Read
No Record; the following reference is to one Elizabeth Read,
Organization and aifiliation Source
American Youth Congress (1) (2). Program of American Youth Con-
Member of Continuations Com- gress, Aug. 15, 16, and 17, 1934,
mittee (identified as from the p. 4.
National Student Federation of •
America.)
Robert Redfield
The "Daily Worker" of June 10, 1938 (page 2) reported that
Robert Redfield endorsed an appeal of the American Friends of
Spanish Democracy to Congress to lift the Spanish embargo.
In 1937-38, the Communist Party threw itself wholeheartedly into the campaign
for the support of the Spanish Loyalist cause, recruiting men and organizing
multifarious so-called relief organizations * * * such as * * * American Friends
of Spanish Democracy. (Special Committee on Un-American Activities, Beport,
March 29, 1944, p. 82.)
Professor Robert Redfield, Chicago, signed a statement of the
National Committee to Defeat the Mundt Bill as shown by the
April 3, 1950, issue of the "Daily Worker" (p. 4).
The Committee on Un-American Activities, in its report on the
National Committee to Defeat the Mundt Bill, January 2, 1951,
cited the group as "a registered lobbying organization which has
carried out the objectives of the Communist Party in its fight against
anti-subversive legislation."
The "Daily Worker" of July 9, 1952 (p. 6) listed Professor Robert
Redfield as having signed an open letter to the Platform Committees
of the Republican and Democratic Parties urging that they include
in their 1952 platforms "a plank calling for repeal of the McCarran
Act."
Mrs. Jacob Riis
(1) Cited by Special and/or Committee on Un-American Activities;
(2) Cited by Attorney General of the United States.
Organization and affiliation Source
League of Women Shoppers (1). Sponsor Letterhead of Oct.
7, 1935.
See also: Hearings before Special Committee on Un-American Ac-
tivities, pages 530 and 3071.
356 tax-exempt foundations
Paul Kobeson
During the committee's hearings regarding Communist infiltration
of minority groups, July 14, 1949, Mr. Manning Johnson (member of
the Communist Party for ten years) testified as follows concerning
Paul Robeson:
I shall never forget when I was called by Charles Dirba, secretary of the national
disciplinary commission of the party. Incidentallly, the national disciplinary
commission is the American Soviet secret police agency in this countrv. I say
that without equivocation and without the slightest hesitation. Charles Dirba
was secretary of that commission, and Golos, the head of World Tourists, was
chairman.
Because I had insisted that Paul Robeson be called in to assist in our fight
against white chauvinism, Dirba said by making such requests I was doing irrep-
arable harm to the Communist Party, because in the first place it was not Paul
Robeson's work, and that by the promiscuous use of Paul Robeson's name it
would become general knowledge that he was a member of the Communist Party,
and they could not afford to have such knowledge become general, because it
would endanger much work Paul Robeson was engaged in. I had to accept that
or accept expulsion from the party. (See: Hearings Regarding Communist In-
filtration of Minority Groups — Part 2, Testimony of Manning Johnson, pages
508 and 509.)
On February 19, 1951, this committee issued a Statement on The
March of Treason, a Study of the American "Peace" Crusade, in which
the following reference was made to Paul Robeson:
The American Peace Crusade is an organic part of the Communist peace of-
fensive now being waged, * * * as an effort to "disarm and defeat the United
States." Spearheading the Crusade are the following known members of th Com-
munist* Party: Moscow-trained Ben Gold, also Howard Fast, Alex Sirota, Albert
Kahn, Maurice Travis, and Paul Robeson * * * Once before, we witnessed
an American Peace Crusade. That was during the infamous pact between Adolph
Hitler and Joseph Stalin. At that time it was sponsored by the American Peace
Mobilization which picketed the White House. Oddly enough, a number of signers
of the call for the coming Peace Pilgrimage were likewise supporters of the Ameri-
can Peace Mobilization, namely Paul Robeson, * * * (See page 1 of the State-
ment.)
Paul Robeson's attitude toward the Soviet Union was reflected in
an article which he wrote for the magazine, Soviet Russia Today
(August 1936, page 13). Mr. Robeson stated that—
The Soviet Union is the only country I've ever been in, where I've felt com-
pletely at ease. I've lived in England and America and I've almost circled the
globe — but for myself, wife and son, the Soviet Union is our future home. For
a while, however, I wouldn't feel right going there to live. By singing its p ses
wherever I go, I think I can be of the most value to it. It's too easy to go to the
Soviet Union, breathe free air, and live "happily ever afterwards."
During a visit to Moscow, he took occasion to visit a number of
Soviet workers' homes. One of them he visited was that of his
brother-in-law, John Goode, employed in Moscow as a mechanic
and busdriver. Mr. Robeson said that —
he lives in a comfortable airy apartment, plenty of sunlight, surrounded by a
number of other workers who had places of the same sort. I don't say every-
thing's perfect, but they're building, improving all the time.
In the Daily Worker of October 11, 1946 (page 11), it is shown that
when Mr. Robeson was questioned relative to his visits to the Soviet
Union and the schooling his son got there, he replied that "my son
had what I would call a very basic Soviet education." When asked
whether he was a Communist, Mr. Robeson answered that he charac-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 357
terizes himself as an "anti-Fascist" and although he wasn't a member
of the Communist Party, he would choose it over the Republicans,
explaining that —
in my association with Communists throughout the world, I have found them to
be the first people to die, the first to sacrifice, and the first to understand fascism.
The New York Times reported on July 10, 1949 (page 31), that —
the famous baritone (Paul Robeson), recently returned from a trip through
Europe (and) told the 300 Negro workers in radio, television and the theatre
that they were deprived of all rights, whereas inhabitants of the Soviet Union
and the "people's democracies" in Western Europe "are in no danger of losing
any of their civil rights" (and further) predicted the death of American democracy
if Negroes and "progressive" artists in this country did not unite with the twelve
indicted leaders of the Communist Party to overthrow the "guys who run this
country for bucks and foster cold war hysteria."
On various occasions, Mr. Robeson has defended the Communist
Party. On July 23, 1940, the Daily Worker reported that he had
signed an Open Letter to President Roosevelt, protesting against the
attack on the right of the Communist Party to use the ballot. On
September 23, 1940, the same publication revealed that he had signed
a statement, urging ballot rights to Communists. The Communist
Party of New York wrote a statement to the President, defending the
Party; the statement was signed by Paul Robeson and others, as
shown in the Daily Worker of March 5, 1941 (page 2). The same
publication (in the issue of April 22, 1947, page 5), named Mr. Robeson
among the one-hundred Negro leaders who called upon President
Truman and Congress "to repudiate decisively the fascist-like proposal
to illegalize the Communist Party."
The Daily Worker of April 21, 1947 (page 1), reported that when
asked if he was a Communist, Mr. Robeson replied that —
there are only two groups in the world today — fascists and anti-fascists. The
Communists belong to the anti-fascist group and I label myself an anti-fascist.
The Communist Party is a legal one like the Republican or Democratic Party
and I could belong to either. I could just as well think of joining the Communist
Party as any other.
Mr. Robeson's defense of Communists and Communist candidates
is shown by the following: He filed a Supreme Court brief in behalf of
the twelve Communist leaders and his photograph appeared in the
Daily Worker on January 9, 1949 (page 3) in this connection. When
some of the Communist Party leaders were arrested in 1948, Paul
Robeson sponsored a "Statement by Negro Americans" on behalf of
these people (Daily Worker, August 23, 1948, page 3; August 29,
1948, page 11); on September 16, 1940, the Daily Worker named
Paul Robeson as one of those who signed a statement by Negro
leaders, protesting attacks against Communist candidates. A meet-
ing was held in Madison Square Garden on March 17, 1941, honoring
William Z. Foster, national chairman of the Communist Party, on
his 60th birthday, on which occasion Mr. Robeson sang (from the
Daily Worker of March 19, 1941, page 5).
Paul Robeson was Chairman of the Committee for the reelection
of Benj. J. Davis, a Communist Party candidate, as shown in the
Daily Worker of September 25, 1945, page 12; an advertisement in
the Washington Post of November 4, 1946, named Mr. Robeson as
358 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
a member of the Citizens Committee for Robert Thompson and
Benjamin J. Davis who were Communist Party candidates. The
Daily Worker also shows that Paul Robeson spoke at a dinner honor-
ing Benjamin Davis (see issue of October 20, 1947, page 7); he sup-
ported the defense of Gerhart Eisler and Leon Josephson, Communists
(Daily Worker, April 28, 1947, page 4) . The Daily Worker of March
4, 1952 (page 3) and March 6, 1952 (page 1), reported that Paul
Robeson was one of those who signed a protest to Premier Plastires
of Greece against the execution of eight Greek Communists.
The pamphlet entitled "What is APM?" (page 12) contained the
"name of Paul Robeson in a list of members of the National Council
of the American Peace Mobilization; he was vice-Chairman of this
organization, as shown in the Daily Worker of September 3, 1940
(page 4) ; he spoke at a mass meeting of the organization in Washing-
ton, D. C, September 13, 1940 (Daily Worker, September 13, 1940,
page 4; September 15, 1940, page 2).
The American Peace Mobilization was cited as "one of the most
seditious organizations which ever operated in the United States"
(Special Committee on Un-American Activities, Report 1311 of March
29, 1944; also cited in reports of June 25, 1942; January 2, 1943).
The Attorney General of the United States cited the organization as
having been; —
formed in the summer of 1940 under the auspices of the Communist Party and
the Young Communist League as a "front" organization designed to mold Amer-
ican opinion against participation in the war against Germany (Congressional
Record, September 24, 1942, page 7684);
and as subversive and Communist (press releases of December 4,
1947 and September 21, 1948; also included in consolidated list of
April 1, 1954).
Paul Robeson was chairman of the Council on African Affairs, as
shown in the following sources: Letterhead of the organization dated
May 17, 1945; a leaflet entitled "What of Africa's Peace in Tomorrow's
World?"; a pamphlet entitled "Africa in the War"; another, "Seeing is
Believing—Here is the Truth About South Africa"; and "The Job
to be Done," a leaflet. The Council on African Affairs was cited as
subversive and Communist by the Attorney General (press releases of
December 4, 1947 and September 21, 1948; included in consolidated
list released April 1, 1954).
Letterheads of the Civil Rights Congress dated March 4 and May 7,
1948, and October 20, 1950, named Paul Robeson as Vice-Chairman
of the organization; the Daily Worker of January 18, 1949 (page 11)
also listed him as Vice-Chairman; he signed the call to the National
Conference of the Civil Rights Congress in Chicago, as shown in the
Daily Worker of October 21, 1947 (page 5); together with Eugene
Dennis (Communist Party member), Mr. Robeson spoke at a meeting
of the Civil Rights Congress (Daily Worker, November 5, 1947, page
5) ; he also spoke at the National Conference of the group in Chicago,
as shown in the Daily Worker of November 19, 1947 (page 6).
The Civil Rights Congress was formed by a merger of two other
Communist-front organizations, the International Labor Defense and
the National Federation for Constitutional Liberties. It was
"dedicated * * * specifically to the defense of individual Com-
munists and the Communist Party" and "controlled by individuals
who are either members of the Communist Party or openly loyal to it"
(Committee on Un-American Activities in Report 1115 of September
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 359
2, 1947); the Attorney General cited the Civil Eights Congress as
subversive and Communist (press releases of December 4, 1947 and
September 21, 1948; included in consolidated list dated April 1, 1954).
A 1947 catalogue of the Winter Term, George Washington Carver
School, listed Paul Robeson as a member of the Board of Directors of
the School which was cited as an adjunct in New York City of the
Communist Party (the Attorney General in press release of December
4, 1947; also included in consolidated list released April 1, 1954).
Letterheads of the Spanish Refugee Appeal of the Joint Anti-
Fascist Refugee Committee, dated lebruary 26, 1946 and May 18,
1951, include the name of Paul Robeson in a list of national sponsors
of the organization. The Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee was
cited as a Communist-front organization headed by Edward K.
Barsky (Special Committee * * * in Report of March 29, 1944).
The Attorney General cited it as subversive and Communist (press
releases of December 4, 1947 and September 21, 1948; included in
■consolidated list of April 1, 1954).
The Daily Worker of April 19, 1947 (page 4), named Paul Robeson
as one of the sponsors of the May Day Committee of the Arts,
Sciences and Professions; he was a member of the same committee for
the May Day Parade (Daily Worker, April 28, 1947, page 3) ; and one
of the Marshals for the United May Day Parade (The Worker, April
27, 1947, page 2). He was a sponsor of a conference in New York
City, March 24, 1951, held under the auspices of the Provisional
United Labor and People's Committee for May Day as shown by the
Call to a United Labor and People's Conference for May Day, 1951.
He participated in the May Day Parade in 1951 (Daily Worker,
May 2, 1951, page 9).
The May Day Parade has been cited as an annual mobilization in
New York City of Communist strength (Special Committee on
Un-American Activities in Report 1311 of March 29, 1944).
Paul Robeson was one of the sponsors of a Win-the-Peace Confer-
ence held in the National Press Building, Washington, D. C, April
5-7, 1948, as shown on the call to that conference; a summary of the
proceedings of the conference showed that Paul Robeson was elected
Co-Chairman, together with Col. Evans F. Carlson, of the National
Committee to Win the Peace. On June 13, 1936, Paul Robeson spoke
at the Win-the-Peace Rally to Stop World War III, sponsored by the
National Committee to Win the Peace (handbill of the rally). A
letterhead of the conference, dated February 28, 1946, and the Daily
Worker of May 9, 1946 (page 3), name Paul Robeson as a sponsor and
Co-Chairman, respectively, of the Win-the-Peace Conference. He
was co-Chairman, New York Committee to Win the Peace, as shown
on a letterhead dated June 1, 1946; and the call to a conference June
28-29, 1946.
The National Committee to Win the Peace was cited as subversive
and Communist by the Attorney General (press releases of December
4, 1947 and September 21, 1948; included in consolidated list released
April 1, 1954).
In a pamphlet entitled "For a New Africa," which contains the
proceedings of the Conference on Africa, held in New York City,
April 14, 1944, Paul Robeson was named as Chairman of the National
Negro Congress; he also participated in the Cultural Conference of
the National Negro Congress (Daily Worker, March 14, 1947, page 11).
"The Communist-front movement in the United States among
360 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Negroes is known as the National Negro Congress" (from a report of
the Special Committee on Un-American Activities dated January 3,
. 1939; also cited in reports of January 3, 1940; June 25, 1942; March
29, 1944); the Attorney General cited the National Negro Congress
as- "An important sector of the democratic front, sponsored and
supported by the Communist Party"; and as subversive and Com-
munist. (Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, pages 7687 and
7688; and press releases of December 4, 1947 and September 21, 1948;
included in consolidated list released April 1, 1954).
Paul Robeson was a member of the Executive Board of the New
York Committee of the Southern Conference for Human Welfare,
as shown in an undated leaflet entitled "The South is Closer Than
You Think" (received by this committee about February 1947);
he was one of the narrators in the attack by the Southern Conference
for Human Welfare on the Freedom Train (news release dated
November 15, 1947).
The Southern Conference for Human Welfare was cited as a Com-
munist-front organization "which seeks to attract southern liberals
on the basis of its seeming interest in the problems of the South"
although its "professed interest in southern welfare is simply an expe-
dient for larger aims serving the Soviet Union and its subservient
Communist Party in the United States" (Committee on Un-American
Activities in Report dated June 12, 1947. The Special Com-
mittee * * * cited the group as a Communist-front which received
money from the Robert Marshall Foundation (report dated March
29, 1944).
A letterhead of the Congress of American-Soviet Friendship, dated
October 27, 1942, named Paul Robeson as one of the patrons of that
congress; he sang and spoke before the group at a meeting in New
York City, November 6-8, 1943 (pamphlet entitled "U. S. A-
U. S. S. R." page 31). According to a letterhead and a memorandum
issued by the congress dated March 13, 1946 and March 18, 1946,
respectively, Paul Robeson was one of the sponsors of the National
Council of American-Soviet Friendship, Inc. A printed advertise-
ment announcing a Rally for Peace, sponsored by the group, appeared
in the Daily Worker of December 1, 1948 (page 6). Paul Robeson
was on the program, arranged by the National Council of American-
Soviet Friendship, which was held, in Madison Square Garden Decem-
ber 13, 1948.
In a report dated March 29, 1944 by the Special Committee * * *
the National Council of American-Soviet Friendship as having been,
in recent months, the Communist Party's principal front for all things
Russian. The Attorney General cited the group as subversive and
Communist (press releases of December 4, 1947 and September 21,
1948; included in consolidated list released April 1, 1954).
The Worker of June 29, 1947 (page 5m), named Paul Robeson as
one of the members of the International Workers Order, cited as "one
of the most effective and closely knitted organizations among the
Communist-front movements" by the Special Committee * * *
(report of January 3, 1939; also cited in reports of March 29, 1944;
January 3, 1940; and June 25, 1942); the Attorney General cited the
International Workers Order as "one of the strongest Communist
organizations" (Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, page
7688) ; and as subversive and Communist (press releases of December
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 361
4, 1947 and September 21, 1948; also included in consolidated list
released April 1, 1954).
Paul Robeson was one of the contributing editors of New Masses,
as shown in the issues of March 14, 1944 and April 30, 1946; he signed
their letter to the President of the United States (New Masses, April
2, 1940, page 21) ; and endorsed the publication, as shown in the Daily
Worker of October 10, 1944 (page 6). On January 14, 1946, Mr.
Robeson was honored at a dinner in New York City for the purpose
of making awards to those who contributed to greater inter-racial
understanding (Daily Worker, January 7, 1946, page 11); he received
New Masses' Second Annual Award for his contribution to promoting
democracy and inter-racial unity (New Masses, November 18, 1947,
page 7).
The Attorney General cited New Masses as a "Communist periodi-
cal" (Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, page 7688); and the
Special Committee * * * cited it as a "nationally circulated weekly
journal of the Communist Party" (report dated March 29, 1944;
also cited in their reports of January 3, 1939 and June 25, 1942).
Beginning in March, 1948, New Masses and the Marxist quarterly
known as Mainstream were consolidated into a publication known as
Masses & Mainstream; Paul Robeson remained as contributing editor,
as shown in the March 1948 issue of Masses & Mainstream (Volume
1, No. 1).
The Daily Worker of February 4, 1952 (page 8), reported that Paul
Robeson was prohibited from leaving this country when he attempted
to enter Canada to speak at a convention of the British Columbia
International Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers.
As a welcome home rally for Paul Robeson in New York City,
June 19, 1949 (reported in The Worker of June 26, 1949, page 4, and
the Daily Worker of July 3, 1949, page 6m), arranged by the Council
on African Affairs, he was quoted in these sources as having made the
following statement: "Yes, I love the Soviet people more than any
other nation, because of their suffering and sacrifices for us, the
Negro people, the progressive people, the people of the future in this
world." He pledged himself to "defend them (the Communists) as
they defended us, the Negro people. And I stand firm and immovable
by the side of that great leader who has given his whole life in the
struggle of the American working class — Bill Foster; by the side of
Gene Dennis; by the side of my friend Ben Davis; Johnny Gates;
Henry Winston; Gus Hall; Gil Green; Jack Stachel; Carl Winter;
Irving Potash; Bob Thompson; Johnny Williamson — twelve brave
fighters for my freedom. Their struggle is our struggle."
Mr. Robeson was one of the sponsors of the Non-Partisan Committee
to Defend Communist Leaders (Daily Worker, July 18, 1949, page 2);
and praised those leaders in an article which appeared in the Daily
People's World of May 16, 1950 (page 11). In an article date-lined
Moscow, June 9, 1949 (see the Daily Worker of June 10, 1949, page 4),
Paul Robeson was quoted as having told the Soviet Academy of
Sciences that he would return soon to the United States to testify
at the New York trial of Communist leaders. Identified as "one
of the most popular of foreign visitors attending a celebration in
honor of the poet, Alexander Pushkin," Robeson was quoted in the
article as having told the group that "we are fully resolved to struggle
for peace and friendship together; * * * with you Soviet people
representing the hope of the whole world * * *"
55647—54 24
362 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
On August 4, 1950, the New York Times (page 1) reported that
the State Department had requested Paul Robeson to surrender his
passport. The Daily Worker of April 3, 1951 (page 2) reported that
on April 5, attorneys before a Federal District Judge would argue
for an order compelling the State Department to renew his passport.
According to the September 18, 1951 issue of that paper (page 1),
Paul Robeson was invited by the Chinese people to attend the Second
Anniversary of the People's Republic of China, but that the State
Department had denied him the right to leave the country. As shown
by the December 9, 1951 issue of The Worker (page 2), Mr. Robeson
applied to the State Department for a special passport to go to Paris
to present a genocide plea before the General Assembly of the UN.
He renewed his fight for a passport in order to attend the American
Intercontinental Peace Conference in Rio de Janeiro (Daily Worker,
January 18, 1952, page 8). He spoke by long-distance telephone to
Canadian unionists in Vancouver, British Columbia, after his passport
was canceled, according to the Daily Worker of February 12, 1952
(page 2).
Esther Roth
(1) Cited by Special and/or Committee on Un-American Activities;
(2) Cited by Attorney General of the United States.
Organization and affiliation Source
Hollywood Independent Citizens' Letterhead dated Dec. 10, 1946.
Committee of the Arts, Sci-
ences and Professions (1).
Member, Executive Council.
Name shown in this source as
Mrs. Esther Roth.
See also : Expose of the Communist Party of Western Pennsylvania
(based upon testimony of Matthew Cvetic, undercover agent, Febru-
ary 21, 1950, pages 1202, 1318, and 1442). These are hearings of
the Committee on Un-American Activities.
Dr. Harold O. Rugg
On November 22, 1938, Miss Alice Lee Jemison, Washington
representative of Joseph Bruner, national president of the American
Indian Federation, was a witness before the Special Committee on
Un-American Activities. In connection with this testimony, Miss
Jemison submitted a statement concerning Indian affairs in the
United States which was incorporated in the record. The following
reference to Dr. Harold Rugg is noted in this statement:
In 1935, the council of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians conducted an
investigation into the new educational program which was put into operation at
Cherokee, N. C. This was followed by individual investigations by Mr. and Mrs.
Fred B. Bauer, Federation members at Cherokee, by Mr. O. K. Chandler, then
Americanism chairman of the Federation, and by Mr. Frank Waldrop, a news-
paper man of Washington, D. C. in 1936. These investigations disclosed that:
That the books, "Introduction to American Civilization" and "Modern
History" by Harold Rugg, member of the Progressive Education Association,
were in use in the class rooms, and that these books had been taken out of the
schools of the District of Columbia because of their radical teachings * * *.
(Public Hearings, Volume 4, pages 2502-2503.)
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 363
Reference to the Rugg Textbooks is also found in the testimony of
James F. O'Neil, vice-chairman of the National Americanism Com-
mission of the American Legion, in public hearings before the Com-
mittee on Un-American Activities on March 27, 1947. The reference
appears as follows:
Mr. O'Neil. . * * * I speak specifically of the Rugg textbooks. The Rugg
textbooks have been removed from the educational systems in many states.
Probably the outstanding instance was in San Francisco, where the Legion
urged the removal of these textbooks from the schools because of their un-American
teachings and doctrine, and as a result a board was created by the San Francisco
Board of Education — an independent group, I don't recall the exact membership,
but I believe there was a representative of either the president or somebody in
the field of social sciences, from the University of Southern California, the Uni-
versity of California, and a third representative from some other institution.
They concurred with the American Legion in the removal and the elimination of
these textbooks from the schools.
Mr. Bonnbb. Just tell me a little something about these Rugg textbooks.
What did they comprise — ■ * * *
Mr. O'Neil. * * * briefly, it was for a science of government that was totally
different from the American system of government— an undemocratic system of
government — in the social sciences * * *. (Hearings on H. R. 1884 and H. R.
2122, March 24-28, 1947, page 28.)
It is noted that on page 271 of Rugg's book, "The Great Tech-
nology," the following statement appears:
Thus through the schools of the world we shall disseminate a new conception
of government — one that will embrace all the collective activities of men; one that
will postulate the need for scientific control and operation of economic activities
in the interest of all people.
It is also noted that Washington, D. C. newspapers have reported
that Harold Rugg is author of textbooks rejected for use in the schools
of the District of Columbia. (See: "Evening Star," December 17,
1947, page B-l; "Times-Herald," February 1, 1948, page 4; and
"Times-Herald," December 26, 1948, page 2.)
Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.
In "Who's Who in America" for 1936-1937, Arthur Meier
Schlesinger is shown to have two children, Arthur Meier and Thomas
Bancroft, and to have been professor of history at Harvard University
since 1925.
Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., is the author of an article entitled,
"The U. S. Communist Party," which was written exclusively for
"Life" magazine and published in the July 29, 1946 issue. The
following statement concerning the author accompanied the article:
The author of this article, Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., is only 28 years old but
is already recognized as an able American historian. His biography, "The Age
of Jackson," won the 1946 Pulitzer Prize and he has been awarded a Guggenheim
Fellowship to write "The Age of Roosevelt." Last Spring he was named associate
professor of history at Harvard. He is currently writing a series of articles for
"Fortune", wrote this one especially for "Life."
An undated booklet entitled, "Can You Name Them?" (page 3),
lists A. M. Schlesinger as having endorsed the American Committee
for Democracy and Intellectual Freedom, organized on Lincoln's
birthday in 1939; he signed a petition of the same committee, as was
shown on a mimeographed, sheet attached to a letterhead dated
January 17, 1940.
364 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The American Committee for Democracy * * * W as cited as a
Communist-front organization which defended Communist teachers
(Special Committee on Un-American Activities in Keports of June 25,
1942 and March 29, 1944).
Prof. Arthur M. Schlesinger was named on a letterhead of the
American Friends of Spanish Democracy, dated February 21, 1938,
as a member of that group; identified as a professor at Harvard
University, he signed a letter to President Roosevelt, urging that the
Neutrality Act be amended so as to render it inapplicable to Spain;
the letter was prepared under the auspices of the American Friends
of Spanish Democracy. In information submitted by Mr. Walter
S. Steele, during public hearings before the Special Committee on
Un-American Activities, August 17, 1938 (page 569), it was disclosed
that Arthur M. Schlesinger was a member of the American Friends
of Spanish Democracy.
During 1937 and 1938, the Communist Party campaigned for sup-
port of the Spanish Loyalist cause, recruiting men and organizing
so-called relief groups such as American Friends of Spanish Democracy.
(From a Report of the Special Committee on Un-American Activities
dated March 29, 1944.)
In the booklet, "600 Prominent Americans Ask President to
Rescind Biddle Decision" (regarding deportation of Harry Renton
Bridges), prepared and published by the National Federation for
Constitutional Liberties, September 11, 1942, A. M. Schlesinger was
named as one of those who signed an Open Letter of that organization.
The National Federation for Consitutional Liberties has been cited
by the Attorney General of the United States as subversive and
Communist (press releases of December 4, 1947 and September 21,
1948 ; included in consolidated list released April 1, 1954) ; the Attorney
General had previously cited it as "part of what Lenin called the
solar system of organizations * * * by which Communists attempt
to create sympathizers and supporters of their program" (Congres-
sional Record, September 24, 1942, page 7687). The Special Com-
mittee on Un-American Activities cited the National Federation
* * * as "one of the viciously subversive organizations of the Com-
munist Party" (Report of March 29, 1944; also reports of June 25,
1942 and January 2, 1943). The Committee on Un-American
Activities cited the National Federation * * * as " actually intended
to protect Communist subversion from any penalties under the law"
(report dated September 2, 1947).
Prof. A. M. Schlesinger, Harvard University, was a sponsor of the
Civil Rights Congress, as shown on the "Urgent Summons to a Con-
gress on Civil Rights" to be held in Detroit, Michigan, April 27 and
28, 1946. The Civil Rights Congress was formed in April 1946 as
a merger of two other Communist-front organizations, International
Labor Defense and the National Federation for Constitutional Liber-
ties; it was "dedicated not to the broader issues of civil liberties, but
specifically to the defense of individual Communists and the Com-
munist Party" and "controlled by individuals who are either members
of the Communist Party or openly loyal to it" (Report No. 1115 of
September 2, 1947); the Attorney General cited the Civil Rights
Congress as subversive and Communist (press releases of December
4, 1947 and September 21, 1948; included in consolidated list released
April 1, 1954).
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
365
A statement by Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., was published in the Book
Review Section of the New York Times, December 11, 1949 (page 3),
as follows :
I happen to believe that the Communist Party should be granted freedom of
political action and that Communists should be allowed to teach in universities
so long as they do not disqualify themselves by intellectual distortions in the
classroom * * *.
Gilbert Seldes
Organization and affiliation
People's Educational Center (2).
Sponsor, "Fun For The People,"
a show at Wilshire-Ebell Thea-
tre, May 21, 1946.
Writers Congress (Cited by 1 as
American Writers Congress) .
Member, Seminar on Radio
Television.
Reichstag Fire Trial Anniversary
Committee (1). Signed Decla-
ration of the organization honor-
ing Georgi Dimitrov.
Karl Shapiro
Organization and affiliation
National Committee to Defeat the
Mundt Bill (1). Sponsor,
National Committee * * *;
i. d. as Prof., Baltimore, Md.
Opposed Ober anti-Communist
bill. i. d. as poet laureate of
Maryland.
Initiated referendum campaign of
Maryland Citizens Committee
Against Ober anti-Communist
law. i. d. as poet.
Endorsed Referendum of Citizens
Committee against Ober Law.
i. d. as Assistant Prof.
Member of Citizens Committee
Against the Ober Law. i. d. as
Assistant Prof.
Meyer Shapiro
Organization and affiliation
Communist Party. Signed state-
ment of League of Professional
Groups in support of Communist
Party Elections. Name shown
in this source as Meyer Schapiro.
See also: Hearings before the Special Committee on Un-American
Activities, Volume 1, pages 547 and 561.
Source
Photostatic copy of the clipping
from Daily People's World,
May 10, 1946, p. 5.
Program of the congress, 1943.
Full-page advertisement in New
York Times, Dec. 22, 1943,
p. 40.
Source
Committee's report on the
National Committee to Defeat
the Mundt Bill, Dec. 7, 1950,
p. 12.
Daily Worker, Mar. 13, 1949,
p. 2.
Daily Worker, Apr. 13, 1949,
p. 5.
Letterhead, Oct. 14, 1950.
Leaflet, "Civil Liberties in Mary-
land Are at Stake!"
Source
Daily Worker, Nov. 6, 1933, p. 2.
366 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Ernest J. Simmons
A Communist periodical, New Masses (February 2, 1937, p. 28),
named Ernest J. Simmons as chairman of a symposium under the
auspices of the American Russian Institute. He was a speaker for
that organization, according to the Communist Daily Worker, Febru-
ary 6, 1937, p. 7, and May 20, 1947, p. 2. The Daily Worker of
December 12, 1947, p. 3, said: "The Board of Superintendents yester-
day announced it intended to eliminate a course for teachers on cul-
ture in the Soviet Union. The course, for which teachers received
credit, was sponsored by the American-Russian Institute. * * *
Chairman of the Institute is Prof. Ernest J. Simmons of Columbia
University." The American Russian Institute was cited as Communist
by the U. S. Attorney General in a letter to the Loyalty Review Board
released April 27, 1949. He redesignated the organization pursuant to
Executive Order 10450, April 27, 1953, and included it on the con-
solidated list of cited organizations April 1, 1954.
Soviet Russia Today (cited by the Committee on Un-American
Activities as a Communist-front publication — Report No. 1953,
April 26, 1950, p. 108) published, in its issue of September 1939,
p. 24, the text of an Open Letter for Closer Cooperation with the
Soviet Union. Professor Ernest J. Simmons, Assistant Professor of
English Literature, Harvard University, was listed as a signer of the
letter, p. 25. According to the Daily Worker of February 10, 1933,
p. 4, Ernest J. Simmons contributed an article to the February issue
of Soviet Russia Today.
The Summary of Proceedings of a Roundtable Conference held by
the American Council on Soviet Relations, May 24-25, 1940, listed
Prof. Ernest Simmons as a participant. The Council was cited as
subversive and Communist by the Attorney General, in letters re-
leased to the press in 1948. His citation of the organization also
appeared in the Congressional Record of September 24, 1942, p. 7688.
He redesignated the organization pursuant to Executive Order 10450,
April 27, 1953, and named it on the consolidated list of April 1, 1954.
The Special Committee on Un-American Activities cited the organiza-
tion in its report of March 29, 1944, p. 174.
A Bulletin of the Committee on Education of the National Council
of American-Soviet Friendship (June 1945, p. 22), listed Ernest J.
Simmons as a member of the Sponsoring Committee. That organiza-
tion was cited as subversive and Communist by the Attorney General
in his letters to the Loyalty Review Board released in 1947 and 1948.
He redesignated the organization April 27, 1953, and named it on the
consolidated list of April 1, 1954. The Special Committee on Un-
American Activities cited the Council in its report of March 29*. 1944,
p. 156.
The Bulletin of the League of American Writers (Summer 1938,
p. 4) listed Ernest J. Simmons as a member. The League was cited
as subversive and Communist by the U. S. Attorney General in
letters to the Loyalty Review Board released in 1948, and was re-
designated April 27, 1953. The League was also named on the con-
solidated list of April 1, 1954. It was cited by the Special Committee
on Un-American Activities in reports of January 3, 1940, p. 9; June
25, 1942, p. 19; March 29, 1944, p. 48.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 367
A Message to the House of Representatives, January 1943, spon-
sored by the National Federation for Constitutional Liberties, listed
among the signers Ernest J. Simmons, Professor of Comparative
Literature, author, Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y. The Federation
was cited as subversive and Communist by the Attorney General in
letters to the Loyalty Review Board released in 1947 and 1948, and
in the Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, p. 7687 ; redesignated
April 27, 1953; consolidated list of April 1, 1954. The Special Com-
mittee on Un-American Activities cited the Federation as "one of the
viciously subversive organizations of the Communist Party" (report
of March 29, 1944, p. 50).
The Daily Worker of October 19, 1948, p. 7, reported that the
National Council of the Arts, Sciences and Professions had issued a
statement that 500 leaders in the arts, sciences, and professions had
joined in support of Henry A. Wallace. Professor Ernest J. Simmons
was listed among the supporters. The National Council has been
cited by the Committee on Un-American Activities as a Communist
front (Report No. 1954, p. 2).
New Masses, October 28, 1941, p. 23, contained an article by
Ernest J. Simmons, "Soviet Scholarship and Tolstoy." "USSR: A
Concise Handbook," edited by Ernest J. Simmons, was reviewed in
New Masses for June 24, 1947, p. 22. New Masses was cited as a
Communist periodical by the Attorney General (Congressional Record,
September 24, 1942, p. 7688) and by the Special Committee on Un-
American Activities (report of March 29, 1944, pp. 48 and 75).
A "Peace Ballot" issued by "The Yanks Are Not Coming Com-
mittee" listed Prof. Ernest J. Simmons, Harvard, as a member of the
"Peace Ballot Commission." The Special Committee on Un-American
Activities, in its report of March 29, 1944, pp. 17, 95, and 100, stated
that the Communist Party was "the principal agent" in "the Yanks
Are Not Coming movement."
The 1948 Catalog (p. 5) of the Workers Book Shop listed "U. S. S. R.
Foreign Policy," by Ernest J. Simmons. "The Workers Book Shop
* * * is headquarters of a chain of Communist bookshops, which are
the official outlets for Communist literature and at which tickets for
Communist Party and front functions customarily are sold" (Hearings
Regarding the Communist Infiltration of the Motion Picture Industry,
Committee on Un-American Activities, 1947, p. 375).
"Books on the U. S. S. R." (a selected bibliography by Bessie
Weissman and issued by the Washington Cooperative Bookshop),
pp. 27 and 28, recommended the following books by Ernest J. Simmons:
"Dostoevski," "Pushkin," and "An Outline of Modern Russian
Literature." The Washington Cooperative Bookshop was cited as
subversive and Communist by the Attorney General, in*letters to the
Loyalty Review Board, released in 1947 and 1948. He redesignated
the organization April 27, 1953, and named it on the consolidated list
of April 1, 1954. The organization was also cited by the Special Com-
mittee on Un-American Activities (report of March 29, 1944, p. 150).
A book by Professor Simmons — "Problems of Leadership and Con-
trol in Soviet Literature" — is referred to in the Communist Daily
People's World of May 26, 1949, p. 5.
An article, "The Kremlin Prepares a New Party Line," by Ernest
J. Simmons, appeared in the magazine section of the January 8, 1950,
368 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
issue of The New York Times, p. 13. The following is quoted from
the article:
An examination of the Soviet newspaper and periodical press from a time
shortly after the end of the war shows a pretty constant pattern of action and
ideological propagandizing which merits the most careful consideration as a
possible harbinger of the shape of things to come.
Like clever dramatists the Soviets often reveal actions before the motives
which govern them. Strange as it may seem, in a dictatorship it is frequently
necessary, as in our own country, to prepare public opinion for significant future
policy, and this policy in turn may well be connected with international develop-
ments since the end of the war which could hardly have been anticipated by
the Soviets or explained by Marxian dialectics. In the ideological battle that
now rages between the two worlds the Soviets must regain the initiative or lose
further ground. So some important change in policy would seem to be inevitable.
Two distinct lines of development emerge from this press campaign. One
is the purge — it might be better to say the purification^of intellectuals, which
has been gathering momentum ever since 1946. The second is the steady cam-
paign to promote the conviction that the transition from socialism to communism
is now a realizable objective in the Soviet Lnion. At first glance there might
not seem to be any connection between these two developments. However, each
is worth exploring precisely from the point of view that they are connected and
are both part of a single, unified drive toward a future transformation of Soviet
policy of momentous concern to the world.
* * * In turn the musicians, artists and architects have been fried in deep
fat; then the economists, philosophers, statisticians, mathematicians, biologists,
lawyers and astronomers; then the literary critics, teachers of literature and
finally teachers, scholars and educators in general. * ■ * *
The extent of the drive indicates clearly that a party directive from on high is
being rigorously executed * * *
When asked why the Russians had been so successful in the war, a character
in a recent Soviet novel replied: "Because they have not only a state, but a
state plus an idea." And the whole vast Soviet propaganda machine has been
selling that "idea" to the world with amazing success for over thirty years. Of
late, however, the "idea" has been encountering formidable opposition, especially
in the West, and the Soviets have evinced a tendency to support the "idea"
with elements of power. But they fully realize, in the present international
power structure, that their greatest hope in this struggle is their ideological
appeal and not military aggressiveness.
To be sure, it is commonly felt that the present growing opposition to the idea
of Soviet communism has not been an ideological one, but a political, economic
and military one * * *. In fact, it is often said that America and the West have
no ideology to answer the ideology of communism on a world plane. This is
partly true, for America has failed, except in a negative sense, to combine ideologi-
cal leadership with its policy to contain Soviet communism.
However, it is also true that all these political, economic and military actions
of the United States and the West carry with them the clear implication of
ideological opposition * * *.
In this ideological struggle of two worlds it is essential, from the Soviet point
of view, that international communism should offer a fresh and inspiring appeal
to the allegiance of all peoples. Hence a declaration at the next All-Union Party
Congress that the people of the Soviet Union would soon enjoy the benefits of
communism — a reward formerly imagined as realizable only in the very distant
future— would obviously be designed to provide a tremendous propaganda
impetus to international communism, and at the same time would reassert the
prominent position of the Soviet people and their party in the battle for the
minds of men.
tax-exempt; foundations 369
Hilda Smith
Organization and affiliation Source
American League for Peace and Membership list— reprinted in
■ Democracy (1) (2). Member, Public Hearings, Special Corn-
Washington Branch (address mittee on Un-American Activ-
shown as: 505 18th St., NW., ities, vol. 10, page 6404.
Washington, D. C).
Hilda K. Smith
Organization and affiliation Source
"New Pioneer" (1). Contributor. New Pioneer, March 1932, p. 12.
Hilda W. Smith
Organization and affiliation Source
Washington Book Shop (1) (2). Membership list in Committee
Member (address shown as: files (1941).
1457 Belmont St., NW., Wash-
ington, D. C).
Hilda Smith
Organization and affiliation Source
See also: Public Hearings, Special Committee on Un-American
Activities, vol. 1, pages 565 and 703.
George Henry Soule, jr.
Organization and affiliation Source
No references were found to George Henry Soule Jr.; but the follow-
ing appears under the name:
George Soule
Organization and affiliation Source
American Friends of Spanish De- New Masses, Jan. 5, 1937, p. 31.
mocracy, Medical Bureau (1).
Member, General Committee.
American Friends of Spanish De- Daily Worker, Feb. 16, 1938, p. 2.
mocracy (1). Signer of Letter
to the President (editor, The
New Republic).
Member, Executive Commit- Letterhead, Feb. 21, 1938.
Signer of Petition to lift the Daily Worker, Apr. 8, 1938, p. 4.
arms embargo.
American Friends of the Soviet Daily Worker, Jan. 29, 1938, p. 8,
Union (1) (2). Speaker. and Feb. 2, 1938, p. 2.
American Youth Congress (1) (2). Pamphlet, "Youngville, U. b.
Member, National Advisory A.," p. 64.
Board. r , „ T ,
Signer of Call to Congress of Proceedings of the Congress, July
Youth, 5th national gather- 1-5, 1939, p. 2.
ing of the AYC, in New
York City (editor, The New
Republic).
Conference on Pan-American De- "News You Don t Get, JNov.
mocracy (1) (2). Signer of Call 15, 1938, p. 3.
to the Conference.
Sponsor Letterhead, Nov. 16, 1938.
370
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Organization and affiliation
Council for Pan American Democ-
racy (1) (2). Vice-Chairman.
Signer of Open Letter to the
President of Brazil to Save
Luiz Carlos Prestes.
Vice-Chairman; member, Ex-
ecutive Committee.
Consumers National Federation
(1). Sponsor.
Coordinating Committee to Lift
the Embargo (1). Listed as
one of the representative indi-
viduals in favor of lifting the
Spanish embargo (writer).
Descendants of the American Rev-
olution (1). Sponsor; and,
member of Advisory Board.
Member
First Congress of the Mexican and
Spanish American People of the
United States (1). Signer of
Call to the congress to be held
in Albuquerque, N. Mex. (editor,
The New Republic).
Frontier Films (1). Member, Ad-
visory Board.
International Juridical Associa-
tion (1). Signer of statement.
Signer of report on mutiny
laws prepared under super-
vision of the I. J. A. at the
request of International
Labor Defense (1) (2).
International Publishers (1) (2).
Writer of introduction to pam-
phlet by V. Chemadanov of the
Young Communist League of
the Soviet Union, published by
International Publishers.
League of American Writers
(1) (2) . Signer of "A Manifesto
and a Call" to the National
Writers Congress, New York
City, June 4, 5 and 6, 1937.
Signer of statement
Signer of Petition in support
of Gerson.
Source
Letterhead, July 11, 1940.
New Masses, Dec. 3, 1940, p. 28.
Pamphlet, "Economic Trends
and the New Deal in the
Caribbean," pub. by the organ-
ization, 1942.
Pamphlet, "The People vs.
H. C. L.," Dec. 11-12, 1937,
p. 3.
Booklet, "These Americans Say,"
p. 9.
Daily Worker, Jan. 21, 1938,
p. 2.
Daily Worker, Feb. 13, 1939, p. 2.
Mimeographed press release on
the congress, Mar. 24, 25, 26,
1939.
Daily Worker, Apr. 6, 1937, p. 9.
Daily Worker, July 25, 1936,
p. 2.
I. J. A. Monthly Bulletin, Vol. 5,
No. 2, Aug. 1936; and Labor
Defender Sept. 1936, p. 15.
Daily Worker, Apr. 30, 1936,
p. 5.
New Masses, May 6, 1937, p. 25.
Daily Worker, Sept. 1, 1936,
p. 4.
Daily Worker, Mar. 10, 1938,
p. 1.
TAX-EXEMPT POUND ATIONS
371
Organization and affiliation
Medical Bureau American Friends
of Spanish Democracy (1).
Member, Executive Committee.
National Committee for People's
Rights (1) (2). Member.
Source
Letterhead, Nov. 18, 1936.
Letterhead, July 13, 1938; and
"News You Don't Get," Nov.
15, 1938.
National Emergency Conference Press Release, Feb. 23, 1940.
for Democratic Rights (1).
Member, Board of Sponsors.
"New Masses" (1) (2). Signer of New Masses, Apr. 2, 1940, p. 21.
New Masses Letter to the Presi-
Daily Worker, Feb. 27, 1937,
p. 2.
1938,
dent (editor, The New Republic) .
North American Committee to
Aid Spanish Democracy (1) (2).
Sponsor of organization's Tag
Day, in New York City.
"Soviet Russia Today" (1). Con-
tributor.
United Office and Professional
Workers of America (1). Spon-
sor of conference of the Book
and Magazine Guild, Local 18,
UOPWA.
Member, sponsors committee
of UOPWA Local 16's 5th
Annual Stenographers' Ball.
See also: Public Hearings, Special Committee on Un-American
Activities, Vol. 1, pages 377, 565, 566, 568, 691, 694, 702,
703, and 876; Vol. 3, pages 2167 and 2169; Vol. 17, pages
10300, 10302, 10305, 10306, 10340, 10341-10347, and
10349.
Soviet Russia Today, Sept. 1936,
p. 29.
Daily Worker, Mar. 9,
p. 5.
Letterhead, Feb. 1, 1940.
Mark Starr
Organization and affiliation
Commonwealth College (1) and
(2). Endorsed reorganization
plan of college ; identified as Ed-
ucational Director, Interna-
tional Ladies Garment Workers
Union.
Consumers National Federation
(1). Sponsor.
Film Audiences for Democracy (1).
Member, Executive Committee.
Films for Democracy (1). Mem-
ber, Executive Committee.
Source
"Fortnightly," publication of
Commonwealth College, Aug.
15, 1937 issue, p. 3.
Pamphlet, "The People vs.
H. C. L.," Dec. 11-12, 1937,
p. 3.
"Film Survey," June 1939, p. 4.
"Films for Democracy," April
1939, p. 2.
372 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Bernhaed J. Stern
The following reference to Bernhard Stern is from the testimony of
Granville Hicks, public hearings, Committee on Un-American Activ-
ities, February 26, 1953 (pp. 96-97):
Mr. Tavenner. When did you become a member of the Communist Party?
Mr. Hicks. In the winter of 1934-35.
Mr. Tavenner. And how long did you remain a member?
Mr. Hicks. Until September 1939.
*******
Mr. Tavenner. Who asked you to become a member of the Party?
Mr. Hicks. Bernhard Stern.
Mr. Tavenner. Bernhard Stern. How was he employed?
Mr. Hicks. He was employed in some capacity at Columbia University. I
don't know what his rank was.
Mr. Tavenner. Was he a teacher?
Mr. Hicks. Yes. I think so.
Mr. Tavenner. Tell the committee the circumstances under which he asked
you to become a party member.
. Mr. Hicks. I was living— I was not living in New York at that time. I was
living in Troy. As I remember, he wrote and asked me if I would have a meal
with him the next time I came to the city. I did so. We had dinner together
and he simply asked me if I didn't feel I was now ready to join the party; and
after we discussed it a little while I said that I did feel so.
Mr. Tavenner. Were you then assigned to a special group or any particular
group of the Communist Party?
Mr. Hicks. Well, he took me to the group to which he belonged.
Mr. Tavenner. Then you became a member of the same group or unit of
which he was a member?
Mr. Hicks. That is true; which was a group of, professional people, writers
mostly, in New York City.
In public hearings before the Special Committee on Un-American
Activities on September 13, 1939, Alexander Trachtenberg, a member
of the Communist Party and its National Committee since 1921,
Secretary and Treasurer of International Publishers, and Chairman
of the Literature Department of the Communist Party, gave the
following testimony concerning Bernhard J. Stern:
Mr. Matthews. Have you published any pamphlets or books by Bernhard J.
Stern?
Mr. Trachtenberg. No; I have not. Oh, pamphlets? Yes, I have.
* * * * * * *
Mr. Matthews. Have you ever published a pamphlet by a man called Bennett
Stevens?
Mr. Trachtenberg. Bennett Stevens? Yes; that is right.
Mr. Matthews. And also by Bernhard Stern? You stated a while ago that
you had published pamphlets by Bernhard Stern.
Mr. Trachtenberg. Edited; yes.
Mr. Matthews. And do you not know that Bernhard Stern and Bennett
Stevens are the same person?
Mr. Trachtenberg. What is the name of the pamphlet? It must be manv
years ago.
Mr. Matthews. Have you met both Bernhard Stern and Bennett Stevens? '
Mr. Trachtenberg. Oh, there are many authors who write under pseudonyms.
Mr. Matthews. Have you met Bernhard Stern, whose pamphlets you have
published?
Mr. Trachtenberg. Yes.
Mr. Matthews. And have you met Bennett Stevens?
Mr. Trachtenberg. Yes; that is the pen name of Bernhard Stern. That is
correct. That must have been about 12 years ago that I published those. I have
no record before me. You have all these records there, you see.
Mr. Matthews. And you know that Bernhard Stern is a professor at Columbia
University, do you not?
Mr. Trachtenberg. I think he is teaching there; yes. (Public Hearings,
pages 4928-4929.) B '
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
e 1623
tee on
wife of
alias of
The following reference to Bernhard J. Stern appears on pa;
of Appendix V to the Public Hearings of the Special Commi
Un-American Activities:
* * * Charlotte Todes, also a Communist Party functionary and
Bernhard J. Stern who was a Columbia University professor using the
Bennett Stevens.
Your attention is called to the following pages of the "Review of
the Scientific and Cultural Conference for World Peace," a copy of
which is enclosed: *
6, 7, 9, 18, 21, 22, 24, 28, 31, 32, 34, 35, 37, 38, 40, 41
45, 49, 52, 54, 56, 57, 60.
Subsequent to the above information our files disclose the fol tawing:
He signed a statement against denaturalization, which wak spon-
sored by the American Committee for Protection of Foreign Born,
according to the Daily Worker, August 30, 1950, page 5 This
source identified him as a professor at Columbia Universitfy. He
signed an Open Letter to the American People in opposition^ to the
Hobbs Bill, H. R. 10, which was sponsored by the American Com-
mittee * * * (Daily Worker, July 25, 1950, p. 4). He was k Spon-
sor of the National Conference to Defend the Rights of Foreign
Born Americans, Detroit, Michigan, December 13 and 14, 1952, as
shown by a Press Release regarding the conference and the "Call and
Program" of the conference. According to the Daily Worker of
April 29, 1953 (page 6), Prof. Bernhard Stern was on a list jpf spon-
sors of the American Committee for Protection of Foreign Born for
1953. He was a sponsor of the National Conference to Repeal the
Walter-McCarran Law and Defend Its Victims, to be held December
12 and 13, 1953, Chicago, 111., as shown by the Daily Worker, October
1, 1953, page 2, and the Call and Program of the conference.
The American Committee for Protection of Foreign Born was
cited as subversive and Communist by the Attorney General of the
United States in letters to the Loyalty Review Board, released June
1 and September 21, 1948. The organization was redesignated by
the Attorney General, April 27, 1953, pursuant to Executive Order
No. 10450, and included on the April 1, 1954 consolidated list of
organizations previously designated pursuant to Executive Older No.
10450. The Special Committee on Un-American Activities in its
report of March 29, 1944 (p. 155), cited the American Committee for
Protection of Foreign Born as "one of the oldest auxiliaries of the
Communist Party in the United States."
The Call to a Bill of Rights Conference, New York City, July 16
and 17, 1949, named Bernard J. Stern, Columbia University, as a
sponsor. Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, member of the National Committee
of the Communist Party, in writing about the conference for her col-
umn in the "Daily Worker" (July 25, 1949, p. 8), stated that one of
the highlights of the conference was the fight for the 12 defendants in
the current Communist cases. She reported that seven of the defend-
ants were present and participated actively. The New York "Times"
(July 18, 1949, p. 13) reported that "the twenty resolutions adopted
unanimously by the two-day conference registered opposition to the
conspiracy trial of the eleven Communist leaders, the Presidential
♦We do not have an available copy of the "Review of the Scientific and Cultural Conference for World
Peace." If you wish to see these references you may come to the Publication Service of the (pommittee.
374 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
loyalty order * * * deportation for political belief * * * among
others. The Conference also called for an end to the investigation by
the Federal Bureau of Investigation into political, rather than crim-
inal, activities."
Dr. Bernhard J. Stern, New York, signed an Open Letter to Presi-
dent Truman on Franco Spain, which was sponsored by the Spanish
Refugee Appeal of the Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee, accord-
ing to a mimeographed letter attached to a letterhead of the organ-
ization, dated April 28, 1949.
The Attorney General cited the Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Com-
mittee as Subversive and Communist in letters released December 4,
1947 and September 21, 1948. The organization was redesignated
by the Attorney General, April 27, 1953, and included on the April 1,
1954 consolidated list. The Special Committee on Un-American
Activities, in its report of March 29, 1944 (page 174), cited the Joint
Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee as a "Communist-front organization."
He was a sponsor of the National Conference on American Policy
in China and the Far East, as shown by a Conference Call, "* * *
January 23-25, 1948, New York City."
The Attorney General cited the National Conference on American
Policy in China and the Far East as Communist and "a conference
called by the Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy" in a
letter released July 25, 1949. The organization was redesignated
April 27, 1953, and included in the April 1, 1954 consolidated list.
A mimeographed list of signers of the "Resolution Against Atomic
Weapons," which was sponsored by the National Council of the
Arts, Sciences and Professions, contained the name of Bernhard J.
Stern, New York. The list of signers was attached to a letterhead
dated July 28, 1950. The letterhead also named him as a member of
the Board of Directors. He was shown as a member of the Board
of Directors of the organization on a letterhead dated December 7,
1952 (photostat). The "Daily Worker" of March 10, 1952 (p. 3),
listed Dr. Bernhard Stern as a signer of a statement of the National
Council of the Arts, Sciences and Professions protesting curbs on
lawyers in political trials.
The Committee on Un-American Activities, in its report, Review
of the Scientific and Cultural Conference for World Peace, arranged
by the National Council of the Arts, Sciences and Professions, released
April 19, 1949 (p. 2), cited the National Council * * * as a Commu-
nist front organization.
Bernhard J. Stern, Columbia University, New York, was one of the
endorsers of the World Peace Appeal, as shown by an undated leaflet,
Prominent Americans Call for * * *" (leaflet received September 11,
1950).
The Committee on Un-American Activities, in its report on the
Communist "Peace" Offensive, April 1, 1951 (p. 34), cited the World
Peace Appeal as a petition campaign launched by the Permanent
Committee of the World Peace Congress at its meeting in Stockholm,
March 16-19, 1950; as having "received the enthusiastic approval
of every section of the international Communist hierarchy"; as having
been lauded in the Communist press, putting "every individual Com-
munist on notice that he 'has the duty to rise to this appeal' "; and
as having "received the official endorsement of the Supreme Soviet
of the U. S. S. R., which has been echoed by the governing bodies
Source
Mimeographed sheet attached to
letterhead, Jan. 17, 1940.
IE I
Letterhead, 4th Annual
ence, Hotel Annapol:
ington, D. C, Mar. 2
"Daily Worker," Oct
p. 3.
Summary of Proceedings, July
15, 1940.
Program of Dinner-Forum
2«
Confer-
, Wash-
■3, 1940.
, 1940,
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 375
of every Communist satellite country, and by all Communisi Parties
throughout the world."
The "Times Herald" of March 28, 1953 (p. 2) reported that Bern-
hard J. Stern, alleged to have used the name of Bennett Stevens in
writings or for Communist purposes, denied he is now a Communist
before the Senate Investigating Committee; but refused to say whether
he ever had been an active member of the Communist Party
Maxwell Stewart
Organization and affiliation
American Committee for Democ-
racy and Intellectual Freedom
(1). Signer of petition.
American Committee for Protec-
tion of Foreign Born (1) and (2) .
Sponsor.
Signer of Statement for Amer-
ican People, and endorsing
the Campaign for American
Citizenship and Citizenship
Eights.
American Council on Soviet Rela-
tions (1) and (2). Participant,
Eoundtable Conference, May
24-25, 1940.
American Committee to Save Ref-
ugees (1). Sponsor of Dinner-
Forum on "Europe Today,"
held at Biltmore Hotel, New
York, Oct. 9, 1941, under joint
auspices ACSR, Exiled Writers
Committee of League of Ameri-
can Writers and United Ameri-
can Spanish Aid Committee.
American Friends of Spanish De-
mocracy, Medical Bureau (1).
General Committee, Member.
Member, Executive Commit-
tee.
American Friends of Spanish De-
mocracy (1). Signer of letter to
President.
Member, Executive Commit-
tee.
American Friends of the Chinese
People (1). Speaker, Mass
Meeting.
Speaker
"New Masses," Jan. 5,
31.
1937, p.
Signer, Letter pledging sup-
port to China.
Contributing Editor, "China
Today" (official publication
of American Friends * * *) .
Letterhead, Nov. 18, 19|36.
"Daily Worker," Feb. 16, 1938,
p. 2.
Letterhead, Feb. 21, 19&8.
"Help China!" (HandbUl).
"Daily Worker," Feb. 5p, 1938, p.
8.
"Daily Worker," July 16, 1940,
p. 4.
"China Today," Feb. i938, p. 2.
376
TAX-EXEEEPT FOUNDATIONS
Organization and affiliation
American League Against War
and Fascism (1) and (2) . Mem-
ber, National Committee.
Member, National Executive
Committee.
American League for Peace and
Democracy (1) and (2). Urges
support of Tag Week drive.
Signer of resolution (urging
passage of Anti-Lynching
Bill).
China Aid Council of American
League for Peace and Democ-
racy (1) and (2). Sponsor of
Easter Drive.
China Aid Council (1) . Sponsor- _
American Youth Congress (1)
and (2). Member, National
Advisory Board.
Book Union (1). Member, Ad-
visory Council.
Committee for a Democratic Far
Eastern Policy (2) . Consultant;
Sponsor, Conference on China
and the Far East, San
Francisco (called by Na-
tional Committee to Win
the Peace and Committee
for a Democratic Far East-
ern Policy).
Committee for a Democratic Far
Eastern Policy (2). Honored.
Answered questionnaire is-
sued by organization in
favor of recognition of Chi-
nese Communist Gov't.
(Contributing editor, The
Nation; editor, Public Af-
fairs Pamphlets).
Committee for a Democratic Far
Eastern Policy (2). Signer of
statement for recognition of
Communist China.
Conference on Pan American
Democracy (1) and (2). Sponsor.
Signer of Call
Council for Pan American De-
mocracy (1) and (2). Signer of
Open Letter to President of
Brazil to Save Luis Carlos
Prestes.
Source
"Call to the Second U. S. Con-
gress Against War and Fas-
cism," Sept. 28, 29, and 30,
1934, Chicago, 111., p. 2.
Letterhead, Aug. 22, 1935;
"Fight," Dec. 1935, p. 2.
"Daily Worker," Apr. 16, 1938,
p. 2.
"Daily Worker," Jan. 18, 1938,
p. 3.
"Daily Worker," Apr. 8, 1938,
p. 2.
Letterhead, May 18, 1938.
"Youngville, U. S. A.," p. 64.
Undated Folder.
Letterheads, 1946 and 1947; let-
terhead, May 28, 1948.
Call to the Conference, Oct.
18-20, 1946; letterhead, Sept.
19, 1946.
"Spotlight on the Far East,"
Nov. 1947, p. 2.
Far East Spotlight, Dec. 1949-
Jan. 1950, p. 23.
"Daily Worker," Jan. 16, 1950,
p. 4.
Letterhead, Nov. 16, 1938.
News You Don't Get, Nov. 15,
1938, p. 3.
"New Masses," Dec. 3, 1940, p.
28.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Organisation and affiliation
Coordinating Committee to Lift
the Embargo (1). Representa-
tive Individual.
Fight (1). Contributor
Friends of the Soviet Union (1)
and (2). Endorser.
Greater New York Emergency
Conference on Inalienable
Rights (1). Sponsor.
Labor Research Association (1)
and (2) . Contributor.
League of American Writers (1)
and (2). Member, Committee
of Sponsors, Dinner-Forum on
"Europe Today" held by Exiled
Writers Comm. of Law., Ameri-
can Committee to Save Refu-
gees; United American Spanish
Aid Comm.
Mother Bloor Banquet. Sponsor.
National Committee for People's
Rights (1) and (2). Member.
National Committee for the De-
fense of Political Prisoners (1)
and (2) . Member.
National Committee to Win the
Peace (2) . Sponsor, Conference
on China and the Far East, San
Francisco (called by the Na-
tional Committee to Win the
Peace and Committee for a
Democratic Far Eastern Policy).
National Council of American-
Soviet Friendship (1) and (2).
Sponsor.
National Emergency Conference
(1). Sponsor.
National Emergency Conference
for Democratic Rights (1).
Member, Board of Sponsors.
National People's Committee
Against Hearst (1). Member.
New Masses (1) and (2). Con-
tributor.
Member, Initiating Commit-
tee, New Masses Letter to
President, and signer of
same.
Non-Partisan Committee for the
Reelection of Vito Marcantonio
(1). Member.
Source
Booklet, "These Americans Say:"
P- 9.
"Fight," June 1934, p
"Soviet Russia Today
ber 1933, p. 17.
Program of Conference^
1940.
"Daily Worker," Jump
p. 5.
Program of Dinner-Fohim
1936
Program, Jan. 24,
Letterhead -, July 13,
You Don't Get, Nov
Letterhead, Oct. 31,
Call to the
18-20, 1946;
19, 1946.
377
2.
" Decem-
, Feb. 12,
8, 1936,
,p. 9.
; News
. 15, 1938.
1938
1935.
Conference Oct.
letterhead, Sept.
Letterhead, Mar. 13, 1946; Mem-
orandum issued by ^he Council
Mar. 18, 1946.
Call to Conference, held at Hotel
Raleigh, Washington, D. C,
May 13 and 14, 1939, p. 3.
Letterhead, Feb. 15, 1940; Press
Release, Feb. 23, 1940.
Letterhead, Mar. 16, 1937.
"New Masses," August 1929,
p. 15; Aug. 8. 1939, p. 24.
"New Masses," Apr,. 2, 1940,
p. 21.
Letterhead, Oct. 3, 1936
5564T — 54-
378
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Organization and affiliation
North American Committee to Aid
Spanish Democracy (1) and (2).
Speaker; Philadelphia.
Open Letter for Closer Coopera-
tion with the Soviet Union (1).
Signer.
Open Letter to American Liberals
(1). Signer.
"Soviet Russia Today" (1).
Contributor.
"Soviet Russia Today" (1).
Member, Editorial Council.
United American Spanish Aid
Committee (1) and (2). Mem-
ber, Committee of Sponsors,
Dinner-Forum on "Europe To-
day," held at Biltmore Hotel,
New York City, Oct. 9, 1941,
under auspices of United Amer-
ican Spanish Air Committee;
American Committee to Save
Refugees; Exiled Writers Com-
mittee of League of American
Writers.
Meeting to Greet Soviet Constitu-
tion; sponsor.
Signed letter protesting ban on
Communists in American Civil
Liberties Union.
Editor, Moscow News
Source
"Daily Worker," Apr. 9, 1937,
p. 2.
"Soviet Russia Today," Sep-
tember 1939, p. 28.
"Daily Worker," Feb. 9, 1937,
p. 2; "Soviet Russia Today,"
March 1937, pp. 14-15.
"Soviet Russia Today," Jan-
uary 1936, p. 12; "Daily Work-
er," June 11, 1937, p. 7;
"Soviet Russia Today," June
1939, p. 35; November 1939,
p. 13; April 1940, p. 9.
"Soviet Russia Today," January
1939, p. 3; January 1940, p. 3;
March 1942, p. 3.
Program of Dinner-Forum.
Taught in the Moscow Institute..
Committee for Peaceful Alterna-
tives to the Atlantic Pact (1).
Signer of statement calling for
International Agreement to Ban
Use of Atomic Weapons; author,
Annandale, N. J.
"Daily Worker," Nov. 30, 1936,
"Daily Worker," Mar. 19, 1940,
p. 4.
"Daily Worker," June 28, 1934,
p. 3.
Testimony of Stuart Lillico, pub-
lic hearings, Committee on
Un-American Activities, Nov.
22, 1938, p. 2512; testimony of
Jack B. Tenney, public hear-v
ings Committee on Un-Ameri-
can Activities, March 1947, p.
247.
Statement attached to Press Re-
lease of Dec. 14, 1949, p. 11.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Organization and affiliation
Labor Research Association (1)
and (2). Contributor.
Sponsor, meeting to greet Soviet
Constitution; NYC.
Signer, Open Letter to New Masses
concerning "American Commit-
tee for the Defense of Leon Trot-
sky."
Speaker at Student Strike, Phila-
delphia.
Signer, statement by American
Progressives on the Moscow
Trials.
Signed telegram sent to Peru to
release political prisoners.
Reviews "USSR Foreign Policy,
Collection of Litvinov's
Speeches," with approval.
Signed letter protesting ban on
Communists in American Civil
Liberties Union.
Statement: "Of course we should
recognize the new gov't of
China: recognition provides a
means of dealing with it; other-
wise we are terribly handi-
capped—viz. the Ward Case.
Recogition has nothing to do
with approval or disapproval.";
Contributing editor, The Na-
tion; editor, Public Affairs
Pamphlets.
Condemns South Korean adminis-
tration; quoted with approval.
Record given
Jacob Viner
Source
"Daily Worker," Junej
p. 5.
"Daily Worker," Nov
p. 5.
"New Masses," Feb.
p. 2.
"Daily Worker," Apr.
p. 5.
"Daily Worker," Apr.
p. 4.
"New Masses," Dec.
p. 20.
"New Masses," Aug.
p. 24.
"Daily Worker," Mar.
p. 4.
Far East Spotlight,
1949-January 1950,
"Daily People's World
1950, p. 4.
Congressional Record,
1950, p. A941.
There are only two references in committee files to Jaqob Viner
See Hearings of the Special Committee on Un-American
page 2374; also Hearings of the Committee on Un-American
Regarding Communism in the United States Governmen
April 25, 1950, page 1727.
J. Raymond Walsh
379,
8, 1936,
30, 1936,
16, 1937,
24, 1937,
28, 1938,
6, 1938,
8, 1939,
19, 1940,
December
23.
' Oct. 6,
Feb. 7,
Activities,
Activities
Part I.
Organization and affiliation
American Committee for Protec-
tion of Foreign Born (1) and (2).
Sponsor (Identified with Hobart
College) .
Source
Program, Fifth National Con-
ference, Atlantic City, N. J.,
Mar. 29-30, 1941.
380
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Organization and affiliation
American Council on Soviet Rela-
tions (1) and (2). Signer of
. open letter to the Pres. of the
U. S. urging a declaration of war
on the Finnish government in
the interests of a speedy victory
by the U. N. over Nazi Ger-
many and its Fascist allies.
(Iden. with Williams College).
American Slav Congress (1) and
(2). Dinner Chairman and
Sponsor of Testimonial Dinner,
Hotel Pennsylvania, N. Y. C,
Oct. 12, 1947.
American Student Union (1).
Convention Speaker.
Committee for a Democratic Far
Eastern Policy (2). Member,
Board of Directors.
Council for Pan American De-
mocracy (1) and (2). Member,
Executive Committee.
"Daily Worker " (1). Photo.
Source
Official folder of the organization.
League of American Writers (1)
and (2). Member (N. Y. C.)
National Council of the Arts,
Sciences and Professions (1).
Sponsor, Cultural and Scientific
Conference for World Peace, N.
Y. C, March 25-27, 1949.
Signer of statement attacking
espionage investigation.
National Emergency Conference
(1). Signer of Call.
National Emergency Conference
for Democratic Rights (1).
Member, Executive Committee.
Open Letter for Closer Coopera-
tion with the Soviet Union (1).
Signer.
Southern Conference for Human
Welfare (.1). Speaker.
Program of Dinner, p. 2.
"The .Student Almanac— 1939"
for the Fourth Annual Na-
tional Convention, Dec. 26-
30, 1938, p. 32.
Letterhead, May 28, 1948; letter-
heads of 1946 and 1947; Far
East Spotlight, June 1948;
Information Bulletin, August
1946.
Letterhead, July 18, 1940; pam-
phlet, "Economic Trends and
the New Deal in the Carib-
bean," published by Council,
1942.
"Daily Worker," Dec. 7, 1936,
p. 3.
Bulletin of the League of Ameri-
can Writers, Summer, 1938, p.
4.
Conference Program, p. 15.
"Daily Worker," Aug. 18, 1948,
p. 2.
Call for a National Emergency
Conference, Washington, D. C,
May 13-14, 1939.
Press Releases, Feb. 23, 1940;
Feb. 15, 1940.
"Soviet Russia Today," Sept.
1939, pp. 24, 25, 28.
News Release, Washington Com-
mittee, Apr. 7, 1947.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
381
Organisation and affiliation Source
Win-the-Peace Conference, Wash., Summary of Proceedings, p. 5.
D. C., April 5-7, 1946 (formed
National Committee to Win the
Peace 2). Chairman, Saturday
Afternoon Session.
Signer of statement attacking
Mundt anti-Communist bill.
Opposed to Mundt-Nixon bill
Press Releases
'Daily Worker," Maf 4, 1948,
p. 11.
"Daily Worker," June 13, 1949,
p. 3. . 1
Congressional Record, June 11,
1946, p. 6824.
Dies Committee
and Speeches.
Gene Weltfish
Gene Weltfish, President of the Congress of American Women,
New York, spoke at a meeting of the American Committee for the
Protection of Foreign Born ("Daily People's World," November 10,
1947, p. 2) ; she signed a letter of the group, attacking deportation of
Communists ("Daily Worker," March 4, 1948, p. 2); she signed this
organization's statement against denaturalization as shown in the
"Daily Worker" of August 10, 1950, page 5. She was named as a
sponsor of the American Committee * * * in the following sources:
Undated letterhead (received for files, July 11, 1950); a 1950 letter-
head; and undated letterhead (distributing a speech of Abner Green
at the conference of December 2-3, 1950;) a book of coupons issued
by them; a letterhead of the Midwest Committee, April 30, 1951;
and the "Daily Worker" of April 4, 1951, p. 8. The "Daily Worker"
of August 24, 1951 (page 6) reported that Prof. Gene Weltfish, sponsor
of the American Committee for Protection of Foreign Bom, was one
of those who signed an open letter to President Truman protesting
the jailing of Abner Green, secretary of the organization.
The United States Attorney General cited the American Committee
for Protection of Foreign Born as subversive and Communist in lists
released June 1, 1948, and September 21, 1948. It was also cited as
"one of the oldest auxiliaries of the Communist Party in ;he United
States" by the Special Committee (Report, March 29, 1944, page 155.
Dr. Gene Weltfish, anthropologist and author, was reported as
being a sponsor of the American Continental Congress for Peace in
the "Daily Worker" of July 29, 1949 (page 5). The Committee on
Un-American Activities in its report on the Communist "Peace"
Offensive, April 25, 1951 (page 21), cited the American Continental
Congress for Peace as "another phase in the Communist 'peace'
campaign, aimed at consolidating anti-American forces throughout
the Western Hemisphere."
Dr. Weltfish was a member of the Board of Directors of Jthe Ameri-
can Council for a Democratic Greece as shown by a pressi release of
March 17, 1948. This group was cited as subversive and Communist,
the organization formerly was known as the Greek-American Council,
by the U. S. Attorney General (letters to the Loyalty Review Board,
June 1, 1948, and September 31, 1948).
The "Daily Worker" of March 15, 1951 (page 8) reported that Dr.
Gene Weltfish was a sponsor of the American Peace Crusade. She
was a sponsor of the American People's Congress and Exposition for
Peace held under the auspices of the American Peace Crusade, Chicago,
382 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Illinois, June 29, 30, and July 1, 1951, as shown by "The Call to the
American People's Congress * * *" and a leaflet, " American People's
Congress * * * invites you to participate in a National Peace Com-
petition" * * * June 29, 1951. The "Daily Worker" of May 1, 1951
(page 11) reported that she was a sponsor of a contest for songs, essays
and paintings advancing the theme of world peace, held under auspices
of the American Peace Crusade.
The Committee on Un-American Activities in its report on the
Communist "Peace" Offensive, April 25, 1951 (page 51) and in its
statement issued on the March of Treason, February 19, 1951, cited
the American Peace Crusade as an organization which "the Com-
munists Established" as a "new instrument for their 'peace' offensive
in the United States" and which was heralded by the "Daily Worker"
"with the usual bold headlines reserved for projects in line with the
Communist objectives."
A "Program of Testimonial Dinner" which was held at the Hotel
Pennsylvania, New York, on October 12, 1947, page 2, named her as
one of the sponsors of a dinner given by the American Slav Congress.
The Fall, 1948 issue of the "Slavic-American" (page 18) named Gene
Weltfish as a speaker at a meeting of the Congress. The American
Slav Congress was cited as subversive and Communist by the U. S.
Attorney General in lists furnished the Loyalty Review Board, which
were released to the press on June 1, 1948 and September 21, 1948.
The American Slav Congress was the subject of a report of the
Committee on Un-American Activities, released June 26, 1949, in
which it was cited as — ■
a Moscow-inspired and directed federation of Communist-dominated organiza-
tions seeking by methods of propaganda and pressure to subvert the 10,000,000
people in this country of Slavic birth or descent, (page 1)
Dr. Weltfish was a speaker or reporter at a Conference to Safeguard
the Welfare of Our Children and Our Homes, held under auspices of
the American Women for Peace, March 22 at the Pythian, 135 W.
70th Street, New York, N. Y., as reported by the April 6, 1952 issue
of the "Daily Worker" (page 8, magazine section). The Committee,
in its report on the Communist "Peace" Offensive, cited the American
Women for Peace as —
an advance wave to establish a beachhead for other left-wing organizations
scheduled to descend on Washington in observance of a Communist-declared
"Peace Week."
She was named as a sponsor of the American Youth for Democracy
as shown by a "Program of dinner on first anniversary of the American
Youth for Democracy" (dated October 16, 1944). The Special
Committee * * * cited this group as "the new name under which
the Young Communist League operates and which also largely ab-
sorbed the American Youth Congress." (Report, March 29, 1944,
page 102) . The Committee also cited this organization as —
a front formed in October 1943 to succeed the Young Communist League and for
the purpose of exploiting to the advantage of a foreign power the idealism, inex-
ferience, and craving to join which is characteristic of American college youth.
ts "high-sounding slogans" cover "a determined effort to disaffect our youth and
to turn them against religion, the American home, against the college authorities,
and against the American government itself." (Report No. 271, April 17, 1947.)
The U. S. Attorney General also cited it as subversive and Communist in lists
of December 4, 1947, and September 21, 1948.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
383
Dr. Gene Weltfish was a speaker at a mass rally to protesit lynchings
which was held under the auspices of the Civil Rights} Congress,
August 28, 1946, New York, N. Y., as shown by the handbill, "Lynch
Terror Stalks America." She signed a statement of the group in
defense of Gerhart Eisler ("Daily Worker," February 28, 1947, p. 2;
she was a panel participant at the conference of the Civil Rights
Congress of New York, October 11, 1947 ("Program of Conference") ;
a sponsor of the National Conference of the group which ^as held in
Chicago on November 21-23, 1947 (Program, "Let Freedom Ring,"
and "Daily People's World," October 28, 1947, p. 4); sponsor of the
group's National Civil Rights Legislative Conference, January. 18
and 19, 1949 (Leaflet, "Freedom Crusade," program of conference);
and an additional sponsor of the Bill of Rights Conference," New
York City, July 16-17, 1949, p. 6; she signed an Open Letter to
Congress urging defeat of the Mundt Bill; signed a statement of the
Congress protesting indictment and arrest of Communist Party
leaders ("Daily Worker," August 3, 1948, p. 2); member of their
delegation in behalf of Communist leaders ("Daily Worker," January
25, 1949, page 10); signed an open letter to J. Howard McGrath on
behalf of the four jailed Trustees of the Bail Fund of the Civil Rights
Congress as shown by an advertisement ("paid for by contributions
of signers"), in the October 30, 1951 issue of the "Evening Star"
(page A-7). The "Daily Worker" of November 12, 1951 (page 18)
reported that she was to speak at a memorial meeting protesting an
act of genocide which was to be held under auspices of the Congress.
She spoke at an anniversary dinner of the group on March 26, 1952,
as reported by the March 26, 1952 issue of the "DanV Worker"
(page 3). _ .... 1.
The Committee on Un-American Activities cited the Civil Rights
Congress as —
an organization formed in April 1946 as a merger of two other Communist-front
organizations (International Labor Defense and the National Federation for
Constitutional Liberties) "dedicated not to the broader issues of civil liberties,
but specifically to the defense of individual Communists and tha Communist
Party" and "controlled by individuals who are either members of the Communist
Party or openly loyal to it." (Report No. 1115, September 2, 1947, pp. 2 and 19).
The U. S. Attorney General cited the group as "subversive and
Communist" in lists furnished the Loyalty Review Board (press
releases, December 4, 1947, and September 21, 1948).
Letterheads of 1946, 1947, July 11, 1947, and May 28, 1^48, named
her as one of the sponsors of the Committee for a Democratic Far
Eastern Policy. As shown by the pamphlet, "What Price! Philippine
Independence" by George Phillips (pages 30-32), Gene Weltfish was
one of those who signed an Open Letter to President Truman, released
on October 7, 1946, under auspices of the Committee for a Democratic
*■ * * cited as "Communist" by the U. S. Attorney General (press
release of April 27, 1949). She was a sponsor of the Natiojnal Confer-
ence on American Policy on China and the Far East, as shown by the
Conference Call "* * * Jan. 23-25, 1948, New York City." This
conference was called by the Committee for a Democratic Far East-
ern Policy and was cited as "Communist" by the U. S. Attorney
General (press release of July 25, 1949).
Gene Weltfish was President of "Woman Power," published monthly
by the Congress of American Women, 55 W. Forty-second Street, New
384 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
York, N. Y M as shown in testimony of Walter S. Steele. (Public Hear-
ings, July 21, 1947, p. 35.) She was also the President of the Congress
of American Women as shown by a letterhead of February 25, 1949,
and by a bulletin of the group (page 2). A leaflet, "What is the Con-
gress of American Women?" listed Dr. Weltfish as vice-chairman of
the Continuing Committee of the Congress of American Women. A
report of Gene Weltfish of the Congress of American Women to the
June 1946 Executive Committee meeting of the International Demo-
cratic Women's Federation in Paris, France, appeared in "Soviet
Women," July-August 1946 (p. 4) . According to the "Daily Worker"
of February 11, 1948, p. 10, she is a member of the Executive Com-
mittee of the Women's International Democratic Federation.
The Congress of American Women was the subject of a report by
the Committee on Un-American Activities, released October 23, 1949,
in which it stated that —
The Congress of American Women is an affiliate of the Women's International
Democratic Federation, which was founded and supported at all times by the
international Communist movement. The purpose of these organizations is not
to deal primarily with women's problems, as such, but rather to serve as a special-
ized arm of Soviet political warfare in the current "peace" campaign to disarm and
demobilize the United States and democratic nations generally, in order to render
them helpless in the face of the Communist drive for world conquest.
This organization was also cited as "subversive" and "Communist"
by the U. S. Attorney General in lists furnished the Loyalty Review
Board (press releases dated June 1, 1948, and September 21, 1948).
Dr. Gene Weltfish was one of the signers of a petition to President
Truman "to bar military aid to or alliance with fascist Spain" released
under auspices of the Spanish Refugee Appeal of the Joint Anti-
Fascist Refugee Committee as shown by a mimeographed petition,
attached to a letterhead of May 18, 1951. The U. S. Attorney
General cited the Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee as "subver-
sive and Communist" (see letters of December 4, 1947 and September
21, 1948). The Special Committee in its report dated March 29,
1944 (page 174), cited the Joint Anti-Fascist * * * as a "Com-
munist-front organization headed by Edward K. Barsky."
One of the most important "cultural" events of the year for the
Reds was the celebration in honor of "Mother" Ella Reeve Bloor on
the occasion of her eighty-fifth birthday anniversary. Gene Weltfish
was one of the sponsors of this banquet, as shown in the "Daily
Worker" of June 11, 1947 (page 5).
Dr. Gene Weltfish, anthropologist, was lasted among those who sent
greetings to women of the Soviet Union, under the auspices of the
National Council of American-Soviet Friendship ("Daily Worker,"
March 8, 1949, page 7). She was an endorser of this organization
as shown by the program, "Congress on American-Soviet Relations,"
December 3-5, 1949. The U. S. Attorney General cited the National
Council * * * as "subversive and Communist" in letters of Decem-
ber 4, 1947, and September 21, 1948. The Special Committee on
Un-American Activities, in its report dated March 29, 1944 (page 156)
cited the National Council of American-Soviet Friendship as "the
Communist Party's principal front for all things Russian."
A pamphlet, "Seeing is Believing," (dated 1947) listed her as a
Council Member of the Council on African Affairs, Inc. An undated
pamphlet named her as a conference participant of the Council
(Pamphlet, "For a New Africa," page 37). The "Daily Worker" of
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 385
April 26, 1947 (page 12) reported that she signed a statement, spon-
sored by the Council. She was a member of the Executive Board
of this group, according to the "Daily Worker" of March 29, 1948,
page 7. The Council on African Affairs was cited as subversive and
Communist (U. S. Attorney General's letters to the Loyalty Review
Board, December 4, 1947, and September 21, 1948).
A pamphlet, "For a New Africa," named Gene Weltfish as an indi-
vidual participant of the Conference on Africa held in New York on
April 14, 1944, under the sponsorship of the National Negro Congress.
The Special Committee in its Report of January 3, 1939 (page 81)
stated that —
the Communist-front movement in the United States among Negroes is known
as the National Negro Congress.
The U. S. Attorney General stated that —
Commencing with the formation of the National . Negro Congress in 1936, Com-
munist Party functionaries and "fellow travelers" have figured prominently in the
leadership and affairs of the Congress * * * according to A. Phillip Randolph,
John P. Davis, secretary of the congress, has admitted that the Communist Party
contributed $100 a month to its support. * * * (Congressional Record, Sep-
tember 24, 1942, pp. 7687 and 7688) .
This group was also cited by the U. S. Attorney General (press
releases of the U. S. Civil Service Commission, dated December 4,
1947, and September 21, 1948).
The "Daily Worker" of September 20, 1947 (page 8) and the
"Worker" for September 28, 1947 (page 10) named Dr. Weltfish as a
speaker for the Veterans of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade. The
January 15, 1948 (page 5) issue of this paper listed her as a participant
in the picket line against Franco, which was sponsored by the Veterans
of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade. The Special Committee * * * in
its report of March 29, 1944 (page 82) stated that —
In 1937-38, the Communist Party threw itself wholeheartedly into the campaign
for the support of the Spanish Loyalist cause, recruiting men and organizing
multifarious so-called relief organizations.
Among these was the Veterans of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade.
The U. S. Attorney General cited this group as "subversive and
Communist" in lists to the Loyalty Review Board, released December
4, 1947 and September 21, 1948.
Letterheads of September 8, 1947, September 30, 1947, and an
undated letterhead (received for files, April 1948) have named Gene
Weltfish as a member of the Advisory Council of "Soviet Russia
Today" which was cited as a "Communist front" by the Special
Committee on Un-American Activities in its Report of March 29,
1944 (page 167) and Report of June 25, 1942 (page 21).
According to the Conference Program (page 15) Gene Weltfish
was one of the sponsors of the Cultural and Scientific Conference. for
World Peace, which was arranged by the National Council of the
Arts, Sciences and Professions and held in New York City on March
25, 26, and 27, 1949. She participated in this conference by speaking
on "Fascism, Colonialism and World Peace" as shown by the edited
report of the Conference, "Speaking of Peace" (pages 72 and 143).
She was a sponsor of a conference held by the National Council
* * * on October 9-10, 1948, as shown by a leaflet, "To Safeguard
These Rights * * *", published by the Bureau on Academic Freedom
of the National Council. She was also a signer of a statement spon-
.^86 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
sored by this organization, as shown by the Congressional Kecord
of July 14, 1949 (page 9620). She was a sponsor of the World Con-
gress for Peace (American Sponsoring Committee) as shown by the
leaflet, "World Congress for Peace, Paris" April 20, 21, 22, 23, 1949.
In its report of April 9, 1949, the Committee on Un-American
Activities cited the Scientific and Cultural Conference for World
Peace as a —
gathering at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New York City on March 25, 26, and
27, 1949, which was actually a supermobilization of the inveterate wheelhorses
and supporters of the Communist Party and its auxiliary organizations.
This group prepared "the way for the coming World Peace Con-
gress to be held in Paris on April 20 to 23, 1949, with similar aims
in view on a world scale and under similar Communist auspices
(page 1). The National Council of the Arts, Sciences and Professions
was cited as a "Communist-front organization" on page 2 of the
same report.
The "Daily Worker" of February 16, 1949 (page 2) and February
20, 1949 (page 10) named Gene Weltfish as one of those persons
protesting the procedure in Communist trials. She was one of those
who signed a telegram in behalf of Robert Thompson, Communist,
as shown by the "Daily Worker" of November 30, 1948 (page 11),
and was also a member of a delegation in behalf of Robert Thompson
("Daily Worker," December 15, 1948, page 1). She was a sponsor of
the National Non-Partisan Committee to Defend the Rights of the
12 Communist leaders, as shown by the reverse side of a letterhead
dated September 9, 1949. Robert Thompson was one of the eleven
Communist leaders who were convicted on October 14, 1949 of con-
spiracy to teach and advocate the violent overthrow of the United
States Government ("New York Times," October 1.5, 1949, page 5).
Gene Weltfish was a signer of a brief submitted in behalf of John
Howard Lawson and Dal ton Trumbo, October 1949, by the Cultural
Workers in the Supreme Court of the United States, October Term,
1949. The following reference to John Howard Lawson, Dalton
Trumbo and certain other individuals appears in the Report of the
Committee on Un-American Activities, dated December 31, 1948,
page 9:
Each of these witnesses refused to affirm or deny membership in the Communist
Party * * * In each case the committee presented voluminous evidence to show
affiliations with communist organizations and a copy of the witness' Communist
Party registration card.
Lawson and Trumbo were convicted of contempt of Congress and
sentenced to one year in jail and fined $1,000 each ("Washington
Times Herald," May 30, 1950, page 1). They began serving their
sentence on June 11, 1950 ("New York Times," June 11, 1950, page
3).
According to the "Daily Worker" of April 10, 1950 (page 2) Gene
Weltfish was a signer of a statement in support of Pablo Neruda, a
Chilean Communist. The "Worker" of October 26, 1947 (page 7)
named Dr. Weltfish as an active supporter of Ada B. Jackson, an
American Labor Party candidate.
For years, the Communists have put forth the greatest efforts to capture the
entire American Labor Party throughout New York State. They succeeded in
capturing the Manhattan and Brooklyn sections of the American Labor Party
\TAS5BSODV;9DQ]iaaB0l»SS r 3S3I-
but outside-of New York City they have been unable to win control. (Special
Committee on Un-American Activities, Report 1311, March 29, 1944, page 78.)
Dr. Gene Weltfish was a sponsor of a conference called by the Pro-
visional Committee for a United Labor and People's May Day which
was organized to "set up May Day Committees" and "to assure the
broadest participation in the May Day Demonstration" ("Daily
Worker," March 14, 1949, page 8). "The May Day Parade in New
York City is an annual mobilization of Communist strength."
(Special Committee on Un-American Activities, Report 1311, March
29, 1944, page 179.)
An undated leaflet, "Prominent Americans Call For * * * (re-
ceived for files, September 11, 1950) named Prof. Gene Weltfish as
an endorser of the World Peace Appeal.
The text of the "peace petition" as adopted in Stockholm on March 15-19,
1950, by the so-called World Peace Congress at the third session of its Permanent
Committee, is announced to the world in the March 24, 1950, issue of "for a
Lasting Peace, For a People's Democracy," official organ of the general staff
of the International Communist conspiracy, the Information Bureau of the Com-
munist and Workers Parties (Cominform). In conformity with this directive,
the Communist Party, USA, formulated its own "peace plan" in the "Worker"
for June 11, 1950. Calling for a "Nation-wide drive for millions of signatures,"
every Communist is notified that he "has the duty to rise to this appeal," On
June 20, 1950, the "peace petition" received the official stamp of approval from
.the Supreme Soviet of the U. S. S. R. (The Communist "Peace Petition Cam-
paign," Interim Statement of the Committee on Un-American Activities, released
July 13, 1950.)
Dr. Weltfish was one of the sponsors of the Committee to Secure
Justice in the Rosenberg Case, as shown on a letterhead of the group
dated June 5, 1952; the "Daily Worker" of October 15, 1952 (page 3),
reported that she had protested the death sentence against Ethel and
Julius Rosenberg; she was one of the individuals who signed an amicus
curiae brief submitted to the U. S. Supreme Court, urging a new trial
for Ethel and Julius Rosenberg; Dr. Weltfish was identified in this
source as an anthropologist at Columbia University. The "Daily
Worker" of January 21, 1953 (page 7), also reported that Dr. Weltfish
urged clemency for the Rosenbergs, sentenced to death after their
conviction in March 1951, of conspiring with a Soviet official to send
atomic secrets to Russia between 1944 and 1950.
Alexander Werth
A review of "The Year of Stalingrad," by Alexander Werth, appears
in "Soviet Russia Today," June 1947 (p. 23). "Soviet Russia Today"
has been cited by the Committee on Un-American Activities as a
Communist-front publication (Special Committee on Un-American
Activities, Report, March 29, 1944, p. 167; June 25, 1942, p. 21 —
Congressional Committee on Un-American Activities, House Report
No. 1953, April 26, 1950, p. 108). The reviewer, Isidor Schneider,
states that the task of the book "is to make clear the full significance
of the year of the decisive battle which changed the course of the
Second World War — and of modern history."
A booklet, "Poland Today," by Alexander Werth, published in
1948 by the Polish Research and Information Service, contains the
following statements:
And it must be said that Polish Communists give the impression of being
Poles first and foremost, Communists only next, and Pro-Russians last and
sometimes not at all. Many say that they want Poland to acquire certain but
388 T^C-ESBMFT FOUimm®S£S
by no means all of the features of Soviet economy. A large number of Poles are
attracted to the P. P. R. (Communist Party) because it has the best organizing
brains at its head * * *.
Soviet Communism is totally unacceptable to the Polish people, and the
Polish Communists know it as well as anybody. But there are certain features
of Soviet organization and economy which they — and not only they — consider
valuable in the process of rebuilding Poland * * * (p. 7).
* ■* * The Russians in general are not liked, and the "Russian occupation" of
1944-45 has left some bad memories; discipline among some of the Russian troops,
especially after victory, went to pieces completely. A growing number of Poles,
however, are beginning to realize that it was the Russians, after all, who drove
the Germans out of Poland, and the fact that "they did not stay on" is &lso put
to their credit (p. 14).
"Moscow War Dairy," by Alexander Werth, was recommended by
the Washington Cooperative Bookshop, in "Books on the U.S.S.R.,"
a selected bibliography by Bessie Weissman, p. 30. The Congressional
Record of September 24, 1942 (p. 7688) contained a statement by the
U. S. Attorney General, from which the following is quoted:
The Washington Cooperative Book Shop, under the name, "The Book Shop
Association," was incorporated in the District of Columbia in 1938. * * *
Evidence of Communist penetration or control is reflected in the following:
Among its stock the establishment has offered prominently for sale books and
literature identified with the Communist Party and certain of its affiliates and
front organizations * * * certain of the officers and employees of the book shop,
including its manager and executive secretary, have been in close contact with
local officials of the Communist Party of the District of Columbia.
The Attorney General also cited the organization as subversive and
Communist in his letters to the Loyalty Review Board, in 1947 and
1948. The organization was redesignated by the Attorney General,
April 27, 1953, pursuant to Executive Order No. 10450, and included on
the April 1, 1954, consolidated list of organizations previously desig-
nated pursuant to Executive Order No. 10450. The Special Com-
mittee on Un-American Activities cited the organization as a Com-
munist front in its Report, March 29, 1944 (p. 150).
Alexander Werth was quoted with approval by Joseph Starobin in
the "Daily Worker" of December 21, 1949 (p. 6).
Joseph Clark, in his "Daily Worker" column of January 30, 1950
(p. 6), said:
Alexander Werth writes from Czechoslovakia in The Nation (Jan. 7): "It seems
important to explode another favorite myth of our anti-Communist propagan-
dists—that Czechoslovakia is being "mercilessly exploited" by the Soviet Union.
It is not. The clear purpose of Soviet policy is to make Czechoslovakia economi-
cally an outstanding success."
An article headed "British Writer Refutes Lies about Soviet
'Forced Labor' " appears on pages 3 and 11 of the "Daily Worker"
of February 16, 1949. The following is quoted from the article:
U. S. charges of "forced labor" in the Soviet Union, often exploded as deliberate
lies in the past, are based on a recent book by David J. Dallin, which has been
exposed are (sic) a series of lies and distortions by leading British and American
correspondents in the Soviet Union.
* * * His book, Forced Labor in the Soviet Union, was riddled by the noted
British correspondent Alexander Werth some months ago in the British publica-
tion New Statesmen and Nation. Werth, who was a correspondent in the Soviet
Union for seven years, cited two places named by Dallin as "forced labor camps,"
which he visited and found to be thriving cities.
In his "Daily Worker" column of January 16, 1950, Joseph Clark
quotes from an article by Alexander Werth in the January 2 issue of
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 389
"The Nation." The article praised the Communist regime in
Czechoslovakia.
An article headed "Anti-Soviet Slander Exposed as Forgery"
appears in the "Daily Worker" of February 23, 1949 (p. 6). The
following is quoted from the article:
"There are no limits to the methods of anti-Soviet propaganda, and in some
countries of western Europe it has become the business not only of the great
magnates — such as for example the great organization behind the distribution of
Kravchenko's book— but also of all kinds of scum who in normal times would be
selling copies, pornographic pictures and other profitable rubbish."
This is the verdict given by the well-known British journalist Alexander Werth
in a statement published in Rude Pravo * * *
Werth described * * * a characteristic method of those who trade in
what he calls "that highly profitable commodity— anti-Soviet propaganda and
slander" * * *.
According to the "Daily Worker" of November 2, 1952' (p. 7),
Alexander Werth was a signer of the World Peace Appeal.
The Committee on Un-American Activities, in its report on the
Communist "Peace" Offensive, April 1, 1951 (p. 34), cited the World
Peace Appeal as a petition campaign launched by the Permanent
Committee of the World Peace Congress at its meeting in Stockholm,
March 16-19, 1950; as having "received the enthusiastic approval of
every section of the international Communist hierarchy"; as having
been lauded in the Communist press, putting "every individual Com-
munist on notice that he 'has the duty to rise to this appeal' "; and as
having "received the official endorsement of the Supreme Soviet of
the U. S. S. R., which has been echoed by the governing bodies of
every Communist satellite country, and by all Communist Parties
throughout the world."
Tennessee Williams
Organization and affiliation Source
Sent greetings to Moscow Art Daily Worker, Nov. 1, 1948, p.
Theater. 13.
Author of "Streetcar Named De- Daily Worker, Dec. 8, 1947, p.
sire," piaised in Daily Worker. 13.
See also: Public hearings of this committee regarding Communist
Infiltration of Hollywood Motion-Picture Industrv — Part 2, April
and May 1951, pp. 331, 2413.
Dr. William Caelos Williams
The following information from the public records, files and publica-
tions of this committee concerning Dr. William Carlos Williams should
not be construed as representing results of an investigation by or find-
ings of the committee. It should be noted that the subject individual
is not necessarily a Communist, a Communist sympathizer, or a fellow-
traveler, unless so indicated.
On March 5, 1941 (page 2), the Daily Worker featured in a full-page
spread the names of several hundred persons who defended the Com-
munist Party against alleged persecution. The statement called at-
tention to "a matter of vital significance to the future of our nation.
It is the attitude of our government toward the Communist Party
* * *." The name of Wflliam Carlos Williams of Rutherford, New
Jersey, appeared in the list of persons who signed that statement.
390 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Dr. Williams was one of those who signed an Open Letter of the
National Federation for Constitutional Liberties, addressed to the
President of the United States, urging reconsideration of the order of
Attorney General Francis Biddle for deportation of Harry Bridges.
The Open Letter was published in pamphlet form, September 11/1942,
by the National Federation * * *, under the title "600 Prominent
Americans Ask President to Rescind Biddle Decision"; Dr. Williams
was identified in this source as being from Rutherford, New Jersey.
The Daily Worker of July 19, 1942 (page 4), also reported that William
Carlos Williams had signed an Open Letter on behalf of Mr. Bridges.
The Attorney General has cited the National Federation for
Constitutional Liberties as "part of what Lenin called the solar system
of organizations, ostensibly having no connection with the Com-
munist Party, by which Communists attempt to create sympathizers
and supporters of their program * * *." (Congressional Record,
September 24, 1942, page 7687); the Attorney General also cited the
organization as subversive and Communist (press releases of Decem-
ber 4/1947 and September 21, 1948; included in consolidated list
released April 1, 1954); the Special Committee on Un-American
Activities found that "there can be no reasonable doubt about the
fact that the National Federation * '* * is one of the viciously
subversive organizations of the Communist Party" (reports of March
29, 1944; June 25, 1942; and January 2, 1943). It was cited as
having been formed for the "alleged purpose of defending civil lib-
erties in general but actually intended to protect Communist sub-
version from any penalties under the law" (Committee on Un-
American Activities in Report 1115 of September 2, 1947). Harry
Bridges was a Communist Party member and leader of the San
Francisco general strike of 1934 which was planned by the Communist
Party (see Report of the Special Committee * * * dated March 29,
1944, pages 90-97).
The printed program of the Fifth National Conference of the
American Committee for Protection of Foreign Born which was held
in Atlantic City, N. J., March 29-30, 1941, contained the name of
William Carlos Williams in a list of sponsors of that conference.
The American Committee for Protection of Foreign Born has been
cited as "one of the oldest auxiliaries of the Communist Party in
the United States" (Special Committee on Un-American Activities
in a report dated March 29, 1944; also cited in report of June 25,
1942); the Attorney General cited the organization as subversive
and Communist (press releases of June 1 and September 21, 1948;
included on consolidated list released April 1, 1954).
The American Committee for Democracy and Intellectual Freedom
has been cited as "a Communist front which defended Communist
teachers" (Special Committee * * * in reports of June 25, 1942 and
March 29, 1944); William Carlos Williams was one of those who
signed the organization's petition, as was shown on a mimeographed
sheet attached to the group's letterhead of January 17, 1940; in this
source he was identified as an author.
Dr. Williams signed a statement of the American League for Peace
and Democracy, according to New Masses for March 15, 1938 (page
19); he signed a letter of the American Friends of Spanish Democracy,
addressed to the President of the United States (Daily Worker, Feb-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 391'
ruary 7, 1938, page 4); lie signed an Open Letter for Closer Coopera-
tion with, the Soviet Union which was printed in Soviet Russia Today
for September 1939 (page 28), in which source he was identified as
a writer; he signed the Golden Book of American Friendship With the
Soviet Union, as revealed in Soviet Russia Today for November 1937
(page 79) ; and signed the Call to the Third American Writers Congress,
as reported in Direction for May- June 1939 (page 1).
The American League for Peace and Democracy was established
"in an effort to create public sentiment on behalf of a foreign policy
adapted to the interests of the Soviet Union" (Attorney General,
Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, pages 7683 and 7684);
the organization was also cited by the Attorney General in press re-
leases of June 1 and September 21, 1948; included in consolidated list
released April 1, 1954. The Special Committee * * * cited it as
"the largest of the Communist 'front' movements in the United
States" (reports of January 3, 1939; March 29, 1944; Januarys, 1940;
Januarys, 1941; June 25, 1942; and January 2, 1943).
American Friends of Spanish Democracy was one of the organiza-
tions formed during 1937 and 1938, when the Communist Party was
campaigning for support of the Spanish Loyalist cause (from the Spe-
cial Committee's report of March 29,1944). The Special Committee
reported on June 25, 1942, that the Open Letter for Closer Cooperation
with the Soviet Union was issued by "a group of Communist Party
stooges." The Golden Book of American Friendship with the Soviet
Union was a "Communist enterprise" signed by "hundreds" of "well-
known Communists and fellow-travelers" (Special Committee * * *
in its report of March 29, 1944).
The American Writers Congress was sponsored by the League of
American Writers, cited as subversive and Communist by the At-
torney General (press releases of June 1 and September 21, 1948;
included in consolidated list released April 1, 1954); it was founded
"under Communist auspices" in 1935 and in 1939 it began openly to
follow the Communist Party line as dictated by the foreign policy of
the Soviet Union" (Attorney General, Congressional Record, Septem-
ber 24, 1942, pages 7685 and 7686); and was cited as a Communist-
front organization by the Special Committee (reports of January 3,
1940; June 25, 1942; and March 29, 1944).
The Daily Worker of April 11, 1951 (page 8), reported that Dr.
William Carlos Williams, poet, would speak at a meeting sponsored
by the National Council of the Arts, Sciences and Professions, on
behalf of John Howard Lawson, Dalton Trumbo, and Albert Maltz;
the same publication, in the issue of April 16, 1951 (page 4), announced
that Dr. Williams had been unable to appear at the meeting, because
of illness, but that he had initiated a letter appealing for parole of
the so-called "Hollywood Ten"; he signed a statement on behalf of
the "Hollywood Ten", as reported in the Daily Worker on May 12,
1950 (page 3); he signed a petition to the Supreme Court of the United
States for a Reconsideration of its Refusal to Hear the Appeal of the
Hollywood Ten, as shown in an advertisement inserted in the Wash-
ington Post on May 24, 1950 (page 14), in which source he was
identified as a poet.
Dr. Williams supported the National Council's effort to secure a
rehearing of the case of Communist leaders before the Supreme Court
of the United States, as shown in "We Join Black's Dissent", a
392 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
reprint of an article from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch of June 20, 1951,
by the National Council * * *. The Committee on Un-American
Activities cited the National Council of the Arts, Sciences and Profes-
sions as a Communist-front organization (Review of the Scientific and
Cultural Conference for World Peace, arranged by the National
Council of the Arts, Sciences and Professions, released April 19, 1949).
During the Special Committee's investigation in 1939, they un-
earthed the fact that "Earl Browder, general secretary of $m Com-
munist Party in the United States, had obtained a false American
passport in the course of his conspiratorial activities * * *. Browder
was tried and convicted on charges in connection with this fraudulent
passport. His sentence was a four-year term in Atlanta Federal
Penitentiary. During his incarceration in Atlanta, the Communists
and their sympathizers all over the United States carried on an
intensive campaign in which they pictured Browder as a victim of
capitalist persecution. The principal Communist organization which
conducted this campaign was known as the Citizens Committee to
Free Earl Browder".
A letterhead of the Citizens Committee to * * *, dated April 2, 1942,
named William Carlos Williams as one of the "prominent Americans
who favor Presidential clemency for the release of Earl Browder".
An undated leaflet of the same organization which was an appeal to
President Roosevelt "for justice in the Browder case" named Dr.
Williams, author, Collected Poems, as one of those who made the
appeal.
Under the title of "Letters from Readers", featured in New Masses
for December 1930 (page 22), William Carlos Williams, Rutherford,
New Jersey, contributed the following:
I like the John Reed number * * *. I feel in a false position. How can I
be a Communist, being what I am. Poetry is the thing which has the hardest
hold on me in my daily experiences. But I cannot, without an impossible wrench
of my understanding, turn it into a force directed toward one end, Vote the
Communist Ticket, or work for the world revolution. There are too many
difficulties, unresolved difficulties in my way. I can however see the monumental
blockwit of social injustices surrounding me on every side. But why they arise,
God only knows. But in any case they are there and I would give my life freely
if I could right them. But who the hell wants my life? Nobody as far as I can
see. They don't even want my verse, which is of more importance. I'm for
you. I'll help as I can. I'd like to see you live. And here's to the light, from
wherever it may come.
Mr. Williams contributed to New Masses for November 23, 1937
(page 17), and reviewed "The Spider and the Clock", by S. Funaroff
(International Publishers), in the August 16, 1938, issue of the same
publication (pages 23-25). Under the heading, "Some Additional
Views", which appeared in New Masses for August 17, 1943 (page
22), William Carlos Williams, poet and novelist, expressed his views
as follows :
Replying to your question, Can Communists and non-Communists unite?
No, not in the same nation, that's why we have nations. But if you'll put your
question, Can a Communist nation unite with a non-Communist nation? Cer-
tainly and why not? We aren't afraid of them and they're not afraid of us. In
fact, we seem to like them, individually, and many of us admire their intellectual
make-up. They seem cleaner than the swine we are used to fighting to keep
our nation halfway honest and anti-thug.
It is going to be some laugh when the war is over and we've beat the mirror-
writing we are so practically familiar with under a different name at our own
doorsteps — it's going to be some fun if Russia or the Russian system, now on a
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 39S&
basis of friendship with : us; begins to be a brilliant- *ad overwhelrolog success
from a business standpoint. Nobody ever thought of that. Oh boy! Is it
going to be fun to watch the subtle change that will come over the local fascist.
Man to man, does any one think that a hard boiled American businessman is so
stupid that he won't shift his political complexion if there's money in itl You've
got to ask me a harder one than that.
(Note: Words italicized above were shown in italics in original
source.)
Edmund Wilson
Organization and affiliation Source
Communist Party (1) and (2). Daily Worker, Sept. 14, 1932, p.
Signed Call for Support of the 1, c. 2.
Communist Party National
Election and its candidates.
Member, League of Profes- Pamphlet, "Culture and the Cri-
sional Groups for Foster sis," p. 32.
and Ford, C. P. candidates
for President and Vice Pres-
ident of the U. S., respec-
tively.
The Liberator (1). Contributor; The Liberator, April 1920, p. 38;
name shown in all of these June 1920, p. 27; May 1921, p.
sources as Edmund Wilson, Jr. 25; September 1921, p. 13;
February 1922, p. 12.
New Masses (1) and (2). Con- New Masses, October 1927, p. 3.
tributing Editor; name shown
as MMtnond Wilson, Jr.
Contributor- New Masses, April 1932, p. 7;
and September 1932, p. 9.
See also: Hearings of Special Committee on Un-American Activities,
pages 380, 509, 557, 559, 566, and 703.
Obganizations
American Student Union
The American Student Union was cited as a Communist-front
organization by the Special Committee on Un-American Activities
in Reports dated January 3, 1939; January 3, 1940; June 25, 1942;
and March 29, 1944.
As a section of the World Student Association for Peace, Freedom and Culture,
the American Student Union is the result of a united front gathering of young
Socialists and Communists. It was formerly known as the Student League for
Industrial Democracy and the National Student League. The latter was the
American section of the Proletarian Youth League of Moscow. Out of the coali-
tion convention, which was held at Columbus, Ohio, in 1937, came the American
Student Union. The united front was heralded in Moscow as "one of its (Com
munism's) greatest triumphs."
The American Student Union claims to have led as many as 500,000 students
out in annual April 22 student strikes in the United States * * * It announced
that it set up the "front" movement, the United Student Peace Committee in
1938, which has brought into its front 17 national youth organizations. * * *
The Young Communist League takes credit for the creation of the American
Student Union, since it was its organization, the National Student League,
which issued the call and organized the convention which was held in Columbus.
In an advertisement which appeared in a Communist journal, New Masses,
the Union offered free trips to Russia. In 1938 it issued a call for a "closed shop
56647— 54 26
394 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
on the campus," urging a united front between its local college groups and certain
teachers and professional groups * * * It claims credit for perfecting a united
front of Communist and Socialist students in Europe (Report of the Special
Committee * * * dated January 3, 1939, page 80).
In the Report on American Youth for Democracy, issued by the
Committee on Un-American Activities April 17, 1947, the American
Student Union was cited as a Communist-dominated organization
(page 16).
Mr. Walter S. Steele, in his testimony in public hearings before the
Special Committee on Un-American Activities, August 17, 1938, gave
information concerning the American Student Union (pages 582 and
584), from which the following is quoted:
The membership of the American Student Union is approximately 30,000. It
is a section of the World Student Union, now the World Student Association for
Peace, Freedom and Culture. Its organ is the Student Advocate.
The American Section (World Student Association for Peace, Freedom and
Culture) was organized at a joint meeting of the (Communist) National Student
League and the (Socialist) Student League for Industrial Democracy, held in the
Young Women's Christian Association at Columbus, Ohio, December 28-29, 1938.
Their report of this congress stated that nearly 500 delegates from 113 schools
and colleges in the United States were present. The Communist unit had in-
veigled the Socialist youth into participating in the congress, usurped the leader-
ship of the organization, and have used it as an adjunct to the Young Communist
movement all during its short life * * *
In a report to Moscow, the Communists refer to the American Student Union
as one of its greatest triumphs in the United States * * * The April 24, 1938
issue of the Sunday Worker published an article which stated that the Young
Communist League created the American Student Union and is the main inspira-
tion behind the student peace activities that rocked America on April 27, 1937
* * *
On February 4, 1938 (Daily Worker, page 6), the American Student Union
thanked the official organ for the fine publicity and support it gave the union's
Vassar convention * * *
The following is from the testimony of "William Nowell, public
hearings before the Special Committee on Un-American Activities
November 30, 1P39 (pages 6994 6595) :
I am discussing now the general policy, and my knowledge of the fact that the
American Students Union was a part of the youth and is a part of the youth
program of the Communist Party, that is, the Young Communist League, which
received instructions to strive to organize such a body. They succeeded. As
I say, the policy was based upon utilizing the discontent of students, based
upon the belief that along with depressed conditions and the fact that students
who are reasonably enlightened, that is, they have some theoretical and political
understandings, since they are students, and are studying, could be and can be
easily politicalized. Therefore, the program, that is, the approach to the organ-
ization of these students was based upon these facts. That is, the league spon-
sored it, because of the lack of opportunity, which is true to a certain extent, and
the fact that they are in the league tells that they are or would be, and that they
are easily politicalized * * *
American Youth Congress
The American Youth Congress was cited as subversive and Com-
munist by former Attorney General Tom Clark in letters to the
Loyalty Review Board, released to the press December 4, 1947, and
September 21, 1948.
"It originated in 1934 and * * * has been controlled by Commu-
nists and manipulated by them to influence the thought of American
youth," according to former Attorney General Francis Biddle
(Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, p. 7685; also cited in re
Harry Bridges, May 28, 1942, p. 10).
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 395
The Special Committee on Un-American Activities, in its report
dated June 25, 1942, described the American Youth Congress as
follows:
The American Youth Congress was prominently identified with the White
House picket line which, under the immediate auspices of the American Peace
Mobilization, opposed every measure of national defense up until the very day
that Hitler attacked Russia. From its very inception the American Youth Con-
gress has been one of the principal fronts of the Communist Party (p. 16).
The Special Committee on Un-American Activities cited the
American Youth Congress as "the Communist front which has now
been largely absorbed by American Youth for Democracy" in its
Report No. 1311, dated March 29, 1944, p. 102.
The following is taken from the testimony of Walter S. Steele
during public hearings before the Committee on Un-American Ac-
tivities, July 21, 1947:
The genealogy of American Youth for Democracy extends back through
several Red ancestors to the Young Workers League, which was formed in 1922
and was one of the beneficiaries of the American Fund for Public Service, more
commonly known as the Garland (Red) Fund. The first national convention of
the organization was held May 13-15, 1922. Prior to that time numerous local
Communist organizations had been using the name Young Workers' League, and
the convention adopted the title. The third national convention of the Red
Youth was held in October 1925, when a revised constitution was adopted and
the name slightly changed to Young Workers' (Communist) League. Commu-
nist youngsters adopted the name Communist Youth League for a brief period
in 1929.
The use of the name Young Communist League began with the
August 1, 1939 edition of the Young Worker, its official organ at the
time. That name continued until the invention of the latest booby-
trap, the American Youth for Democracy. At the time of the trans-
formation, Communists said:
"All Communists will naturally hope that thousands of youth who
will join the new organization will later join the Communist Party."
stf sic Ht sk sic sk ' «lc
, In the May 1922 issue of Young Worker, then the official organ of
the Young Communist League, the following statement appeared:
We hear the tramp of the young as they come in ever larger masses to the banner
of the revolutionists. Soon they will conquer. Meanwhile as we view the intoler-
able situation forced upon us by the master class, let this be our slogan till that
happy May Day comes when we have won for ourselves a workers' republic:
"We have loved enough; now let us hate" (pp. 71 and 72).
In Report No. 1311 of the Special Committee on Un-American
Activities, dated March 29, 1944, it was stated that "the American
Youth Congress was outstandingly active in the American Peace
Mobilization against conscription and the national defense program."
An article entitled "Communist Youth Ask for Unity" appeared in
the Daily Worker of July 19, 1935, p. 1, from which the following is
quoted:
In the past period of time, we have learned to work together and to act together
despite the fundamental differences in program and policy which still separates
our two organizations. Working relationships have now existed between the
Young Peoples Socialist League and the Young Communist League for over a
year. Joint activity for realizing the program of the American Youth Congress
resulted in the inspiring student strike of April 12th, participated in unitedly by
Socialist and Communist students.
396 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The following statement was made by Earl Browder (then General
Secretary of the Communist Party) in 'his book "Communism in the
United States":
The greatest progress has been made among the youth. Without any formal
negotiations the Young People's Socialist League and the Young Communist
League already find themselves standing upon an agreed platform. This achieve-
ment came out of the struggle against the fascist Central Bureau which called
the American Youth Congress in which the anti-fascist united front won a com-
plete victory in winning over almost the entire body of delegates to a program
entirely opposed to the one proposed by the leaders, with government support,
adopting instead a program of struggle against war and fascism, and for the
immediate needs of the youth, including unemployment insurance, etc. This
victory, the basis of which had already been laid by the Youth Section of the
American League Against War and Fascism which was already a growing united
front from below, reaching all strata of youth, now comprises 1,700,000, ranging
from Y. M. C. A.'Sj Y. W. C. A.'s, church youth organizations, trade union youth
sections, settlement houses, etc., clear down to the Y. P. S. L. and Y. C. L. In
this, the political center of gravity is the work of our Y. C. L. Practically all the
basic proposals and policy came from us or from those circles influenced by us
through the unanimous support of this broad youth movement" (pp. 265-266).
Brookwood Labor College
The subject organization has not been cited as subversive by this
committee or by the United States Attorney General. The Special
Committee on Un-American Activities, in its report of March 29, 1944
(House Report No. 1311), referred to the organization as a "commu-
nistic"school, and named it among "Communist enterprises" which
had received financial assistance from the American Fund for Public
Service, stating that it had received "at least $115,000" (pp. 34 and
76). The American Fund for Public Service (Garland Fund) was
cited in the same report as being "a major source for the financing
of Communist Party enterprises" (pp. 75 and 76).
Brookwood's Fifteenth Anniversary Review contained an article
by Spencer Miller, Jr., from which the following is quoted:
The Workers Education Bureau of America and Brookwood celebrate in 1936
the fifteenth anniversary of their establishment. During the period of a decade
and a half of their respective service to the labor movement, there have been not
a few elements in common in their history. Many of the same persons who were
present at the conference called at the Brookwood School in Katonah, New York,
to plan for the establishment of a resident labor college on March 30 and April 1,
1921, were also present the following days, April 2 and 3, at the New School for
Social Research * * * when the plans were finally adopted for the creation of a
national clearing-house on workers' education. * * *
For the first eight years of the existence of Brookwood it was an affiliated and
valued member of the Workers Education Bureau. When in 1929 this link of
affiliation was discontinued because of the difficulties between Brookwood and
the American Federation of Labor, the officers of the Bureau continued unofficially
and informally to cooperate with Brookwood. * * *
* * * Brookwood was to be a training center to train workers to work in the
workers' movement, (p. 31)
The following is quoted from the preface to "Workers' Education
at the Cross Roads — Sixth Annual Conference of Teachers in Workers'
Education at Brookwood, February 22-24, 1929 (Edited by a Com-
mittee of Local 189, American Federation of Teachers)," p. 3:
* * * In August of that year (1928) the Executive Committee of the A. F. of L,
launched an attack upon Brookwood Labor College on the ground that it was
"un-American, atheistic, and Red" and that it was too critical of A. F. of L. unions.
Friends of workers' education who saw in this an attack upon the whole move-
ment rallied to the defense of Brookwood and for months the controversy waxed
hot. At the New Orleans convention of the American Federation of Labor in
TAX-EXEMPT TOUNDATTOJSTS 397
October, -1928 f attempts to obtain & helping fosthe aebooL were throttled, and the
convention confirmed the recommendation of the Executive Council that unions
be advised to withhold moral and financial support from the school,
Brookwood was disaffiliated from the Workers Education Bureau by the action
of the W. E. B. executive committee on January 18, 1929, on the ground that the
Bureau had no other alternative in view of the A. F. of L. action, although it was
definitely stated that the W. E. B. had no charges against Brookwood and had
made no investigation. * * *
"Ten Years of Workers' Education, a survey of the 8th Annual
Conference of Teachers in Workers' Education at Brookwood,
February 21-23, 1931" contained a report by Helen G. Norton, of
Brookwood, from which the following is quoted (p. 75) :
Some graduates have been blacklisted by employers because of strike or organ-
izational activity and have gone into other and unorganized industries.
Some have turned to the Communist or Socialist party. * * * I cannot give
you figures on how many of our students were Communists when they came.
Some of them are not now party members by their own or the party's wish. The
same is true of those who joined the party after they left school. One of them
writes, "I am still a left winger with some moderation. I was expelled from the
party for being a Trotskyite and I left the latter group for being something else."
A number who were in the party's opposition before the present group came into
power have been expelled for still being oppositionists. It may be that radicals
get into the habit of being in the minority and can't get over it when the minority
by chance becomes the majority. The fact that the number of graduates engaging
in labor political activity has. risen from 13 in the 1923-26 group to 30 in the
1927-30 may be considered a result of the stagnation of the trade union move-
ment. And in their rebellion against the ineffectualness of "business unionism"
most of them seized upon the most radical program they could find as is evidenced
by the fact that out of 43 persons engaged in labor political activity, 31 are Com-
munists of one brand or another. Thirty graduates are members of the Confer-
ence for Progressive Labor Action, started two years ago. Be it said to Brook-
wood's credit that it has not manufactured any Republicans or Democrats. * * *
Further references to Brookwood Labor College may be found in
hearings of the Special Committee to Investigate Un-American Prop-
aganda, as follows: Volume 1, pp. 563, 564, 566, 973; Volume 3, p. 2106.
Fellowship op Reconciliation
Fellowship of Reconciliation has never been officially cited as a
Communist-front organization nor in any other manner by this Com-
mittee or the Attorney General of the United States.
In public hearings before the Special Committee on Un-American
Activities, November 7, 1938, the Fellowship of Reconciliation was
described by Mr. J. B. Matthews, its former executive secretary, as
a "radical peace organization." (Public Hearings, Volume 3, p.
2179.)
According to a pamphlet of the organization, the Fellowship of
Reconciliation began in England soon after the outbreak of the First
World War "as a movement of Christian protest against war and of
faith in a better way than violence for the solution of all conflict."
The pamphlet further states that the organization was composed of
individual members from more than twenty countries who subscribed
to the following Statement of Purpose:
They refuse to participate in any way, or to sanction military preparation; they
work to abolish war and to foster good will among nations, races and classes;
They strive to build a social order which will suffer no individual or group to
be exploited for the profit or pleasure of another * * *
The Fellowship of Reconciliation has published a magazine, "Fel-
lowship," and has utilized the magazine, "The World Tomorrow," to
398 TAX-EXEMPT FOTTNTDATIONS
reach religious and psace organizations. Ifrhas -ptfbHsb«d~ ieafl^e^i,
pamphlets, guides for study groups, newsletters, and interracial news-
letters.
"Reconciliation Trips" which have piloted 50,000 persons on visits
of understanding to all sorts of groups in New York City were inspired
by the Fellowship of Reconciliation in 1921 "when in an era of 'red-
baiting' propaganda the suggestion was made to a group of clergymen
that it might be a good plan to meet and talk with leaders of radical
groups in their own headquarters." Some of its officers and members
have
conducted reconciliation trips to foreign countries * * * Fellowship members
were among the first to visit Soviet Russia and to urge the resumption of diplo-
matic relations between Russia and the United States. (From John Nevin
Sayre's "The Story of the Fellowship of Reconciliation, 1915-1935.")
Through its official representatives, the Fellowship of Reconciliation
has participated in Communist-inspired conference against war, when
the line of the Communist Party was anti-war. As executive secretary
of the Fellowship of Reconciliation, Joseph B. Matthews attended the
Communist-controlled Amsterdam World Congress Against War in
1932. (Public Hearings, Volume 3, p. 2175.) The Fellowship also
participated in the Unite'd States Congress Against War held in
August, 1933, which was the predecessor of the American League
Against War and Fascism and the American League for Peace and
Democracy.
The United States Congress Against War was cited as a Com-
munist-front organization by the Special Committee on Un-American
Activities in Reports dated January 3, 1940, June 25, 1942, and
March 29, 1944. Attorney General Francis Biddle found that the
"American League Against War and Fascism was formally organized
at the First United States Congress Against War and Fascism held
in New York City, September 29-October 1, 1933" (Congressional
Record, September 24, 1942, p. 7683).
The American League Against War and Fascism was "established
in the United States in an effort to create public sentiment on behalf
of a foreign policy adapted to the interests of the Soviet Union."
Established in the United States in 1937 as successor to the American
League Against War and Fascism, "the American League for Peace
and Democracy * * * was designed to conceal Communist control,
in accordance with the new tactics of the Communist International"
(Attorney General Francis Biddle, Congressional Record, September
24, 1942, p. 7683 and 7684).
Both the American League Against War and Fascism and its suc-
cessor, the American League for Peace and Democracy, were cited
as subversive and Communist by Attorney General Tom Clark.
(See: Press Releases of the U. S. Civil Service Commission, December
4, 1947 and June 1, 1948 and September 21, 1948.)
Both the American League Against War and Fascism and the
American League for Peace and Democracy were cited as Communist-
front organizations in Reports of the Special Committee on Un-
American Activities dated Januarv 3, 1939; January 3, 1940; June 25,
1942; and March 29, 1944. The American League for Peace and
Democracy was also cited in Reports of January 3, 1941 and January
2,1943.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 399
A search of Committee files ^hwfevealed >mo recent literature ofHhe
organization in which its present officers might be listed ; however,
the "Directory of Agencies in Intergroup Relations" for 1948-1949,
published by the American Council on Race Relations, Chicago,
Illinois, gives the address of Fellowship of Reconciliation, Racial-
Industrial Department, as 2929 Broadway, New York 25, New York,
and names Bayard Rustin and George M. Houser as co-secretaries
(page 21). No information concerning Bayard Rustin or George M.
Houser is found in the public records, files and publications of the
Committee.
Highlander Folk School
The Highlander Folk School has never been cited as subversive by
the Committee on Un-American Activities and/or the Attorney Gen-
eral of the United States.
In an article which appeared in the New York Times on December
16, 1946, p. 29, and which was datelined Monteagle, Tennessee,
December 15, it was reported that—
the Highlander Folk School here will start next year a three-year inter-racial rural
education program throughout the South to promote better understanding be-
tween people of rural and urban areas and to combat racial and religious prejudice,
it was announced today by Myles Horton, director of the school * * *. The
school, since its inception in 1932, has trained more than 7,000 Southerners in
residence sessions and more than 12,000 others in field extension courses. Among
those who have endorsed the work of the school in the past were listed Mrs.
Eleanor Eoosevelt, Dr. Frank Graham, president of the University of North
Carolina, and Senator Elbert Thomas of Utah.
A leaflet of the school, advertising the 1939 Winter Term, claims
that the "purpose of Highlander Folk School is to promote the pro-
gressive labor movement in the South." Under the courses announced
in the same leaflet is one in Union Problems which "deals with definite
problems of the students as labor unionists. Methods of organizing,
strike tactics, Labor Board procedure, education in unions, race re-
lations are some of the things discussed * * *."
On July 21, 1947, Mr. Walter S. Steele testified before the Committee
on Un-American Activities that —
one of the oldest of the Red mediums of propaganda is the Communist school
for the training and orientating of new recruits * * *.
The Highlander Folk School in Monteagle, Tennessee, unquestionably keeps
pretty close to the party line. Its directors, James Dombrowski and Myles Horton,
are found in the company of Red-fronters. It has been a recipient of funds from
the Robert Marshall Foundation * * *
Mr. Steele continued:
Members of the executive council of the Highlander Folk School are William H.
Crawford of the CIO Steelworkers' Union, district director; Edward F. Gallaghan,
vice president of the Hosiery Workers' Union; Paul R. Christopher, CIO regional
director, Tennessee; James Dombrowski, listed as secretary of the Southern Con-
ference for Human Welfare; Charles Gillman, CIO regional director, Georgia;
Carey Haigler, CIO regional director, Alabama; Lucy Randolph Mason, CIO
public relations director; George Mitchell, regional director, CIO- P AC; Hollis
Reid, legislative board of locomotive firemen; Thomas Starling, director, Region
8, Auto Workers' Union ( CIO) ; Aubrey Williams, organizing director of Regional
Farmers' Union and publisher of Southern Farmer (Montgomery, Alabama),
a member of the board of directors of the Progressive Citizens Association.
(From Mr. Steele's testimony before the Committee on Un-American Activities,
July 21, 1947, pages 56 and 57.)
400 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Public records, files, and publications of the Committee contain the
following information concerning James Dombrowski and Myles
Horton, named by Mr. Steele as directors of the Highlander Folk
School:
James Dombrowski
A list of the 1947-1948 officers of the Southern Conference for
Human Welfare named James A. Dombrowski as an administrator
of that organization. (Reprinted in Committee's Report on the South-
ern Conference * * *, June 12, 1947.) The same report also contains
a chapter on Mr. Dombrowski, quoted in part as follows:
At the April 1942 sessions of the Southern Conference for Human Welfare,
James Dombrowski was elected executive secretary. He was the signer of a
statement defending the Communist Party in March 1941 and a speaker for the
National Conference for Constitutional Liberties in 1940. The latter organiza-
tion has been cited as subversive by Attorney General Biddle.
Dombrowski, together with Myles Horton, a member of the present board of
representatives of the conference, helped launch a joint Socialist-Communist
united-front movement in the South in 1 935. As Socialist Party leaders in Ten-
nessee, the two men endorsed a united-front plan of action which included cam-
paigns against the AAA and for a "rank and file" movement in the American
Federation of Labor (Chattanooga Times of January 28, 1 935, p. 5) . They have
both been charged with operating as stooges for the Communist Party within
Socialist circles.
A clue to Dombrowski's political views is given in his book, "The Early Days
of Christian Socialism in America" (1936). Dombrowski asserts that the Rev.
George D. Herron, whom he considers "by far the most able man" in the early
days of the Christian Socialist movement, pointed out in the last decade of the
nineteenth century:
"* * * that class lines were becoming more sharply denned that the logic of
the inherent contradictions within capitalism was leading inevitably to more and
more concentration of wealth, to the enrichment of the few at the expense of the
masses" (p. 30).
Dombrowski goes on to defend Herron's views on violence. Herron, he says:
«'* * * did not think that violence was inimical to a religious approach to
social change. Peace at the expense of justice was not a religious solution to
social problems. And resorting to his social interpretation of the cross, according
to which all moral progress is made at the expense of suffering and sacrifice, he
looked upon a revolution by violence, provided it promised a more just society,
as a possible technique for social change worthy of the sanction of religion" (p. 193).
"In his acceptance of the fact of the class struggle went the implicit recognition
of the necessity for coercion" (p. 192).
The Southern Conference for Human Welfare was cited as a Com-
munist-front organization which received money from the Robert
Marshall Foundation, one of the principal sources of funds by which
many Communist fronts operate. (From a report of the Special
Committee on Un-American Activities dated March 29, 1944.) The
organization "seeks to attract southern liberals on the basis of its
seeming interest in the problems of the South" although its "professed
interest in southern welfare is simply an expedient for larger aims
serving the Soviet Union and its subservient Communist Party in the
United States" (Report 592 of the Committee on Un-American
Activities dated June 12, 1947).
The following is quoted from the testimony of Paul Crouch before
this Committee during public hearings, May 6, 1949 (pages 190 and
lyoj:
Mr. Crouch. * ■ * * Prior to the Southern Conference, there was a small
committee, with headquarters in Birmingham, which included as its leading
members Joseph S. Gelders, Communist Party leader in Birmingham * . * *
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 401
Mr. Mandel. Was James A. Dombrowski in that group?
Mr. Crouch. He came into it later.
% % $ # $ $ $
Mr. Mandel. Did you know James Dombrowski as a member of the Com-
munist Party?
Mr. Crouch. Not as a member of the Communist Party. I do not know
whether he is or is not a member of the Communist Party. He professes to be
a left Socialist. I have met officially with him on a number of occasions as head
of the Communist District Bureau of Tennessee. He and Myles Horton were
present at the conference as Socialists and as representatives of the Highlander
Folk School at Monteagle, Tenn.
At this conference Mr. Dombrowski gave me the impression of being completely
pro-Communist and anxious to collaborate with the Communist Party and follow
its leadership, without taking the risk.pf actual Party membership.
I would like to mention in this connection that the Highlander Folk School at
Monteagle, Tenn., was a school organized by Myles Horton and Don West, and
which Mr. Dombrowski shortly thereafter joined. Mr. Horton likewise professed
to be a left Socialist, with Communist sympathies, and I asked him about joining
the Communist Party. He did not give a final answer, but had not joined at
the time I left Tennessee in early 1.941. His wife, Zylphia, seemed even more
pro-Communist than her husband, and I heard reports in party circles, which I
am unable to verify, that she had subsequently joined the party.
Mr. Mandel. Does that finish your comments on the Southern Conference?
Mr. Crouch. Yes, except I would like to add that my most recent contact
with the Southern Conference has been at Birmingham, Ala., where I have at-
tended a number of meetings during the past 18 months, where I have heard Mr.
Dombrowski and Clark Howell Foreman speak; and I personally know that the
leading officers of the Southern Conference, Theresa Kantor— —
Mr. Mandel. Of what city?
Mr. Crouch. Miami Beach; and Leo Scheiner, chairman of the Southern Con-
ference in the Miami area, are active members of the Communist Party.
A letterhead of the American Committee for Protection of Foreign
Born, dated December 11—12, 1948, contains the name of James A.
Dombrowski in a list of sponsors of the organization, "one of the
oldest auxiliaries of the Communist Party in the United States"
(from a report of the Special Committee dated March 29, 1944; also
cited in their report of June 25, 1942); the United States Attorney
General cited the organization as subversive and Communist (letters
to the Loyalty Review Board, released June 1, 1948, and September
21, 1948; redesignated April 27, 1953).
The name of Dr. James Dombrowski, identified with the Southern
Conference for Human Walfare, appears on a letterhead of the
People's Institute of Applied Religion, Inc., dated January 1, 1948,
as a member of the International Board, a member of the Southern
Conference, and a sponsor of that group. The People's Institute was
cited as subversive and Communist by the Attorney General (press
releases of June 1 and September 2 1 , 1948; redesignated April 27, 1953).
James A. Dombrowski was a member of the Advisory Board of the
Southern Negro Youth Congress, as shown on letterheads of that
organization dated June 12, 1947, and August 11, 1947; he spoke at
a meeting of the group, as shown in the following sources which
identify him as Director of the Southern Conference Educational
Fund: Daily People's World of April 25, 1948 (p. 11); Daily Worker
of June 7, 1948 (p. 4); June 17, 1948 (p. 7); and June 27, 1948 (p. 2).
The Southern Negro Youth Congress is "surreptitiously controlled"
by the Young Communist League, as disclosed in a report of the Com-
mittee on Un-American Activities (which was released April 17, 1947) ;
it was cited as subversive and Communist by the United States Attor-
ney General (letter to Loyalty Review Board, released December 4,
402 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
1947; redesignated April 27, 1953). The Special Committee on Un-
American Activities cited the organization in its report of January
3, 1940.
On March 5, 1941, p. 2, the Communist Daily Worker printed a
full-page spread of the names of several hundred persons who defended
the Communist Party against alleged persecution. The statement
addressed to the President and Congress of the United States, called
"attention (to) a matter of vital significance to the future of our
nation. It is the attitude of our government toward the Communist
Party * * *" The name of James Dombrowski, Monteagle, Tennes-
see, was signed to the statement.
Identifying himself with the Socialist Party, Tennessee, James
Dombrowski was one of those who signed a letter (printed in the
Chattanooga Times, Chattanooga, Tennessee, January 28, 1935, p. 5
"calling upon state executive committees of all southern States to
hold meetings to effect united front between socialists, communists
and other working class groups and suggesting revolutionary
campaign."
Fortnightly magazine for August 15, 1937, p. 3, disclosed that James
Dombrowski, Secretary, Highlander Folk School, had endorsed the
reorganization plan for Commonwealth College (publishers of Fort-
nightly). The United States Attorney General has cited Common-
wealth College (Mena, Ark.) as Communist (letter to Loyalty Eeview
Board, released April 27, 1949; redesignated April 27, 1953). The
Special Committee on Un-American Activities called it a "Communist
enterprise" (Report, March 29, 1944, pp. 76 and 167).
Mr. Dombrowski spoke at the Conference on Constitutional Liber-
ties in America which was held in June 1940, as shown on the program
(p. 2), and in New Masses of June 18, 1940 (p. 22); he signed the
January 1943 Message of the National Federation for Constitutional
Liberties, addressed to the House of Representatives (leaflet attached
to an undated letterhead of the National Federation) .
The National Federation for Constitutional Liberties has been cited
as subversive and Communist by the Attorney General (press releases
of December 4, 1947, and September 21, 1948); he redesignated the
organization April 27, 1953. The Attorney General called it "part of
what Lenin called the solar system of organizations, ostensibly having
no connection with the Communist Party, by which Communists
attempt to create sympathizers and supporters of their program
* * *" (Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, p. 7687). The
Special Committee on Un-American Activities called it "one of the
viciously subversive organizations of the Communist Party" (Report
March 29, 1944, p. 50; also cited in Reports, June 25, 1942, p. 20; and
January 2, 1943, pp. 9 and 12). This Committee cited the organiza-
tion in Report No. 1115, September 2, 1947, p. 3.
The Daily Worker of February 1, 1951, p. 2, named Dr. James A.
Dombrowski of New Orleans as one of the sponsors of the American
Peace Crusade; the "Call for Peace and Freedom" named him as one
of the sponsors of the Crusade's American People's Congress and
Exposition for Peace which was held in Chicago, June 29-July 1, 1951;
he was also identified in this source as being from New Orleans.
The American Peace Crusade has been cited as an organization
which the Communists established as "a new instrument for their
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 403
'peace' offensive in the United States" and which was heralded by the
Daily Worker with the usual bold headlines reserved for projects in
line with the Communist objectives (Report on the Communist
"Peace" Offensive, released by the Committee on Un-American
Activities April 1, 1951).
In the same report on the "Peace" Offensive, the Committee
disclosed that the World Peace Appeal was a petition campaign
launched by the Permanent Committee of the World Peace Congress
at the meeting in Stockholm, March 16-19, 1950; it "received the
enthusiastic approval of every section of the international Communist
hierarchy." Dr. James A. Dombrowski of New Orleans endorsed the
World Peace Appeal, as shown on an undated leaflet entitled,
"Prominent Americans Call for * * *" .
Myles Horton
The printed program of the Southern Conference for Human Wel-
fare, November 20-23, 1938, reveals the name of Myles Horton as a
speaker at that conference; it also identified him as a member of the
Committee on Resolutions and a member of the Southern Council of
the organization. He also spoke at a conference of the group which
was held April 14-16, 1940, as was shown on the official program.
In both sources Mr. Horton was identified as Director of the High-
lander Folk School, Monteagle, Tennessee. In 1947-1948, Myles
Horton was a member of the Board of Representatives of the Southern
Conference * * *, according to the organization's publication, "The
Southern Patriot", for December 1946, p. 8.
In public hearings before the Special Committee on Un-American
Activities, August 13, 1938, Mr. John P. Frey, President of the Metal
Trades Department of the American Federation of Labor, made the
following reference to Myles Horton, in a report which he presented
in connection with his testimony:
* * * Elizabeth Hawes, Alton Lawrence, Miles Horton: These three people
have been in the past, and probably now are, paid organizers for the Textile
Workers Organization Committee. They have been active in radical work in
the South and a few years ago attended a secret convention in North Carolina,
at which time plans were made for spreading the revolutionary theories throughout
the South.
In connection with this we might mention that the Highlander Folk School,
Monteagle, Tennessee, was mixed up in this secret convention in which these
three CIO organizers took a very prominent part. (Public Hearings, Special
Committee on Un-American Activities, volume 1, page 126.)
The Chattanooga Times (Chattanooga, Tennessee), of January 28,
1935, p. 5, reported that Myles Horton was one of those who, "with
other Socialists", signed a letter "calling upon state executive com-
mittees of all Southern states to hold meetings to effect a united
front between socialists, communists and other working class groups,
and suggesting a revolutionary campaign." Myles Horton signed
the statement and identified himself with "the executive committee
of the Socialist party."
Also note reference to Mr. Horton in the testimony of Paul Crouch,
under "Dombrowski".
404 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Independent Communist Labor League op America
The following is quoted from a publication of this committee,
"Organized Communism in the United States," released August 19,
1953 (p. 143):
Factional fights in the Communist Party of Russia and in the Communist
International carried over into the Communist Party in America. The expulsion
of Trotsky by the Russian Communist Party was followed by the wholesale expul-
sion of the followers of Trotsky from the American Party. The factional fight
between Stalin and Bukharin also affected the Communist Party in the United
States.
Jay Lovestone, who was suspected of sympathy with Bukharin, was ordered
to Moscow for work in the Comintern.
On May 12, 1929, the Comintern reported an "Address" it had decided to send
to the American Communist Party. Lovestone and others were asked to give
their endorsement to this "Address," which was nothing more nor less than a
condemnation of the Lovestone group. When Lovestone refused, he was removed
from all positions in the American Communist Party and the Communist Inter-
national and was ordered to remain in Moscow. Several weeks later, Lovestone,
without the knowledge or permission of the Comintern, left Moscow and returned
to the United States. For this breach of discipline, he was expelled by the Com-
munist Party of the United States.
Lovestone,' with some of his followers, formed the Communist Party U. S. A.
(majority group) ; later changed to the Communist Party U. S. A. (opposition) ;
still later changed to the Independent Communist Labor League of America, and
finally to the Independent Labor League of America. In January 1941, the
Independent Labor League of America, through its general secretary, Jay Love-
stone, issued a declaration of dissolution and expressed the belief that radicalism
in the United States was "in a hopeless blind alley from which there is no escape
along the old lines."
National Farmers Union
The National Farmers Union has never been cited by the Attorney
General of the United States nor has it ever been investigated or cited
as a Communist or a Communist-front organization by the Committee
on Un-American Activities.
The Guide to Public Affairs Organizations, published by the Ameri-
can Council on Public Affairs in 1946, lists the National Farmers
Union as being located at 3501 East 46th Avenue, Denver, Colorado;
James Patton, President. The publication further states that the
organization maintains an office at 1371 E Street, N. W., Washington,
D.C.
"The Worker" of November 14, 1943 (page 6) reported in an article
datelined Utica, N. Y., that the Farmers Union of New York in its
second wartime convention voted to affiliate with the National
Farmers Union and to join in the creation of the new Northeastern
Division of the National Farmers Union. The same article named
Archie Wright as President of the New York organization. "The
Worker" is the Sunday edition of the Communist publication, "The
Daily Worker."
The following quotations from "The Communist" of October 1937,
an official publication of the Communist Party, concern the Com-
munist Party's hopes to infiltrate the National Farmers Union:
Every district of the Party must work to have this program become the property
of the National Farmers Union, with special emphasis on making it the rallying
point to isolate the Kennedy-Coughlin forces in the Farmers' Union November
Central Committee Plenum * * * (page 953).
In our mass work our main concentration must be to build the National Farmers
Union, to develop local, state and national programs around which we can rally
and crystallize a firm progressive leadership (page 948).
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 405
James G. Patton, who signed as President, National Farmers Union,
wrote a letter to the Honorable Martin Dies, dated November 12, 1942,
concerning statements made on the Floor of the House of Representa-
tives by Mr. Dies. The letter was written on a letterhead of the
Farmers Educational and Cooperative Union of America, Office of the
President, which showed the address of the organization as 3501 East
46th Ave., Denver, Colorado.
The Honorable Martin Dies in his speech stated that the Farmers
Educational and Cooperative Union of America received contributions
from the Robert Marshall Foundation in the sum of $22,500.00. Mr.
Dies also stated that the following leaders of the Farmers' Educational
and Cooperative Union of America were national leaders of the Ameri-
can Peace Mobilization: Gerald Harris, Alabama Farmers Union;
* * * Clinton Clark, Louisiana Farmers Union; * * * (See: Con-
gressional Record, September 24, 1942, page 7690.)
The Robert Marshall Foundation "has been one of the principal
sources for the money with which to finance the Communist Party's
fronts generally in recent years" (Special Committee on Un-American
Activities, Report 1311 dated March 29, 1944).
The American Peace Mobilization was cited as a Communist-front
organization by the Special Committee on Un-American Activities in
Report 1311 of March 29, 1944 (page 5). The Attorney General of
the United States cited the American Peace Mobilization as a Com-
munist-front and as subversive and Communist (Congressional Record,
September 24, 1942, page 7684; letters to the Loyalty Review Board,
released to the press December 4, 1947 and September 21, 1948, respec-
tively; also included in consolidated list released April 1, 1954).
The "Daily Worker" of August 2, 1938 (page 3) reported that the
Farmers Educational and Cooperative Union of America participated
in the World Youth Congress, "a Communist conference held in the
summer of 1938 at Vassar College" (Special Committee * * * in
Report of March 29, 1944).
References to the National Farmers Union are found in the Com-
mittee's Hearings Regarding Communist Activities Among Farm
Groups, held February 28 and March 9, 1951, a copy of which is en-
closed (See: pages 1894-1896, 1901-1903, 1916-1920, 1923).
James G. Patton
An article published in the "Daily Worker" of September 18, 1947
(page 8) stated that "an attempt to disrupt the Farmers Union by
raising the red issue was quashed by its top leaders recently. James
S. Elmore, until recently editor of the National Union Farmer, resigned
under fire after being criticized for inserting a red-baiting editorial and
cartoon in the current issue.
James Patton, Farmers Union President, who is recovering from an operation,
wrote Elmore declaring the material was inconsistent with Farmers Union policy
and "invited" his resignation.
The "Daily Worker" of January 29, 1948 (page 2) reported that
James G. Patton, President, National Farmers Union, indicated that
the organization would support Henry Wallace for President. His
photograph appeared in the March 15, 1950 (page 8) issue of that
paper; it stated in this connection that he opposed the Mundt anti-
Communist bill.
406 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The American Slav Congress issued an invitation to a Testimonial
Dinner at the Hotel Pennsylvania, New York City, October 12, 1947;
the printed program named James G. Patton as one of the sponsors
of the dinner. The American Slav Congress was cited by the Com-
mittee on Un-American Activities as "a Moscow-inspired and directed
federation of Communist-dominated organizations seeking by methods
of propaganda and pressure to subvert the 10,000,000 people in this
country of Slavic birth or descent." (Report 1951 dated April 26,
1950, page 1.) The Attorney General of the United States cited the
American Slav Congress as subversive" and Communist in letters to
the Loyalty Review Board, released to the press June 1 and September
21, 1948; also included in consolidated list released April 1, 1954.
On January 11, 1938, the "Daily Worker" named James G. Patton
as one of those who signed a manifesto which was sponsored by the
Union of Concerted Peace Efforts, cited as a Communist-front organi-
zation by the Special Committee on Un-American Activities in its
Report No. 1311 of March 29, 1944.
James G. Patton, identified as President of the National Farmers
Union, was one of those who signed a statement of the National
Federation for Constitutional Liberties which hailed the War Depart-
ment's order regarding commissions for Communists ("Daily Worker,"
March 18, 1945, page 2). The National Federation * * * was cited
as "one of the viciously subversive organizations of the Communist
Party" (Special Committee * * * in Report 1311 of March 29, 1944;
also cited in Reports of June 25, 1942 and January 2, 1943).
The National Federation * * * was among a "maze of organiza-
tions" which were "spawned for the alleged purpose of defending civil
liberties in general but actually intended to protect Communist sub-
version from any penalties under the law" (Report 1115 of the Com-
mittee on Un-American Activities dated September 2, 1947). The
Attorney General of the United States cited the National Federation
as "part of what Lenin called the solar system of organizations,
ostensibly having no connection with the Communist Party, by
which Communists attempt to create sympathizers and supporters of
their program." (Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, page
7687). Subsequently, the Attorney General cited the National
Federation as subversive and Communist (press releases of December
4, 1947 and September 21, 1948; also included in consolidated list
released April 1, 1954).
The Civil Rights Congress issued a statement opposing red-baiting
and attacks on Communists, which was signed by James Patton, as
shown in "The Worker" of May 25, 1947 (page 9); he was identified
as a member of the Executive Board, Local 78, Food, Tobacco, Agri-
cultural and Allied Workers of America, Phoenix, Arizona. James
G. Patton, President, National Farmers Union, was a member of the
Initiating Committee for a Congress on Civil Rights held in Detroit,
April 27-28, 1946, as shown by the Summons to the Congress.
The following quotation is found on page 19 of a Report on the
Civil Rights Congress, released by the Committee on Un-American
Activities, September 1947:
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 407
It is worthy of note that subsequent to the formation of the Civil Rights
Congress in Detroit on April 27-28, 1946, and the enlistment of additional spon-
sors, the names of a number of members of the initiating committee, having
served their decoy purposes, disappeared from the organization's letterhead,
among them being * * * James G. Patton *. * * This seems to be a favorite
device of Communist-front organizations.
From facts available to the Committee on Un-American Activities,
it was found that "the Civil Rights Congress is an organization
dedicated not to the broader issues of civil liberties, but specifically
to the defense of individual Communists and the Communist Party,
that the organization is controlled by individuals who are either
members of the Communist Party or openly loyal to it" (Committee
Report on the Civil Rights Congress dated September 2, 1947).
The Attorney General of the United States cited the Civil Rights
Congress as subversive and Communist (letters released December 4,,
1947, and September 21, 1948; also included in consolidated list re-
leased April 1, 1954).
James G. Patton, President, National Farmers Union, endorsed
"In Fact," as shown by a folder entitled "A Statement from George
Seldez on In Fact." The publication, "In Fact," was cited as a
Communist front by the Special Committee in its Report of March.
29, 1944.
In addition, Committee records show that in 1947, James G„
Patton was an honorary sponsor of the Union for Democratic Action,
Washington Chapter (letterhead dated January 10, 1947). This,
organization has not been cited as a Communist front; it was the
predecessor of Americans for Democratic Action whose stated purpose-
is:
We believe that all forms of totalitarianism, including Communism, are in-
compatible with these objectives. In our crusade for an expanding democracy
and against fascism and reaction we welcome as members of ADA only those
whose devotion to the principles of political freedom is unquestioned. (From
the Civil Liberties Conference Program of the Philadelphia Chapter, ADA,;
January 10, 1948.)
Also in 1947, James G. Patton, President, Farmers Union, was one
of those who signed a "statement made by eighty-seven leading Ameri-
can liberals, setting forth what they consider to be a standard of polit-
ical conduct for those who believe in liberalism or progressivism as.
a middle way between the extremes of reaction and communism * * *"
This statement, which was placed in the Congressional Record on
May 23, 1947 (pages A2599-2600), by the Honorable James E.
Murray, contains the following attack on the Communist Party:
"The American Communist group — registered party members, to-
gether with their more or less unofficial adherents — has its roots in a
foreign land, and the record shows that it follows the behests of a.
foreign government."
It is noted that the "Statement of James G. Patton, President,
National Farmers Union, submitted to the House Committee on
Un-American Activities, March 31, 1950, in opposition to H. R..
7595 and H. R. 3903" appears in the public hearings on legislation
o outlaw certain un-American and subversive Activities, March 21,,
22, 23, and 28, 1950 (page 2353).
\
408 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Public Affairs Pamphlets, an Activity of the Public Affairs
Committee
The Public Affairs Committee, Inc., has never been cited in any
manner by this Committee or the Attorney General of the United
States.
In testimony before this Committee, July 21, 1947, Mr. Walter S.
Steele, Managing Editor of the "National Republic" magazine, and
Chairman of the National Security Committee of the American Coali-
tion of Patriotic, Civic, and Fraternal Societies, made the following
reference to the Public Affairs Committee, Inc. :
Public Affairs Committee, Inc., with offices at 122 East Thirty-eighth Street,
New York, N. Y., entered the pamphleteering field several years ago. It issues
higher quality pamphlets on subjects related to those adopted for propagation by
the Communist Party. Maxwell S. Stewart, former editor of Moscow News, and
with other front connections, is editor of the pamphlet service. Violet Edwards
is education and promotion director. Frederick V. Field, of New Masses — Com-
munist organ — is a member of the board.
Ruth Benedict, a member of the East and West Association, and Gene Weltfish,
a leader in the Congress of the American Women, have written pamphlets for the
Public Affairs Committee. One of them, Races of Mankind, was barred by the
War Department affer Congress protested against its use in orientation classes of
the Army, declaring that its aim was to create racial antagonism. (Testimony
of Mr. Walter S. Steele, July 21, 1947, pages 40 and 41.)
The files of the Committee contain a copy of the pamphlet, "The
.Races of Mankind," written by Ruth Benedict and Gene "Weltfish,
copyright, 1943, by the Public Affairs Committee, Inc. In the Report
on the Southern Conference for Human Welfare, released by this
Committee, June 16, 1947, "The Races of Mankind" was described
as "a eulogy of Russia's treatment of minority groups that was
condemned by the War Department" (page 12).
The Committee on Un-American Activities does not maintain a
complete file of pamphlets issued by the Public Affairs Committee,
Inc. One of the latest publications of the group on file is a pamphlet
entitled "Prejudice in Textbooks" (copyright, 1950), which was
written by Maxwell S. Stewart. As shown in this source, "The
Publication of the Public Affairs Pamphlets is one of the activities
of the Committee, whose purpose as expressed in its Constitution is
'to make available in summary and inexpensive form the results of
research on economic and social problems to aid in the understanding
and development of American policy. The sole purpose of the
Committee is educational. It has no economic or social program of
its own to promote.' Publication of a pamphlet does not necessarily
imply the Committee's approval of all of the views contained in it."
Rand School of Social Science
The Rand School of Social Science has never been cited in any
manner by this Committee or the Attorney General of the United
States.
A full-page advertisement of the Rand School of Social Science in
the New York "Star" for September 21, 1948 gives its address as
7 East 15th Street, New York 3, New York, and shows Theodore
Schapiro to be Executive Director. The files also contain several
copies of the School's "Index to Labor Articles" published during 1944.
A copy of "100 Questions to the Communists," by Stephen Naft,
published by the Rand School Press, copyright 1939, appears in the
files, from which is quoted the following:
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 409
The following questions, addressed to sympathizers, fellow-travelers and
members of the Communist Party, are put with the sincere intention not to
antagonize, but rather to evoke answers in their own thoughts on the basis of
their own independent sincere reasoning. * * * Therefore we hope that every
honest sympathizer and supporter of Communist and Socialist aspirations, who
consequently must cherish the ideals of personal and economic security, of free-
dom, of justice, social equality and brotherly solidarity will not only understand
and appreciate our motives but will welcome these questions as an opportunity
for self-criticism and self-evaluation of his attitude towards the principles dear
to him, * * *
A check of the public records, files and publications of the Com-
mittee has shown no other references to Stephen Naft.
Public hearings of this Committee and the Special Committee on
Un-American Activities contain references to the Rand School of
Social Science, excerpts from which are quoted, as follows:
Mr. John Mills Davis, former Communist Party organizer, testified
before this Committee, July 15, 1953, that the "Rand School is an
anti-Communist school. It is known as a Socialist school. " (Com-
munist Activities in the Albany, N. Y., Area — Part 2, page 2474.)
The Rand School of Social Science was organized in New York in 1906. Its
purpose was to instruct leaders in socialism and labor organizations. Each
session the school has had enrolled over 1,000 students. Its operation expenses
run from $50,000 to $100,000 a year. It has 6,000 books in its library. Many
C. I. O. unions have contributed financially to the school. It maintains a publish-
ing house which has printed numerous books and pamphlets on socialism.
The officers of Rand School of Social Science are Algernon Lee, president; Dr.
William E. Bohn, educational director; and Henry Apotheker, manager. The
instructors are Jack L. Afros, former director of the Young Circle League of the
Workmen's Circle; * * * Rebecca Jar vis, formerly educational director, Women's
Trade Union League; * * * Bela Low, well-known authority on Marxian econom-
ics * * *.
Rand School was raided by the Government during the war. Its leaders were
convicted under the Espionage Act.
The School also operates Camp Tamiment in Pennsylvania. (Public Hearings,
information submitted by Walter S. Steele in connection with his testimony
before the Special Committee * * *, August 17, 1938, page 566.)
Louis Waldman, born, Yomcherudnia, Russia, January 5, 1892; * * * elected
Socialist Party assemblyman, New York City, 1918; reelected in 1920; ousted
from assembly, 1920; author, The Great Collapse and Government Ownership;
member, cutters local, International Ladies Garment Workers Union (C. I. O.) ;
lawyer; Mason, and member of Socialist Party; author, Socialism of Our Times;
Socialist Party candidate, Governor, New. York, 1930-32; board of directors,
League for Industrial Democracy (radical Socialist) ; contributor, Socialist Plan-
ning and a Socialist Program; member, national committee, League Against
Fascism (Communist set-up) ; sponsor, radical Artists and Writers Dinner Club,
1935; instructor, Rand School of Social Science (radical Socialist), New York;
chairman, People's Party, 1936; member, executive committee, American Labor
Party, 1938; associated with the Social Democratic Federation. (Ibid., page 648.)
Joseph Scblossberg, born in Russia, May 1, 1875, edited Das Abendblatt,
1900-1902, and Der Arbeiter in 1904-11; member of Socialist Workmen's Circle;
national committee, American Civil Liberties Union; National committee,
League Against Fascism; board of directors, League for Industrial Democracy;
American Friends of Spanish Democracy; Emergency Peace Campaign; Rand
School, extremely Socialist institution (Ibid,, page 682.)
The following is quoted from the testimony of Alexander Trachten-
berg during public hearings before the Special Committee on Un-
American Activities on Spetember 13, 1939:
Mr. Whitley. What occupations have you followed?
Mr. Tbachtenbeeg. From 1908 to 1915 I was a student in three universities,
including Yale, and after that I was invited to teach in Rand School of Social
Science, and headed the research department of that institution; that was up
to 1920 * * *
55647—54 27
410 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Mr. Whitley. Mr. Trachtenberg, how long have you been a member of the
Communist Party?
Mr. Trachtenberg, Since the end of 1921. * * * Prior to that I was a
Socialist, (page 4864)
Mr. Trachtenberg. * * * Mr. Heller and myself were working together in
the Rand Sehool of Social Science some 25 or 26 years ago, he, as a member of
the board of directors and myself as an instructor and as head of the public-
research department. * * *
And, in 1924 we got together and organized this firm (International Publish-
ing Company) for the purpose of publishing translations, principally of the
classics; and other books of interest to the American people and we have engaged
regularly in publishing activities * * * on economics, politics, philosophy, arts
and sciences. * * * We publish books of our own and publish books from
various other publishers, usually under our name, (page 4687)
The Chairman. Is he (Mr. Heller) a member of the Communist Party?
Mr. Trachtenberg. He is.
The Chairman. And has been since 1921, like you?
Mr. Trachtenberg. He has been a member for 40 years of the Socialist move-
ment. * * * I have been for 33 years with the Socialist movement.
The Chairman. You broke off from the radicals and joined the Communists?
Mr. Trachtenberg. That is right. He helped to build the Rand School,
which is a Socialist educational institution, (page 4881)
Mr, Starnes. To whom did he (Mr. Heller) make contributions?
Mr. Trachtenberg. To educational institutions * * * The Rand School of
Social Science, (page 4883)
Mr. Trachtenberg. The Rand School was the primary national educational
institution of the Socialist movement at that time, very, very prominent, inter-
nationally known institution. For instance, when the building was bought for
that school in 1917, he was one of the heaviest contributors to buying that build-
ing from the Y. W. C. A. for the Rand School. I remember that.
Mr. Starnes. And that school is still operated?
Mr. Trachtenberg. That school is still operated.
Mr. Starnes. But not by the Socialist Party?
Mr. Trachtenberg. Yes; by the Socialist Party. * * * But not actually offi-
cially, because there have been so many split-offs, but a certain part which was
formerly the Socialist Party, but not by the Communist Party, (page 4884)
Mr. Whitley. Have you ever known Juliet Stuart Poyntz?
Mr. Trachtenberg. Yes.
Mr. Whitley. When did you know her?
Mr. Trachtenberg. She went to the Rand School as a teacher, in the years
when she was assistant professor, in 1915 or 1916. * * * That was when I was
also a teacher in the Rand School. * * *
Mr. Whitley. You know of the fact that the New York papers frequently
carried her name in the early years?
Mr. Trachtenberg. I saw that — —
Mr. Whitley. As leading demonstrations for the Communist Party; in con-
nection with her arrest?
Mr. Trachtenberg. Yes; I saw that (pages 4911 and 4912).
The International Publishers, of which Mr. Trachtenberg was
secretary and treasurer, was cited by the Attorney General of the
United States as "the (Communist) Party's publishing House"
(Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, page 7686). The Special
Committee * * * cited it as an "official publishing house of the
Communist Party in the United States" and a medium through which
"extensive Soviet propaganda is subsidized in the United States"
(Reports of January 3, 1940, page 8 and June 25, 1942, page 18) ; it was
cited in a similar manner by this Committee in Report No. 1920 of
May 11, 1948 (page 80).
Files show no information concerning the officers of the Rand
School of Social Science, Algernon Lee, Dr. William E. Bohn, Henry
Apotheker, and Theodore Schapiro, mentioned on pages 1 and 2 of
this memorandum.
tax-exempt foundations 411
War Resisters League
A letterhead of the War Resisters League dated May 6, 1949,
signed by George W. Hartman, Chairman, gives the address of this
organization as Five Beekman Street, New York 7, New York, and
states that it is affiliated with the War Resisters' International,
Enfield, Middlesex, England, Laurence Housman, President. This
letter was addressed to Members of Congress, a part of which is
quoted for your information:
Specifically, the War Resisters League earnestly requests the highest-level
political leadership in Washington to offer the people of the world some better
protection against the chronic menace of war than that allegedly sought and
provided by the North Atlantic Pact. Paradoxically as it may sound ; the only
real gamers from the Atlantic coalition so far have been the Communists; those
advocates of force and violence as the ultimate arbiters of social conflict will
not be "contained" merely by the threat to use their own favorite techniques on
a bigger scale. Such precedent-bound diplomacy merely makes the supreme
horror of atomic and bacteriological warfare more rather than less likely as the
days roll by.
* * * * * * *
Far more could be done along the lines of a Joint Congressional Resolution
for universal disarmament, limited world government * * * .
The following is taken from the testimony of Walter S. Steele
during public hearings before the Special Committee on Un-American
Activities, August 16, 1938:
The American Student Union has cooperated directly with other Communist
movements in many avenues in the United States. Its last convention was held
at Vassar College, December 27-31, 1937, at which time it took on a direct
political tinge by resolution. The union also resolved to boycott Japan and to
help the Spanish and Chinese "red" fronts. It especially favors the Nye-Kvale
bills to abolish military training in schools and colleges. It passed a resolution
eulogizing some of its members fighting on the Spanish "red" front. The union
upheld the Mexican confiscation of American properties; it denounced American
interference in Puerto Rico and the arrest of revolutionists there, demanding
their release; it endorsed the World Youth Congress, to be held at Vassar in
August 1938; * * * it urged the passage of the anti-lynching bill; the abolition
of poll tax; it supported the Harrison-Black bills, the Southern Negro Congress,
the Scottsboro Negroes. The union adopted resolutions opposing theatre owners
banning Negroes in movie houses of the South. It ordered its members to coop-
erate in labor struggles * * * It denounced the jailing of labor agitators, and
criticized colleges and universities expelling students and discharging professors
for radical activities.
The American Student Union set up the United Student Peace Committee in
1938, through which it has a wider range in organizing strikes in American schools.
Molly Yard is organizational secretary of this committee. Through it they claim
to have influenced 17 national youth movements to become affiliated with it.
These include the * * * American Youth Congress, the American League for
Peace and Democracy * * * War Resisters' League * * * .
On March 24, the American Student Union called a strike, at which time,
according to the Daily Worker, March 22, 1938, page 5, it called on Secretary of
State Hull to follow the Soviet peace policy against the "Fascist aggressor."
Of course, that policy was to supply money, men, and arms to the "red" fronts,
thereby injecting the country into the fracas.
The April 24, 1938, issue of the Sunday Worker published an article which
stated that the Young Communist League created the American Student Union
and is the "main inspiration behind the student peace activities that rocked
America on April 27" (1937). (page 476)
* * * * * _ * *
Back in 1930 there was also formed the Revolutionary Youth, an organization
to contribute further to the Marxian drive in America, that was launched by
Jack Rubenstein * * * and others. There has come into being since the follow-
ing youth movements in the United States; not all are Communist, but most of
412 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
them are Marxian to some degree. These were: * * * Youth section of War
Uesisters' League, (p'age 593)
The American Youth Congress was conceived by Viola lima. Founding the
congress, the purpose of which she proclaimed was for "sound intellectual, spiritual,
and physical development of the youth of America." the first meeting was called
in August of 1934 at the Washington Square College, in New York City.
The first break to the left come several weeks before the congress was to con-
vene, when Prof. Harvey Zorbaugh, of the Sociology Department of Washington
Square College, New York City, who in the summer of 1935 served on the advisory
council of Moscow State University, became ired at Miss lima for holding down
liberal and radical organizations to a minimum representation. Professor
Zorbaugh invited 12 organizations to participate in the conference, including the
ultra- radical and pacifist groups, the League for Industrial Democracy (Socialist),
National Student Federation, Pioneer Youth (Socialist), War Resisters' League
(ultra-radical pacifists) * * *. (page 611)
On the sponsoring committee of the Second World Youth Congress there are
a few fairly conservative individuals sandwiched in with liberals of every trend
of thought. Chairman of the committee is Dr. Henry M. MacCracken. The
members include Stephen Duggan, John Nevin Sayre, and Mary B. Wooley,
and others, many of whom are at least considered extreme "liberals".
Two weeks before the World Youth Congress convened at Vassar College, the
'rolling stone" had gathered considerable moss. According to the official organ
of the Communist Party (Daily Worker, August 2, 1938, page 3), the following
organizations announced their intention of participating in the "red jubilee":
* * * War Resisters' League * * *
The following statements with reference to "The So-Called Fas-
cists" and the War Resisters' International are found on pages 662
and 664 of the Public Hearings:
Long ago the Communist at Moscow set the course insofar as pacifism is con-
cerned, for the radical forces in non-Communist countries. This course is again
reiterated in the Moscow Izvestia under date of August 1, 1929. Izvestia is the
official organ of the Third International and the Soviet Government, in Moscow.
It says:
"While the defense of one's fatherland is not to be tolerated in imperialistic
countries, in the country of the proletarian dictatorship it is one's first duty."
Consequently, it is not strange then that we find over 1,000 national pacifist
movements within the United States, without a single one in the Soviet Union.
* * * that most of these pacifist movements in the United States are bound up
into united front groups, then into Internationals with headquarters abroad from
where they receive their inspirations and instructions. * * * that we found almost
without exception these organizations promoting the propaganda and public
sentiment for recognition of Russia * * * carrying on an organized campaign
in the United States against "fascism" but not against the more widely organized
menace communism; it is not strange then that we find them demanding that
we "keep America out of war by keeping war out of the world" meaning it is
shown by their demands that we strain our neutrality laws to mean assistance to
revolutionist and pro-Russian elements in various countries but not to anti-
Soviet forces.
* * * * * * *
The War Resisters International is called a Communist organization which
desires to bring a new social order through revolutionary uprisings. It initiated
the War Resisters International Council, which comprises the War Resisters Inter-
national and its sections, together with the International Fellowship of Recon-
ciliation, Women's International League for Peace and Freedom * * * Their
first international conference was held in Holland; one in Austria in 1928, where
resistance and revolution were discussed. They unite for the suppression of
capitalism and imperialism and would establish their new social and international
order. They maintain that war resistance is a practical policy, but do not oppose
war of their own making. Its American section is the War Resisters' League,
whose honorary chairman in 1933 was Albert Einstein. They advise that we
change our economic system and thus get rid of war. In an Armistice Day peace
letter to the President of the United States they announced their "deliberate
intention to refuse to support war measures or to render war service" should our
Government have to resort to arms.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 413
World Youth Congress
In Report 1311 of the Special Committee on Un-American Activi-
ties, dated March 29, 1944, the World Youth Congress was cited as
a Communist conference held in the summer of 1938 at Vassar College.
In the report of the Special Committee on Un-American Activities
dated January 3, 1939, we find that the same organizations which
were affiliated with the World Youth Congress were affiliated with
the American Youth Congress (see separate memorandum on Ameri-
can Youth Congress) .
Right- wing youth movements refused to attend the World Youth Congress
which was held at Vassar. The organizers in the United States were leaders of
Communist, Communist "front," and Communist sympathizing movements
(P- 82).
An article concerning the World Youth Congress appeared in the
Daily Worker of August 15, 1938, p. 1. According to this article—
the World Youth Congress movement originated in 1934 when the League of
Nations Association called a conference of all the youth organizations that had
grown up in various lands in the struggle against war. * * * The first world
Congress convened in Geneva, Switzerland in the late summer of 1936, on the
heels of the Italian conquest of Ethiopia and the fascist uprising in Spain. * * *
In the United States, the chief center for the World Youth Congress movement
has been the American Youth Congress. * * *
It was reported in the same article that fifty leading American youth
organizations would be represented at the Congress, and delegates
would number almost 500 from 54 countries.
World Youth Festivals
The first World Youth Festival was held in Prague, Czechoslovakia,
July 20-August 17, 1947. According to an article which appeared in
the Daily Worker of August 23, 1947, p. 6, seven of the delegates
from the United States charged that the youth festival was dominated
by Communists, and distributed a statement to that effect at the
closing parade festival. The dissident group was denounced in a
statement by other American delegates to the World Federation of
Democratic Youth, according to this same source.
The second World Youth Festival was held from August 14-28,
1949, in Budapest, Hungary. The Committee on Un-American
Activities (in Report No. 378, April 25, 1951, pp. 77 and 78) stated
that the Festival was held in cooperation with the American Youth
for a Free World and the World Federation of Democratic Youth.
It was reported that delegates were usually led by the Soviet delega-
tion, displaying a huge photograph of Joseph Stalin. Representa-
tives of the Chinese Communist armies won prominent places and
nigh honors in the festivities. The United States was represented by
a delegation of 175 students. The Daily Worker of August 30, 1949,
p. 5, reported that the festival closed with delegates, among them 22
Americans, pledging "to fight for a lasting peace." They were asked
by Matthias Rakosi, deputy prime minister and leader of the Hun-
garian Communist Party, to "take an oath for world peace and to
fight against the western union, which is arming the world for a new
war." The West coast publication, Daily People's World, issue of
September 20, 1949, p. 5, carried a reference to the Budapest Youth
Festival as being "on our State Department's 'Moscow peace plot'
list."
414 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Young People's Socialist League
The Young People's Socialist League (4th International), is the
Youth Section of the Socialist Workers Party, as was shown on an
announcement issued by the group for a demonstration against war;
the announcement is undated but is attached to a letterhead dated
November 13, 1939.
The United States Attorney General cited the Socialist Workers
Party as a subversive organization which seeks "to alter the form of
government of the United States by unconstitutional means" (letters
to the Loyalty Review Board, released to the press, December 4,
1947 and September 21, 1948). The organization was redesignated
by the Attorney General pursuant to Executive Order 10450 of April
27, 1953. The Socialist Workers Party is—
a dissident Communist group not affiliated with the Communist International
nor officially recognized by either the Communist hierarchy in Moscow or the
Communist Party, U. S. A. Essentially, however, both the official and unofficial
groups base themselves upon the teachings of Marx, Engels, and Lenin. The
Socialist Workers Party are followers of Leon Trotsky, who was expelled from
the Russian Communist Party. The official Communists are followers of Joseph
Stalin.
(Committee on Un-American Activities, Report No. 1920, May 11,
1948, page 141).
"The Challenge of Youth" (January-February 1938), published
monthly by the Young Peoples Socialist League (4th Internation-
alists), reported that—
the New Year's week end saw the formal launching at an impressive convention
held in Chicago, of the Socialist Workers Party, American section of the Fourth
International movement. The delegates to this convention were made up of
rank-and-file representatives of the left-wing of the Socialist Party who had
previously been expelled for their belief in revolutionary ideas. Quite a few
members of the Y. P. S. L. were included among the more than 100 regular and
fraternal delegates. * * *
The convention categorically placed itself and the party in favor of the most
loyal and unconditional defense of the Soviet Union, at the same time that it will
conduct a relentless struggle against Stalinism. On the Spanish question, the
convention reiterated the position of the revolutionists that the working class
must conduct a struggle against fascism and at the same time prepare for a final
struggle against the capitalist system which breeds fascism. In the spirit of
internationalism, the new party affiliated itself to the Fourth International
which bases itself on the revolutionary teachings of Marx and Lenin, and which
alone carries on the struggle for world socialism today.
Relations between the SWP and the YPSL were firmly established. The
National Committee of the SWP has a YPSL representative on it; constitutional
provisions provide for a YPSL representative on each corresponding Party
committee or body ; young socialists attaining a specified age are to (be) auto-
matically enlisted in the party ranks; the Party stands pledged to give the YPSL
its utmost cooperation, including financial aid. The relations between the party
and YPSL are the greatest omen of the future successes assured our movement.
"Political Affairs" for September 1952 (pages 33-47) published a
chapter from William Z. Foster's book, "History of the Communist
Party of the United States," under the title, "The Formation of the
Communist Party (1919-1921)." Reference to the Young People's
Socialist League was made, as follows:
The youth were also a source of strength for the gathering Communist forces.
The profound events which had resulted in the split in the Socialist Party and
the organization of the Communist Party naturally had its repercussions among
the Socialist young people. The S. P., in April 1913, after several years of pre-
liminary work of the Intercollegiate Socialist Society, had constituted the Young
People's Socialist League. The Y. P. S. L. in 1916 consisted of 150 clubs and
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 415
4,000 members. It published The Young Socialist and carried -on educational
and social work. During the war the organization, Leftward-inclined, held
many anti-war meetings and made much agitation against conscription.
The treacherous attitude of the Social- Democratic leaders of the Second Inter-
national, toward the Russian Revolution and the war, produced profound reper-
cussions in the Y. P. S. L., as in other sections of the American Socialist move-
ment. At the Y. P. S. L.'s first national convention, held in May 1919, this Left
spirit in the organization found expression. The convention passed resolutions
condemning the Second International and supporting the Third International.
In December 1919, after the Socialist Party had split in September, the Y. P. S. L.
held a special convention, in response to Left-wing demands. It thus set itself
up as an independent organization, declaring for the Young Socialist International,
which was then in the process of transforming itself into the Young Communist
International. When the Palmer raids against the labor and Communist move-
ment took place, the independent Y. P. S. L. disintegrated as a national organiza-
tion, although some of its sections remained in existence. Wm. F, Kruse, the head
of the Y. P. S. L., joined the Workers Party at its formation in December 1921,
and many former Y. P. S. L. members also took part in forming the Young
Communist League. * * *
The Young Peoples Socialist League supported the "Call to the
(first) United States Congress Against War" in New York City,
September 2, 3 and 4, 1933 (from "The Struggle Against War,"
published August 1933), and made a part of public hearings before
the Special Committee on Un-American Activities, Volume 10, page
6234) . Delegates from the Young Peoples Socialist League attended
the Second U. S. Congress Against War and Fascism, as was shown in
the printed proceedings of that Congress which was held in Chicago,
Illinois, September 28, 29, 30, 1934 (from Public Hearings, Appendix
to Volume 10, pages I and XI).
The American League Against War and Fascism was formally
organized at the First United States Congress Against War and
Fascism, September 29 to October 1, 1933.
The program of the first congress called for the end of the Roosevelt policies
of imperialism and for the support of the peace policies of the Soviet Union, for
opposition to all attempts to weaken the Soviet Union. * * * Subsequent
congresses in 1934 and 1936 reflected the same program (U. S. Attorney General,
Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, page 7683).
The Congress —
was completely under the control of the Communist Party. Earl Browder was a
leading figure in all its deliberations. In his report to the Communist Interna-
tional, Browder stated: "The Congress from the beginning was led by our party
quite openly." (From Report 1311 of the Special Committee on Un-American
Activities dated March 29, 1944, page 119; also cited in Reports of January 3, 1940
and June 25, 1942.)
The Young Peoples Socialist League was named in public hearings
before the Special Committee on Un-American Activities as one of the
organizations "cooperating in the American Youth Congress" which
was held in New York City in August 1934 (Public Hearings, Volume
I, page 613); later, during the same hearings, it was revealed that
"two weeks before the World Youth Congress convened at Vassar
College, the 'rolling stone' had gathered considerable moss. Accord-
ing to the official organ of the Communist Party (Daily Worker,
August 2, 1938, page 3), the following organizations announced their
intention of participating in the 'red jubilee': Young Communist
League, Southern Negro Youth Congress, American Student Union,
* * * Young Peoples Socialist League of America." (Public Hear-
ings, Volume I, pages 615-616.)
416 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The American Youth Congress has been cited as subversive and
Communist by the U. S. Attorney General (letters released by the
Loyalty Review Board, December 4, 1947 and September 21, 1948;
redesignated pursuant to Executive Order 10450, April 27, 1953); "it
originated in 1934 and * * * has been controlled by Communists and
manipulated by them to influence the thought of American youth"
(Attorney General, Congressional Record, September 24, 1942, page
7685; also cited in re Harry Bridges, May 28, 1942, page 10). The
Special Committee on Un-American Activities cited the group as
"one of the principal fronts of the Communist Party" (Report of
June 25, 1942; also cited in Reports of January 3, 1939; January 3,
1941 and March 29, 1944).
The World Youth Congress has been cited as a Communist confer-
ence which was held in the summer of 1938 at Vassar College (Special
Committee on * * *, Report 1311 of March 29, 1944, page 183; also
cited in Report of January 3, 1939).
In an Open Letter to the American Student Union, dated Novem-
ber 2, 1939, the Young Peoples Socialist League (4th International),
Youth Section of the Socialist Workers Party, called upon the Ameri-
can Student Union to- —
return to an anti-war program. The YPSL broke with your organization a year
ago when you openly supported Roosevelt and his aimament program, the war
measure of the NYA Air Pilot Schools and the foreign policies known under the
general heading "Collective Security." At the same time you opposed any real
opposition to war in the form of a popular war referendum and the Oxford
Pledge — refusal to support the United States Government in any war it may under-
take * * * For the last three years the YPSL has led campus opposition to
imperialism and its wars.
"Solidarity" (published by the Young Peoples Socialist League),
in the issue of July 1940, expressed the stand of the organization as
follows:
Because the Socialist Party is for the workers against the owners, for democracy
against depotism, it is also for peace against imperialist war. But we point out
that only social ownership will do away with the most important cause of modern
wars (page 2).
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
MINORITY VIEWS
OF THE
SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS AND
COMPARABLE ORGANIZATIONS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
EIGHTY-THIRD CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON
H. Res. 217
Minority views .
SUBMITTED BY
REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE L. HAYS
REPRESENTATIVE GRACIE PFOST
55647— 54—-" -38 ...._ ... 417
CONTENTS
Page
I. Prejudgment 421
II. The "factual" basis for the majority report 422
III. The denial of a fair hearing to the foundations 422
IV. The nature of the public hearings 424
V. The report 428
VI. What the report should be 430
VII. Conclusion 431
419
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The minority does not agree with the report submitted by the
majority. 1 It not only disagrees with that report but earnestly
believes that it should never be published.
Each step of the proceedings of this committee placed an ugly stain
on the majestic record of the United States House of Representatives
and the great tradition of the American people. The minority
membership of this committee, feeling that fundamental American
principles were under attack in the committee, diligently attended its
meetings despite the many other congressional responsibilities that
were equally demanding of their attention. The majority member-
ship operated primarily through proxies held by the chairman.
A review of the record of the committee proceedings has brought
to mind again the elemental unfairness that was the basic characteristic
of this intended legislative inquiry by a committee of one of the
greatest legislative bodies in the world. The minority members
confess that this review first angered and then dismayed them.
From the collaboration between them required to state their views,
however, there has come a deep sense of the tragedy of these proceedings
and the report of the staff which has been approved by the majority.
The House of Representatives, in passing House Resolution 217
creating this committee, had a right to expect an enlightened, im-
partial and factual inquiry, which would inform the Congress whether
legislation in this area was required. It had a right to expect an
inquiry affording an opportunity for the fullest expressions of views
by all interested persons, and one in which such facts as were neces-
sary for the committee report to have substance and meaning would
have been carefully and impartially gathered. A similar inquiry
by the Cox committee in the Eighty-second. Congress resulted in the
submission of a full and detailed report which laid the foundation for
a well-considered investigation by this committee.
The hard truth is that, by the manner in which the proceedings of
the committee were conducted and by the self-evident bias of the
majority report, the committee has failed in the most basic way to
carry out the mandate of the Congress. The results of the proceedings
are of no value to the Congress, and it was, therefore, a complete
waste of public money.
I. PBE JUDGMENT
The theme of prejudgment which so singularly characterized the
entire course of this committee's activities was, like the theme of
doom in a tragic opera, revealed in its prelude. The following remarks
1 This report submitted by two minority members of the committee may, or may not, be a minority
report. One member of the majority has indicated that he disagrees with the report submitted by the
staff and approved by two members of the committee, and that he intends to file separate views, although
he assented to the submission of the staff report as a "majority" report. However, that is a problem for
the parliamentarian. It is mentioned only to emphasize the unreliability of the report submitted by the
"majority."
421
422 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
of the chairman in the House, when he called up the resolution, cer-
tainly evidenced his unshakable beliefs and his steadfast resolve as
to the course the inquiry should and would take and the conclusions
it should announce:
Certainly, the Congress has a right and a duty to inquire into the purposes
and conduct of institutions to which the taxpayers have made such great sacrifices.
In any event, the Congress should concern itself with certain weaknesses and
dangers which have arisen in a minority of these.
Some of these activities and some of these institutions support efforts to
overthrow our Government and to undermine our American way of life.
These activities urgently require investigation. Here lies the story of how
communism and socialism are financed in the United States, where they get
their money. It is the story of who pays the bill.
There is evidence to show there is a diabolical conspiracy back of all this. Its
aim is the furtherance of socialism in the United States.
Communism is only a brand name for socialism, and the Communist state
represents itself to be only the true form of socialism.
The facts will show that, as usual, it is the ordinary taxpaying citizen who
foots most of the bill, not the Communists and Socialists, who know only how to
spend money, not how to earn it.
The method by which this is done seems fantastic to reasonable men, for these
Communists and Socialists seize control of fortunes left behind by capitalists
when they die, and turn these fortunes around to finance the destruction of
capitalism.
II. The "Factual" Basis for the Majority Report
The "factual" material in the record is a curious mosaic formed by
the staff of the committee. It consists primarily of fragmentary
quotations from a variety of published materials, larded by staff
interpretations and conclusions; various charts prepared by the staff;
and the testimony of nine nonstaff witnesses, two of whom were
officials of the Internal Revenue Service, and one of whom, as we shall
discuss later, was cut off midway in his statement as he began to
destroy with facts all the staff testimony. This is in contrast to the
hearings of the Cox committee, in which 40 witnesses freely testified
in public hearings and were treated fairly and impartially.
Some of the statements of fact and opinion contained in the report
are untrue on their face, others are at best half-truths, and the vast
majority are misleading. It would unduly lengthen this report to
demonstrate each and every such error in the majority report.
Certainly those citizens and organizations affected can and should
bring all of them to the attention of the American people in due course.
It is shocking that anyone in America should be required to follow
such a course, but unfortunately the majority has made it necessary;
In this connection it seems fitting to make some mention of the
character of principal members of the committee staff. This group
was composed of five persons. Two were members of a New York
law firm engaged in legal tax work in connection with trusts. One
was associated with-an investment banking firm in New York. One
was a former electrical engineer, and the last a legislative lobbyist.
Two other staff members were dismissed on the basis of objections
made as to their fitness by the minority.
III. The Denial of a Fair Hearing to the Foundations
Finally, the record shows that at the sudden conclusion of public
hearings on June 17, 1954 (effected July 2 in a 3-to-2 committee vote
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 423
over protest of the minority membership that such action would deny
fundamental rights to those persons and organizations slandered by
the testimony of previous witnesses and by distorted conclusions
inserted into the record by the staff), the chairman announced that
all persons and organizations desiring to make statements for the record
could submit them in writing. It is now evident that, although some
of these statements have been included in the last volume of. the
gargantuan record, the staff either did not read them or, the more
likely, deliberately ignored them in the preparation of their report.
It should be noted at this point that the report seeks to justify this
denial of the opportunity for the foundations to testify in public
hearings by saying that —
The foundations touched by the hearings were thus given a fair opportunity to
put their best foot forward at the same time that they escaped the embarrassment
of cross-examination (p. 2).
This language brings into clear focus the astonishingly cynical
approach of the majority to a denial of the American tradition of fair
play, and due process under our laws. This refusal to afford the most
elemental rights guaranteed to our citizens is thoroughly indicative
of the pattern of the entire proceedings. It is frightening to read a
report of a committee of Congress which callously seeks to justify a
refusal to grant equal rights under the law, and to deny one who has
been accused the opportunity to testify publicly in his own defense,
and which implies that the right of a person under attack to take the
witness stand and to answer questions under oath is not particularly
important.
It is a gratuitous insult to say that under the committee's procedures
the foundations escaped the "embarrassment of cross-examination."
The minority will not be a party to such an evil disregard of funda-
mental American guaranties. Furthermore, the minority does hot
believe that either the Congress or the American people will accept or
tolerate that sort of procedure by any committee of Congress.
As evidenced by the testimony of Dr. Pendleton Herring, dis-
cussed elsewhere in this report, testimony in public hearing was far
from "embarrassing." It was the one certain way that persons and
organizations accused by the staff of this committee could destroy the
deadly inferences, innuendoes and charges that hung over them.
As the matter now stands, the tax-exempt foundations of this Na-
tion have been indicted and convicted under procedures which can
only be characterized as barbaric.
A review of the course of the hearings brings out in bold relief the
unfair, undemocratic treatment which has been accorded to the foun-
dations. In the first place, the staff blindly and sullenly refused to
permit the admission in public hearing of the very substantial evi-
dence available to rebut and utterly refute the opinions, biases, and
prejudices which were being used to indict the foundations. Secondly,
the charges against the foundations were aired in public hearings,
were televised, were given the benefit of full treatment by the press
and radio, and in totality were given all of the publicity which is to be
expected to come from such a controversial hearing by a congressional
committee. When the staff had exhausted itself and its own hand-
picked witnesses, the foundations suddenly found that they were to be
denied simple justice — the right to reply in the forum in which the
charges against them were made.
424 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
Every principle of our Constitution as it protects the individual in
his free enjoyment and exercise of individual rights was violated.
Every precedent of fair and unbiased congressional inquiry was
ignored.
The counsel and staff, apparently remembering the frustration of
their plans during the course of the limited public hearings by the
persistent cross-examination of their witnesses by the minority, now
insist with real conviction that a continuing investigation of founda-
tions be made sub rosa, devoid of the frustrations of public hearings.
The report states:
Should the study be resumed, we recommend that it be on a somewhat different
basis. The process of investigation through public hearings is inadequate for a
subject such as that of foundations. As we have said, an inquiry into this subject
is primarily a research undertaking (p. 15).
In this transparent language, the staff has inserted into its report
a new plea that the investigation of tax-exempt foundations be a one-
sided star chamber proceeding, one in which the accused would be
given no opportunity to answer publicly any charge, no matter how
biased, which staff "research" might conjure up against them.
The question is as fundamental as this: Of what value are the Bill
of Rights and our traditional concepts of due process of law if a com-
mittee of the Congress of the United States is to be permitted to deny
those rights to our citizens?
Further, the record and the report are devoid of any of the facts
concerning the great and lasting contributions which the foundations
have made to almost every phase of modern life. This shining record
of achievement, which the most uninformed citizen would agree should
be considered by the committee as a matter of simple "fireside equity,"
is flatly ignored, with the statement that the committee's objects were
only to consider "the errors committed by these private groups."
J. L. Morrill, former vice president of Ohio State University, now
president of the University of Minnesota, has pointed to the record of
the foundations in these words in a letter to the committee staff, which
was never included in the record:
If the best defense against democracy's enemies is to make America a better
place in which to live and to place human welfare first, American foundations
have rendered service far beyond the actual sums they have contributed to higher
educational institutions. Thus, indirectly, the foundations can be credited with
a significant role in the never-ending battle against democracy's enemies. And
at this point I should like to add one fact of vital importance: In all our dealings
with foundations and with their representatives, we have never found evidence
of any motivation other than a sincere an-d patriotic desire to further scholarship
in the best American tradition.
IV. The Nature of the Public Hearings
The unfolding of the dedicated purpose of the staff and its deep-
seated antagonism toward foundations were made plainly evident
early in the hearings, and it is clear that the staff and not the
committee members operated and controlled the proceedings at all
stages. This self-evident opposition to foundation activity may well
be characterized as pathological in the light of the excesses committed
by the staff throughout the proceedings.
A significant example of the predisposition of the staff to reach
conclusions under the spur of their own biases may be found in the
response of the assistant research director, Mr. McNiece, to the fol-
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 425
lowing three passages which Mr. Hays read to him before revealing the
author of the quoted language, indicating that they were taken from
context:
But all agree that there can be no question whatever that some remedy must
be found, and quickly found, for the misery and wretchedness which press so
heavily at the moment on a very large majority of the poor. The ancient work-
men's guilds were destroyed in the last century and no other organization took
their place. Public institutions and the laws have repudiated the ancient religion.
Hence by degrees it has come to pass that workingmen have been given over,
isolated and defenseless, to the callousness of employers and the greed of unre-
strained competition. And to this must be added the custom of working by con-
tract and the concentration of so many branches of trade in the hands of a few r
individuals so that a small number of the very rich have been able to lay upon the
masses of the poor a yoke little better than slavery itself.
Every effort must therefore be made that fathers of families receive a wage
sufficient to meet adequately ordinary domestic needs. If in the present state of
society this is not always feasible, social justice demands that reforms be intro-
duced without delay which will guarantee every adult workingman just such a
wage. In this connection we might utter a word of praise for various systems
devised and attempted in practice by which an increased wage is paid in view of
increased family burdens and a special provision made for special needs.
For the effect of civil change and revolution has been to divide society into two
widely different castes. On the one side there is the party which holds the power
because it holds the wealth; which has in its grasp all labor and all trade, which
manipulates for its own benefit and purposes all the sources of supply and which is
powerfully represented in the councils of the state itself. On the other side there
is the needy and powerless multitude, sore and suffering, always ready for dis-
turbance. If working people can be encouraged to look forward to obtaining a
share in the land, the result will be that the gulf between vast wealth and deep
poverty will be bridged over, and the two orders will be brought nearer together.
The following colloquy then ensued:
Mr. McNiece. Commenting for a moment, before making a reading of this,
the share of the land reference reminds me very much of one of the paragraphs
quoted from the findings of the Committee on Social Studies, as supported by the
Carnegie Foundation and the American Historical Association.
Mr. Hays. I gather you disapprove of that, is that right?
Mr. McNiece. Because I disapprove of communistic and collectivistic tend-
encies. All of these [meaning the quotations]— I do not know your source — are
closely comparable to Communist literature that I have read. [Emphasis ours.]
The objectives cited parallel very closely communistic ideals or socialistic ideals.
If working people can be encouraged to look forward to obtaining a share in the
land — in the smaller areas — I should say rather in the areas of less concentrated
population, I know from firsthand information that it is the desire and the attained
objective of many workingmen to own their own properties
1 distinctly remember reading in the papers — that is my only authority for it —
that at one time some of the labor union leaders were advising their workmen not
to become property owners, because that tended to stabilize tbem and make them
more dependent on local conditions, I don't know how you would reconcile the
divergent points of view.
Mr. Hays. If you are through with those, I would like to have them baek so
I can identify them.
The first and last were from the encyclical of Pope Leo XIII on labor. The
middle was from the encyclical of Pope Pius XI.
You have given a very practical demonstration, Mr. McNiece, of the danger
of lifting a sentence or paragraph out of context, because you have clearly labeled
these as being in conformity with the communistic literature that you have read.
Mr. McNiece. Yes, and I repeat that * * *.
As Mr. Hays pointed out (hearings, pt. I, p. 607), the Catholic
Church is one of the bulwarks against communism in the world. No
one in possession of his senses would call the Catholic Church or its
leaders communistic. It was left to the committee staff to compare
statements of the leaders of the Catholic Church with Communist
426 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
writings. In this testimony, we were given the clearest insight into
the workings of the minds of the committee's staff.
In the early meetings of the committee the general counsel, Mr.
Wormser, advanced the proposal that the inquiry be made without
public hearings and without seeking the testimony of interested per-
sons, suggesting instead that the staff be directed to devote its time
to independent study and inquiry, the results of which would be
brought to the committee when concluded. It apparently never
occurred to Mr. Wormser, a member of the bar, that such a proceed-
ing, in a matter so sensitive, inevitably conflicted with constitutional
guaranties of free speech and violated every American principle that
individuals and groups, subjected to accusations in the course of an
inquiry, be permitted to defend themselves.
It was not until May 10, 1954, that a public hearing was held.
For 3 days that month the stand was occupied by Mr. Aaron Sargent,
a San Francisco attorney, whose testimony can fairly be said to be a
representation of the basic theme of the staff testimony of Mr. Dodd,
Mr. McNiece, and Miss Casey.
Some insight into Mr. Sargent's political and economic thinking was
revealed when he stated that the United States income tax was part
of a plot by Fabian Socialists operating from England to pave the
way for socialism in this country; that the judicial power of the
United States Government has been undermined by court packing;
that subversive teaching in our schools is a tax-exempt foundation
product and that it has resulted in the greatest betrayal in American
history; that the foundations are deliberately stimulating socialism;
that the Rockefeller, Ford, and Carnegie Foundations are guilty of
violating the antitrust laws, and not content with these perversions,
that the Spanish -American War was more or less a picnic. (Eleven
thousand Americans died in that "picnic")
Such was the nature of the testimony on which the committee
report has been based. Although the tax-exempt foundations sub-
mitted detailed factual documentation in refutation of the charges
made against them, the report is silent with reference to all of those
facts.
The only testimony which brought solid facts into this arena of
bias and prejudice was that of Dr. Pendleton Herring, president of
the Social Science Research Council. Unfortunately for the founda-
tions, however, the staff had no intention of permitting facts and logic
to be introduced into public hearings. For it was midway in Dr.
Herring's testimony that the chairman adjourned public hearings for
all time to come.
Dr. Herring destroyed the charges made by the staff of an alleged
"interlock," the "tight control" of education and research by a
"highly efficient functioning whole" made up of the foundations and
the learned societies, with undue emphasis on empiricism. He pointed
out that the Social Science Research Council received financial support
from only 12 of the estimated five or six thousand foundations in this
country; that the foundations contribute approximately $12 million
annually to social-science research, only one-tenth of which is available
to the council; that there are some 40,000 persons in the United States
who could be classed as social scientists and that approximately 40
percent of these were scattered among the 1,700 colleges and uni-
versities of the country; that the other 60 percent were engaged in
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 427
nonacactemic work with business organizations and government ; that
while there were hundreds of fellowships in social science offered each
year by the colleges and universities of the Nation, the Social Science
Research Council had only 150 such fellowships at its disposal; that
the council granted its fellowships on a nationwide competitive basis
and that the emphasis on choosing the successful candidates was on
individual ability instead of the type or subject of the research; that
there were some 281 formally organized research institutes in 104
different colleges and universities in the country.
An examination of these undisputed figures should convince even
the most cynical observer that there is not and could not be any " tight
control" exercised by any group, however powerful. The very idea of
exercising a tight control over some 40,000 individuals engaged in
social science work is in itself ludicrous. When it is considered that
more than half of this number are engaged in business or governmental
enterprises which are entirely independent of academic or foundation
guidance or support, the idea becomes even more ludicrous. And
when one takes into consideration that the Social Science Research
Council is only one of many organizations conducting or financing social
science research, and that it has only $1,250,000 annually with which
to conduct its work, it becomes evident that the idea is "psycho-
ceramic," or, in more commonplace usage, crackpot.
Dr. Herring defined empiricism as follows:
To approach a problem empirically ie to say: "Let's have a look at the record,"
To employ the empirical method is to try to get at the facts.
He pointed out that the empirical method of getting at the facts
rather than indulging in mere speculation was a deeply ingrained
American tendency which had come down to us as a heritage from
the Founding Fathers; that- —
empiricism tends to be more in the American tradition than rationalism.
Ho also pointed out that empiricism was totally incompatible with
communism and that the Communists "object to it most violently."
He quoted from certain documents to support his contention that
the Communists were bitterly hostile to foundations, the learned
professional societies and to our work in the social sciences. As to
the latter he had this to say:
The social sciences stand four-square in a great tradition of freedom of inquiry
which is integral to American life, to the Anglo-Saxon tradition of self-govern-
ment, and to the concern with the individual fundamental to both western
civilization and its ancient heritage stemming back through the Renaissance to
the Classic world and to Judaic-Christian concern with human dignity.
Concerning the alleged overemphasis on empirical research Dr.
Herring said:
In my opinion, there is not an overemphasis upon empirical research. In my
opinion and experience and observation, quite the reverse is true. I observe a
strong human tendency on the part of a great many of us, as individuals, to see
what we choose to see and to believe what we want to believe. I observe a readi-
ness to speculate, to guess, to haphazard opinions, and to come to judgments on
the basis of very inadequate evidence. It is my observation that this is a very
human tendency, if not indeed a common human weakness. This tendency is
found in all walks of life. It becomes a matter of high moment in policy decisions
and in the formation of public opinion.
Dr. Herring's testimony restored some measure of reality and per-
spective to what had become so much an Alice-in-Wonderland pro-
428 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
ceeding in which the verdict was rendered before the evidence was
considered.
We are dealing here not with an inquiry in the traditional sense in
which this legislative body operates. This was not an investigation
in which the purpose was to gather facts, to evaluate them, and then
to arrive at fair conclusions on the basis of those facts. Instead, we
are presented with an inquiry in which facts have played no part.
The committee's activities were in single purpose directed at justify-
ing conclusions arrived at even in advance of the enabling resolution
of the House of Representatives.
The minority cannot emphasize too strongly the abhorrence it
holds for such a procedure and indeed the abhorrence which the House
of Representatives and the American public will hold for the whole
unfortunate transaction when the majority report is published.
V. The Report
The consistency of the dedicated prejudgment of the staff and the
real control of the proceedings which it maintained is (aside from the
many other examples cited in this report) made further evident by
the fact that, from the conclusion of the hearings on June 17, 1954, to
the present, the staff has secluded itself to prepare the majority re-
port. There has been no consultation or communication with the
minority, and presumably no direction or observation of the prepara-
tion of the report by the majority. This report truly has been written
in "a dark cellar," The staff went further, and in violation of con-
gressional procedure tampered with and altered the "corrected" copy
of the hearings which were submitted by the minority, in some in-
stances changing the context and meaning of questions by minority
members.
In view of the manifest unfairness of the proceedings, it might be
assumed that the report prepared by the staff would seek to overcome
the basic unsoundness of its contribution by preparing a temperate
document, short in length and impartial in tone. But, like the
theme of doom in a Wagnerian opera, the basic resolve to justify the
initial prejudgment of condemnation of foundations is expressed and
reexpressed in this enormously lengthy report. Where the record
contained no facts to support some particular conclusions, a type of
staff "judicial notice" has been taken of facts and conclusions drawn
from these facts, from whatever source has seemed convenient.
The great body of the press of the Nation has condemned the com-
mittee for its shocking excesses and its denial of elementary fair play.
As a result, the press has been attacked in the majority report along
with all others who dared to disagree.
Even before the issuance of the report, the chairman of this com-
mittee made an unwarranted attack on three of the Nations's leading
newspapers, the New York Times, the New York Herald Tribune,
and the Washington Post and Times Herald. In a statement inserted
in the Congressional Record, the chairman accused these three great
newspapers of deserting their traditional principles of honest and
unbiased presentation of the news. Not content with that reckless
assertion, he deliberately linked the names of these newspapers with
that of the Daily Worker in an effort somehow to imply guilt by
innuendo even though not one iota of evidence was ever presented
in support of this poisonous attack.
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 429
The report picked up where the chairman left off. It went com-
pletely outside of the record to accuse the Reid Foundation of possible
illegal practices, with no other point in mind than that this foundation,
so the report states, owned stock in the New York Herald Tribune.
The fact that the Herald Tribune (in common with a myriad of other
newspapers) criticized the manner in which this committee proceeded
may have some bearing on the malice evidenced by the staff toward
this great newspaper.
From the New York Herald Tribune the report moved to the
New York Times, using the following language:
The presence of Mr. Sulzberger, president and publisher of the New York
Times, on the board of the Rockefeller Foundation is an illustration of this
extension of power and influence. (Mr. Sulzberger is also on the board of several
other foundations.) We do not mean to imply that Mr. Sulzberger directed his
editors to slant their reporting on this committee's work, but his very presence
on the Rockefeller Board could have been an indirect, intangible, influencing
factor. At any rate, the Times has bowed to no other newspaper in the vindic-
tivehess of its attack on this committee. In its issue of August 5, 1954, it gave
856 2 lines of laudatory column space, starting with a front-page article, to the
statement filed by the Rockefeller Foundation. The following day, August 6,
1954, appeared one of a succession of bitter editorials attacking this committee,
(p. 33).
Even more important, the report included in its findings the
following statement:
7. The far-reaching power of the large foundations and of the interlock has so
influenced the press, the radio, and even the Government that it has become
extremely difficult for objective criticism of foundation practices to get into news
channels without having first been distorted, slanted, discredited, and at times
ridiculed (p. 17).
To the minority, there is an integral relationship between the
majority's refusal to accord the foundations a public hearing and its
broadside attack on the press of the Nation. For, those who would
abuse the rights of the individual fear the press and rail against the
right of the press to report the facts and to criticize wrongdoing.
History teaches us that we must be alert to any incursion on our
basic freedoms. Here we are confronted with the two specters of a
denial of a fair hearing and an effort to intimidate the press for report-
ing and commenting upon that denial. The minority condemns this
and fervently hopes that the majority even at this late hour will recant
and vote to issue no report.
In the report, facts have been distorted and quotations from writings
have been taken out of context. Apparently, only those witnesses
(excepting the two witnesses from the Internal Revenue Service) who
possessed the qualifying bias of the staff were invited to testify, but
for the rare and refreshing case of Dr. Herring, whose testimony we
have discussed.
The other 8 nonstaff witnesses included, in addition to the 2 repre-
sentatives of the Internal Revenue Service, 2 retired and 2 employed
professors and 2 lawyers. These two members of the bar had no special
qualifications other than their own bias, which strangely coincided with
that of the staff.
The report outstrips the record in its bias, its prejudgment, and its
obvious hatred for the object of its wrath — the principal private
foundations of the Nation.
2 Parenthetically, It may be noted that the small-mindedness of the staff is well portrayed by the fact
that it took the time to count the lines which a newspaper devoted to a foundation report. A more
colossal waste of the taxpayer's money than line counting we can't conceive!
430 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
The only concession made by the staff in the interval between the
public hearings and the report was the abandonment of the staff's
pet theory of the great Fabian Socialist conspiracy of foundations,
colleges, and universities, and agencies of the Federal Government to
take over America. Quite probably it has now dawned upon the
staff that this theory would have made malefactors out of the Con-
gress of the United States — for the Congress passed all of the social
legislation condemned as the end result of this "conspiracy," including
such programs as social security and Federal aid to education, the
enlightened programs for labor and agriculture, the protection of bank
deposits and security markets, and a host of others, which strengthen
the whole fabric of our society and its economy.
The theory of conspiracy was abandoned, but a charge of a special
sort of monopoly was substituted — a monopoly of the educated
"elite." The fruit of this monopoly is, so the staff concluded,
control by the foundations of the avenues of intellectual exploration
which otherwise would not be explored as evidenced by the fact that
foundations have given substantial financial support to empirical
research and to research in the social sciences.
The staff's report would seem to recommend to the Congress that
all foundations should be denied their tax-exempt status unless they
shall, in the field of the social sciences, adhere to principles which
the staff supports. The following sets forth the lines of censorship
suggested by the staff:
They (the trustees) should be very chary of promoting ideas, concepts and
opinion-forming material which runs contrary to what the public currently wishes,
approves and likes (p. 20).
We assume that the staff would recommend that this censorship
be exercised by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue; a role, by
the way, which the Commissioner in public testimony properly re-
jected.
The excessive length of the report is, in itself, an index of the
unseemly effort of the staff to reach a predetermined conclusion, for
if the conclusions stated were valid, then a positive, incisive, and
brief statement of facts would be sufficient to support them.
It must be remembered that even though the Congress soundly
rejects and repudiates the majority report, as it should, the report
will stand forever in all its spuriousness as a "majority report" of
facts and the sober conclusions of a majority of the members of a duly
constituted committee of the House of Representatives of the United
States and will be quoted by every fear peddler in the Nation as
incontrovertible fact.
In addition, the real mischief in these proceedings rests in the
effect which they may have on the future conduct of the tax-exempt
foundations. If, as a result of this inquiry, the foundations shall
surrender to timidity, then the aim of those who would destroy the
effectiveness of the foundations shall have been accomplished. Truly,
the integrity of the foundations will hinge on the manner in which
they meet this challenge.
VI. What the Repokt Should Be
It is unfortunate that the minority report, limited as it must be to
the record and the majority report, is compelled to place major
emphasis upon the errors of both. However, these errors are so basic
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS 431
and shocking that it is of public importance that they be identified
so that every citizen of the land can know what has occurred.
There is little that the minority at this point can recommend as to
what the report should contain that can give any real guidance to the
Congress in this sensitive area, for there are no reliable facts in the
record made up by the staff.
The minority recognizes that foundations are favored by State and
Federal tax laws. Even if they were not, however, they have a high
duty of public responsibility. This responsibility, however, does not
divest such foundations of the rights guaranteed by our Constitution.
Inherent in such guaranties is the proposition that Government may
not dictate, directly or indirectly, what the officers of such foundations
should think or believe or how they shall exercise their trust responsi-
bilities. Government cannot interfere with the lawful operations of
these private organizations in any manner. The fact that some or all
Members of Congress might disagree with all or a part of the acts (rfm — -
foundation does not alter the constitutional protection against this
attempted invasion of their private rights under the guise of the taxing
authority.
The majority report should, in all fairness, state at least the fol-
lowing:
1 . The purposes of the resolution were not carried out.
2. The proceedings were grossly unfair and prejudged.
3. The record which was constructed by the staff is not reliable.
4. If there is a necessity, in the public interest, to inquire into the
validity of the tax-exempt status of foundations and other charitable
institutions, then a new inquiry must be authorized to seek all the
facts and to give all interested persons an opportunity to be heard.
In truth, such an investigation, made in conformity with the great
tradition of congressional inquiry, is the only way in which Congress
can be properly advised of the facts in this area — and in which the
foundations can be relieved of the cloud of suspicion placed upon them
by the majority report.
VII. Conclusion
The proceedings and the rendition of the majority report are both
tragic events. The minority members are filled with a sense of deep
sorrow in the contemplation of the monstrous nature of both.
The minority members have discussed long and soberly this dark
reality, and they have concluded that the cloud of fear so evident in
all phases of our national life in recent years has enveloped this com-
mittee staff, and that these proceedings, under their guidance, are only
a part of a greater and more ominous movement under the direction
of a group who would use the deadly evil of fear for their own pur-
poses — purposes which would, in their realization, destroy American
constitutional liberty. In this reality, the minority invites the mili-
tancy of all Members of Congress and all citizens of this free land to
root out now and forever this evil and those who nurture it.
The proceedings and the majority report evidence the tragedy of the
men and women of the committee's staff who, having lived and pros-
pered under freedom, yet do not believe in due process and American
fair play; who fear the thinkers and those who dare to advance the
new and the unaccepted ; who believe that universal education for our
432 TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
people can be risked only if the teachers and their pupils accept their
doctrine and are shielded from the mental contamination of other
thoughts and beliefs. They would deny the right of individuals to
seek truth without limit or restriction.
Happily, the staff is representative of only a small and unhealthy
minority in the Nation. The fear-sickness of this group leads them to
brand as conspiratorial and un-American the citizens and organizations
who support the great liberal tradition in our society including such
well-known persons as Edward R. Murrow, Paul Hoffman, Senator-
elect Clifford Case, of New Jersey, and Senator Paul Douglas, of
Illinois, and such highly respected organizations as the Federal Council
of Churches, the Parent-Teachers Association, the National Education
Association, the Anti-Defamation League, and some of the most
prominent newspapers and publishers in the land.
This tragic event evidences the decay which has resulted from the
cynical disillusionment of the minds of free men and women. These
unhappy citizens have forgotten the touchstone of America's great-
ness — freedom. The American faith is one which accepts the right of
free people to make mistakes and believes that a free people, despite
its mistakes, will sustain and advance with wisdom the common good.
If there is an element of good to be found in these proceedings, it is
the challenge to high leadership. Leadership at every level of society
from the smallest community to the White House must find ways to
strengthen those among us in this free and vigorous land who have lost
faith in freedom. We must rehabilitate those who somehow have
forgotten that America's individual and collective strength in a tor-
tured and straining world is, and has always been, in the supremacy of
a positive faith in freedom; not in the nursing of doubts and fears.
Wayne L. Hays
Gracie Pfost
o
*3
(Not printed at Government expense)
PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 83^ CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION
Special Committee on Tax-Exempt Foundations
SPEECH
OF
HON. B. CARROLL REECE
OF TENNESSEE
IN THE HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, August 20, 1954
Mr. REECE of Tennessee. Mr. Speak-
er, I had hoped to avoid the necessity of
making these remarks concerning the
work of the Special Committee To Inves-
tigate Tax-Exempt Foundations, but re-
cent events which, while not materially
affecting the work of this committee,
have been damaging to the entire prin-
ciple of congressional investigations have
left me no choice.
In my years of service in the Congress,
I have never observed a better organized
smear campaign against a congressional
committee nor such wanton distortion
of the facts by the public press. The
editorials and articles appearing concur-
rently in the Daily Worker, the New
York Times and Herald Tribune attack-
ing the committee and its work would
appear to be more than a coincidence.
Let me go back to the beginning of the
work of this committee. As a member
of the Cox committee, the predecessor of
this committee, I had observed three
bodies of evidence which seemed to me of
great importance: The first pointed to
Communist or Communist sympathizer
infiltration into the foundations; the
second pointed to a much broader con-
dition, namely, foundation support of
Fabian socialism in America; and the
third pointed to the financial aspect of
the foundations.
There are presently some 7,000 foun-
dations with assets in excess of $10 tail-
ion and with an annual income in ex-
cess of $300 million.
Less than a dozen of these foundations
ire widely known" to the public.
There is much to indicate that the
housands of foundations unknown to
314514—51872
the public are set up generally to avoid
payment of taxes.
The number of foundations is rapidly
increasing each year. They now have
tremendous resources, which largely are
taken out of our taxable income.
The tax-exempjt foundations in Amer-
ica—big and little — are becoming a ma-
jor concern.
Fabian socialism is not communism;
it is a technique of nonviolent revolution
by the consent of a duped, propagan-
dized population.
It is the technique that brought social-
ism to Great Britain.
In the United States Fabian socialism
has taken the name "New Deal" and
"Fair Deal."
Of this there can be no doubt.
Norman Thomas, the long-time head
of the Socialist Party in the United
States, has publicly admitted that the
. New Deal almost put the Socialist Party
out of business by taking all of the prin-
cipal planks from its platform.
Parenthetically, I want to say a brief
word to those Americans who approve of
the New Dsal-Fair Deal-Fabian revolu-
tion, and therefore might call this inves-
tigation a tempest in a teapot.
It is their privilege to do so, but it is
my privilege to oppose this overt subver-
sion of traditional American ideals.
I have fought it for 20 years during its
steady progress, and as long as I con-
tinue to serve the public I will continue
to fight it.
Although the Cox committee was not
looking for Fabian socialism, the evi-
dence presented before it disclosed to me
what might be an important clue to the
location of the nerve center of subversion
in America, — the left-wing intellectuals,
whose prestige and influence seemed to
be the product of the tax-exempt foun-
dation grants.
I therefore suggested to the Congress
that the investigation be extended.
A
In doing so, I realized that if my sus-
picions were true all of the enormous
power and prestige of the foundations,
and to some extent that of the corpora-
tions from which they sprang, would be
pitted against the committee.
If I were wrong, the investigation
would cause no more excitement than
did the Cox committee investigation.
I also realized that if my surmise con-
cerning Fabian socialism was correct,
, every left-wing group that is participat-
v ing in or benefiting from the intellectual
revolution would join in the attack on
the committee.
I also realized that the left-wing press
and the pseudoconservative press would
be under terrific pressure from these in-
tellectuals and organizations to discredit
the committee and distort the facts con-
cerning its work.
What I did not realize was that this
influence would reach even into the con-
servative press.
And from what has happened in the
last month, it is obvious that the large
foundations are trying to make certain
that never again will a mere committee
of the Congress have the temerity to look
into their social and political science
activities and into their financial power.
Let me review the method adopted by
the committee.
After discussing with the staff the best
and fairest method of approaching this
inquiry, we decided to inform the foun-
dations in advance of the main lines of
investigation.
To me, this offered the foundations a
tremendous advantage, knowing in ad-
vance the area of the inquiry.
But this step was violently attacked as
prejudgment of the case, in spite of the
fact that when the outline was presented
by Mr. Dodd, the committee's director of
research, he stated, and I quote :
As this report will hereafter contain many
statements which appear to be conclusive, I
emphasize here that each of them must be
■understood to have resulted from studies
which were essentially exploratory; In no
sense should they be considered proved.
As the hearings got under way, it be-
came very obvious that the ranking
minority member of the committee had
no intention of permitting orderly hear-
ings and was determined to discredit and
harass the investigation.
Throughout the hearings Mr. Hays as-
stumed an attitude of aggressive suspi-
cion and insulting distrust of the major-
314514r— 51872
ity members of the committee and of the
committee staff.
He could not have made it clearer thai
he intended to frustrate to the limit oi
his abilities any orderly procedure.
It is interesting to note that Mr. Hays
the minority member in question, is
representative of the political group thai
has benefited most from the intellec-
tual revolution that has taken place ir
America, and it seems probable to mt
that his rude, unreasoning, and ruthles;
attitude during the foundation hearing!
is one of defending an important sourc*
of New Deal strength in America.
I do not know whether one of Mr
Hays' objectives was to force the dis^
continuance of the public hearings, bu
at least he was successful in makini
that decision necessary.
I would like to take a moment t<
describe to you the tactics of Mr. Hay
that eventually forced this action.
In his role of a skillful provocateur
he interrupted witnesses beyond all rea
son, attempting to frighten witnesse
and to disorganize both their initia
presentations and orderly interrogatkH
by others.
During one of the 3-hour session*
Mr. Hays interrupted one witness 24
times.
During the public hearings he indulge
in intemperate attacks upon the staj
and upon the majority members of th
committee.
He accused the chairman of lying an
being a coward and accused Mr. Goor
win of duplicity and cowardice.
As an example of the Marxian tech
nique of attacking a messenger when th
message cannot be attacked, he cast a£
persions upon the character and recor
of a distinguished Catholic nun, th
daughter of Senator McCarhan, whos
scholarly work on Fabian socialism i
Great Britain had been placed in ev:
dence.
As further examples, Mr. Hays cha)
acterized an outstanding group of Amei
ican scholars appearing as committi
witnesses as "crackpots," "dredged ui
by the committee.
As was written to the chairman <
the committee by the eminent Pre
Kenneth Colgroye, subsequent to his ai
pearance before the committee, M
Hays created, and I quote:
A fear among competent persons wt
might otherwise question the omniscient
of the directors of those foundations. Wi
nesses are thec*y warned that no matter
how objective their testimony, no. matter
how legitimate their questions, their char-
acter would be smeared and their testimony
ridiculed.
In spite of the sniping by Mr. Hays
Professor Colgrove was able, on a piece-
meal basis, to get a very valuable body
of evidence into the: record: concerning
the deplorable lack of science contained
in so many of the foundations' social
science projects.
Actually, a great deal of so-called so-
cial science, as carried on with founda-
tion funds, is little more than an elabo-
rate, argument that Government can
take, better care of the people than the
people can take care of themselves.
Prof. A. H. Hobbs was criticized for
his attack upon the Kinsey report, which
initially was a foundation project.
Actually> anyone who had taken the
time to examine this highly questionable
statistical study cannot help but agree
with Professor Hobbs, even if only for
one reason* namely, that it makes a
laughing stock of morality and reduces
human love to the animal level.
In his letter to the chairman, Pro-
fessor Colegrove also states:
Obviously, no self-respecting seholar would
care to testify before such a committee un-
der such circumstances.
When the truth is known concerning
the work of this committee, a large sec-
tion of the American press which printed
virtually none of the competent and per-
tinent testimony presented to the com-
mittee and has printed practically all of
Mr. Hays' tidbits of character assassina-
tion and so-called witty barbs, will be
faced with an embarrassing situation.
It seems to me that a suitable subject
for congressional investigation would be
the source and nature of the pressure
which is behind the terriffc attack upon
the committee by three large papers, in
addition to the Daily Worker — the New
York Times, the New York Herald Tri-
bune, and the Washington Post and
Times Herald.
The promptness and uniformity with
which a large section of the press has
attacked the committee's decision to dis-
continue the public hearings on the false
ground that the foundations would
thereby be deprived of a chance to de-
fend themselves, indicates the thorough-
ness of the plans and press coverage be-
lind Mr. Hays' effort to frustrate the
learings.
314514—51872
Regarding the cry of Injustice result-
ing from the discontinuance of the pub-
lic hearings, let me point out that it is
only common sense to conclude that no
action could have been more favorable
to the foundations because they were
thereby given an opportunity to speak
in their own defense and completely
avoid having to substantiate their claims
through cross-examination.
Some of the foundation answers have
not yet been received, but thus far there
has been very little to refute the basic
suspicion that caused me to suggest this
investigation, namely, that the large
foundations have supplied the bulk of
the money that has been used to lay
the intellectual base for and perpetuate
the prestige of 1}he New Deal.
In fact, one of the briefs filed by the
Carnegie group states that one of their
projects which had been criticized as
being socialistic, namely, the report of
the Commission on Social Studies by the
American Historical Association, was not
socialistic. --— " -■* «"
Here are the exact words used by Mr.
Charles Dollard, president of the Carne-
gie Corp. of New York, in refutingrtKafe
charge. — "~~~ "
I quote:
The worst that can be said is that the
authors not only reported this trend but
appsared to accept it cheerfuly. What they
were accepting was hot socialism — It was
the New Deal. '— -*• — ~— —•»— ,™»^*-,*.~ .—•■ - ■■**"
I believe that special attention should
be given to the foundations' charge that
the discontinuance of the hearings will
deprive them of proper publicity for
their filed statements.
A good example of the degree to which
they will be penalized is found in a single
issue of a single newspaper — the New
York Times of July 25— published the
day after the Ford Foundation released
its statement attacking the committee.
In that 1 issue there were 3 completely
favorable stories regarding the Ford
Foundation, totaling approximately
4,000 words, that went into more than a
million American homes.
One of the articles was a front-page
feature carried over to the pages ad-
jacent to the other two articles.
Nothing could have been planned
more meticulously.
This was their own story and con-
tained many derogatory statements
which would have had to have been cor-
roborated had the Ford Foundation
been subjected to the normal procedure
of cross-examination. :
■ Every citizen who read the New York
Times July 25— Sunday — was ' com-
pletely assured of the purity of the Ford
Foundation.
It will be interesting to see how many
words of these remarks are carried by
the same paper.
In spite of the fact that through this
superb public relations smear campaign
in an effort to exonerate the tax-exempt
foundations of all blame, even before
} the committee report has been prepared,
/ I am determined that the committee
; work shall proceed normally, that an
i adequate public record shall be de-
\- veloped, and that a fair, objective report
of findings will be rendered.
This is the task to which I have set
myself and this is the task which I pro-
pose to finish, regardless of the forces
attempting to stifle and discredit, the
investigatory powers of this legislative
body.
If I have seemed to have been silent
under this abuse for too long a time, it is
because I am confident that in the end
the truth will prevail.
, In summing up, I would like to speak
with more bluntness than is my usual
custom. This committee has been sub-
jected to various and strange pressures
and harassments. It began to be reviled
314514r— 51872
from many directions very early in its
career.
A steady procession of condemnatory
resolutions emanating from a puzzling
'assortment of organizations have f 01-
> lowed its work. As I mentioned before,
[ several of the major newspapers — nota-
\ bly the New York Times, the New York
s Herald Tribune, and the Washington
Post and Times Herald — have joined
v with the Daily Worker in a steady, con-
stant, almost daily campaign of savage
attacks, both in editorials and what pur-
ported to be news reports.
These savage attacks have been of a
nature so venomous and untruthful as to
eliminate any explanation but one.
The attitude of the committee and of
its staff and the occurrences at the hear-
ings have been deliberately misrepre-
sented to the public with such obviously
intended malice that no explanation
seems rational but that the power of
some of the major foundations and theii
sycophants is truly great.
It has been said that the foundations
are a power second only to that of the
Federal Government itself. Perhaps thij
statement should be modified because i1
seems to have become an affront for s
congressional committee to dare to sub-
ject foundations to criticism. Perhap;
the Congress now should admit that th«
foundations have become more powerful
in some areas at least, than the legisla-
tive branch of the Government.
D. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE] I9S4
Not printed at Government expense)
ROGEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 84** CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION
emarks of Carroll Reece, National Press
Club Luncheon, February 23, 1855,
Made in -Reply to Dr. Robert Maynard
Hutchbs
EXTENSION OP REMARKS
OP
HON. B. CARROLL REECE
OF TENNESSEE
IN THE HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, February 23, 1955
Mr. REECE of Tennessee. Mr.
jeaker, under leave to extend my re-
arks in the Record, I include the fcl-
wing remarks made by me at the Na-
anal Press Club luncheon, February
:, 1955, in reply to Dr. Robert Maynard
utchins:
1
Four weeks ago, many of us gathered here
day -were honored by the presence of Dr.
jbert Maynard Hutchins, one of the Na-
m's most publicized educators— now the
esident of a large tax-exempt foundation.
As this man of wisdom spoke, I was some-
>w reminded of Elbert Hubbard's definition
egotism. He denned egotism as "the anes-
etic that nature gives to deaden the pain
being a damn fool."
As he moved into his address, his evalua-
m of me became quite evident, but, after
■f 34 years in public life, I do not feel
at either my patriotism or intellectual in-
srity are diluted by Dr. Hutchins disassoci-
ng himself from me.
We seem to have only one thing in com-
>n: Once, he was heralded as the "Boy
>nder." Once, after obtaining leave of
sence from New York University to run
■ Congress, I was heralded as "The Boy
ngressman." Now I am no longer a boy,
ither is he any longer a boy or a wonder.
\.s this great and dedicated man rose to
Jress us, an aura of academic distinction
liated from his person, an aura reinforced
the soft effulgence which radiates from
i wealth and power which support him.
indeed, it seemed to me that there stood
ore us a knight in golden armor whose
;h purpose well might be to save a spot-
s' maiden from a foul and fire breathing
■raster.
342665—54360
Alas, our knight in golden armor chose not
to draw the 2 edged sword of truth and
facts, but rather, in anger and acrimony,
brought forward the mace of demogogery,
studded with spikes of vituperation.
We were treated to the horrors of a po-
litical abatoir in which personality, charac-
ter, and integrity ar,e destroyed. It seemed
a strange cacophony.
Why should he regale us with obiter
dicta — if not in an effort to use you to bolster
his case in the press of the Nation? Why
stoop to public obfuscation when facts and
reason are available.
Testimony and facts developed under oath
by a duly constituted committee of Congress
cannot be set aside by ridiculing their source
or content.
Such factual testimony deserves full con-
sideration and objective analysis.
This point of view was emphasized by Mr.
Justice Frankfurter when he said in an
opinion in the Rumley case:
"Our Republic will have lost its vitality
when the people are no longer permitted to
hear the information developed by their leg-
islators. And our scholars, oUr intellectuals,
our great educators hardly justify the con-
fidence reposed in their integrity when they
resort to ad homineum arguments and obiter
dicta to suppress and discredit information
of which they pertonally disapprove."
Again Woodrow Wilson said, "The inform-
ing function of Congress should be preferred
even to its legislative function."
What a great shock, a distinguished aca-
demician turning politician, before our very
eyes. His utterances appear as endless re-
writes of a central theme of the professional,
intellectuals found in the foundations. The
artful propagandists, dressed in the attire
of an intellectualist, rides again,
in
As a rather reluctant dragon, I come be-
fore you today through the courtesy and
and spirit of fair play of the National Press
Club — so characteristic of the members of
the press and radio of our Nation.
It appeared to me that you, the purveyors
of facts, might prefer me to answer in a more
moderate and objective tone. Perhaps if an
eminent scholar can turn politician for a
day, you will permit me, a politician with
some experience, to turn educator again for
a day within the limits of my ability.
"Let me say that in advocating a return
to reason I do not advocate abandonment
of our Interest in facts. I proclaim the value
of observation and experiment. 1 would pro-
claim also the value of rational thought and
would suggest that without it, facts may
prove worthless, trivial and irrelevant— ra-
tional thought is the only basis for educa-
tion," so said a great scholar.
In this spirit let us examine the speech
of this knight in golden armor who came
to slay, and to save the virtue of tax-exempt
foundations.
Most psychologists, teachers, and advertis-
ing men know that repetition fixes an idea
or symbol in the mind.
IV
Despite Dr. Hutchins' fervent disclaimer,
in the title and first paragraph of his speech,
Fund for the Republic is repeated four times,
once more than the number of times the
sponsor's product needs to be mentioned in
a radio commercial. ' ;
This disclaimer hardly balances the im-
pression, and, by the way, if he was speak-
ing without even consulting his trustees, he
reduces them to the level of impotent win-
dow dressing.
He avers, however, that the foundations
have been doing a good deal of talking
lately. Does he mean through their presi-
dents and without consulting their trustees?
Does this concerted activity indicate the
overt evidence of a hitherto covert condition?
In view of his disclaimer, I wonder who
paid for mimeographing his speech, who paid
his expenses to Washington — and, you will
recall, when a member of the club asked in
one of the questions the amount of his
salary he said he could not hear him. By
the power of subpena, it would have been
easy for us to have obtained his salary and
that of all other foundation officials.
Since tax-exempt foundations are by na-
ture public trusts, the public does have a
right to know the salaries, and expenses of
officials but our committee was interested in
getting more significant information. How-
ever, if Dr. Hutchins, due to the complexity
Of figures involved, should forget what his
salary is, I shall be glad to inform him.
v
Parenthetically, I might say I received no
extra compensation for my laborious assign-
ment, nor did I charge any of my consider-
able expenses to the committee, except a
very few telephone calls.
My efforts were purely a labor of love — if
any. Although, I realize the difficulty Dr.
Hutchins may have in agreeing that any
Member of Congress with whom he may dis-
agree is interested only in doing a good job.
After 34 years of public service, what other
purpose would he expect a man of my age
to have.
Much .of Dr. Hutchins' attack was directed
at me personally, as though the whole in-
vestigation had been my oersonal plot
against Foundations.
The fact is, as painful as it may be to
him, the resolution directing the investiga-
342665—54360
tion was passed by the House of Represent-
atives by a strong majority vote, both Re-
publicans and Democrats voting for it.
There are some 7,000 foundations at the
present time. Their aggregate funds amounl
to about $iy 2 billion and they have annua:
income in excess of $600 million.
The foundations of $10 million capital, oi
over, comprise 7 percent of the foundations
but comprise 56 percent of the total endow-
ment and 32 percent of the annual income
The origin and nature of foundations, as
well as their effect on our tax structure, give!
the Congress ample basis for an investiga.
tion of them.
Due to the nature of our tax laws, th<
birthrate of foundations is increasing at ai
alarming rate. The possibility exists that £
large part of American industry may eventU'
ally find its way into foundations.
VI
Because of the tax exemption grantee
them, foundations are public trusts an<
must be dedicated to public purposes
Through these tax exemptions an additiona
tax burden is put on the American taxpayer
The rest of the people must pay heavie:
taxes, for example, because the Ford family
was relieved of estate taxes upon the crea
tion of the Ford Foundation, and becausi
the foundation itself pays no income tax oi
90 percent of the profits of the Ford Moto:
Co. it receives in dividends.
The duty follows, in Congress, to maki
certain funds thus provided are not diverted
to either unlawful enterprises or any enter
prise outside of tax exemption privileges
Citizens with their own money may pro
mote any cause, good or bad, not forbiddei
by law, but tax-exempt funds should no
be used to propagandize for the theories o
either Karl Marx or Mark Hannah.
For instance, the Fund for the Republl
is now distributing a one-hour edition o
Mr. Edward R. Murrow's teleshow with Di
Robert Oppenheimer. This would be a per
fectly legitimate thing for an individual ti
do with his own money, but it is not under
standable how the tax-exempt foundatioi
gets into it since it is obvious that Mi
Murrow's program was not designed to b
an objective study, but an opportunity fo
Dr. Oppenheimer to make a defense of hi
conduct.
The directive of the enabling resolutioi
setting up the committee was to "determin
if any foundations or organizations are usin
their resources for purposes other than pur
poses for which they were created."
This language gives full faith and credi
to the high purposes for which the founda
tions were organized.
The investigation was not directed agains
foundations as an institution in America:
life.
I feel honored to have been selected fc
the presidency of a foundation— now a sma
one, but which gives every promise of be
coming an important one. This foundatioi
So long as I am connected with it, will
always toe open to inquiry.
VII
Dr. Hutchins' remarks were intended to
convey the impression that the, committee
had concluded that foundations had con-
tributed nothing of consequence to the
public.
Either he had not read the report or he
purposely suppressed the statement to be
found on page 3 of the report and italicized
for emphasis, reading as follows: "The com-
mittee was and is well aware of the many
magnificent services which foundations have
rendered to the people of the United States
In many fields and areas, particularly in
medicine, public health, and science. Noth-
ing has occurred to change its initial con-
fiction that the foundation as an institution
Is desirable and should be encouraged. If <
little time is spent in this report reciting
the good which the foundations have done,
It is not because this committee is unaware
yl it or in any way reluctant to acknowledge
It. Rather, this committee considers that
t is necessarily concerned with the evalua-
tion of criticisms. A fair judgment of the
work and the position of foundations in our
society must obviously take into account the
*reat measure of benefit for which they have
jeen responsible. At the same time, the
jower of these foundations is so great that
i proper evaluation must give great weight
;o the dangers which have appeared in their
>peratlons in certain areas of activity."
The report makes utterly clear it is not an
ittack upon foundations as such, and that
t is, in general, in one broad area of activity
;hat foundations have been widely criticized,
hat of the so-called social sciences.
In this area criticism comes from highly
ireditable and qualified persons.
On the nature of these criticisms, Dr.
lutchins spent no time, satisfying himself
o toss off the report with nasty personal
nsinuations and attack by epithet.
VIII
No reasonable man can accept Dr. Hutch-
as* unctuous suggestion that our inquiry
.t once brands the esteemed and highly
laced directors of all the foundations as
ither fools or knaves. We all know as a
latter of routine these operations are car-
led on by the paid administrative staffs.
The directors never presume to be in inti-
late daily touch with administrative de-
Isions. I might say, primarily for Dr.
Eutchins' benefit that the Ford Foundation
rufltees by resolution specifically relieved
iiemselves of this responsibility by organiz-
lg in such a manner as to expressly exclude
lemselves from the detail of selection and
len said: "The founders of at least two
irger American foundations intended their
•ustees to devote a major part of their time
) the actions and conduct of foundation
lairs. Usually this arrangement has not
roved practicable * * * for the program of
842666—54360
a foundation may be determined more cer-
tainly by selection of its top officers than
by any statement of policy or by any set of
directions."
We cannot escape the conclusion that the
trustees of this foundation abdicated their
trust responsibility in assenting to this plan
of operation under which everything except
possibly the establishment of glittering gen-
eralities could be left to the employees.
Dr. Hutchins accused the committee of
being guilty of fraud, absurd charges, scan-
dalous conduct, wild and squalid presen-
tation, and in a climatic obiter dictum he
said the Reece investigation in its inception
and execution was a fraud.
These are phrases one hardly expects to
hear uttered before such a discriminating
audience. Such arrogance does not reflect
credit upon academicians.
These blanket charges impugn the integ-
rity of, not only a duly constituted commit-
tee and its members, but the integrity of the
House of Representatives itself, and I am
glad to address myself to these charges and
give you an account of the work of the com-
mittee so far as time may permit.
IX
In a spirit of fairness, our committee be-
gan with what turned out to be a mistake
in this instance: We decided to follow one
of America's fundamental concepts of Jus-
tice and procedure, namely, to make known
the nature of the inquiry before the hear-
ings began.
The evidence that had been gathered by
the staff pointed to one simple underlying
situation, namely, that the major founda-
tions by subsidizing collectivistic-minded
educators, had financed a socialist trend In
American Government.
We informed the foundations in advance
that our findings suggested that the foun-
dations had for a long time been exercising
powerful, although sometimes indirect polit-
ical influence in both domestic and foreign
policy, predominantly toward the left — to
say nothing of the support by the founda-
tions of the Institute of Pacific Relations
which lead the movement to turn China over
to the Communists and which was admit-
tedly Communist dominated.
The doubts and reservations concerning
the validity of the complaints against the
large foundations were largely dispelled by
the almost hysterical reaction of the foun-
dations to the summary presented to the
committee by the committee staff on the
opening day of the hearings.
The excitement bordered on panic; as was
observed by the demonstrations through
the public relations channels of the large
foundations and this convinced me, and
others of the American public, judging from
the letters received and which are still being
received in my office, that the general picture
which had taken shape, was not very far
from the truth.
The foundations, being well aware of the
nature of the duties and responsibilities of
the committee, set up what might be termed
a defensive barrage. This barrage was sue-.*
cessful to a degree in smearing the commit- I
tee and preventing the full facts from get- '
ting into the public press. ;
Concerning the difficulty of our task, Johni
O'Donnell wrote in the New York Dailyj
News : '«-"
"From the very start the special House
committee created to investigate our Na-
tion's multibillion tax-exempt foundations
faced an almost impossible task. This was
to tell the taxpayers that the incredible was,
in fact, the truth.
"The incredible fact was that the huge
fortunes piled up by such industrial giants
as John D. Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie,
Henry Ford, etc., were today being used to
discredit the free-enterprise system which
gave them birth."
x
There is no doubt but that the large foun-
dations and their satellites knew far better
than did the committee where the bodies of
their collectivism were buried, and as a re-
sult, their champion on the committee, the
ranking minority member, could be thor-
oughly briefed on how to frustrate and dis-
credit the various witnesses called before
the committee.
The number of interruptions and the in-
tensity of the vituperations heaped upon
these witnesses by the ranking minority
member was without precedent in the his-
tory of congressional investigations.
And is it not astonishing that Dr. Hutch-
ins, who poses as the great champion of civil
liberties and whose fund for the republic
was set up as a defender of witnesses before
congressional committees, if not to inves-
tigate the investigatorial processes of Con-
gress, has not offered one word of criticism
of the conduct of Mr. Hays?
Contrast this silence with his slanderous
personal attacks upon the committee major-
ity.
On the contrary, Dr. Hutchins joined with
Congressman Hays in slandering the critical
witnesses, referring to them as "witnesses of
dubious standing."
By dubious did he mean Professor Emeritus
Briggs, of Columbia; Professor Hobbs, of
Pennsylvania; Professor Rowe, of Yale; and
Professor Colgrove, formerly of Northwest-
ern?
Did he mean to include also Professors
Sorokin and Zimmerman, of Harvard, and
Boasard, of Pennsylvania, who gave highly
critical testimony by letter?
I suppose the answer is that anyone who
resists the foundations' intellectual straight-
jacket is of dubious standing and should be
publicly discredited.
When the pattern of the opposition tactics
became obvious, I, as chairman, made up
my mind that the only thing to do was to try
to conquer discourtesy with courtesy, and
342665—54360
throughout the hectic hearings I tried m
successfully to persuade Congressman Ha:
to a reasonable pattern of behavior.
• Mr. Hays repeatedly villified other mec
bers of the committee and questioned the
good faith. He publicly, from the rostrui
accused the chairman of lying and being
coward, and accused the genteel Mr. Goo<
win of duplicity and cowardice.
~~* XI
The following excerpt which I, as qhai
man, had deleted from the printed reco:
in an effort to maintain the dignity of t]
committee, is illustrative of the violent ai
abusive remarks, exceeding in improprlet
remarks for which a Senator was recent
brought up on charges:
"The Chairman. Now, the gentleman fro
Ohio, I am sure, is not going to get anyboc
worked up or irritated here. If he has th
in mind he might just as well subside, b
cause the chairman for one has made up b
mind that he is not going to let any bypl:
get him out of temper. That would impa
the usefulness of this committee. • * *
"Mr. Hays. I will say this to the gentl
man, that out where I come from we have
saying that if a man doublecrosses you one
that is his fault; if he doublecrosses yc
twice, that is your fault. I just want you
know you won't get the second opportunity
"The Chairman. Even that statement
not going to provoke the chairman, but the
is no living man can justifiably say that tb
— chairman — that this man who happens
be chairman at this time — has ever doubl.
crossed anybody or he had failed to keejj h
■. word... ■
"Mr. Hays. I am saying both,
i "The Chairman. That is all right,
' — "Mr. Hays. Is that clear enough? The
is no inference there is there?
"The Chairman. That does not disturb n
a particle.
"Mr. Hays. I know, you are pretty hard
disturb. I thought they had more guts
Tennessee.
""" "The Chairman. You are not going to pr
voke me. You need not worry; I have alreai
made up my mind on that."
I am told that I demonstrated conslderab
forbearance, and I believe I did, althou{
that was a difficult moment when Mr. Ha-
impugned not only my personal integri
but my physical courage.
I was tempted to compare military recon
with him, but that would not have, been
very adult impulse to follow.
XII
By this time most of you gentlemen a
probably familiar with the world's reco:
which Mr. Hays has set for marathon inte
ruptions of a witness.
In the case of one highly respected witne
who was endeavoring to give the committ
some information, Mr. Hays interrupted 2'
times in 185 minutes. — — —• ~-—-~^ ■-—■■— .
And even though the committee passed a
rule that a witness should be permitted to
flhish bis presentation before being ques-
tioned and cross-questioned, Mr. Hays
angrily declared in public session that he
would interrupt whenever and wherever he
pleased, and to say that he made good his
word is an understatement.
. . Eminent professors among the witnesses
were referred to publicly by Mr. Hays during
the hearings as "crackpots'* and as having
been "dredged up by the committee staff,"
statements now echoed by Dr. Hutchins here.
An eminent Catholic scholar, Sister
Margaret McCarran, was characterized by Mr.
Hays as incompetent and as having secured
her doctorate degree through political in-
fluence, presumably that of her father, the
then senior Senator from Nevada.
' The best answer to this remark which was
manifestly made in an effort to discredit
damaging testimony is a letter I received
from Bishop Bryon J. McEntegart, rector of
Catholic University, and which might be
said was written with Cardinal Spellman's
knowledge.
It is a long letter so I will quote only three
sentences :
• "It has come to my notice that at a hear-
ing of your committee in early June, the
assertion was made that a doctoral degree
was granted at Catholic University of Amer-
ica as a result of pressure.
"On behalf of the University I wish to
deny that allegation as completely false.
* * * If the unwarranted assertion referred
to above is included in the record of your
hearings, may I ask that this letter be given
equal prominence in your record."
XIII
Mr. Hays' technique of frustrating the
testimony even included heckling the ma-
jority members of the committee during
their questions and cross-examination.
It became apparent, therefore, that the
appearances and testimony of the founda-
tion representatives would be a farce be-
cause Mr. Hays would never permit cross-
examination, and there was nothing I could
do about it because as you gentlemen know,
..there is no force which governs the behavior
Of members of congressional committees, ex-
cept that of self-control and common
courtesy.
'.. The majority members of the committee
therefore, decided that further hearings
-would be fruitless.
To those of you who may have been given
-the erroneous impression by Dr. Hutchins
and others, that this cancellation was not a
•unanimous majority action and that Con-
Sgressman Goodwin did not concur, I refer
tjSou to page 945 of the committee hearings,
which contains the following statement sent
(to me in writing, and I quote :
"I cannot be at the meeting on founda-
tions tomorrow, and in the meantime I
%ant you to know I think there should be
342665—64360
an immediate cancellation of all public
hearings. Signed, Angier L. Goodwin."
Obviously, the cancellation of the formal
testimony of the large foundations and their
satellites was all to their advantage from a
public opinion standpoint because virtually
none of the evidence against them had ap-
peared in public print and the self -cleansing
statements which took the place of their
testimony were printed verbatim plus favor-
able editorial comments in most of the im-
portant newspapers that came to my atten-
tion.
Dr. Hutchins' speech supports the false
statement in Dean Griswold's fifth amend-
ment to the effect that "After developing the
case against the foundations, this commit-
tee closed its hearings without giving the
foundations a chance to present their de-
fense."
Now, here are copies of parts I and II of
the hearings. In part I, pages 794 to 865
consist of foundation testimony and prac-
tically all of part II is foundations testimony.
In a single issue of the New' York Tiriies,
July 25, the self-cleansing brief of the Ford
Foundation "was,, given 2*~Teature stbries
totaling about 4,000 words.
One story praised the*~"Ford Foundation;
the other smeared the committee.
I think you gentlemen will agree that that
is thorough press coverage.
xiv
I now want to say a few words about Amer-
ica's large tax-exempt foundations— - the ones
who are at the center of this storm.
Dr. Hutchins. when he was here, ridiculed
the committee opinion that these founda-
tions were involved in an inteilectuff carjel
Tmo^sfaleirtEa^
in "new wrinkles to the distortions that we
have become accustomed to In congressional
Investigations."
This language of Dr. Hutchins is typical of
the vituperation which has been poured on
us by the professional operators of founda-
tions.
Realizing the impossibility of controvert-
ing the massive evidence which we produced,
they have resorted to smear and slander.
They cannot disprove the existence of the
- intelle ctual cartel which we^so clear ivdls-
" "'closed— -a cartel which, using public money,
has so effectively influenced academic and
public opinion both, in the domestic and in-
ternational fields.
Among many warnings concerning, this
caital ci:*33 one from Prof. Carl O. Sauer,
of the University of California:
"In American social science it has indeed
become a dominant folkway to associate
progress with putting the Job Inquiry into
large-scale organizations, under formally
prescribed methods, and with limited objec-
tives. Having adopted the name 'science' we
are impressed by the 'method of science' as
inductive, quantitative, and experimental.
We are even told that such is the only proper
method."
Professor Sauer refers to the top social-
science planners as "an elite, fashioning in-
creasingly the direction and limits of our
work" and says "a serious and delicate prob-
lem is posed by the growing role of the na-
tional research council and foundation, the
last years having seen a continually increas-
ing concentration of influence."
You know, these planners, of whom Dr.
Hutchins is an outstanding example, have
cleverly adopted a Communist tactic.
Communists charge that the rest of the
world is aggressive.
Similarly, these planners accuse the Com-
mittee on Foundations of wishing to suppress
freedom of thought.
The fact is that the intellectual cartel
Which they have created itself suppresses
freedom of thought by expending vast mil-
lions of foundation money under their con-
trol to determine opinion, academic and pub-
lic, in the leftish directions they favor.
There is extensive testimony to this effect
by most competent witnesses,
xv
The foundations have placed great stress
upon the fact that the amount of money
actually spent in the social sciences is not
enough to finance an intellectual revolution.
But the fact remains that, working at the
fountainhead, it does not take much money
to exercise virtual control over the relatively
small number of people and institutions who
in turn can control huge areas of policy and
public opinion.
This power to impose brainwashing at the
key points is against everything America
stands for.
Evidence of this power comes from Prof.
Charles E. Merriam, of the University of
Chicago, one of the Nation's most notable
educators.
Professor Merriam, himself inclined to-
ward collectivism, was, at one time, an im-
portant dispenser of foundation funds.
In discussing his experience in this capac-
ity, Professor Merriam said to one of his
colleagues : "Money is power and for the last
few years I have been dealing with more
power than a professor should ever have in
his hands."
As proof of the atmosphere of fear in
which the conservative educator lives and
works today, I would like to mention that
the most pertinent information the com-
mittee received concerning the close-shop
that apparently is being imposed on edu-
cators came from men who refuse to risk
retaliatory action but were willing to give
me off-the-record information.
One of them, who is a celebrated classical
educator and known to all of you, said : "It
is sad but true that it would be a waste of
time for any graduate student of mine,
however brilliant, to apply for a scholar-
ship from the powers that be. They simply
do not conform to the new collectivistic order
of modern social science in America today."
342665—54360
Another internationally known professo
ar-d economist told us that in the large uni
versity where he teaches, no assistant pro
fessor would dream of not being a foilowe
of the Keynes theory of deficit spending an<
the monetization of a public debt becaus
only a supporter of Keynes could hope fo
promotion to a full professorship.
One of the most brilliant and most coura
geous social scientists in the country todaj
Dr. A. H. Hobbs of the University of Penn
sylvania, is still merely an assistant pro
fessor.
He has been passed over for promotion
and the University authorities have made i
utterly clear, ever since he began to poln
out the limitations of social science as i
guide to social reform and began warnim
against the effect of such efforts upon thi
American way of life.
xvi
Regarding the question whether the foun^
dations are supporting actual or potentially
subversive projects, Dr. Hutchins virtuallj
defeated his own case when he was attempt-
ing to point out how absurd these suspicion!
were.
He said in his speech before you that ac-
cording to the Reece committee's definition
support of social planning by the founda-
tions could be subversion.
This was said in derision because in Dr
Hutchins' opinion no rational man can tak«
this statement seriously.
This shows the vast gulf between the ra-
tionality of Dr. Hutchins and that of the
millions of Americans, Democrats as well at
Republicans, who have come to realize thai
the planning of the social scientist reform-
ers for their brave new world is actually 01
potentially subversive.
It is "subversive" because it seeks to in-
troduce Fabian socialism into the United
States.
The word "subversion" connotes a proc-
ess of undermining; and these planners,
these "social engineers" as they call them-
selves, who deem themselves entitled to lead
us common people into better pastures, seek
to undermine some of our most precious in-
stitutions, one being our unique system of
enterprise of free management and free labor.
There is no need to doubt this.
They have been candid among themselves.
To some degree, they even have been can-
did with us common people.
They have set down their objectives as
clearly as did Hitler in his Mein Kampf.
One of the documents which frankly dls«
closes their plans is the Conclusions and
Recommendations of the American Histori-
cal Association's Commission on Social
Studies, a call to American educators to
teach collectivism to our youth.
This project was financed by the Carnegie
Foundation.
In his statement on behalf of the Carnegie
Foundation filed with the committee, its
president, Charles Dollard* sought to deny
the socialist nature of this report which be-
came an important influence in education.
He stated: "The worst that can be said
ts that the authors (of this report) not only
reported this trend but appeared to accept
it cheerfully. What they were accepting was
lot socialism — it was the New Deal.
But gentlemen, this was not the New Deal.
My authority is none other than Prof,
toward J. Laski, the top philosopher of the
3ritish Socialist Party, who said of these
jonclusions and recommendations: "At bot-
tom, and stripped of its carefully neutral
)hraseS( the report is an educational program
or a socialist America."
Yet, after the Conclusions and Recom-
mendations was published, the president of
he Carnegie Corp. stated that the public
iwed its authors a vote of thanks,
xvn
Those of you who were here when Dr.
lutchins spoke will remember his eloquent
losing words: "The Fund for the Republic
s a sort of fund for the American dream. I
'.o not think the fund can make the Ameri-
an dream come true, but perhaps it can help
;eep it alive and clear."
I would like to give you my impressions
f the American dream that is now occupying
he attention of the foundation-financed in-
ellectual cartel.
Ever since the world began, well-meaning
eople, lacking faith in the common man to
onduct his own affairs, have promoted the
lea of government by an elite.
Plato wanted his perfect society run by
11 powerful, allwise and, of course, incor-
jptible philosophers.
Francis Bacon wanted his world run by a
roup of top scientists answering to the same
^educations.
Robert Hutchins and the other members
I this self-annointed professional intellec-
lal aristocracy dream of an America gov-
■ned by social scientists, guided by their
snign infallibility under a system which
ees the people from the responsibilities of
eedom.
Mr. Pendleton Herring, of the Social Sci-
lce Research Council, wrote in 1947 con-
rning this matter: "One of the greatest
seds in the social sciences Is for the devel-
>ment of skilled practitioners who can use
cial data for the cure of social ills as doe-
rs use scientific data to cure bodily ills."
The degree to which this elite penetrated
e Federal Government is indicated by the
47 report of the President's Commission
. Higher Education.
I would like to give you a few extracts
)m that report.
'It will take social science and social en-
leering to solve the problems of human
ations. Our people must learn to respect
3 need for special knowledge and tech-
;al training in this field as they have come
defer to the expert in physics, chemistry,
diclne and the other sciences."
343665—54360
I would like to mention that by no valid
definition can sociology and economics iden-
tify themselves as true science.
Seven years before this report was issued,
one of the members of the President's Com-
mission on Higher Education, Horace M.
Kallen, wrote a magazine article entitled,
"Can We Be Served By Indoctrination?"
I would like to quote two short paragraphs
from that article:
"I And within the babble of plans and
plots against the evils of our time one
only which does not merely repeat the past;
this is the proposal that the country's peda-
gogues shall undertake to establish them-
selves as the country's saviors." . .
After some elaboration, Dr. Kallen con-
cludes, "Having taken power, the teachers
must use it to attain the central purpose
of realizing the American dream. They must
operate education as the instrument of so-
cial regeneration. This consists of incul-
cating right doctrine."
Change the word "American" to "Fabian"
and you are pretty close to the truth.
Another phase of this American dream
might be found in another document for
professional pedagogues entitled, "Molders
of the American Mind," by Prof. Normal
Woelfel.
Here is one of his admonitions: "The
younger generation is on its own, and the
last thing that would interest modern youth
is the salvaging of the Christian tradition.
The environmental controls which technolo-
gists have achieved and the operations by
means of which workers earn their liveli-
hood need no aid or sanction from God nor
any blessing from the church."
And he adds this final touch: "In the
minds of the men who think experimentally,
America is conceived as having a destiny
which bursts the all too obvious limitations
of Christian religious sanctions and of capi-
talistic profit economy.
xvm
I am sure that this particular audience is
peculiarly aware of the difficulty of putting
into a small number of words any discussion
of a subject of the magnitude of this one,
particularly because only portions of the
ground have been properly explored.
I also realize that many in the audience
know more about some aspects of this sub-
ject than I do, because it is their business to
follow political and sociological trends.
Among these journalists are a number of
very fine people who honestly disagree with
me concerning the danger of Fabian social-
ism, and they are entitled to their opinion.
But I do not think that any Informed ob-
server of public aifairs would disagree with
me as to the evidence of its encroachment
upon the American economy.
For this reason, it is my opinion that the
great majority of the working newspapermen
of the United States, were they in possession
of all of the evidence concerning the opera-
tion of the large foundations, would agree
with me that foundation grants have know-
ingly given very substantial aid and comfort
to Fabian socialism in the United States and
unknowingly, or otherwise, given aid and
comfort to causes which are subversive in a
more literal sense.
Whether this is good or bad is, of course,
a matter of personal conviction, but in either
case, it Is not a proper activity for philan-
thropic foundations.
What are these foundation funds which
this intellectual elite presumes to use for
their own political purposes?
They are public funds, dedicated to the
public and necessarily so because they are
the product of tax exemption.
342666—54360
I submit that those who expend these
public trust funds should be subjected to
the highest fiduciary duty.
For my part, I am not willing to see foun-
dations given tax exemption to enable them
to promote ideologies detrimental to the.,
public welfare.
Even with its several faults, the report of
the committee is a competent one, and An
many ways an historic document;
Long after the pious protestations of its
adversaries have been forgotten, this record
will stand as the first determined effort to
alert the Nation to the presence of a force
which, if allowed to persist and grow, could
become stronger than the Government Itself.
». I. IDVHNHIHT MIHTINI OFFICd till
! ,-i
! U
COMPOSITE INDEX
TO
HEARINGS, APPENDIX, AND REPORT
OF THE
SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE
TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS AND
COMPARABLE ORGANIZATIONS
EIGHTY-THIRD CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON
H. Res. 217
[Index to Select Committee on Tax Exempt Foundations, Cox Committee,
H. Res. 561, 82d Cong., is a supplement to this index. See p. 155.]
UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
49720 WASHINGTON s 1955
r
COMPOSITE INDEX TO HEARINGS OF THE SPECIAL COM-
MITTEE TO INVESTIGATE TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS
AND COMPARABLE ORGANIZATIONS
Key to symbols
Symbol
Publication
Date
Pagination
h „-
Hearing, Part 1
May 10, 11,18-20,
24-26, June 2-4,
8, 9, 15-18, July
2, 9, 1954.
June 21, 1954
Dee. 16, 1954
Nov. 18 to Dec.
30, 1952.
1-943
a
A.ppendix, Part II „ _ _
945-1241
r
House Report No. 2681.,
1-432
Cox Committee Hearings Index pre-
pared for Russell Sage Foundation
by Sydney S. Spivack>
1-16
* This index Supplement will be found at the end of the Composite Index.
in
COMPOSITE INDEX
AAA r4G0
ABA Committee a 1054
ABA Journal a 1054
Abbott, Leonard D h 220
Abel, Theodore a 1184, 1185
Aberle, S. D a 1137
About the Kinsey Report (publication) h 131; r 69
Abraham Lincoln Brigade h 223,
253-255, 286, 317-319, 597, 598, 603, 643; a 989;
r 251, 261, 292, 294, 332, 333, 337, 347, 349, 385.
Abramovitz. (See Harrison & Abramovitz.)
Abrams, Charles h 779, 793; a 984, 990, 995
Abrams, Frank W h 346, 349, 376; a 1021
Abt, John r 287
Academic Freedom Rally r 342
Academy of Pedagogical Sciences h 838
Academy of Political Science h 872
Academy of Sciences of the USSR h 838, 847, 848
Acheson, Dean h 893, 918
Across Africa on Foot (publication) h 927
Across the Gobi Desert (publication) h 927
Action Committee to Free Spain Now r 228
ADA (Americans for Democratic Action) h 32, 41
Adamic, Louis h 34; a 1174, 1216
Adams, Dr h 855
Adams, Governor h 590
Adams, Arthur S a 1009, 1016
Adams, Gridley r 351
Adams, Jane h 223
Adams, John Quincy h 405, 805
Adams, Samuel h 311
Adams Memorial h 223
Adams School for Social Science r 349
Adamson, Ernie r 227
Adler, David h 74
Adler, Milton h 351
Adler, Mortimer h 42, 74; a 1042, 1043; r 162, 189, 227
Adult Education Association a 1165
Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (film) r 164
Advertising Council, Inc h 42; a 1031, 1043; r 221
Advisory Board (American Student Union) r 230, 353
Advisory Board (Film Audiences for Democracy) r 305, 306, 308
Advisory Board (Films for Democracy) r 305, 306, 308
2 COMPOSITE INDEX
Advisory Board of the American Committee for Protection of Pago
Foreign Born r 255
Advisory Board of Frontier Films T r 238, '327 , 336
Advisory Committee (Ford Fund for the Advancement of
Education) r 23, 38, 162
Advisory Committee on Postwar Foreign Policies h 885, 888
Advisory Council of Soviet Russia Today r 271
Athiopica (publication) a 1241
Affiliated Schools for Workers h 34
Africa (publication) h 928
Africa: Facts and Forecasts (publication) h 929
Africa in the War (pamphlet) r358
African Affairs Council r 268
Afros, Jack L r 409
After Defense— What? (pamphlet) r 131
After the War — Full Employment (pamphlet) rl31
Agar, John G . h 353
Agard, Walter R a 1009
Age of Jackson (publication) r 363
Age of Roosevelt (publication) r 363
Agee, James r 189
Agenda of Democracy (publication)^ r 132, 141
Agnes Scott College h 360
Agricultural Relief Act administration, Effects of Sales
Taxes (study) r 128
Agriculture Exchange (publication) r 233
Aid to China (Washington Committee) r 289, 323
Aid to Individuals (publication) h 832
Aid Which the Social Sciences Have Rendered and Can Render
to National Planning (report) h 473
Air War College h 941
Akeley, Delia J -_-- h 927
Alabama Farmers Union r 405
Alabama University a 1218
Albright, Horace M h 352
Albright College a 1229
Albu, Austen a 984
Alderman, Edwin A h 358
Alderson Reporting Co a 1035
Aldrich, Winthrop W h 353, 358, 891
ALES (American Labor Education Service) r 106-109
ALES-CIO World Affairs Institute a 1161
ALES Annotated List r 107
ALES Midwest Workers Education Conference-, a 1159, 1160; r 106
ALES Philadelphia Center r 106
Alexander, Robert J h793;a 981, 984
Alexander, Wallace McK h 340
Alice in Wonderland, Or Through the Looking Glass (publica-
tion) h588
All American Anti-Imperialist League h 222; r 229, 232, 307
All Eisler Program (Town Hall) r 250
All Men Are Created Equal (poster) a 1048
All-Union Party Congress r 368
w
COMPOSITE INDEX 3
Aii-Union Society for Cultural Relations With Foreign Coun- Page
tries (VOKS) h 273; 275; r 158
All Union Travel Co. (Intourist) r 158
All We Are and All We Have (publication) h 929
Allahabad Agricultural Institute a 1029
Allbaugh, Lelena G a 1073
Allen, Devere h 220
Allen, Edward W h 552
Allen, Frederick Lewis h 254, 289, 296, 301, 303, 346, 608
Allen, Raymond B h 343, 552
Allen, Froude, Hilen <fe DeGarmo (law firm) h 552
Allied Mission to Observe Elections in Greece h 886
Allied Voters Against Coudert al 171
Allis-Chalmers h 752
Allport, Alexander W h 897
Allyn & Bacon h 395
Alma Egan Hyatt Foundation a 1241
Almack, John C h 214
Altaian Foundation h 16
Altschul, Frank-_ T „_ r h 347
Alumni Homecoming Dinner Sponsoring Committee (Ameri-
can Student Union) r 306, 353
Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America a 977 ; r 287
Amerasia (publication) h 557, 558
America (article) a 1238
America: World Leader or World Led? (publication) h 927; r 173
America and Asia (publication) h 929 ; r 173
America in the Changing World (publication) h 938
America Discovers Its Songs (article) h 320
America First (organization) h 787, 788
America and the New World (publication) h929
America and the Refugees (publication) h34
American (publication) h 33 ; r 121
American Academy of Arts and Sciences a 999
American Academy of Political Science h902
American Academy of Political and Social Sciences h 74; r 51
American Advisory Organization h 266; r 152, 157
American Affairs (publication) h 36; a 1036
American Anthropological Association h 32, 818 ; a 999
American Antiquarian Society a 999
American Architect (publication) h 496
American Association for Adult Education h 674, 675
American Association for the Advancement of Science r 171
American Association of International Conciliation h 873, 906,
924; r 171
American Association of Junior Colleges a 1147
American Association for Public Opinion Research a 1036
American Association of School Administrators h 74, 482; a 1147
American Association for Social Security h 777, 778 ; a 990
American Association of Social Workers h32
American Association of the United Nations h 381 ; a 984, 1162
American Association of University Professors h 272,
275, 482, 681, 715; a 1239; r 142
American Bank Note Co h 553
/
4 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
American Bankers Association a 1044
American Bar Association h 196>
382; a 1031, 1052, 1054, 1219; r 111, 185, 188
American Bar Association Journal ^ _ _ a 1238
American Bar Foundation a 1031, 1054
American Birth Control League h 431
American Book Co h 393, 395
American Book Publishers Council h 395
American Bourgois Philosophy and Sociology in the Service of
Imperialism (publication) h 838, 848
American Broadcasting Co h 386
American Business and the Independent College (article) a 1239
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) h 39,
223, 303, 390, 902; r 228, 229, 231, 378, 379, 409
American Coalition of Patriotic, Civic and Fraternal Societies
(National Security Committee) r 408
American Commission to Negotiate Peace at Paris in 1918 h 878
American Committee for Anti-Nazi Literature,. a 1176
American Committee for Anti-Nazi German Seamen a 1171
American Committee for Cultural Freedom r 257
American Committee for the Defense of Leon Trotsky r 328, 379
American Committee for Democracy and Intellectual Freedom, h 222;
a 1170, 1171, 1215; r 228, 233, 250, 254, 258, 301, 304,
307, 311, 327, 331, 333, 335, 354, 363, 364, 375, 390
American Committee for International Student Congress
Against War and Fascism h 223
American Committee of Liberals for the Freedom of Mooney
and Billings h 222
American Committee for Protection of Foreign Born h 222,
223; a 1171, 1173; r 230, 232, 240, 246, 251, 255, 265,
267, 290, 291, 307, 311, 321, 326, 331, 333, 340, 344,
348, 349, 352, 354, 373, 375, 379, 381, 390, 401.
American Committee to Save Refugees a 1216;
r 248, 305, 309, 318, 335, 375, 377, 378
American Committee for Soviet Relations a 1176
American Committee for Struggle Against War a 1175,
1176; r 230, 232, 258, 318, 350
American Committee for Yugo-slav Relief r 265, 308
American Congress for Peace and Democracy r231,
232, 275, 326, 352
American Constitutional History (publication) h 524
American Continental Congress for Peace r 280, 321, 341, 381
American Contributions to Civilization (publication) a 1071
American Coordinating Committee for International Studies..- h 900
American Council for a Democratic Greece. r 269, 381
American Council on Education h 21,
46, 47, 74, 269, 275, 469-471, 475, 482, 612, 618, 620,
672, 674-677, 679, 681, 682, 686, 687, 689, 695, 698,
700, 701, 703-707, 713-716, 720, 722, 808; a 998, 1005,
1006, 1009, 1012, 1014-1016, 1081, 1112, 1124, 1147,
1236; r 45, 47, 52, 53, 129, 135, 136, 142, 157, 171.
COMPOSITE INDEX 5
Page
American Council of learned Societies h 21,
45, 48, 469, 470, 475, 476, 482, 525, 549, 556, 564, 569,
570, 580, 584, 589-592, 601-603, 612, 618, 808, 809,
' 894, 937; a 959, 998, 999, 1006, 1008, 1009, 1012, 1030,
1081, 1128, 1129, 1189, 1222, 1223, 1225-1229; r 26,
32, 39, 45, 47, 48, 53-57, 59, 81, 129, 137, 142, 171, 201
American Council on Public Affairs r 404
American Council on Race Relations r 329, 399
American Council on Soviet Relations h222;
a 1173, 1176; r 253, 256, 259, 318, 375, 380
American Delegation (UNESCO) r 108
American Dilemma (publication) _. h49, 58, 578, 592; a 967, 969; r 125
American Diplomacy, 1900-1950 (publication) r 306
American Economic Association. _ h 32, 818, 838, 847; a 993, 998, 999
American Education Fellowship h34, 35,
388, 395, 397, 398, 493, 675; a 1149; r 146, 151, 152
American Education Under Fire (pamphlet) h 327, 388, 397
American Educational League li 322, 324
American Farm Bureau Federation h881, 920
American Federation of Labor (AFL) „ h 746,
750, 751, 776, 780, 781, 784, 788, 789, 792. 920;
a 977, 981, 984, 995, 1159, 1169, 1233; r 97, 107, 396,
397, 400, 403.
American Federation of Teachers a 985, 1159; r 106, 396
American Folklore Society a 999
American Foundation for Political Education r221
American Foundations—Their Fields (publication) fa 669; a 1235
American Friends of the Chinese People h 222 ;
a 1216; r 230, 232, 234, 308, 354, 375
American Friends Service Committee h 389, 390 ;
r 186, 187, 211, 302, 351
American Friends of the Soviet Union a 1171; r 269, 317, 369
American Friends of Spanish Democracy h 222 ;
a 1170, 1171; r 229, 232, 237, 238, 247, 254, 259, 301,
304, 305, 308, 317, 318, 327, 331, 333, 335, 337, 350,
353, 355, 364, 369, 371, 375, 390, 391, 409.
American Friends of Spanish Democracy (Medical Bureau) r 237,
259, 277, 288, 292, 304, 317, 327, 337, 370, 371, 375
American Fund for Public Service h 222 ;
r 229, 241, 297, 308, 328, 395, 396
American Geographical Society h 286
American-German Review a 1241
American Hawaiian Steamship Co h 553
American Heritage Council r 221'
American Heritage Foundation r 46
American Heritage Program of the National Library Associa-
tion T -_ r 221
American Heritage Project (American Library Association) — r 164
American Historical Association h21,
32, 46, 58, 285-287, 469-471, 475. 476, 478-480, 488,
506, 603, 612, 617, 697, 720, 818, 838, 847; a 967, 974,
975, 999, 1081, 1112; r 45, 53, 129, 140, 141, 153, 171,
425.
6 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
American Historical Society h 286, 400, 476, 894; r 32, 137
American Indian Federation r 362
American Indians (article) h319
American Institute (Moscow University) 158,1 59, 1 61
American Institute of Electrical Engineers h 496
American Institute of Management (AIM) h 370, 373, 377
American Intercontinental Peace Conference r 273, 274
American International College a 1230
American Investors Union, Inc a 1171, 1176, 1216
American Journal of Economics and Sociology a 1239
American Journal of International Law h 556
American Journal of Psychiatry h 123, 134
American Journal of Public Health a 1238
American Judicature Society h 196
American Labor Education Service h 724;
a 1158-1167, 1169; r 45, 106-109
American Labor Party r 1Q4 7
268,285,322,344,348,386,409
American Law Institute a 1 142
American League Against War and Facism h 222;
a 1170; r 230-232, 251, 253, 258, 259, 298, 318, 326,
333, 335, 344, 348, 351-353, 376, 398, 415.
American League to Enforce Peace h 926
American League for Peace and Democracy h 222 ;
a 1169, 1171, 1176; r 109, 160, 228, 231, 232, 234, 235,
238-240, 251, 253, 254, 259, 260, 275, 276, 288, 292,
314, 318, 326, 335, 349, 352, 369, 376, 390, 391, 398,
411.
American League for Peace and Democracy (Theatre Arts
Committee) r288, 289
American Legion h 29, 40, 243; a 1156; r 338, 363
American Legion Magazine a 1238
American Legion Subversive Activities Committee r 338
American Library Association. __ h 327, 590; a 955, 1031 ; r 164, 166
American Locomotive Co . a 1048
American Management Association h 495
American Medical Association a 1156
American Mercury (publication) h222;
a 1216, 1240, 1241; r 114, 202
American Mining Congress h 495
American Mining Congress Journal b 496
American Music Alliance of Friends of the Abraham Lincoln
Brigade - r 251
- American Musicological Society a 999
American Newspaper Publishers Association r9
American Numismatic Society. a 999
American Oriental Society a 999
American Patriots, Inc h 329
American Peace Crusade. _ h 223; r 274, 278, 285, 340, 356, 381, 402
American Peace Crusade Open Letter to the President r 285
American Peace Crusader (publication) r 274
American Peace Mobilization (APM) r 237,
336, 341, 356, 358, 395, 405
COMPOSITE INDEX 7
Page
American People's Congress and Exposition for Peace r 274,
278, 381, 382, 402
American Perspectives (publication) a 1241
American Philological Association a 999
American Philosophical Association h 847, 854, 902; a 999; r 47
American Policy in the Far East, 1931- (publication) h 928;
r 173, 235
American Political Association h 580
American Political Science Association h32,
556, 560, 564-569, 573, 585, 590, 617, 818; a 993, 999;
r 26, 27, 91, 115, 117, 131, 200, 201.
American Political Science Review (publication) h556
American Progress Foundation h 292, 302
American Progressives h 792; r 313, 379
American Protective League h 496
American Psychological Association h 32, 818, 847
American Pushkin Committee ; h 223
American Review of Reviews (publication) h361
American Round Table (organization) al 043
American Russian Institute h 929;
a 1215, 1222-1224; r 173, 174, 246, 256, 289, 320, 330,
333, 366.
American School in Japan al 197, 1205
American Senate and the Treaty-Making Power (publication) _ h 556
American Sexual Behavior and the Kinsey Report (publica-
tion) r 68
American Slav Congress a 1 174 ;
r 323, 340, 344, 348, 380, 382, 406
American Slave Congress (Report) r 323
American Socialist Party r98
American Society for Aesthetics a 999
American Society of Cinematographers h429
American Society for Cultural Relations with Russia a 1176
American Society of International Law h 556, 873
American Society of Mechanical Engineers h 496
American Society of Public Administration a 1209
American Society for Technical Aid to Spanish Democracy r 259
American Sociological Review (publication) r77
American Sociological Society h 32, 818; a 999
American Soldier (publication) hi 50>
151, 160, 161, 898; a 967, 972, 974
American Soldier project r 74, 75
American-Soviet Cultural Conference - r252
American Soviet secret police agency in the United States r 356
American Sponsoring Committee (World Peace Congress), r 273, 280
American Statistical Association h 32, 495, 818; r 128
American Student Union h 222;
a 1173; r 230, 353; r 187, 232, 235-237, 277, 306, 308,
312, 326, 353, 380, 393, 394, 411, 415, 416.
American Student Union Invites You (leaflet) r 306
American Technical Society h 394
American Telephone & Telegraph Co _-_ h 349, 354, 360, 446
American Textbook Publishers Institute h 395, 396
8 COMPOSITE INDEX
Pago
American Theatre (article) h 320
American Trade Union Delegation r 256
American University (Beirut) a 1029
American Vietnamese Foundation a 983
American Way (publication) h 34
American Way of Business (pamphlet) rl55
American Women for Peace r 382
American World Policies (publication) h 926
American Writers and Artists Committee r 259
American Writers Congress. _ r 261, 282, 336, 341, 346, 348, 365, 391
American Youth Commission h 74, 696, 697 ; r 136
American Youth Congress h 222;
a 1171, 1175, 1176; r 187, 230, 232, 236, 237, 276, 296
302, 336, 355, 369, 377, 382, 394-396, 411-413, 413,
415, 416.
American Youth Congress (Fourth Annual Conference) r 276
American Youth For Democracy r 296,
319, 333, 344, 348, 382, 394, 395
Americanization Committee (National Society, Sons of the
American Revolution) h 386, 387, 396; r 147
Americans for Democratic Action (ADA) h 32, 41; r 407
America's Future, Inc h 322, 324, 731
America's Outposts (article) h 319
America's Second Crusade (publication) rl21
America's Stake in Britain's Future (publication) h 929
America's Struggle for Electric Power (publication) h 793
Amherst College h 220, 350, 750; a 977, 1051, 1219; r 99
An Amiable Adventure (publication) h 927
Amster,I r 258, 298
Amsterdam World Congress Against War r 255, 318, 350, 398
An American Dilemma (publication) r 89, 91, 184
An Atlas of the Empire (publication) _ h 928
An Atlas of the U. S. S. R. (publication) h 929
An Invitation to American Labor to Participate in a Peace
Congress (leaflet) r 274
And the Bravest of These (publication) h 929
Ander, Oscar Fritiof a 1231
Anderson, Albin Theodore a 1231
Anderson, C. Arnold a 1184, 1187; r 62, 63
Anderson, Dillon h 340
Anderson, Eleanor C. (Mrs. Sherwood Anderson) a 1159,
1170; r 106, 227, 228
Anderson, Florence h 340
Anderson, H. A a 1237
Anderson, Howard R h 64
Anderson, M. D h 16
Anderson, Paul B h 347
Anderson, Rachael Evans h 64
Anderson, Mrs. Sherwood (Eleanor C. Anderson) a 1159, 1170
Anderson Foundation h 16
Anderson, Wrenn & Jenks (law firm) h 554
Andrew Jackson High School h64
Andrews, E. Benjamin h 358
COMPOSITE INDE£ 9
Paga
Andrews r 11,22, 96
Andrews, F. Emerson h 60; a 1117
Andrews, Fanny Fern h 927
Andrews, Frank a 1235-1237
Andrews, T. Coleman h 418-
422, 442-448, 453, 454, 456-458, 460-463, 734, 735,
740, 786; a 1120.
Angell, James R h 338, 339, 353, 358
Angell, Norman h 927, 928; r 173, 228
Annual Report of the Fund for Adult Education (1951) h 41
Answers for Americans (Facts Forum broadcast) rl74
Anthony, Alfred W a 123,5
Anti-Defamation League h 21, 47
Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith h 388, 389; r 211, 432
Anti-Defamation League Bulletin (B'nai B'rith) r211
Anti-Lynching Bill r 352
Anti-Nazi Council of the American League for Peace and
Democracy r231
Anti-Soviet Slander Exposed as a Forgery (article) r 389
Apotheker, Henry. __. r 409, 410
Appalachian Mountain Club a 1209
Appell, Donald r 301
Appleget, Thomas B h 357
Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc h 394
Approach to Foundations (article) a 1238
Aquinas, Thomas a 1168
Arabic Works a 1002
Arbuthnot, Thomas S __ r 338
Archaeological Institute of America a 999
Are Our Teachers Afraid to Teach? (article) h 490
Are We Being Talked Into War (pamphlet) r 322
Arendtz, Herman F___" h 927
Arens, Herman J a 1229
Aristotle. ____-_- ,. h 805; a 1168
Arizona University a 1230
Armstrong h 346
Armstrong, Hamilton Fish h 886, 928
Army Field Manual (publication) r.97
Arndt, Christian O h 64, 390
Arnett, Trevor h 353, 359, 362, 363
Arrangements Committee for the United States Congress
Against War r 230
Artef Theatre r 292
Artists' Front To Win The War__. r 251, 265, 344, 348
Artists and Writers Dinner Club r 409
Arts and the American Craftsmen (article) h 320
Ashbee, C. R ... h 926
Assignment in Utopia (publication) h 928
Associated Hospital Service of New York h351
Associated Research Council a 1006, 1162
Associated Women of the Federation h 881
Association of American Colleges h 268,
275, 681, 715, 874; a 1238, 1240
10 COMPOSITE INDEX
Pago
Association of American Geographers a 999
Association of American Law Schools h 32; a 1219
Association of American Universities. _ h 681, 715, 874; a 1113; r 335
Association of Land Grant Colleges and Universities h 482; r 143
Association Press a 1235, 1236
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
(NEA)___. h 64, 388, 489; a 1150; r 190
Atheism (article) : r 92
Atherton, J. Ballard h 552
Atlanta Constitution h 349
Atlanta Federal Penitentiary r 267, 392
Atlanta University — h64
Atlantic (publication) a 1237
Atlantic Monthly a 1238, 1240
Atlantic Monthly Supplement r 189
Atlas Engine Works h 360
Atmono, S a 984
Atomic Age (publication) h 793
Atomic Age Opens (publication) h 929
Attilio h929
Attlee h 595
Auden, W. H r 189
Augustus College a 1231
Ausable Club a 1181
Austin, Eduardo a 1229
Austin, Warren Robinson h 65 ; r 191
Author Meets the Critic (television show) a 981
Auto Workers Union , CIO (region 8) r 399
Avalon Foundation h 16
Axtelle, George E a 985
Aydelotte, Frank h 343
Ayer, Fred C a 1149
Ayerbach, Mrs. George S a 1181
Ayors, Leonard a 974, 1235
B
Bach, Otto Karl a 1231
Bachman, Dorothy a 1165
Bachman, Frank P h'363
Background of African Liberation Struggles (seminar) r 268
Bacon (see Allyn & Bacon.)
Bacon, Francis b 805
Bacon, Robert h 340; a 1057
Baehr, George a 984
Baehr, Harry h 901
Baghdad and Points East (publication) h 927
Bagley a 1 145
Bail Fund of the Civil Rights Congress of New York_ r 278, 345, 350
Baird College a 984
Baker, Frank E a 12,16
Baker, Lawrence G a 1237
Baker, Newton D h 338; a 969
Bakke, E. Wright a 983
composite momx 11
Page
Baldanzi, George h 778; r 104
Baldwin, C. B ._ a 1173
Baldwin, Roger .._. h 904; r 93, 228-231
Baldwin, William H_ h 359, 362; a 11-81
Bail v. Paramount Pictures (case) fa 365
Ballantine, Arthur A h 340, 347
Ballantine, Joseph W h 553
Balleau, Frank A h 514
Ballou, Frank W_- h 286
Balokovic, Zlatko a 1174
Baltimore Sun h 795
Bancroft, Edgar A h 340
Bancroft, Thomas r 363
Banani, Amin a 1229
Bank Run (pamphlet) a 1 164
Banking (publication) a 1044
Bar of the District of Columbia h 724
Barbary Shore (publication) r 343
Barbash, Jack a 981, 990
Bar of the City of New York a 1219
Bar of the Supreme Court h 724
Bard, Harry h 74
Bard College a 984
Barkin, Solomon a 979
Barnard, Chester I h 353, 357, 359, 362, 880; a 1084, 1236
Barnard, Chester I r 232
Barnard College h 220, 524, 678, 706; r 94
Barnes h 903
Barnes, A. S h 394
Barnes, Harry Elmer a 1175; r 178, 179
Barnes, Joseph Fels a 1223, 1228
Barnes, Kathleen a 1223, 1228
Barnes, Mrs. Katrina McCormick a 980
Barnes & Co h 394
Baron, Baronig r 161
Baron, Murray h792
Barou, Noel h 793
Barrett, Edward h 904; a 1132, 1221
Barrows, David P h 340, 877,918
Barsky, Edward K__ l r 263, 321, 359, 384
Barsky v. United States (case) r 263
Bartky, Dean John a 1048
Baruch, Bernard r 119
Barzun, Jacques r 189
Basch, Antonin h 891, 892; a 1230
Basic Facts About Carnegie Corporation of New York and
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching
(publication) h 675, 678
Basis of Durable Peace (publication) h 926
Basis for Peace in the Far East (publication) h929; a 1216; r 173
Batelle Memorial Institute r46
Bates, Professor h 846
Bates, Blanchard W a 1231
12 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Battle of Consent (article) r 146
Battle for Peace (publication) r 271
Bauer, Fred B r 362
Bauer, Mrs. Fred B r 362
Bauer, John __ ____ h 793, 843
Bay Area Educational Television Association (San Francisco) __h 386
Bayard, Herbert h 907
Bazar, Julia Older r 160
Be Glad You're a Real Liberal (publication) h 33; r 121
Beal, George J h 357, 363
Beard, Charles h 32,
58, 286, 488, 516, 518, 519, 566, 573, 574, 576, 586, 595,
697, 828; a 968, 975; r 28, 117.
Beard, Charles Austin r 89, 178
Beatty, Willard W h 265
Beauchamp, Mary __, h 327
Beaumont, Louis D L. h 16
Beaumont Foundation ■___ . h 16
Beaverbrook, Lord r 119
Bechterov _ h 278
Beck, George T ■__■ a 1229
Becker . h 848
Becker, Carl a 1013
Becton r 294
Bedacht, Max r 298
Bedekar, S. K r 161
Beecroft, Eric Armour a 1230
Beer, Max____ h 31; r 92
Behavioral Sciences Division (Ford Foundation) h36,
481; r 24, 46, 49, 50,81, 82
Behlow, Robert a 1024
Belding. (See Foote, Cone & Belding.)
Belfrage, Cedric ■__.___ r 280
Bell, Daniel h 33; a 983
Bell, H. McClelland h 343
Bell, Howard M h 697
Bell, James F h 340
Bell, Laird ----- a 961
Bell for Adano (publication) h 553
Bell and Howell r 165
Beltz Edward W h 553
Ben Leider Memorial Fund a 1171
Bendiner, Robert h 793; a 1237; r 105
Benedict, Ruth h 34,
139, 929; a 1215, 1216; r 165, 174, 232-234, 408
Benes, Eduard _.„_. h 928
Benjamin, Harold h 320/ 321, 329-335, 388, 390
Benjamin, Herbert r 253, 260, 314
Bennett, John C a 977
Bennington College a 979
Benson, W. S __. h 394
Benson & Co h 394
Bentley, Elizabeth h 303; r 262, 263, 287
COMPOSITE INDEX 13
Paee
Bentley, Harold W _________ _ : h 345
Benton, William _____ h 893, 918
Berelson, Bernard h 36; a 1035, 1036; f 189
Berg's Economic Geography of the U. S. S. R ___ a 1003
Berkley, Charles C h 779; a 990
Berkowitz, Fred h 750; r 99
Berle, A. A. Jr h 629; r 92
Berlin, Rose a 1055
Berlin University h 31; a 1139; r 93
Bernard ___ _ h 848
Bernays Foundation ■_.__ r 88
Bernays, Edward L : ___ r 88
Berninghausen, David K h 327
Berry, Catherine E __ a 1009
Bertram, James _ h 338, 339
Besant, Anna ._ h 215
Bethesda Naval Hospital ■_ h 90, 91
Bevan, Aneurin h 143
Beveridge, William H___ h 775; a 989, 1140
Beveridge Report a 989
Beyer, Otto S h 220
Bible _ r203
Bibliographical Society of America a 999
Bibliography of the Soviet Union (publication) : r 264
Bidault h 595; r 169
Biddle, Francis r 252, 291, 310, 329, 364, 390, 394, 398, 400
Bid well, Percy W h 892
Biedenkapp, Fred ____ r 298
Biennial Survey (publication) . ____ a 1111
Big Farm (publication) h 34
Big Sea (publication) r 297
Bigelow, Paul. r 189
Biggerstaff, Knight h 553
Bilbo, Senator ____ h 848
Bill of Grievances (publication) __r; 147
Bill of Rights Conference r 270, 373, 383
Billings h222
Bingham, Barry h 349; a 974
Birchard, C. C h 394
Birchard & Co _4- h 394
Birnbaum, Adele ^________>._ r 161
Bisbee. (See Rushmore, Bisbee & Stern.)
Bishop, Bernice P — __ h 553
Bishop, William Rowley ,____*- a 1229
Bishop Trust Co. (Honolulu) k 553
Bisson, T. A h 928; a 1215; r 173, 174
Bituminous Coal Act h 748
Bituminous Coal Code, Annotated (publication) h 724
Black, Dr -__ h 830
Black, Hugo L r 210
Black Folk Then and Now (publication) r271
Black Legion ----- h 312
Black Pit (pamphlet) a 1164; r 107
49720 — 55 2
/
14 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Black Pit (play) - a 1164; r 347
Black Reconstruction (publication) r 271
Blackmur, R. P r 189
Blackwell, Thomas E a 1238
Blair & Co h 360
Blaisdell h 38
Blaisdeil, BalMs Edwin r 161
*Bfew&fflv Thomas C h 615, 621
Bkkiston Co h 394
Bland, Hubert h 215
Blanding, Sarah Gibson h 348
Blandshard, Brand a 983
Blanshard, Paul h 135, 749, 751; r 100, 236
Blasser, Arthur Frederick a 1230
Blegen, Theodore C a 1009
Bleicken, Gerhard D a 1238
Bliss (See Hehering v. Bliss.)
Bliven, Bruce h 220; a 1238; r 110, 148, 236-239
Blocks (play) a 1165; r 108
Bloor, Ella Reeve. h223, 224; r 229, 247, 258, 302, 309, 313, 377, 384
Blue Glamor (publication) h 926
Blueprints for Action (article) h 755 ; r 99
Blueprints of Action — a Handbook for Student Revolutionists
(publication) h 741
Blumer, Herbert h 848; a 1184, 1188
BMT (NYC) h 749
B'nm-B'rith h 388, 389; r 52, 211
Board of Education (California) h 197; r 146, 147
Board of Education (San Francisco) h 197,
255, 257, 260, 262; r 146, 150
Board of Foreign Scholarships h 809
Bobbio, Nordberto a 1194
Boble h346
Bobbs-Merrill Co h 394, 395
Bodman, Longley, Boble, Armstrong & Dahling (law firm) h 346
Bogardus h 848
Bogoiepov. h471;rl97
Bohn, William E r 409, 410
-Bt»lfes;»Blaire_-: h 897
Bolsheviks h 746, 749, 927; r 98
Bolshevism (article) r 92
Bolte, Charles G h 308
Bondfield, Margaret a 989, 990
Bendy, Francois r 189
Bontecou, Eleanor a 1131, 1132
Book and Magazine Guild (United Office and Professional
Workers of America, Local 18) r 239, 328, 371
Book House for Children h 394
Shop Association r 242, 368
Union h 222; r 246, 261, 282, 376
Book Union Bulletin r 261, 314
Bookplate (publication) r 341
Books on the U. S. S. R. (publication) r 242, 367, 388
COMPOSITE INDEX 15
Page
Bobkshopper (publication) r 341
Borden Co a 1043
Borger, Cathrine h 919
Borton, Hugh h 553
Bossard, James H. S a 1184, 1188; r 64, 65
Boston Retail Distribution Conference h 495
Boston University r 158
Botein, Bernard a 984, 1 146
Boushy, Theodore F a 1229
Bovmgdon, John r 160, 161
Bovingdon, Louise r 161
Bowen, Willis Herbert a 1231
Bower r 351
Bowles, Chester h 353; a 1127, 1183; r 169
Bowling Green University h 250
Bowman, Francis J. E a 1231
Bowman, Isaiah h 286, 885, 886, 889; a 975
Bowman, John G h 345
Bowman, Leroy E h 780, 789; a 990
Bowman, Raymond T a 1025
Boycott Japanese Goods Conference r 235, 240, 252
Brace h 394
Braden, Spruille a 1183; r 169
Bradley, Dwight a 1174
Bradley, Justice. h 641
Brady, Diamond Jim Ji 769
Brady, Dorothy a 1025
Brady, Robert A r 117-1197239, 240
Brainwashing in Red China (publication) h 142
Brameld, Theodore h 35, 327, 397; r 152, 240
Brandeis, Louis D r 19
Brandeis University r 290
Brandon Films r 165
Brandt, Karl h 392
Branscomb, Bennett Harvie. h 359; a 1041, 1048, 1128
Bratt, K. A h 927
Braun, Madame Madeleine a 121 5 ; r 175
Bray, Wlllianl G a 1232
Brsteil : An Interpretation (publication) _ . h 929
Brazilian Communist Party r 233, 239, 249, 254,259, 328
Bread (play) a 1165
Breech, Ernest R ji 376
Breit, Harvey r 189
Bretton Woods a 1217
Briand f h 595
Briarcliffe Junior College a 1232
Bribery by Tax Exemption (article) a 1238
Bricker, John W l h 59, 310, 511; a 1179
Bridges, Harry h 222; a 1171; r 240, 251, 252, 291, 298, 310,
314, 319, 329, 336, 339, 347, 349, 364, 390;"f94, 416
Bridges, Robertson, Schmidt Defense Committee r 240, 339
Bridges, Styles h 590
16 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Brief Statement of the History and Activities of the American
Council on Education (publication) r 52
Brierly, William W h 368
Briggs, Thomas Henry h 94-110, 113, 163, 414, 584, 585; a 959,
1075, 1089; r 21, 23, 27, 38, 127, 161, 162, 166, 167
Brigham Young University h 729
Bring Daddy Home Clubs a 973
Britain : Partner for Peace (publication) h 929 ; r 173
British Columbia International Union of Mine, Mill, and
Smelter Workers _ _ r361
British Columbia University h 874
British Conservative Party h 572, 792
British Institute of Management a 984
British Labor (publication) h 793
British Labor Party _ _ _ r98
British Labor on Reconstruction in War and Peace (publica-
tion)_„ h 793
British Labor Socialist Party h42,
397, 746, 772, 774, 790; a 1044; r 132, 141, 203
British Liberal Party. . h 792
British Writer Refutes Lies about Soviet Forced Labor (arti-
cle) r388
Brock, Stuart P h 553
Broderick, Alan H h 929
Brogan, D. W__ a 1140
Bromley, Dorothy Dunbar a 984
Bronk/Detlev W h 359; a 1127, 1128
Bronk, Detlev W h 353
Brookings, Robert S _ h 340
Brookings Institution h 17, 44, 93, 553,
629, 643, 879, 893, 894, 934-936, 941; a 962, 963, 970
Brooklyn College- a 976, 980, 981, 983, 988, 990, 1217, 1232
Brooks, Charles E h 345
Brooks, Cleanth r 189
Brooks, Thomas a 983
Brookwood College h 750;
a 1159, 1164, 1169, 1170, 1175; r 99, 106, 107, 396, 397
Brookwoods Fifteenth Anniversary Review (publication) r 396
Brorby, Melvin a 1181
Brotherhood of Man (nlm)______- r 165
Brothers Under the Skin (publication) r341
Browder, Earl a 1171, 1176, 1222, 1224; r 251, 261, 267, 281,
285, 287, 289, 291, 298, 330, 336, 351, 354, 392, 396
Brown, Bernice (Cronkite) h 874
Brown, Dyke h 347
Brown, H. Clifford h 553
Brown, Harcourt ___ a 1231
Brown, James Scott h 877
Brown, Robert C a 1238
Brown, Stanley D r 9
Brown Bros., Harriman <fc Co h 355; a 1127
Brown University h874; a 1231
Browne, William r 338
COMPOSITE INDEX 17
Page
Brownell, Mr h 310
Brownell, Lincoln C h 553
Browning, Robert ■_, h 567
Brownlee, James F h 346, 350, 351; a 1021, 1051
Broyles, Paul r 299
Bruce, Howard. h 348
Bruch, Hilde r 72
Brudney, Victor a 1116
Bruner, Herbert h 327
Bruner, Joseph r 362
Bryan, Malcolm h 350; a 1051
Bryan, William L . h 343
Bryce, James h 577
Bryce, Lord a 969
Bryn Mawr College h 268; 275
Buchanan, Norman S h 891
Buck, Pearl S__._ h 927; r 173, 241-244
Bucknell University a 1184
Budenz, Dr. Louis F h 34, 39, 135, 471, 513; r 197, 338
Buell, Raymond Leslie h 926; a 1177; r 173, 244
Buffalo University a 1114
Bugas, JohnS _..__ h 376
Buhl Foundation h 16
Buhler, Curt F a 1009
Building America Textbooks h 197,
287, 309, 310, 313, 315, 316, 320, 719; a 1149, 1150;
r 121, 136, 147, 154-156.
Building for Peace at Home and Abroad (publication) h33;rl21
Building a Power Winning Organization (conference theme) h 750 ;
r 99
Building a Science of Society for the Schools (pamphlet) h 255
Building the World Society (publication) h 927 ; r 173
Bukharin r 404
Buliis, Harry A h 348
Bullitt, William Marshall h 340
Bunche, Ralph J h 349, 763, 781, 791; a 977
Bundy, Harvey H . . h 340
Bunting, Earl h 33, 34; r 121
Burdett Co h 394
Burdock, Eugene I h 340
Bureau of Academic Freedom __ r 241, 270, 299, 332, 385
Bureau of Adult Education, New York State h 780, 789
Bureau of Educational Research (Ohio State University), h 267, 274
Bureau of the Representative in the United States of the
Russian Socialist Federal Soviet Republic (Department of
Information) r 110
Bureau of Research and Statistics a 990
Bureau of Social Hygiene a 1 137
Bureaucracy (article) r 92
Bureaucracy and Trusteeship in Large Corporations (publi-
cation) — r 45
Burgess, John W h 572-574
Burgess, Robert M.___ ■__ a 1231
18 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Burgess, W. Randolph h 338; a 974
Burke, Earl . a 1238
Burke, Edmund h 572; r 117
Burke, Kenneth r 190,245
Burke, Thomas h 340
Burling h 350
Burns, Arthur F h 785; a 963, 980
Burns, Arthur R h 785
Burns, Eveline M h 615, 621, 622, 777, 785; a 990, 995
Buros, H. R r 161
Bursler, Norman r 288
Burton, M. LeRoy._ h 343
Bush, Vannevar h 338; a 949, 962, 965, 967
Bushby h 347
Business and Politics in the Far East (publication) h 927; r 173
Business of Giving (article) a 1237
Business of Giving Money Away (article) a 1238
Business Reports (publication) a 1235
Business as a System of Power (publication) rll8
BusinessWeek (publication) h 375; a 1044, 1238
Buss, Claude A T h 874
Butler {see United States v. Butler.)
Butler h56
Butler, Nicholas Murray h 338-340,
343, 556, 573, 584, 588, 873, 875, 876, 881, 882, 891,
894, 907, 918, 920, 924, 926, 928, 929; a 1057, 1062,
1063; r 26, 171, 233, 331, 354.
Butler University a 1232
Butterfield, Victor L a 1041
Buttrick, Ernest A h 363
Buttrick, Wallace h 353, 359, 362, 363
Byrnes, Governor r 101
Byrnes, James F h 563, 593, 643, 893, 918
C
Caechione, Peter V r 267
Cadbury, Henry J r 187
Cadwalader, John L__ h 340
Caetani, Marguerite r 189
Cairns, Huntington h 350 ; a 1051
Calderwood, James a 1161
Caldwell, Erskine , a 1216
California Committee on Education h315,316
California Department of Education rl55
California Institute of Technology a 1124, 1219
California Labor School r 344, 348, 354
California Legislature h 313, 315, 319, 320
California schools r 154, 155
California Senate Investigating Committee on Education b 315,
316; r 154, 155
California Senate Un-American Activities Committee r 116
California Society, Sons of the American Revolution, h 197 ; r 146, 147
California Sponsoring Committee, Northern Division (Harry
Bridges) r 240
COMPOSITE INDEX 19
Page
California State Bar h 196
California State Board of Education- h 197; r 146, 147
California State Department of Education h 387, 396 ; a 1 149
California Tenney Committee Report _ ,., r, 33^8
California University If'lSy 1S6,
255, 257, 356, 361, 395, 496, 553, 694, 723, 877, 904,
937, 940; a 1014, 1025, 1127, 1128, 1132, 1139, 1184,
1188, 1221, 1230; r 42, 81, 83, 150, 184, 236, 240, 292,
301,324,334,363.
California University Press. _ . h 395
California University Provost r 150
Calkins, Robert D h 362, 363
Call to Action, American Congress for Peace and Democracy
(leaflet) r r 231
Call to a Conference on Constitutional Liberties in America
(leaflet) r 227
Call to a Conference on Women of the U. S. A. and the
U. S. S. R . in the Post-War World (leaflet) r 228
Call to a National Congress for Unemployment (leaflet) r 280,
260, 314
Call to the Second U. S. Congress Against War and Fascism
(article) r 230, 253
Call to the Teachers of the Nation (pamphlet) h 265, 484: r 143, 151
Call to the Third Annual Conference (American Committee
for Protection of Foreign Born) r 255
Call To the U. S. Congress Against War (publication) r 312
Call Upon the Film Industry to Revoke Blacklist (signed
Statement) r 342
Cambridge University r 158
Cameron , Barney r9
Cameron, Colin a 983
Cameron, George T : h 553
Caminita, Mrs. Fanny Sessions Mittell a 1233
Campbell, Doak S a 1149
Campbell, James W h 340
Campbell, Wallace J h 308 ; a 97§
Campus Rebels, a Brief History of the Student League for
Industrial Democracy (publication) h 740
Campsall, Frank 1 h 346, 347
Can America Stay Neutral? h 928
Can Science Save Us? (publication) h 149
Can We Be Neutral? (publication) h 928
Can We Be Saved by Indoctrination? (article) h 484; r 143
Canada and the United States (publication) h 926
Can You Name Them (publication) r 335, 363
Canada's Fabian Party h 788
Canadian Congress of Labor h 784, 792
Canadian Parliament _. h 764, 783
Canadian Peace Conference r 274
Canadian Progressives on the March (publication) h 793
Canadian Socialist Party h 764
Canadians Find Security With Freedom (publication) h. 793
Canby, Dean C a 1025
20 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Caniiing, William M h42; a 1041
Gapen, Samuel P h 343
Capitalism (article) h32;r 92
Capps, Edward h 358, 363
Cardozo, Justice a 1080
CARE Mission in Israel a 985
Carey, Mrs. Andrew Galbraith a 1181
Carey, James B h 766, 767; a 996
Carl Shurz Memorial Foundation al241
Carleton College h347; a 1021
Carlson, Evans a 1224 ; r 359
Carlson, John Roy a 1173
Carman, Harry J a 993
Carmichael, Leonard a 1048
Carmichael, Oliver C h 338, 340, 343, 345
Carnegie, Andrew h 338,
339, 359, 378, 586, 669, 671, 675, 679, 714, 717, 852,
853, 873, 912; a 951, 952, 954, 956, 963, 1056-1058,
1065; r27, 116, 134, 170.
Carnegie, Mrs. Andrew h 338
Carnegie, T. Morrison h 343, 345
Carnegie Corporation h 13,
16, 32, 43, 49, 55, 58, 59, 65, 132, 136, 240, 241, 286,
337, 338, 400, 472, 474, 476, 479, 519, 527-529, 577,
592, 668-670, 675, 678-681, 684, 710, 711, 713, 714,
717, 721, 795, 854, 869, 893, 898, 904, 905, 939, 943;
a 949-955, 957, 958, 962-965, 967, 969, 974, 975,
1000, 1000, 1006, 1063, 1189, 1236, 1238; r 29, 34, 41,
42, 45-47, 74, 85, 86, 89, 91, 117-121, 134, 135, 137,
140, 141, 170, 176, 178, 179, 182, 191.
Carnegie Corporation of New York h 16,
49, 65, 337, 400, 474, 479, 668, 675, 678, 681, 710,
854, 869, 904, 905; a 949-955, 957, 958, 962-965, 967,
969, 974, 975, 1000, 1006, 1063, 1189, 1236; r 47, 51,
52, 82, 86, 89, 91, 117-121, 134, 135, 137, 141, 179,
182, 191.
Carnegie Corporation Report (1949) rl20
Carnegie Educational Pension Fund - h680
Carnegie Endowment History (publication) h 873
Carnegie Endowment to the International Mind Alcoves r 174
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace hl6,
52, 54-57, 64, 301, 337-339, 472, 474, 529, 584, 588,
668, 670, 869, 870, 874, 884, 889, 891-894, 898, 905-
913, 915, 916, 918-920, 923, 924, 926, 929, 930;
a 951, 983, 1056, 1060, 1063-1065, 1104, 1176, 1183,
1215-1217, 1238, 1241; r 24, 26, 45-46, 52, 54, 134,
166, 169-179, 181-185, 199, 220.
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Yearbooks _ h 905-913,
915, 918, 920; r 177, 178, 183
Carnegie Endowment reports r 172
Carnegie Fellowships a 1058
COMPOSITE INDEX 21
Page
Carnegie Foundation — --- h 2,
8, 20, 28, 31, 43, 51, 52, 56, 60, 64, 212, 266, 286,
336-338, 401, 535, 559, 672-681, 689, 703-705, 710-
712, 714, 717, 870, 873, 876, 885, 887, 890; a 950,
985, 1034, 1105, 1119, 1156; r 47, 52, 54, 117, 118,
134-136, 140, 156, 169, 425, 426.
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Education _ h 680 ; r 135
Carnegie Foundation for Advancement of Teaching- _ hl6 r
101, 338, 339, 474, 567, 668, 670, 675, 677, 679, 681,
689, 693, 702, 705, 710, 711, 714, 717, 854, 874;
a 951, 952, 954, 955, 1241; r 47, 52, 117, 118, 134.
Carnegie Hero Fund Commission h 338, 339, 668; a 951
Carnegie Institute h 338, 669
Carnegie Institute of Pittsburgh h 668 ; a 95 1
Carnegie Institute of Technology. h 677, 679; a 1025
Carnegie Institution h 16, 668
Carnegie Institution of Washington h 338,
339, 360, 668; a 949, 951, 962
Carnegie Professional Pension Fund -__ h 680
Carnegie Tech r 81
Carpenter, Colonel h 562
Carr, Dr h 106
Carr, Robert a 1131, 1132
Carr, William G h 697; a 1151, 1158
Carr-Saunders, Alexander a 1140
Carroll, Professor r 81
Carroll, Thomas D a 1229
Carroll, Thomas H -_. h 347
Carruth, Hayden h 351
Carter, A. C -_ h 16
Carter, Edward C h 553, 558-560, 927; a 1228; r 173, 180, 246
Carter Foundation h 16
Carter, Raymond. a 1212
Carter, William S h 358
Cartwright, Morse A h 339
Carty, John J h 338
Carver School r 359
Casady, Lauren W a 1230
Case, Clifford P h 350, 351; r 111, 114, 432
Case Study of an Underdeveloped Area a 1073
Casey, Robert J h 927
Casey, William J h351;a 1235
Caswell, H. L a 1149
Catholic Church h 607; a 947; r 425
Catholic University of America h 231, 244, 723; a 945-947, 1231
Catholic veterans organizations h29
Catlin, Daniel K h 340
Caucus for Peace (postal card) r 323
Cavanaugh, John J h 348
CBS (Columbia Broadcasting System) h40
Censored News (leaflet) . r 340
Center for International Understanding (Los Angeles) h 874
22 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Central Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools h 672
Central Committee Plenum r 404
Central Conference of American Rabbis . _ a 990
Central Hanover Bank and Trust Co a 1236
Central Michigan College a 982
Central Pedagogical Institute. r 159
CeiStraha mine disaster (film) r 293
Century Co a 1071, 1236
Century of the Common Man (quote from Hoover speech) r 203
Certificate of Incorporation (Peoples Radio Foundation) r319
Chaflin, William H a 1127
Challenge (film) r 165
Challenge of Red China (publication) a 1216
Challenge of International Communism (speech) a 980
Challenge of Isolation, 1937-40 (publication) h 884
Challenge of Life Time Learning (publication) a 1236
Challenge of Soviet Power (publication) r 306
Challenge of Youth (publication) r414
Chamber of Commerce (New York State) h 892
Chamber of Commerce of the United States _ h 495, 920 ; a 1044 ; r 158
Chamberlain, Joseph P h 553
Chamberlain, Lawrence H al 132
Chamberlain, William Henry r 121
Chambers r 287
Chambers, Lawson P a 1232
Chambers, Merritt M a 1235
Champion of Youth (publication) h 223 ; a 1 1 76
Chancellor Hutchins in the Witchhunter's Den (article) r 299
Chandler, O. K_ T ___ T -.— --.- - r 362
Changing Conditions in Public Giving (article) a 1235
Changing Times (article) a 1240
Channing a 1080
Chapin, W. W_ h 340, 918
Chapman, John F a 1181
Chapman, Oscar L h 763; a 977
Chappell, Winifred. r 298
Character Assassination (book) h39
Character Education in the Soviet Union (publication) h 287
Characteristics of the American Negro (publication) r 312
Charitable Community Trusts, with Special Reference to New
Haven Foundation (article) a 1238
Charitable Corporation and the Charitable Trust (article) a 1238
Charitable Foundations and Related Matters Under the Reve-
nue Act (article) a 1238
Charitable Foundations Tax Avoidance and Business Expe-
diency (article) a 1238
Charitable Trusts for Political Purposes (article) a 1238
Charitable Organizations & Federal Taxation (article) a 1239
Charles Hayden Foundation. __ h 13, 16; a 1235
Charles Stewart Mott Foundation hl6
Charter-Jobs for All (speech) h 920
Charters, W. W h 267, 274
Charts h 644-665b
COMPOSITE INPEX 23
Page
Chase, Chief Justice h 640
Chase, Harry Woodburn h 267, 268, 274, 359
Chase, Stuart h 74,
132-140, 144, 146-150, 162, 170, 186, 839, 848, 897,
927; a 967, 972; r 85-89, 110, 121, 125, 157, 247-249
Chase National Bank h 346, 353-355, 358, 920; a 1021, 1127
Chatham House (England) h 897, 911
Chattanooga Times r 400, 402, 403
Chedney Press a 1236
Cheek, Mary A a 1041
Chekhov Publishing House h 348
Chemadanov, V r 370
Chemical and Metallurgical Engineering (publication) h 496
Chen, Stephen h 929
Cherokee Indian Eastern Band r 362
Cherrington, Ben M h 64, 340, 888, 918
Cherry, H. Dicken a 1229
Chevrolet Co h 373-375
Chicago All- American Anti-Imperialist League h222
Chicago Bridge & Iron Co h 553
Chicago Committee For the Struggle Against War h 223
Chicago Congress (Student Congress Against War) r 255
Chicago Council of American-Soviet Friendship rl65
Chicago Council on Foreign Relations h 555
Chicago Daily News h 825
Chicago Defender (publication) r 293
Chicago Maroon (publication) h33
Chicago Stock Exchange h 496
Chicago Sun-Times h 350; a 1051
Chicago Tribune h 144; a 1044, 1217
Chicago University h 19,
32, 33, 36-39, 41, 60-62, 268, 275, 286, 355, 356, 360,
395, 523, 524, 565, 581-583, 672, 674, 675, 694, 701,
703-705, 713, 719-721, 880; a 955, 961, 1009, 1025,
1035, 1036, 1081, 1114, 1115, 1124, 1195, 1196, 1229,
1235; r 11, 37, 80, 81, 83, 133, 135, 155, 158, 163, 255,
299, 301, 318, 351.
Chicago University Law School a 1132
Chicago University Press h 395; a 1235
Chicago University Roundtable h 32, 41, 581
Chicago University Roundtable Broadcasts rl33
Chicago World Congress Against War r318
Children and Families in the Courts of New York City (pub-
lication) a 1219
Children in Concentration Camps (pamphlet) r 259, 309, 337
Childs, JohnL h 308, 780, 789; a 985, 990, 1174
China (article) h 319
China Aid Council (American League for Peace and Democ-
racy) r 352, 376
China Aid News (leaflet) r 289, 301
China Among the Powers (publication) h 524
China in Revolution (publication) h 927
China Today (publication) r 375
24 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Chinese Eastern Railway h 772
Chinlund, Edwin F a 1181
Choate, Joseph H h 340; a 1057; r 170
Chodorov, Frank a 1238
Christian Century (publication) r 243
Christian Socialist Party r 400
Christian Science Monitor (publication) a 1059
Christie, Harry I . h 257
Christopher, Paul R „ r 399
Chrysanthemum and the Sword (publication) h 929
Chrysler Corporation h 371, 374, 376; r 7
Chudson, Walter A a 1230
Church, Edgar M a 1181
Church, Samuel Harden h 338
Church Peace Union h 679
Churchill, Winston h 595; r 169
CIO (Congress of Industrial Organizations) h 553,
767, 776, 778-780, 784, 788, 792, 920; a 977, 984, 1168;
r 104, 165, 232, 239, 399, 403, 409.
CIO-PAC r 399
CIO Steelworkers Union r 399
CIO War Relief Committee r 232
Citizen Writer (publication) r 345, 348
Citizens Committee for Harry Bridges h 222; a 1171; r 251
Citizens Committee to Free Earl Browder a 1171,
1176, 1222, 1224; r 267, 289, 291, 354, 392
Citizens Committee for Robert Thompson and Benjamin J.
Davis r 358
Citizens Housing and Planning Council a 984
Citizens for a New World (publication) h 928; r 173
Citizens Rally (leaflet) r 228, 254
Citizens Union r 267
Citizenship Education Project r 120
City Art Museau (St. Louis, Mo.) a 1231
City College of New York h 268, 275, 390; a 976, 1041, 1229
City Government of San Francisco r338
City Manager League of Toledo, Ohio a 1197
Civic Responsibility (article) h 318
Civil Affairs Training Schools (CATS) a 1001
Civil Liberties (article) h 306, 318, 320
Civil Liberties Conference Program r407
Civil Liberties in Maryland Are at Stake (leaflet) r 365
Civil Responsibilities (article) h 320
Civil Rights Congress h 26;
r 266, 270, 271, 278, 283, 284, 302-304, 329, 332-334,
339, 340, 343, 344, 347, 348, 350, 358, 359, 364, 383,
406, 407.
Civil Rights Congress (Los Angeles Chapter) r 334
Civil Rights Congress of New York r 278, 332, 345, 347, 350
Civil Service v. Merit (article) a 1208
Civil Service at the Crossroads (article) a 1208
Cizek, Elizabeth H a 1009
Claessens, August h 766; r 101
COMPOSITE INDEX 25
Page
Claflin, William H., Jr .___.._ h 353
Clague, Ewan__ a 1235
Clapp, Gordon R__-_ h 904
Clapp, James Gordon a 1232
Clapp, Margaret h 340
Clark {See Kimberly-Clark Corp.)
Clark, Clinton r 505
Clark, Evans h 220, 928; a 1215; r 109, 110, 148, 166, 174, 249
Clark, Gordon H . a 1232
Clark, Grover _,__„____ h 927
Clark, Joseph . r 388
Clark, Gen. Mark W r 183
Clark, Tom a 1200, 1215, 1216, 1224; r 394, 398
Clark University h 220, 583; r 80
Clarke, C. M a 1238
Clarke, Dwight L h 553
Clarke, John H h 907
Classifications for Surveys of Highly Trained Personnel
(publication) a 1004
Clausen, Clarence Arthur ,. a 1231
Clayton, Frank L a 1217
Clayton, W. L h 920
Clement, E. W h 926
Clement, Rufus E h 64
Cleve, Felix M a 1232
Cleveland Council on World Affairs h 57
Cleveland Plain Dealer h 42; a 1042
Cleveland Trust Co h 665a
Clevenger, Hon. Cliff h 37
Clinic for the Social Adjustment of Gifted Children (New York
University) h 275
Clise, Charles F h 553
Clothing (article) h 310
Clough, Ernest T a 1181
Clurman, Morton r 63
Cochran, M. Frances a 1009
Cochrane. Commissioner h 432
Coffman, Harold C a 1235
Coffman, Lotus Delta h 338,343
Cohen, Edward M h 793
Cohen, Felix S h 748, 749; a 980; r 98
Cohen, Louis r 161
Cohen-Portheim, Paul h 927
Cohn, Jack r 161
Cohn, Roy M h 43
Coil, E. J h 779; a 990
Coit, Eleanor G a 1163, 1165
Coldwell, M. J h 783, 784, 791-793; a 977, 984, 991
Cole, Charles W h350;al051
Cole, David L h 340
Cole, Fred C a 1041
Cole, G. D. H h 31, 32, 307;r92, 93
Cole, Margaret ,.__.,__ a 985
26 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Colegrove, Prof. Kenneth h 242,
555-599, 874, 876, 926, 929; a 967, 1210, 1211 ; r 26-28,
37, 47, 57, 77, 80, 91, 116, 117, 125, 168, 173, 176, 194,
200, 225.
Colin, Ralph F _. h 352
Collected Poems (publication) r 392
College Art Association of America a 999
College of Education (University of Illinois) h 390
College of Education (University of Maryland) h 390
College de France a 1 139
College Entrance Examination Board h681,
682, 688, 689, 704, 705, 714; a 1081
College of the Holy Names . .-- — r a 947
College of Letters and Science (University of California) a 1041
College of Letters and Science (University of Oregon) _„ a 1041
College of Literature, Science and the Arts (University of
Michigan) _ _ _ a 1 129
College of Physicians and Surgeons of Columbia University, __ r 72
Coolidge, President a 1063
Coolidge, T. Jefferson a 1128
College of the City of New York- h 268, 275, 390; a 976, 1041, 1229
Collier, P. F : h 39*
Collier & Son Corp h 394
Colliers (publication) a 1238, 1241
Collyer, John L h 348
Colony Trust Company h 359
Colorado University h 395
Colorado University Press h 395
Colum, Padraic h 927
Columbia Broadcasting System (CBS) h 40, 386
Columbia University h 19,
33, 36, 40, 74, 94, 219, 220, 224, 252-255, 263, 268,
272-275, 285, 286, 288, 318, 347, 355, 390, 395, 400,
468, 484, 485, 492, 495, 496, 518, 524, 538, 553, 556,
572-574, 599, 643, 672, 674, 675, 677, 678, 694, 696,
697, 700, 701, 703-706, 713, 719-721, 776, 781, 789,
791, 886, 893, 903, 904, 912, 928, 933, 934, 936, 937,
941; a 955, 977, 980, 983-985, 990, 993, 996, 1009,
1033, 1037, 1059, 1081, 1114, 1124, 1127, 1130-1133,
1139, 1145, 1146, 1148, 1174, 1183, 1184, 1193, 1208,
1215, 1216, 1218, 1224, 1229-1231; r 21, 42, 51, 6o,
72, 77, 81, 118, 120, 121, 132, 135, 136, 149, 157, 158,
173, 174, 184, 250, 256, 257, 275, 288, 307, 311, 330-
333, 335, 366, 372-374.
Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons r72
Columbia University Law School a 1131, 1132, 1218; r 68
Columbia University Teachers College h 33,
64, 65, 74, 94, 252, 253, 263, 268, 272-275, 285, 286,
288, 390, 400, 484, 485, 553, 674, 675, 677, 694, 696,
697, 700, 701, 703-705, 713, 719. 720, 780, 789, 912,
928, 938; a 1081, 1115, 1144-1146, 1149, 1217, 1230,
1236; r 120, 121, 149, 157, 173.
Columbia University Press h 395, 485 ; a 1236 ; a 1 18
Columbia University Russian Institute h 36,
886, 933, 934, 936, 941; a 1130
COMPOSITE INDEX 27
Page
Columbus . ^ h 317
Columbus University (Wash., D. C.) h 723
Comberbateh, Muriel J a 998
Cominf orm - h 757
Comintern r 404
Coming -of. the New Party (publication) - 1^2.
Commager, Henry Steele _ _ r H&&
Commentary (publication) __ r 63
Commercial and Financial Chronicle (publication) h496
Commercial and Tariff History and Research in International
Economics by Federal Agencies (publication) h 891
Commercial Policy for the United Nations (publication) h 892
Commission for Academic Freedom ^ r 299
Commission of the Churches on International Affairs _^ h 936
Commission on Financing Higher Education a 113, 1235
Commission on the Freedom of the Press h 902
Commission on Higher Education (Truman) r 108
Commission on Human Resources and Advanced Training h 809
Commission on Human Rights (United Nations) h 67; f 192
Commission on Latin America. r 234
Commission on Secondary School Curriculum h 698
Commission on Social Studies „ h 476, 481, 482, 494,
506, 513, 514, 612; a 974; r 129, 131, 137, 141
Commission on Social Stud es (Report of Conclusions and: Rec-
ommendations) - ,. ■_ ..-_ _ r 137
Commission to Study the Organization of the Peace h 74,
874, 890, 891, 893, 911, 912, 916, 917, 928; a 1064
Committee on Africa ^ h 928
Committee to Aid China ___„ a 1225, 1228
Committee to Aid the Striking Fleischer Artists a 11 70
Committee on Art in American Education and Society (publi-
cation) h918
Committee For a Boycott Against Japanese Aggression h 222;
a 1216
Committee on Cartels and Monopoly all72
Committee for Constitutional Government h 322, 324, 736, 754
Committee for Concerted Peace Efforts r 275
Committee to Defend Alexander Tractenberg : r 2*66
Committee to Defend America by Keeping Out of War h 222
Committee to Defend V. J. Jerome ^ f 266
Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy a 11 74;
r 235, 269, 303, 308, 324, 341, 374, 37©, 377, 380, 383
Committee for Economic Development h47;a 996
Committee on Education (California Legislature) h315,
316; r 154, 155
Committee on Education (National Council of American-
Soviet Friendship) r 264
Committee for Free Political Advocacy r 344
Committee on Government Statistics and Information Serv-
ices " r 1*28
Committee of History and Other Studies in the Schools (Car-
negie Corp.) 1 h 476
Committee on Intellectual Freedom h327
Committee on International Economic Policy h 91 6
28 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Committee on International Exchange of Persons •__ a 1162
Committee on International Kelations__ h 64; r 191
Committee for Israel Amter's Candidacy for President r 245
Committee on Labor Law and Social Legislation r 340
Committee for the Nations Health _ _ a 983
Committee of One Hundred and Two Writers and Artists. _ _ _ r 275
Committee for Peace Through World Cooperation r 276
Committee for Peaceful Alternatives to the Atlantic Pact_ _ __ r 240,
297, 321, 331, 333, 378
Committee on Political Research (American Political Science
"Association) ■_ _ _■ r 131
Committee of Professional Groups for Earl Browder and James
*f •: W. Ford r 245, 251, 285, 289
Committee for the Protection of Foreign Born h 222,
223; a 1171, 1173
Committee to Repeal the McCarran Act r 333
Committee for Research in Problems of Sex (National Re-
i search Council of the National Academy of Sciences) hl23
Committee to Save Spain and China h 222
Committee to Secure Justice in the Rosenberg Case r 262, 387
Committee on Social Studies (American Historical Associa-
tion) h286;r425
Committee of Trustees on Experimental Programs h 854; r 47
Committee on Un-American Activities (California) rll6
Committee of Welcome for the Red Dean of Canterbury r 250
Committee to Win the Peace r 376
Common Cause (publication) r 162
Commons, John B a 993
Commonwealth College a 1169; r 255, 371, 402
Commonwealth Foundation h 13
Commonwealth Fund h 16, 854; r 45, 47
Commonwealth or Anarchy (publication) h 928
Communism (article) r 92
Communist (publication) r a 1212
Communist District Bureau of Tennessee r401
Communist International h 903;
r 234, 239, 245, 249, 254, 256, 257, 259, 293, 315,
326, 328, 343, 350, 351, 404.
Communist Labor Party h 467
Communist Manifesto h 33, 749
Compass (publication) a 1238
Communist Party h 17,
25-43, 93, 135, 136, 141, 156, 158, 221, 223, 224, 261,
271, 288-290, 301, 303, 313, 315, 316, 326, 327, 336,
387, 390, 393, 396, 397, 400, 401, 467, 499, 512, 513,
517, 535, 536, 538, 557, 561, 562, 576, 606, 762-764,
770-773, 782, 790, 838-840, 847, 848, 901-904, 940;
a 1035, 1037, 1041, 1157, 1171, 1172, 1174, 1176, 1183,
1215, 1216; r 21, 24, 29, 32, 41, 54-57, 87, 89, 92, 93,
103, 106, 108-110, 113-115, 118, 119, 121, 127, 131,
132, 148, 151-153, 155, 157, 158, 160, 161; 163-165,
169, 173-176, 179, 180, 183, 186, 187, 190, 195-205,
220, 222, 228, 229, 239, 249, 254, 259, 312, 328, 386,
413, 414.
COMPOSITE INDEX 29
Page
Communist Party (Cultural Commission) ^ r 266
Communist Party Workers School , h 224; r 237, 247, 268
Communist Party Yearbook (1937)., ___ r 293
Communist Workers Bookshop , r 312
Communist Youth Ask for Unity (article) r 395
Communist Youth League __ r 395
Community Chests r 97
Community Chests ___„ h 745
Community Church (New York) a 996
Community Planning (article) h 319
Community Trusts — the new look in Charitable Giving (arti-
cle) a 1237
Company Gifts: Bars Go Down a 1238
Compton, Arthur H h 343; a 1041, 1148
Compton, F. E h 394
Compton & Co h 394
Compton, Karl T h 346, 347, 353, 359
Compulsory Arbitration (publication) h927
Comstock, Ada h 286
Conant, James B h 343, 678, 705; a 1133, 1148
Conant, Kenneth _ _ r 157
Conclusions and Recommendations (American Historical Asso-
ciation Report) . h285, 286
Concordia Seminary (St. Louis) r 293
Condliffe, John B h 888, 891, 892; a 1230
Condon, E. U h 74
Condon, Edward J __„_„__ h 352
Cone (See Foote, Cone & Belding.)
Cone, Fairfax M a 1043
Conference on Africa (NYC) -- r 359
Conference on American Policy (article) h893
Conference on American Policy in China and the Far East r 235
Conference Board of Associated Research Councils h 808; r 53
Conference Board Committee on International Exchange of
Persons a 1227
Conference on China and the Far East r 376, 372
Conference on Constitutional Liberties h222;
a 1170; r 227, 332, 345, 348, 400, 402
Conference on Democratic Rights (pamphlet) r323
Conference for Education in the South h 706
Conference on Pan American Democracy a 1170, 1173, 1216;
r 227, 233, 238, 249, 254, 259, 327, 349, 369, 370, 376
Conference on Peaceful Alternatives r269
Conference for Progressive Labor Action r397
Conference to Safeguard the Welfare of Our Children and Our
Homes r382
Conference on World Cooperation and Social Progress in 1951 _ a 991
Conflict (publication) h 927
Congress (article) h319
Congress of American Revolutionary Writers — r 245, 260, 281, 290
Congress of American Soviet Friendship r 242,
246, 252, 289, 296, 320, 346, 360, 384
Congress of American Soviet Relations r269
49720 — 55 3
30 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Congress of American Women, a 1215; r 175, 264, 381, 383, 384, 408
Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO) h 553,
767, 776, 778-780, 784, 788, 792, 920: a 977, 984,
1168; r 104, 165, 232, 239, 399, 403, 409; r 104, 165,,
232, 239, 399, 403, 409.
Congress for the Peoples for Peace (Vienna) r 280
Congress of Youth r 302
Congressional Record h29,
30, 88, 92, 152, 235, 289, 305, 468, 480, 500, 628, 643,
840; a 1044, 1238-1240; r 132, 233, 234, 236-238, 241,
242, 245, 246, 248, 249, 260, 267, 271, 272, 275, 277,
281, 282, 286, 291, 295-298, 302, 305, 309, 310, 315,
317-319, 321, 324, 327-329, 336, 351-353, 358, 360,
361, 366, 367, 379, 380, 385, 386, 388, 390, 391, 394,
402, 405^07, 415, 416, 428.
Connecticut Bar Journal a 1238
Connecticut State Medical Society a 983
Connecticut University h 388
Connolly, Cyril r 189
Conquest of the Past (publication) h 928
Conrad, Arthur.. h 93; a 947
Conservation (article) h 310, 319
Constitutional Education League h 322, 324
Constitutional Imperialism in Japan (publication) __ h 926
Constructive Philanthrophy (publication) a 1236
Consumers Cooperative Services h 779; a 990
Consumers National Federation a 1170, 1172, 1216; r 227 r
230, 232, 239, 249, 254, 306, 312, 328, 353, 370, 371
Consumers Union r 236, 301
Container Corporation of America _ h 349
Contemporary American Bourgeois Sociology in the Service
of Expansionism (publication) h 838, 848
"Contribution of Labor in Rebuilding Democratic Society"
(conference theme) r 106
Coolidge, Calvin h 298
Coolidge, T. Jefferson h 359
Coombs, Philip H h 350
Coon, Horace a 1235
Coons, Alvin E r 100, 161
Coons, Arthur G h 553; a 1041
Cooper, James W- a 1238
Cooper, W. Mansfield a 1219
Cooperative Commonwealth Federation of Canada h 780, 783,
784, 788, 791, 792
Cooperative Educational Testing Commission . ._ h 688
Cooperative League a 979
Cooperative Study of General Education (publication) h 706
Cooperative Study of Secondary School Standards (publication) h 706
Cooperative Test Service h 674, 682, 686-689, 701, 704, 705, 713
Coordinating Committee To Lift the Embargo a 1170, 1172,
1176; r 227, 237, 238, 242, 244, 251, 255, 275, 305-308,
312, 327, 337, 350, 353, 354, 370, 377.
COMPOSITE INDEX 31
Page
Copenhaver, Eleanor a 1170
Copland, Aaron.. r 189, 190, 250,251,253
Copperfield, David.. h 500
Corbett, Percy E h929; r 173
Corey, Lewis r 93
Cornell Liberal Club r 99
Cornell University h 36,
40, 355, 361, 395, 495, 496, 514, 553, 679, 694, 750,
898, 900, 901, 903; a 954, 1055, 1124, 1127, 1130,
1131, 1141, 1148, 1220, 1221, 1230; r 8199, 114, 367
Cornell University Press.. h 395
Corner, G. W a 1137
Cornish, George ^ r 9
Coronet (publication) a 1239
Corporate Director (publication) h 370, 373; r 7
Corporation (article) r 92
Corwin, Norman a 1174
Cory, Ellen ... h 927
Cosentini, John Walter a 1231
Cosmos h 926
Costello a 1172
Cotrell r49
Coughlin r 404
Coughlin, Father h 330
Council on African Affairs r 242, 268, 358, 361, 384, 385
Council of American Learned Societies h 369
Council of American-Soviet Friendship a 1173
Council of American-Soviet Friendship (Chicago) r 165
Council on Foreign Relations h 57,
475, 677, 879, 884, 885, 894, 895, 897, 900, 921, 924,
931, 933, 936, 938, 940; a 1030, 1064, 1132, 1133;
r 170, 176-178, 181, 182, 184.
Council on the Future of Germany and World Peace (sym-
posium) r320
Council for Pan American Democracy r 233, 254, 312, 332, 376
Council for Social Action a 1163
Council on World Affairs a 1182; r 184
Countryman, Verne a 1132
Counts, George S h 263-266,
268, 273-275, 285-289, 303, 390, 400, 484, 488, 904;
a 980, 984, 985, 996, 1145, 1146; r 92, 143, 145, 149,
151-153, 157, 253-258.
Courier- Journal (Lousville, Ky .) h 347, 349
Courtis, Stuart A ... r 63
Couzens h 372
Covington & Burling h 350
Cowles, John h 346, 376; a 1021
Cowley a 1145
Cowley, Malcolm r 189, 190, 258, 262
Cowling, Ellis . h 779; a 990
32 COMPOSITE INDEX
Psge
Cox, Eugene h 2,
6, 7, 9, 11, 14, 17, 18, 21, 23, 24, 26-28, 43, 44, 60, 62,
75, 79, 82, 92, 93, 167, 187, 189-194, 204, 293, 301,
304, 305, 366, 471, 472, 510, 701, 703, 721, 840, 880;
a 950, 959, 1006, 1007, 1038-1040, 1056, 1060, 1069,
1071, 1077, 1082, 1084, 1095, 1096, 1118, 1120, 1131,
1134-1136, 1140, 1141, 1210, 1214, 1220; r 1, 2, 11,
13, 15, 19, 23, 24, 30, 32, 37, 44, 54, 55, 147, 180, 181,
187, 196, 197, 421, 422.
Cox Committee h 2,
6, 7, 9, 11, 14, 17, 18, 21, 23, 24, 26-28, 43, 44, 60, 75,
79, 82, 92, 93, 167, 187, 189-194, 204, 293, 301, 304,
471, 472, 510, 701, 721, 840, 880; a 950, 959, 1006,
1007, 1038-1040, 1056, 1060, 1071, 1077, 1082, 1084,
1095, 1096, 1118, 1120, 1131, 1134-1136, 1140, 1141,
1210, 1214, 1220; r 1, 2, 11, 13, 15, 19, 23, 24, 30, 32,
37, 44, 54, 55, 147, 180, 181, 187, 196, 197, 421, 422
Coyne, Kobert W h 920
CPUSA a 1037
Craig, B. J h 346, 347
Craighead, Edwin B ,_ h 343
Cranbrook Institute of Science a 1241
Crapster, Basil Long a 1229
Craven, Avery O . h 286
Crawford, William H h 343; r 399
Creel, George a 1216; r 174
Creighton University a 1229
Cressey, George B h 553
Crisafulli, Alessandro a 1231
Crisis in American and World Resources (speech theme) _ h 762
Crisis Papers (publication) ^ r 284
Criticism, Social (article) r 92
Crocker, Henry G h 878
Cromwell, Oliver h 565
Cromwell. (See Sullivan & Cromwell.)
Cronkite. (See Bernice Brown.)
Cross, Samuel H r 157
Cross Roads in Ireland (publication) h 927
Crouch, Paul r 400, 401, 403
Crowell, Thomas Y h 394
Crowell Co h 394
Crown Zellerbach Corp__ h 350; a 1051
Cruising the Mediterranean (publication) h 928
Crusoe, L. D . h 375, 376
Cubberley a 1145
Cullen Foundation h 16
Cultural and Scientific Conference for World Peace h 223 ;
a 1174; r 241, 252, 264, 274, 304, 311, 321, 332, 333,
341, 342, 347, 349, 380, 385.
Cultural Commission of the Communist Party, U. S. A r 266
Cultural Workers . r 241, 343, 386
Culture Affecting Education (article) h 490
Culture and Crisis (publication) r 258, 289, 303, 393
COMPOSITE INDEX 33
Page
Culture and Life (publication) h 839, 841, 848
Cummington. Story (publication) , r 164
Cumulative List of Organizations that are Eligible for Tax-
Exempt Contributions (publication) ___._.__.._ h 734
Curie, Enid _ h 131; r 69
Current Digest of the Soviet Press a 1003
Curriculum Problems (publication) ^ h94
Currie, Sir Arthur W h 343
Currie, Lauchlin r 262, 263
Curry, J. L. M h 359
Curt, Merle E _.__, h 265
Cushman, Robert E h 898, 901-904; a 1131, 1132, 1221; r 263
Customs Union Issue (study) h 887
Cuthbertson, Kenneth E , r 204
Cutright, Prudence a 1149
Cvetic, Matthew-.-- r 290, 343, 362
D
Dahling h 346
Daily People's World (publication) .. .-__. h223;
r 236, 242, 244, 248, 249, 267, 269-274, 277, 278, 280,
285, 294, 298, 299, 302, 306, 314, 316, 320, 322-324,
334, 338-348, 352, 354, 361, 365, 367, 379, 381, 383,
401, 413
Daily Worker h 39,
223, 224, 903; a 1174, 1212, 1216, 1221; r 165, 228-
238, 244-254, 256-261, 264-281, 283-286, 288-295,
297, 299, 301-305, 308-314, 316-325, 327-333, 335-
350, 352, 354, 362, 365, 369-371, 373-391, 393, 395,
401-406,411,413,415,428
Dallin, David J a 1216; r 388
Dana, Henry W. L r 158, 198
Danforth Foundation h 16
Daniel, Franz h 751; r 99
Dante a 1168
Darcy, Sam Adams r 252, 310, 330, 340
Darden, Colgate W., Jr h 874
Dare Progressive Education be Progressive (pamphlet) h 263
Dare the Schools Build a New Social Order (pamphlet) h 262,
285, 484; r 143, 151, 153
Darrow, Clarence S h 220; a 993
Dartmouth College h 353, 354, 360, 395, 941 ; a 1127
Dartmouth College Press h 395
Darwin a 1168
Das Abendblatt (publication) r 409
Dashiell, Lefferts M h 357, 363
Daugherty, D. H a 1009
Daughters of the American Revolution. __ a 1204; r 114, 237, 247, 259
Davenport, Donald H a 990
David, Donald K h 346, 376; a 1021
Davidson, Carter h 343
Davidson, Gert r 161
Davidson, Jo a 1173; r 279
34 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Davidson, Lillie r 161
Davidson, Thomas h 215
Davies, E. C h 928
Davis, Benjamin J., Jr r 266, 357, 358, 361
Davis, Chester C h 42, 347
Davis, Elmer r 108
Davis, Hallie Flanagan r 189
Davis, Harold T h 582
Davis, Herbert a 1216
Davis, Horace B r 93
Davis, Howard r 9
Davis, J. R.___ h 376
Davis, Jackson h 362, 363
Davis, Jerome h 39, 903; a 1175
Davis, John Mills r 409
Davis, John W h 341, 353, 359, 889; a 1060
Davis, Joseph S h 892
Davis, Malcolm W h 918, 919; a 1238
Davis, Norman H h 341
Davis, Polk, Wardwell, Sunderland & Kiendl (law firm) h 353,
359; a 965
Davison, Emmett C a 1232, 1233
Day, Edmund E •_ h 286, 358, 363, 514; a 1148
Day, George N r 158
Day, John (publisher), , h 263, 265, 395
Day After the Revolution (conference theme) h 751; r 100
Day Co. (publishers) h 263, 265, 395
DeBoer, John J h 34; r 151
DeGarmo. (See Allen, Froude, Hilen & DeGarmo.)
DeHuszar, George h 193
De Kadt, Jacques a 984
De Kiewiet, C. W a 1009
De la Rue, Sidney h 926
De Madariga, Salvadore h 927; r 173
DeMille, Agnes George r 265
DeTocqueville a 969; h 852
DeToledano, Ralph a 1216
DeVane, William C h 359; a 1041, 1128
DeVoto, Bernard r 266
Dead Reckoning (publication) r 245
Deak, Francis h 888
Dean, Arthur H h 343, 552, 553
Dean, Vera Micheles h 74,
874, 882, 883, 897, 901, 928; a 1179, 1180, 1215, 1229;
r 175, 176, 264.
Deant, Albert W a 1041
Dearmont, Russell L '__. h 350; a 1051
Declaration of the Rights of Youth r 276
Defense of the Empire (publication) h 928
Delano, Frederic A h 341
Delaware State College a 1231
Delaware Univeristy - a 1229
Delegates Assembly for Peace r 274
COMPOSITE INDEX 35
Page
Delson, Max i a 980
Deming, W. Edwards _^.___^_ a 1025
Democracy (article) . ; r92
Democracy and Education (publication) h 265
Democracy and You (publication) h 397
Democracy Today and Tomorrow (publication) h 928
Democracy Versus Dictatorship (publication) h 773
Democratic Manifesto (publication) h 929
Democratic Party h 212,
213, 227, 333, 382, 386, 492, 513, 737, 751, 784; r 61,
162, 198, 223, 280, 281, 355, 357.
Democratic Platform Committee r 280, 355
Democratic Socialism (publication) h 467, 793
Dennett h 558; a 1212, 1213
Dennis, Eugene. r 266, 271, 315, 344, 345, 358, 361
Denny, George H h 343
Denver Art Museum a 1231
Denver Post , h 862
Denver University.... ----- h 64, 888, 941; a 955
Department of Education (California) r 165
Department of Education and Research (CIO) h 784
Department of Secondary School Principals h 696, 697; r 136
Department of Superintendents (National Education Associa-
tion) r85, 140
Deperon, Paul h 892
Der Arbeiter (publication) r 409
Derby, Albert LeForest h 345
Des Moines Register and Tribune a 1021
Des Moines University of Lawsonomy ... h 457, 458
Descartes : h 805
Descendents of the American Revolution. _ r 237, 247, 259, 308, 370
Design for America (publication) h 397
Design for Giving a 1239
Desmond, Alice Curtis h 927
Deutsch, Albert h 131; r 71
Deutsch, Monroe h 255, 257
Dewey, Charles S h 920
Dewey, John... h 21,
203, 217-219, 224, 265, 268, 274, 308, 309, 324, 327,
488, 516, 518, 573, 781, 782, 791; a 977, 980, 1145;
a 1012; r 45, 117, 149, 156.
Dewey Society h 21, 46, 309, 388, 390; a 1012; r 45
Dewey, Thomas E h 149; a 1045, 1189; r 309, 347
Dewey Laboratory School (University of Chicago) h 216
Dewhurst, J. Frederick h 137; r 86
Dickey, Charles D h 349
Dickey, John S h 353: a 1127
Dickinson, R. L hl31;r68
Dictatorship in the Modern World (publication) . h 928
Dictionary of American Biography a 1 00 1 , 1 007
Dies, Hon. Martin h 40, 135,
904; a 1159, 1169-1172, 1174, 1175, 1220; r 93, 109,
110, 197, 263, 381, 405.
36 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Dies Committee h904; a 1159,
1169-1172, 1174, 1175, 1220; r 93, 109, 110, 381
Dies Committee Press Releases r 381
Dies Committee Reports (1944) r 93
Dilworth Committee h 315, 318-320, 389; r 154, 155
Dillard, Hardy C h 874
Dillard, James H h 359; a 1235
Dillard University a 1041
Dillingham, Walter F h 552, 553
Dilworth, Nelson h 315, 318-320, 335, 389
Dilworth report- h319, 389
Dimitrov, Georgi _ r 365
Dinwiddie, Albert B h 343
Diogenes (publication) r 189
Diplomatic Immunities and Privileges of Agents and Staff
Members of the International Organization (publication) — h 915
Dirba, Charles r 356
Direction (publication) r 286, 346, 391
Directory of Agencies in Intergroup Relations for 1948-1949
(publication) r 399
Directory of Fellowship Awards for Years 1917-1950 (publica-
tion) - ----- _-_ a 1236
Directory of Social Sciences Research Organizations in Univer-
sities and Colleges (publication) h 808, 855
Dirksen ____ a 1189
Disarmament (publication) h 927 ; r 173
Discriminations and Preferences in International Trade (publi-
cation) h892
Disraeli h 571
District of Columbia Bar h 724
District of Columbia Schools r 362, 363
Dixon, Dean a 1174
Dobb, Maurice. _ h 31, 32; r 92
Doctor Counts is Afraid (editorial) r 257
Documentary Film (seminar) r334
Dodd, Norman h 5-81 ,
89-94, 195, 736, 796, 803, 804, 810, 834, 844; a 1046-
1048.
Dodd, Paul A a 967, 1041
Dodd, William a 1224
Dodd, Mead & Co a 1219
Dodds, Harold W h 343, 353, 359
Dodge, Cleveland H h 341
Dold, Charles C h 351
Dollard, Charles h 132,
135-137, 338-340; a 949, 950, 965, 967, 972; r 46, 51,
82, 85, 86, 89, 120, 140.
Dombrowski, James A r 107, 399-403
Dormer Foundation h 16
Dorner, Hannah a 1173
Dorville Corp . (Campus publishing division) h395
Dostoevski (publication) r 367
Doubleday Page & Co h 361, 395, 921
COMPOSITE INDEX 37
Page
Dougherty _._.._______„__._ h 297
Douglas, Helen Gahagaru ^.^^_^_; _ a 996
Douglas, James H., Jr__ ___-.__„__ h 349
Douglas, Lewis W_- _-._ _-.- h 353, 359; a 1127, 1128
Douglas, PaulH . h 220,
227, 231, 239, 242, 243, 492, 763, 781-783, 791; a 977;
r 110, 148, 432.
Douglas, Thomas C „.____...___._ h 763, 764, 793;. a 977, 991
Douglass, Harl ________ h 697
Down the Tiber and Up to Rome (publication) h 926
Downes, Olin <. -.___ a 1174
Dragoicheva, Tsola N . a 1215; r 175
Drake University a 1230
Draper, Edgar a 1149
Dressmakers Union, ILGWU__ a 977
Driving a Ford Across Soviet Russia (publication) h 273
Dubinsky, David . h 309; a 977; r 104
DuBois, W. E. B h 34, 35, 74; r 151, 266-274
DuBridge, Lee A . h 341; a 1219; f 46
Dudley, Tilford E h 792
Duffett, W. E h 928
Duffy, Irving A , h 376
Duggan, Stephen P h 268, 273, 274, 897; r 157, 159, 412
Duke Foundation . _- h 13, 16, 366, 367, 377, 440; r 6
Duke University h 61, 367, 395; a 1230
Duke University Hospital h 367
Duke University Press . — _ h 395
Duling, G. Harold , a 1238
Dulles, Allen W_ - h 928; a 1133
Dulles, John Foster.___ h 57,
341, 353, 357, 359, 362, 889, 918; a 1044, 1057, 1084;
r24.
Dumbarton Oaks Conference h 886, 890, 916-918
DuMont Broadcasting Co_ h 386
Duncan, Charles T - h 351
Dunford House Association h 909
Dunjee, Roscoe r 266
Dunn, Frederick S - h 341, 874, 928
Dun's Review a 1239
DuPont Co h 375
Durrell (see also Smith <& Durrell) h 395
Dutcher, George Matthew h 926
Dutton,E. P h395
Dutton, William S - a 1238
Duttoncfc Co h395
E
E in UNESCO (pamphlet) h 379
Eagan, Leo -- r 4, 30
Earle, Ken h 725-793;
a 976, 978, 985, 986, 989-998; r 96, 99-103, 105
Early Days of Christian Socialism in America (publication) _ _ r 400
East Asian Institute (Columbia University) h 553
38 COMPOSITE INDEX
Pair*
East European Fund, Inc__ h 36, 50, 346; a 1027, 1036, 1047; r 24, 47
East Indies (article). h 319
East and West Association , r 408
Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians___ r 362
Eastern Illinois State Normal School h94
Easton, Charles L. S h 265
Easton, Stewart C a 1229
Eaton, Berrien a 1238
Eberlein h 926
Eberstadt, Ferdinand . _ _ , r9
Economic Bases of Peace (publication) h 928
Economic and Financial Organization of the League of Nations
(publication) h 915
Economic and Financial Problems (study) r 177
Economic Geiger Counters (editorial) h 849
Economic Imperialism (publication) h 926
Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United
States (publication) h 573
Economic Organization of Welfare (publication) h 890
Economics and the Public Interest (study) h 19, 51, 625; a 1079
Economic Relations With the U. S. S. R. (pamphlet) h891
Economic Rivalries in China (publication) h927
Economic and Social Council (United Nations) h 67, 71, 769
Economic and Social History of the World War a 1058
Economic Trends and the New Deal in the Caribbean (pam-
phlet) r380
Economics in One Lesson (publication) r 122
Economics and the Public Interest (report) r 132
Economy of Abundance (publication) h 134
Economy Co h 394
Edelson, Louise M r 161
Edison a 1168
Edison, Thomas r 203
Editorial Committee ("Soviet Summer") rl60
Editorial Council of Equality r 345
Editorial Research Reports a 1240
Edman, Irwin h 309; a 1009; r 189, 274, 275
Edmondson, J. B a 1148
Edsall, David L h 354
Educating for the Abolition of Want (speech) h780
Educating for Tomorrow (publication) h 488
Education and the Social Order (publication) h 308
Education, History (article) r 92
Education for International Understanding in American Schools
(publication) a 967, 970; r 191
Education for the New America (publication) h35;rl41
Education for Tomorrow (publication) h516
Education for a World Society (publication) h 390
Education in Haiti (pamphlet) h 619
Education Through Indoctrination (pamphlet) h 263
Educational Exchange (United States Advisory Commission), r 108
Educational Foundations and Progress (article) a 1239
Educational Foundations and the Quality of Higher Education
(article) a 1239
COMPOSITE INDEX 39
Page
Educational Institute of Scotland .1 _ ____._.__ — _._ ____■: ; h: 74
Educational Policies Commission h 74, 697 ; a 1147
Educational Record (publication) .,__ a 1237, 1238
Educational Records Bureau h 674, .688, 701, 704, 705, 713
Educational Research Department (Teachers College) _ ... r 149
Educational and Social Planning in the Soviet Union (article)., r 255
Educational Testing Service h 705
Educational Yearbook - a 1146
Educator, The New Deal, and Revolution (article) _ h 487; r 145
Edward L. Bern ays Foundation _ . r 88
Edwards, Joel a 1238
Edwards, Marvin Louis - a 1229
Edwards, Violet r 408
Edwin Gould Foundation for Children -_. hl6
Effective Use of Social Science Research in the Federal Services
(publication) h 473
Egerton, J r 263
Egghead Clutch on the Foundations (article) h 222; r 114, 202
Eichelberger, Clark M h 881,
890, 917, 918, 927; a 984; r 173, 275, 276, 277
(Eichelberger) Commission To Study the Organization of the
Peace _■ h 74
Eiges, Helen r 161
Eiges, Herberg r 161
Eight-Year Study (publication) h 706
Eighth American Scientific Congress h9l2
Eisenhauer, Alice . r 263
Eisenhower, Dwight D h 152,
243, 341, 343, 380, 381, 512, 643, 766, 940; a 987, 1015,
1043, 1052, 1057, 1061, 1079, 1081, 1130, 1148, 1158,
1204, 1208; r 132, 133, 195.
Eisenhower, Milton S.-_ h 348
Eisler, Gerhart h 223; r 266, 339, 345, 358
Eisler, Hanns a 1165; r 108, 190, 250, 253, 261, 301, 309, 383
Eisler, Robert r 93
El Pomar Foundation h 16
Eldridge. (See Hinds, Hayden & Eldridge.)
Electronized Chemical Corp h 553
Eleven Communist leaders r 373
Eleven Years in Soviet Prison Camps (Reader's Digest article) _ h 408
Eliot, Charles W h 341, 343, 352, 354, 359; a 1071
Eller, Edouard D --- h 363
Elliott, Edward C h 343
Elliott, Edward D . a 1235
Ellis. (See Wilbur-Ellis Co.)
Ellis, Albert h 130; r 71
Ellis, Howard ___ --- h 940; a 1230
Ellis, M. H h926
Ellsworth, PaulTheo . a 1230
Elmore, James r 405
Elting and Gossett fa 33
Embree, Edwin R h 357; a 1238
Emeny, Brooks h 553, 874, 897; a 1177, 1181
40 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Emergency Civil Liberties Committee- r 277, 322
Emerson a 1168
Emerson, Rupert h 553
Emerson, Thomas I__ h39
Emory University a 955, 1041, 1124
Empire in the World (publication) h 928
Emporia Gazette h 356
Encyclopedia Americana h 394
Encyclopedia Brittanica h 308, 394; r 164
Encyclopedia of Social Sciences h 31,
33, 894; a 1236; r 49, 92, 93, 198
End the Cold War— Get Together for Peace (pamphlet) __ r 269, 331
Endowments and Foundations (publication) a 1236
Engels r 129, 414
England, the Unknown Isle (publication) h927
Engle-Janosi, Friedrich h 244
Episcopal Academy in Virginia a 969
Epstein, Abraham h 220
Epstein, Henrietta h 777, 778; a 990
Equal Access to Health (article) h 614, 615
Equal Justice (publication) r 260
Equal Rights for Negroes in the Arts, Sciences, and Profes-
sions (conference) r 279
Equality (publication) r 345, 348
Equitable Life Assurance Society h 355, 361
Escher, Franklin h 927
Espionage Act r 409
Essex, Martin a 992
Essex County jail (New Jersey) r 229
Estate Planning in a Changing World (publication) h 1 86
Ethnogeographic Board a 1226
Ethridge, Mark 1 h 347; a 1021
Etting_ r 121
Ettinger, Karl E a 1183, 1193
Euclid h 142
Eugene and Agnes E. Meyer Foundation rlO
Eurich, Alvin C h 349
Europe Today (Dinner-Forum) r 305, 318, 377, 378
Europe and the U. S. (publication) h 901
European Advisory Commission h 886
European Summer (publication) h 928
Evans, Lawton B h 341
Evans, Melbourne G a 1232
Evans, Roger h 538, 540; r 28
Evening Moscow (publication) r 253
Evening Star (Washington) r 243,
270, 274, 278, 283, 322, 323, 325, 344, 350, 383
Everett, Samuel h390; a 1149
Every Man's United Nations, a Ready Reference to the Struc-
ture and Functions of the Work of the United Nations and
Its Related Agencies (pamphlet) h 385
Evolution of the Philanthropic Foundation (article) a 1238
Ewert h 903
COMPOSITE INDEX 41
Pag*
Ewing, Oscar R .__. h 308, 757; a 995
Executive Order No. 10450 h434;
r 237-239, 242, 243, 246, 248, 268-271, 279, 283, 284,
288, 305, 310, 324, 329, 334, 352, 353, 366, 373, 414,
416.
Existentialism the Philosophy of Decadence (publication) a 1 194 ;
r 76
Exiled Writers Committee (League of American Writers) r 248,
305, 318, 375, 377, 378
Experience in International Administration (publication) a 1241
Experiment in the Eradication (publication) a 1073
Exploitation (article) r 92
Export Policy (publication) h 892
Express to Hindustan (publication) h 926
F
Fabian News (publication) h 215
Fabian Party (Canada) h 788
Fabian Publications, Ltd h 308
Fabian tract No. 288__ h 308
Fabian Society h 31, 46,
202, 205, 214, 215, 221, 245, 307, 319, 573; a 984, 985
Fabian Socialists h 236-237, 297,
307, 319, 393; r 57, 117, 132, 148, 155, 156, 426, 430
Fabianism (article) r 92
Fabianism in Great Britain (publication) __ r 148, 155
Fabianism in the Political Life of Britain (publication) h 215,
243, 244; a 946, 947
Fabulous Ford Foundation (article) a 1239
Fackenthal, Frank D h 309
Facts Forum h 52, 53, 54, 137, 185, 725
Facts Forum broadcasts r 133, 174
Facts Forum News (publication) rl74
Faculty Research Fellowships (SSRC pamphlet) r61
Fads and Delusions in Modern Sociology, Psychology, Psy-
chiatry, and Cultural Anthropology (publication) r.78
Fahs, Charles B h 358, 561; r 201
Fainsod, Merle h 347
Fair Employment Practices Commission (FEPC) r 101
Fair Labor Standards Act a 1206
Fairbank, John K . h 553
Fairchild, Henry P h 488, 516; a 1174, 1216; r 277-281
Fairman, Charles h 874
Falconer, Sir Robert h 343
Falk, I. S h 777; a 985, 990
Falk, Laura h 16, 854; r 45, 47
Falk, Maurice h 16, 854; r 45, 47
Falk Foundation h 16, 854; r 45, 47
Fall h297
Fames, Oscar J_'_ _ a 1231
Family Foundation (article) a 1239
Family Life (article) h 320
Family of Nations (publication) h 928
42 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Far East Spotlight (publication)-, r 235, 236, 269, 308, 376,. 379, 380
Far Eastern Affairs (publication) h 524
Far Eastern Association _ — a 999
Far Eastern International Kelations (publication) — h 927
Far Horizons (publication) h 927
Farmer, James a 979, 982, 983
Farmer-Labor Party h 790, 791; a 1163
Farmers Educational and Cooperative Union of America r 405
Farmers Union r 187
Faris, Ellsworth a 1235
Farrand, Livingston ■_ h343;al220
Farrar Straus & Co., Inc h 395
Farrell, James T r 189, 281, 282
Farrell, John T h 244
Facism, Colonialism, and World Peace (speech) r 385
Facism and National Socialism (publication) h928
Facist Central Bureau _ . r 396
Facist Goat Glands for Capitalism (article) h 744
Fascist Party - h 222,
223, 308, 330, 335, 382, 504, 604, 744, 746, 762, 771,
773, 788, 847; r 21, 87, 98, 220, 240, 251, 259, 265,
276, 318, 326, 329, 332, 333, 335, 344, 347, 348, 351-
353, 357, 374, 380, 396, 398, 412.
Fast, Howard h 33; r 121, 282, 283, 284, 285, 297, 356
Faulkner, Kay Nelsen a 1231
Faulkner v. Commissioner (case) h 433
Faust, Dr h HI
Faust, C. H h 348, 349; a 1238
Fearing, Kenneth r 245, 285-287
Federal Council of Churches a 990; r 432
Federal Council of Churches of Christ__ a 1156, 1235
Federal Government and You (publication) h397
Federal Loyal-Security Program (study) a 1132
Federalist (publication) . h 593, 928
Federation for the Repeal of the Levering Act h 390
Feinberg, Israel h 762; a 995
Fellows of the Social Science Research Council 1925-1951
(publication) r 62
Fellowship (publication) r 397
Fellowship of Reconciliation r 187, 397-399, 412
"Fellowships and Grants" (SSRC pamphlets) r 61
Fels, Samuel S h 16
Fels Fund h 16
FEPC (Fair Employment Practices Commission) rlOl
Ferguson, Francis r 189
Fergusson, Erna h 928
Ferguson, Homer h 552; a 1200
Ferry, Frederick C h 343
Ferry, W. H h 351; r 189
Few of the One Hundred and Eighty-One Who Have Led
Groups Served by the Open Road (publication) r313
Field, Frederick V h 560; a 1222, 1224, 1225; r 408
Field, Marshall h 16, 28, 471, 472; r 54
COMPOSITE INDEX 43
Page
Field Enterprises, Inc h 394
Field Foundation. h 16, 28, 471
Fields h 903
Fields of Wonder (publication) r 297
Fifteen Facts on the Proposed British Loan (publication) h 920
Fifteen Million Dollars to Study Peace (article) a 1238
Fight (publication) r 228, 230, 231, 258, 298, 376, 377
Fight War (pamphlet) r 318
Filene, Edward H r 109
Film Audiences For Democracy h 222; r 371
Film Audiences for Democracy (Advisory Board) r 305, 306, 308
Film Council of America r 166
Film Survey (publication) r 305, 308, 371
Films for Democracy (publication) r 308, 371
Financing of International Administration (publication) h 915
Finch, George A h 341, 873, 878, 881, 887, 888, 890, 918
Fine Arts in Philanthropy (publication) a 1236
Finer, Herman h 33, 929; a 1140
Finkelstein, Maurice___ a 1238
Finkelstein, Moses h 42
Finley, Professor h42
Finley, Moses (Finkelstein) a 1041, 1042
Finnegan, Richard h350; a 1051
Finney General Hospital (Thomasville, Ga.) h 920
Firestone Foundation h 16
Firing Line (newsletter) h40
First American Delegation to U. S. S. R r 247
First American Writers Congress (Mecca Temple, NYC) r 281
First Boston Corp h 351
First Congress of the Mexican and Spanish American People
of the United States r 370
First Kinsey book r 71
"First of May" (song) r 190, 253
First Russian Seminar and Near East Cruise (1933) r 157, 158
First United States Congress Against War r 318, 351, 353, 398
Fischer, George h 348
Fish Committee r 229
Fisher, G. W h 553
Fisher, Helen h 751; r 99
Fisher, John r 161
Fisher, Joseph L h 352
Fitch, John A r 93
Flanagan, Hallie F h 268, 275
Flannigan h 218
Fleischman, Max C h 16
Fleischman Foundation h 16
Fleming, Frank h 74
Fletcher, Arnold Charles a 1229
Fletcher, C. Scott - h 348, 349
Flexner, Abraham h 62,
98, 101, 250, 252, 287, 345, 359, 363; a 950, 955, 1145,
1196, 1235, 1238; r 44.
Flexner, Simon _-__ h 354
44 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Flick, Friedreick , r 119
Flood, Hon. Daniel J h37
Florinsky, Michael T h 928
Flower, B. O h 220
Flynn, Elizabeth Gurley h 224; r 373
Flynn, John T h 731; r 121, 122
Flynn, Kathleen T a 1009
Flynn, Leone h 402
Foley, William h 329
Folger, J. Clifford h 891
Folkways (publication) a 972 ; r 83
Follett, Helen h 929
Food and Agriculture Organization a 1103; h 66, 67, 71
Food, Tobacco, Agricultural and Allied Workers of America r 406
Foote, Cone & Belding a 1043
For a New Africa (pamphlet) ___ _ r 359, 384, 385
For the Rescue of Refugees (publication) r 309, 335
For the Right to Liberty (article) h 320
For This We Fought (publication) h 134
Forbes, Rose D h 429
Forbes, Rosita h 927
Forced Labor in the Soviet Union (publication) r 388
Forces Affecting American Education (publication) __ h 489, 490, 494
Ford, Benson h 346, 376; a 1021, 1023
Ford, Edsel h 346, 347; a 1021
Ford, Guy Stanton h 286, 928; a 975
Ford, Henry h 25, 40, 101,
249, 250, 372, 375, 586, 848; a 1021; r 27, 116, 167
Ford, Henry II h 39, 250, 346, 347, 376; a 1021, 1039
Ford, James W r 245, 251, 258, 285, 289, 303, 393
Ford, William C_._ h 376
Ford Behavioral Science Foundation h 36 T
481; r 24, 46, 49, 50, 81, 82
Ford East European Fund „ r 24, 47
Foreign Economic Administration ,, r 263
Ford estates r 7
Ford family r 7, 9, 10
Ford Foundation h 2,
13, 16, 18, 25, 26, 28, 30, 31, 36, 38-43, 50, 54, 93, 96 r
97, 104-106, 108, 212, 246, 250, 333, 336, 337, 346, 363,
370, 372, 375, 376, 379-381, 384, 400, 401, 459, 474,
480, 481, 519, 549, 732, 840, 854; a 1103, 1016-1018,
1021, 1023-1027, 1029-1036, 1038-1050, 1052, 1053,
1055,- 1119, 1156, 1168, 1183, 1197, 1204, 1227, 1229,
1230, 1235, 1238, 1239, 1241; r 4, 6, 7, 21, 23-28,
31-33, 41, 45, 46, 48, 59, 81, 94, 107, 111-114, 116,
123, 156, 161, 162, 169, 170, 176, 177, 186-189, 226,
299, 300, 426.
Ford Foundation (breakdown chart) _ r24
Ford Foundation Arkansas Experiment a 1238
Ford Foundation Reports _„__ h 42, 375; r 25
Fund for Adult Education (Ford), r 52, 53, 107, 108, 162, 164, 166, 176
COMPOSITE INDEX 45
Page
Ford Fund for the Advancement of Education.. h 584;
r 23, 27, 38, 127, 161, 162, 166, 167
Ford Fund for the Advancement of Education (Advisory Com-
mittee) r 23, 38, 162
Ford Institutional Exchange Program r24
Ford Millions for Education (article) a 1237
Ford Motor Company, h 39, 41, 42, 346, 370-377; a 1021 ; r 6, 7, 111
Ford's New Venture (article) a 1238
Foreign Policy Association , h 36,
57, 74, 475, 553, 874, 877, 879, 881-884, 894, 895, 897^
900', 901, 921, 924, 931, 933, 941; a 1036, 1037, 1064,
1133, 1156, 1176, 1177, 1179-1182, 1215, 1229; r 170,
171, 174-176, 182, 184, 235.
Foreign Policy Bulletin a 1179; r 174
Foreign Trade (article) h 319
Foreman, Clark Howell r 401
Forging A New China (publication) h 901
Foresman, Scott h 394
Foresman & Co h 394
Form 990 A r214
Formal Grammar as a Discipline (publication) h94
Formation of the Communist Party, 1919-1921 (article) r 414
Forest, Wilbur r 9
Forstall, James J h 433
Forsyth, Margaret r 298
Fortnightly (publication) a 1239, 1241; r 371, 402
Fortune (publication) a 983, 1239; r 363
Fortunes, Private, Modern Period (article) r92
Forty-five years of the Carnegie Foundation (publication) a 1236
Forty Years of Carnegie Giving (publication) h 669; a 1236
Forty Years of Education (publication) h 308, 793
Forty Years of Social Work Leadership (article) a 1238
Forward March of American Labor (publication) h 781,
791; a 981, 988, 997
Fosdick, Harry Emerson h 354
Fosdick, Raymond B h 136,
354, 360, 362, 669, 879, 880, 893, 896, 919, 942; a 1073,
1082, 1084, 1090, 1117, 1130, 1140, 1235; r 19, 20, 30,
32, 88.
Foss, Martin a 1232
Foster r~258, 393
Foster, Arthur William h 341
Foster, Bill r 361
Foster, John W h341; a 1057, 1200, 1023
Foster, William Z r 258, 271, 303, 315, 325, 357, 414
Foundation for Economic Education a 997
Foundation for Foreign Affairs a 1241
Foundation: Its Place in American Life (publication) _ _ a 1236; r 30
Foundation Program and Public School Finance (article) a 1240
Foundation Racket (article) a 1239
Foundations and Endowments in Relation to Research (pub-
lication) a 1236
49720 — 55 4
46 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Foundations for Health (article) a 1238
Foundations, a modern Maecenas (article) a 1237
Foundations and Public Service (article) _ al238
Foundations and Their Support of Scholarly Publishing
(article) a 1239
Foundations on Trial (article) a 1238
Four-H Clubs . h 881
Fourth American Writers Congress r341, 346
Fourth Annual Conference (American Youth Conference) r 276
Fowler, Codey r 185
Fox, Austen G h 341
Fox, Bertrand a 1025
Fox, Dixon Ryan„ h 343
Fox, G a 1181
Fox & Co a 1181
Fox, Mary h 220
Fraekel, Osmond K h 39
Frame, Donald Murdoch a 1231
France (New Plans for Education) publication h397
France, Short History (publication) h929
Francis, Clarence h 348; a 1028
Franck, Peter Goswyn a 1230
Franco ---- r 321, 333, 345, 374, 385
Frankenberg, Lloyd r 309
Frankenstein, Alfred V . a 1231
Frankfort University h 31; r 92
Frankfurter, Alfred M r 189
Frankfurter, Felix h 309; a 1232
Franklin, Benjamin h 805, 846, 859
Franklin, Francis a 1175
Franklin Institute (Philadelphia) h845
Franks, Robert A h 338, 339, 341, 343, 345
Franzwa, Elmer h379;r!88
Fraser, Alexander h 348
Fraser, Leon h 341, 891
Fratres, Corda h 876
Frazar & Hansen Import-Export Co h 553
Frazer, Keener C h 874
Frazier, Lynn J -- a 1175
Frazier, Bill r 186
Fred, Edwin B h 343
Free, Henry John a 1229
Free Cedric Belfrage (handbill) r 280
Freedom in an Age of Danger (broadcast) h33
Freedom Crusade (Civil Rights Congress) r 270, 343, 383
Freedom, Culture, and Social Planning, and Leadership (pam-
phlet)___ h263
Freedom From Want (pamphlet) h 779; a 989, 997
Freedom of Speech and of the Press (article) r 93
Freedom and the Welfare State (publication) r 100, 103
Freedom and the Welfare State Today (symposium) h 308,
755, 756, 762, 773
COMPOSITE INDEX 47
Page
Freedom's Charter, The Universal Declaration of Human
Rights (publication) h 884
Freedom's Choice, The Universal Declaration of Human
Rights (publication) r 176
Freegood, Anne G r 70
Freelander, Ronald h 351
Freeman, David F h 350, 351
Freeman, Douglas S h 341, 354, 360
Freeman, Edwin Ruthven a 1229
French, Mrs. John a 1181
French Canadian Outlook (p ublication) h929
Frew, William N h 338
Frey, John P r 403
Freyre, Gilberto b 929
Frick, Henry Clay „ h 16
Frick Educational Commission h 16
Friedman, Robert r 322, 323, 343
Friedman, Samuel H a 1165
Friends of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade r 251, 261, 292, 337
Friends Committee on National Legislation r 187
Friends of Democracy a 1173
Freedom and Welfare State a 994, 995
Friends of the Public Schools h 322, 324, 326
Friends Service Committee (Philadelphia) r 302
Friends of the Soviet Union h 222;
a 1175; r 235, 247, 248, 256, 259, 317, 330, 377
Frisch, Rabbi Ephraim a 990
Frissell, Hollis B h 360
Fritchey, Clayton a 1181
Frontier Films a 1 172 ;
r 230, 232, 238, 251, 259, 327, 332, 333, 336, 345, 370
Frontiers of Democracy (publication) h 468; r 146, 168
Froude (See Allen, Froude, Hilen & DeGarmo.)
Fruit of an Impulse — 45 Years of Carnegie Foundation— 1905-
1950 (Publication) h378, 669, 680; a 1236
Fruits of Philanthropy (article) a 1240
Fry, Varian h 928
Fuchs, Klaus r 56
Fulbright, Senator .. a 1059, 1157
Fuller, Richard E h 553
Fulton, William a 1238
Funaroff, S r 392
Fund for Adult Education (Ford) h 4 1,346,
349, 379, 883; a 1027, 1028, 1040, 1236
Fund for the Advancement of Education h 96, 98-
100, 103, 106, 107, 109, 346, 349, 350, 480; a 1027,
1028, 1041, 1042, 1048.
Fund for American Leadership, Inc h 197
Fun For The People (show) r 365
Fund for the Republic, Inc h 346, 350;
a 1027, 1031, 1040, 1050, 1051, 1053, 1054, 1055; r 24,
111, 114, 116, 198.
48 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Funds and Foundations (publication) *. h 62; a 1235, 1239; r 44
Funk and Wagnall a 978, 1236
Furth, J. Herbert a 1230
Furst, Clyde h 345
Future, Inc h 351
Future Supply of Human Resources (article) a 1239
G
Gadler, Steve r 293
Gailmor, William S a 1174
Gaines, Francis Pendleton h 341
Gaither, H. Rowan h 38, 346, 347, 376; a 1016, 1039; r 46
Gale, Samuel C a 1043
Galio, John r 161
Gallaghan, Edward F r 399
Galloway, George h 567, 569
Gallup, Dr h 148-150
Gallup poll h 148, 149; r 61
Gamble, Charles K h 553
Gamble, Ted R h 920
Gambs, John S h 265
Gardner, John h 137, 338-340, 527; a 965; r 34, 86
Garett, Garet a 1036; h 36
Garfield a 1220
GarfinckeL Julius a 1232
Garfinckel Co a 1232
Garland Fund h 223,
399, 400, 457, 458, 471; r 54, 197, 201, 229, 247,
395, 396
Garside, Charles h 351
Gasser, Gerbert S h 354; r 9
Gates, Mr r 30
Gates, "Bet a Million" h 769
Gates, FrederiskT h 354, 360, 362
Gates, Johnny r 361
Gates Papers r 30
Gatti, Allen h 929
Gaylord, Robert M h 891
Gebhart, Paul H h 123
Geddes, Donald Porter h 131
Gellhorn, Walter h28, 40, 898, 903; a 1131, 1132, 1218, 1219, 1222
General American Investors Co., Inc h 347
General Corporation Act of Michigan a 1049
General Education Board (Rockefeller Foundation) h 16,
34-36, 104, 119, 226, 250, 251, 287, 337, 353-356, 359-
361, 400, 474, 475, 525, 546, 548, 668, 669, 672, 677,
690-693, 697, 702, 706, 710-713, 716, 718-721, 854,
939, 1066-1075, 1083, 1084, 1094-1096, 1099-1101,
1107-1110, 1113, 1122, 1127, 1128, 1141, 1144-1149.
General Electric Co h 98,
349, 357, 362; a 979, 1021, 1044, 1136
General Foods Corp a 1028, 1043
General International Organization — Its Framework and
Functions (publication) h 890
COMPOSITE INDEX 49
Page
General Mills h 98; a 1943, 1044
General Motors (GM) h 98, 370, 371, 374-376; a 989, 1044; r 7
Gearhart, Bertrand r 351
Gearing, Kenneth : r 190
Geddes, Donald Porter r 69
Gelders, Joseph S r 400
Gellhorn, Walter r 288
General Education Board (Rockefeller) r47,
52, 59, 136, 149, 154, 156
General Education Board Annual Report, 1940 (Rocke-
feller) r 154, 198
George Washington Carver School r 359
George Washington University h 590, 723
Georgetown University h 729; a 1055, 1229
Georgetown University Law School h 729
Gerbode, Martha A h 553
Gerhard, Win. Arthur a 1232
German- American Bund h 330
Germany Is Our Problem (publication) h 929; a 1216
Gerschenkron, Alexander h 891
Gerson, Simon W r 240, 258, 267, 275, 327, 343, 370
Gerth, Donald Rogers a 1229
Gettysburg College a 1229
Getz Bros h 553
Ghaller, L. O r 161
Ghosh, Suprakas a 1229
Giannini Foundation a 1238
Gideonse, Dr. Harry D a 1217
Gifford, Walter S h 349, 354, 360
Gilbert, Walter M h 345
Gilchrist, Huntington h 920
Gildersleeve, Virginia C h 917, 919
Gillette, H. Malcolm h 357, 363
Gilliat a 1228
Gillman, Charles r 399
Gilman, Charlotte Perkins h 220
Gilman, Daniel C h 360
Gilmore, Eugene A h 343; a 1230
Gimbel, Dwight S a 1174
Ginn & Co. (Boston) h 394
Girard Trust Corn Exchange Bank (Philadelphia) h 356; a 1127
Gitlow, Benjamin r 248, 256
Givens, Willard E h 35, 74, 385, 405, 409, 482; r 141
Gladieux, Anna Cook a 1204
Gladieux, Bernard Louis h36,
37, 38; a 1038, 1197, 1198, 1204, 1238
Gladieux, Mrs. Bernard L a 1205, 1209
Gladieux, Victor Modest a 1204
Gladstone h571
Glasser, Carrie h 747
Glasser, Harold r 197, 287, 288
Glazer, Joseph a 981, 988
Glazer, Nathan h 162
50 COMPOSITE INDEX
Tage
Gleason, William Everett h 884
Glebov's History of Russian Music , a 1003
Gleickman, H. H r 161
Glenn, John M a 1236, 1238
Glueck, Eleanor h 175
Glueck, Sheldon h 175
GM (General Motors) h 98, 370, 371, 374-376; a 989, 1044
Godfrey M. Hyams Trust h 16
Godkin Lectures a 970
Goebbels r 322
Goerring, Hermann-.. r 119
Goetz, Delia h 897
Goff, Mr — a 1175
Gold, Ben r 356
Gold and Prices (publication) h 639
Golden, Clinton S h 348
Golden Book of American Friendship with the Soviet Union. _ h 222;
a 1171, 1215; r 175, 260, 264, 269, 290, 304, 312, 327,
331, 333, 391.
Golden Rule Foundation a 1236
Goldner, Werner Ernst a 1229
Goldsmith, Robert h 926
Goldsmith Memorial Award a 1219
Goldthorpe, John H - a 1236
Golos, Jacob r 287, 356
Gomme, A. W h 929
Good Earth (publication) , h 927; r 173
"Goodbye Christ" (published poem) r 12 1 , 151
Goode, John r 356
Goodell, Jane h 929
Goodman, Sarah r 161
Goodrich, Carter h 776, 917; a 990
Goodrich, L. Carrington h 553
Goodwin, Angier L a 1 120
Gordon, Alvin h 929
Gordon, Darley h 929
Goslin, Willard L h 320, 325, 330, 389,404,409
Gosplan h 31; r 130
Gossett r 121
Gossett, William T h 376
Gossman, Norbert Joseph a 1229
Gottingen University a 1139
Gould, Edwin h 16
Gould, Kenneth M a 1175
Gould, Laurence M h 347; a 1021
Gould Foundation for Children hl6
Government, Soviet Russia (article) r 93
Governmental Research Association a 1209
Grace, W. R h 346, 376; a 1021
Grace & Co # --_. h 346, 376; a 1021
Graduate Library School (Chicago University) a 1036
Graduate Record Service h 688, 689, 704, 705
Graduate School (University of Minnesota) h 286
COMPOSITE INDEX 51
Page
Graduate School of Arts and Sciences (Catholic University of
America) , h 244
Graduate School of Business Administration (Harvard Uni-
versity) h346;a 1025
Graduate School of Education (Harvard University) a 1041
Graduate School of Public Health (University of Pittsburgh), h 355;
a 1127, 1128
Graebner, Theodore r 293
Graham, Frank P h 268, 275, 343; r 399
Graham, Martha r 290, 288
Graham, Philip L a 1043
Gramp, Professor __ r 159
Grandmother Drives South (publication) h 929
Grant, Frances R „ a 985
Grant, Ulysses S h 43
Grant Foundation h 854; r 47, 52
Grants-in-Aid of Research (SSRC pamphlet) r 61, 62
Grassi a 1105
Grattan, C. Hartley a 1175
Gravediggers of America (publication) a 1216
Graves, John Temple, Jr h 220; r 148
Graves, Dr. Mortimer a 1009,
1222, 1223, 1227, 1229; r 55, 56, 289, 363
Graves, Kizer & Graves (law firm) h 553
Gravit, Francis West : a 1231
Gray, George_ _„_ h341;a 1057
Gray, Gordon a 1181
Gray, Herman A h 779; a 990
Great Books Foundation r 221, 351
Great Britain, an Empire in Transition (publication) h 928
Great Collapse and Government Ownership (publication) r 409
Great Investment (publication) h 94
Great Technology (publication) r 363
Greater Boston Peace Strike Committee h 223
Greater New York Emergency Conference on Inalienable
Rights a 1176; r 301, 306-310, 349, 377
Greece (publication) h 929
Greek-American Council r 269
Green, Abner r 267, 290, 381
Green, Gilbert r 298, 361
Green, William____ h 781, 920; a 991, 997
Greenacres Association a 1209
Greenbacks (organization) h 515
Greene, Jerome D h 354, 357, 360
Greene, Katrine R. C h 552
Greene, Roger S h 357
Greenfield, Mrs. Albert M a 1181
Greenwood, Arthur h 774, 775, 776; a 989
Gregg, Alan h 357, 358, 363
Gregg Publishing Co h 394
Gregory, George D h 879
Gregory, Horace r 190, 289
Grether, Dean E. T a 1025
52 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Grew , h 769
Grierson, John r 165
Griffon, Bill r 186
Griswold, A. Whitney - h 343
Griswold, Erwin N h 350; a 1051, 1052
Grizodubova, Valentina r 241
Grolier Society, Inc h 309, 310, 394
Gromov, Antoli a 1223, 1228
Grosberg, Marian r 161
Gross, Ernest A h 341
Gross, Felix a 983
Grossman, Mordecai h 488
Group Health Association of Washington, D.C a 1209
Group Leader's Guide _. a 1049
Grover, Elizabeth S a 1065
Grubstakers (article) _ a 1238
Grubstaking the Best Folks (publication) a 1240
Guardians of American Education, Inc h 261, 262
Guardians of Liberty r 280
Guerard, Albert h 929; r 189, 190, 290, 291
Guggenheim, John Simon h 16,
60, 355, 471, 472; a 1127, 1240; r 24, 54, 197, 198
Guggenheim Memorial Foundation (John Simon) h 16,
60, 355, 471, 472; a 1127, 1240; r 24, 54, 197, 198
Guggenheim, Solomon R : h 16
Guggenheim (Solomon) Foundation h 16
Guggenheim Fellowship r 363
Guide to the Practice of International Conferences (study) h 887
Guide to Public Affairs Organizations (publication) r 404
Guide to Reading on Communism r 297, 315
Guide to Soviet Education (publication) h 397
Guide to the Study of Medieval History (publication) h831
Gulick, Robert L. Jr h 891, 892, 920
Gumbo (play) a 1164
Gunn, Selskar M h 357
Gustavson, R. G h 344, 352
Guthrie a 974
Gwinn, Ralph W__ h 292, 302, 643; 132
H
Haas, William S h 929
Haber, David h 39
Hacker, Prof. Louis M a 998
Haddad, Jamal a 1229
Hadley, Arthur T h 344
Hadley, Herbert Spencer h 354
Hadley, Morris h 338; a 965
Haigler, Carey r 399
Haines, Aubrey B a 1238
Hakmon, Frances B a 1232
Hale,E. M h 394
Hale & Co h 394
Half-Billion for Humanity (article) a 1238
COMPOSITE INDEX 53
Page
Hall, Bascom a 964
Hall, Gus r 361
Hall, Helen a 984
Hall, RobE r 324
Hall, S. S., Jr h 340, 345
Hall Brothers Foundation hl6
Halla, Philip J _ a 1229
Halperin, Maurice a 1223, 1228
Halt the Defamers Who Call Peace Un-American (handbill) _ . r 279
Hambro, C. J h 982, 929
Hambuechen, Joseph W h 351
Hamilton h 875
Hamilton, Alexander h 593, 805, 928
Hamilin, Charles S h 341
Hammond, C. S h 394
Hammond & Co h 394
Hampton Institute (Hampton, Va.) h 360
Hampton University h 694
Hancox, Robert h 348
Hand, Mrs. Learned a 1182
Handbook on International Understanding h893
Handbook for Latin American Studies h895
Handbook of the National Education Association r 136
Hankamp, Gertrude A h 64
Hanna, Hugh H h 360
Hanna, Mark h 136
Hanna, Dr. Paul R a 1145, 1150
Hansen, Alvin H h 74
Hansen, O. C h 553
Harcourt, Brace & Co ■ h 394; a 1236
Harder, D. S___ h 376
Harding, Clifford H a 1229
Harding, Warren G , h 297; a 1063
Hardman, J. B. S_. r 93
Hardware Age (publication) h 496
Harger, Alice M a 1009
Harley, J. Eugene h 874
Harper h 583; r 80
Harper, Heber h 266, 274, 275; r 157
Harper, Samuel G h 927; r 158
Harper, William R h 344, 360
Harper & Bros h 346, 390, 394; r 85
Harper's (publication) h 131, 132, 346;
a 1235, 1238, 1239; r 70, 210, 250
Harriman, Henry L r 158
Harriman, W. Averell a 1197, 1198, 1200, 1207
Harriman. (See Brown Bros., Harriman & Co.)
Harris, Abram h33
Harris, Gerald r 405
Harris, Helen a 984
Harris, Rufus C h 344
Harris, Seymour E h 468, 468, 497, 508, 628, 793; a 981
Harrison, Charles C h 344
54 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Harrison, Earl Grant-- -- h 341
Harrison, Selby M h 60; a 1236, 1238
Harrison, Wallace K h 354; a 1127
Harrison & Abramovitz (architects) h 354; a 1127
Harrison-Black bills r 411
Harsha, E. Houston a 1132
Harshorn, Merrill F h 64
Hart, Henry C a 1229
Hart, Schaffner & Marx h 350; a 1051
Hartford Courant (publication) r 160
Hartford, John A h 16
Hartford Foundation h 16
Hartman, George W h 467; r 411
Hartsville School a 1229
Harvard Business Review h496; a 1240
Harvard Class of 1905 Thirtieth Anniversary Report r231
Harvard Law Review h 903; a 1219, 1240
Harvard Law School h 350; a 1051, 1055, 1180
Harvard Medical School h 354
Harvard School of Business Administration h 376 ; a 1021
Harvard School of Public Health h 354
Harvard University h 19,
32, 62, 63, 220, 224, 346, 347, 354, 359-361, 376, 404,
468, 525, 553, 574, 599, 617, 628, 678, 694, 705, 795,
830, 840, 892; a 970, 981, 993, 1009, 1021, 1071, 1124,
1133, 1139, 1145, 1148, 1184, 1191, 1193, 1196, 1219;
r 45, 64, 75, 77, 81, 157, 158, 178, 231, 248, 263, 306,
363, 364, 366, 367.
Harvard University Press h 482, 617
Hassell, James Woodrow, Jr a 1231
Hastings College of Law _. h 196; a 1230
Hat Worker (publication) a 989
Hatami, Abolghassen J a 1229
Hatcher, Harold O a 1163
Hathaway, Clarence r 298
Hauser, Dr. Philip M_ h 37; a 1203; r 83
Haverford College a 954, 995, 1230, 1232
Havighurst, Robert J h 36, 363, 696-698
Hawaii University h 553
Hawes, Elizabeth r 403
Hawkes, Albert W r 298
Hawkes, Herbert E h 687
Hay, Clara E h 398, 405
Hayden (See Hinds, Hayden & Eldridge.)
Hayd en, Charles h 13, 16; a 1235
Hayden Foundation h 13, 16; a 1235
Haydn, Hiram r 189
Havek, Frederick A h 33, 494; r 121
Hayes, A. J h 791, 792; a 977, 979
Hayes, Brooks a 1120
Hayes, Carlton J. H h 286, 926; a 975
Hayes, Ellen, ■ h 483
Hayes, Samuel Perkins, Jr a 1230
COMPOSITE INDEX 55
Page
Haym Solomon (publication) r 285
Hays, Arthur Garfield h 902
Hays, Will . h 297
Hazen, Edward W - a 1235, 1241; r 52
Hazen Foundation a 1235, 1241; r 52
Hazen Pamphlets a 1241
Hazlitt, Henry r 122
Headline Books h 883, 900, 901; a 1215; r 174, 176
Headline Series Booklet a 1179, 1180
Heald, Henry T __„ a 1048
Health Care for Americans (publication) h34
Health Insurance Our Next Forward Step (speech) h 778
Hearst . h 223, 267; r 238, 260, 377
Heath, D. C h 394
Heath & Co h 394
Hebrew University ; a 1139
Heckscher Foundation h 471; r 54
Hedin, Sven h 927
Heffernan, Helen a 1149
Heilbroner, Robert L a 1239
Heinrichs, Waldo Huntley a 1230
Heinz, H. J„__ h 351
Heinz, H. J., II h 351
Heinz, Howard h 341; a 1236
Heinz Co h 351
Held, Adolph h 517, 763
Heller : r 410
Heller, A. A r 298
Hellman, Lillian a 1174
Helms, PaulH h 348
Help China (handbill) r 375
Helper, Dr h 332
Helvering r. Bliss (case) h 429
Helvering v. Davis (case) a 1080
Henderson h 3 97
Henderson, Donald r 161, 298
Henderson Memorial Prize a 1219
Hendrick, V. J h 669
Henley, Constance Jordan h 929
Hennig, Elmer h 352
Henry, Patrick h 311
Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation h 16
Henry Street Settlement a 984
Hepburn, Alonzo B ■_: h 354
Herald-Journal (Syracuse, N. Y.) r 352
Herbert, John E ._ h 352
Herbison, Margaret a 995
Here Is Africa (publication) h 929
Heritage Foundation (publisher) h 243, 246 ; a 945-947
Hernandez v. Texas (case) h 364
Hemdon, Angelo h 306; a 1175; r 154
Herndon Bail Fund r 314
Herod, W. R h 553
56 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Herodotus a 960
Herring, Hubert a 1163
Herring, Pendleton h 137, 340, 794-865;
r 48, 49, 86, 115, 126-127, 226, 423, 426, 427, 429
Herron, George D r 400
Hershey, Amos S h 878
Hersey, John R h 553
Heydt, Charles O h 354
Hibben, John G h 344
Hickey, Margaret A h 920
Hicks, A. R__ h 928
Hicks, Granville r 372
Higgins, Eugene h 16
Higgins Scientific Trust h 16
Higginson, Thomas Wentworth h 220; a 993
High, Stanley a 1239
Higher Education (article) a 1240
Higher Education and American Business (publication) a 1235
Higher Education, Philanthrophy and Federal Tax Exemption
(publication) a 1236
Higher Education in France (pamphlet) ^ h 6 19
Highlander Folk School a 1 164 ; r 107, 399^03
Hilen (See Allen, Froude, Hilen & DeGarmo.).
Hill, David Jayne h 341
Hill, David Spence h 345
Hill, Louis h 16; a 1227, 1231; h 16
Hill, Maud : h 16; a 1227, 1231; h 16
Hill Family Foundation h 16; a 1227, 1231; h 16
Hilldring, General h 560, 579, 580
Hillman, Sidney a 1172
Hinds, Hayden & Eldridge, Inc h 395
Hindus, Maurice h 927; r 173
Hiroshima (publication) h 553
Hirsch, Rudolf r 189
Hiss, Albert R h 344
Hiss, Alger h 56,
193, 194, 301, 303, 543, 872, 893, 918; a 997, 1060,
1217; r 24, 54, 172, 175, 184, 185, 196, 197, 261, 277,
287, 350.
Historical Blackout (publication) rl78, 179
Historical Outlook (publication) h 478 ;r 140
History of the Communist Party of the United States (pub-
lication) r414
History of League of Nations (publication) h 397
History of Political Ideas (publication) h831
History of the English Speaking Peoples (publication) h 929
History of the Far East in Modem Times (publication) h 928
History of Science Society a 999
History of the Standard Oil Company (publication) h 219, 669
Hitchcock, Henry Russell r 189
Hitchcock Memorial Presbyterian Church a 1209
Hitler h 141
248, 771, 778, 901, 92~8~; a 1015, 1225; 7 42^ Yl8, 119^
277, 322, 326, 352, 356.
COMPOSITE INDEX 57
Page
Hitler-Stalin pact a 1225
Hitti, Philip K ... a 1230
Hi-Y Club a 1204
Hobbe h581
Hobbs, Dr. A. H h 114-187,
414,CS11, 812; r 31, 60, 63, 64, 66, 68- 69, 71, 72, 74-
79, 85-88, 94, 125, 204, 225.
Hobbs Bill r 265, 267, 321, 373
Hobby, Oveta Culp h 777, 786; r 9
Hobson, J. A h 926
Hochman, Julius h 308
Hoetzsch, Otto - h31;r93
Hoffman, Alice h 309
Hoffman, Paul G h26,38,
39, 42, 346, 347, 350, 351, 363, 379-382, 384, 385, 891;
a 1039, 1049-1053, 1055, 1208, 1239; r 111, 114-116,
166, 188, 432.
Holcombe, A. N „-_ a 993
Holcombe, Arthur W h 919
Holland, William a 1228
Holland, William J h 338
Holland, William L h 553
Hollins College h 874
Hollis, Ernest Victor h 58, 479,
669-674, 678, 681, 684, 702,-707, 711-714, 716, 722;
a 1236, 1239; r 134-136.
Hollywood Independent Citizens Committee of the Arts,
Sciences and Professions r 292, 334, 362
Hollywood Quarterly (publication) r 240, 292, 334
Hollywood Ten h 224; r 313, 391
Hollywood Writers Mobilization r 240, 292, 324, 334
Holman, Alfred h341
Holmes, John Haynes._ h 309; a 977, 996
Holt, Henry h 394; a 1001
Holt & Co h 394; a 1001
Holy Land Under Mandate (publication) h927
Hook, Sidney h 265, 488, 516-519; a 977, 996; r 190, 257
Hooven-Owens-Rentschler Co h 346
Hoover, Glenn E h 255, 258, 259
Hoover, Herbert h 197, 231, 745,
778, 850, 851; a 1063, 1080, 1220; r 97, 103, 195, 202
Hoover, J. Edgar r 114, 115, 266
Hoover Commission h 617; a 1208
Hoover Institute..- h 231; a 1030, 1229; r 147
Hoover Institute Library h 197
Hoover's speech. r 202
Hopkins, Ernest M h 354, 360, 362
Hopkins, Harry h 300
Hopper, Bruce C — r 158
Horace Mann-Lincoln Institute of School Experimentation,
Teacher's College, Columbia University h74
Horn, Ernest h 286
Horn, John L h 255
58 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Horn, Robert. . h 33
Hornbeck, Stanley K h 929
Home, Ernest h 514
Horrabin, J. F h 928
Horsley, G. William h 38
Horton, Mrs. Douglas h 349
Horton, Myles r 107, 399-401, 403
Horton, Zylphia r 401
Hoselitz, BertH r 163
Hosiery Workers Union _ r 399
Houghton, Alanson B h 341
Houghton Mifflin Co h 394
House that Hitler Built (publication) h 928
House I Live In (publication) J r 165
Houseman, John__. r 190, 292
Houser, George M r 399
Housing Program for America (publication) h 306, 793
Housman, Laurence r411
Houston, David F h 338
Houston, William V h 344
Houston Chronicle a 1044
Houston Endowment __' h 16
Hovde, Dr. Bryn J a 977, 995, 1231
How Children Learn About Human Rights (pamphlet) h 619
How Discriminatory are College Admissions? (article) r 63
How to End the Cold War and Build the Peace (pamphlet) _ _ r 253,
268, 320, 346
How Fare American Youth? (publication) h 697
How Free Is Free Enterprise? (conference theme) __ h 785, 793; r 105
How May Power Be Won (conference theme) h 750 ; r 99
How Science Aids the Golden Rule (article) v a 1241
How Tax Laws Make Giving to Charity Easy (publication) __ a 1236
''How This Book Came To Be Written" (article) h 132
How To Evaluate a Secondary School (publication) h 706
How To Give Money Away (article) a 1241
How To Have Your Own Foundation (article) a 1239
How To Think About War and Peace (publication) __ _ a 1043; r 227
How To Win the Peace (publication) h 928, 929
Howard, Donald S h 779; a 990
Howard, Martha C h 348-
Howard, William M h 341
Howard Heinz Endowment a 1236
Howland, Charles P h 354, 360; a 969
HuShih-___ - h309
Hubbard, Frank W... h 491, 495, 501, 502, 505
Hudson, J. L h 346
Hudson, Manley h 74, 927
Hudson, Roy „ r 298
Hudson, Shirley D a 1009
Hudson Co : h 346, 374, 376
Huff h927
Huffman, Paul G a 1197
Hughes, Charles Evans h 219, 354, 879*
COMPOSITE INDEX 59
Pago
Hughes, Edwin H fa 344
Hughes, Frank a 1217
Hughes, Langston . h 34, 35; a 1216; r 121, 151, 293-298
Hugins, Roland h 926
Hull, Cordell h 226, 885, 916; a 1132; r 233, 331, 332, 411
Hullfish, H. Gordon. fa 327-329, 332, 335, 388
Human Events (article) a 1238
Humanity Uprooted (publication) h927;rl73
Nume *_- a 1168
Humphrey, Bob h 298
Humphrey, George M h 348
Humphrey, Hubert H a 977
Humphrey, John R h 874
Humphreys, Alexander C h 344
Hunt h 137
Hunt, ErlingM h 54, 65, 912, 928; r 173
Hunt Foundation h 137
Hunter . h 269
Hunter, Edward h 142
Hunter, Frederick M a 1148
Hunter, Robert h 219
Hunter College h 350; a 1051, 1232
Hurewitz, Jacob C a 1230
Hurley, Gen. Patrick h559
Hutchins, Clayton D a 1239
Hutchins, Judd a 1145
Hutchins, Robert Maynard h 38-40,
268, 275, 347, 350, 351, 490, 491, 498, 499, 501-504;
a 1038, 1039; r 111, 114, 155, 190, 198, 299-301, 323.
Hutchison, Bruce- , h 929
Hyams Trust _ h 16
Hyams, Godfrey M h 16
Hyatt Foundation a 1241
Hyde, Walter W r 158
Hyneman, Charles S a 1184, 1191; r 39
I Take My Stand For Peace (pamphlet) r 271
IBM hl30;r 63
Ickes, Harold h 300; r 132
Ickes' Diary r 132
Idaho University h 553
Ideologists of the Imperialist Bourgeoisie (publication) h 838, 847
Idle Men, Idle Money (publication) hl34
ILGWU (International Garment Workers Union) h 762, 779,
780, 789, 792, 793; a 977, 983, 996, 1167; r 104, 108
Ilich, Vladimir r 92
Ilin, M h 927
Ilin, U-_-__ - h927
Illinois Legislature r 300
Illinois Seditious Activities Investigation Commission fa 38;
r 299 323
Illinois University h 220, 388, 390,395^495
60 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Illinois University Press h 395
lima, Viola r 412
Import Capacity of the United States (publication) h 892
Imprecorr (publication) r 243
In Battle for Peace (publication) r 272
In the Case of Morris U. Schappes (pamphlet) r253
In Defense of American Activities (article) a 1221
In Defense of Culture (leaflet) r 315, 341, 346
In Egypt (publication) h 927
In Fact (publication) h 34; r 407
In Search of Ireland (publication) h 927
In Search of Scotland (publication) ; h 927
In Search of Wales (publication) h 927
Income and Economic Progress (publication) h34
Income Tax Deductions for Donations to Allegedly Subversive
Groups (article) _ a 1239
Independent Citizens Committee of the Arts, Sciences and
Professions , r 241, 265, 334, 336
Independent Communist Labor League of America r 187, 404
Independent Labor League of America r 404
Index to Labor Articles (publication) r408
India Today (publication) h 928
Indiana Text Book Commission h 490, 499
Indiana University h937; a 1137, 1138, 1229, 1231
Individualism and Capitalism (article) h32
Industrial Foundations and Community Progress (article) a 1240
Industrial Price Policy (publication) h34
Industrial Property in Europe (pamphlet) h891
Industrial Workers of the World (I. W. W.) r 229
Industrialism (article) r92
Industry Support for our Colleges — moral and financial
(article) a 1240
Inkeles, Alex h 840, 846
Inman, Samuel Guy h 929
Inner Asian Frontiers to China (publication) r 323
Institute for Adult Education (Columbia) h677
Institute for Advanced Study (Princeton, N. J.) h 16,
356, 359, 360, 361
Institute for Advanced Study (Princeton University) h 347
Institute of Current World Affairs a 1230
Institute of Educational Research h 677; r 136
Institute of International Education. _ h 74,
268, 269, 273-275, 282, 475, 674, 675, 702-705, 713,
894, 924; a 1064, 1081, 1113, 1162; r 135, 136, 157,
158, 160, 161, 171, 182, 221.
Institute of International Relations (Forum) r 351
Institute of International Studies (Yale) h 524, 843, 893, 932
Institute of Management and Labor Relations a 11 66
Institute of Pacific Relations (IPR) h 26,
43, 57, 475, 529, 535-545, 547, 548, 553, 557-561, 564,
580, 879, 883, 888, 892-894, 897, 909, 921, 927, 929,
935, 940; a 1060, 1134-1136, 1180, 1210-1215, 1223,
1228; r 19, 23, 24, 28, 29, 41-45, 54, 56-59, 170-174,
179-182, 198-201.
COMPOSITE INDEX 61
Page
Institute of Philosophical Research h 42; a 1042; r 162
Institute of Public Affairs (Seattle), h 874
Institute of School Experimentation^ al 146
Institute of Sex Research a 1138
Institute for the Study of Law (Johns Hopkins) :___ h 286
Institutional Exchange Program (Ford) r24
Institutional Research Policy Committee (American Council
on Education) : r 52
Insull, Samuel h 373
In tellectuals World Congress for Peace r 234
Intelligence and Politics (pamphlet) h 907
Intelligent Philanthropy (publication) a 1235
Intelligent Student's Tour of Socialism r 313
Inter- American Bar Association h 912
Inter-Relationships Between Foundations, Education, and
Government (chart) r 53
Intercollegiate Council- _ "_ a 986
Intercollegiate Socialist (publication) _ T h 483
Intercollegiate Socialist Society _ _ _ _ h46
134, 135, 205, 219, 220, 221, 492, 740; a 993; r 85, 97,
148, 163, 414.
Intercollegiate Student Council h 741, 751; r 96
Intercontinental Peace Conference (Rio De Janiero) _ _ " r362
Intercultural Publications, Inc.__ h 346, 351; a 1027; r 188, 189
Inter-University Labor Education Committee r 1 62, 1 63
International Agreement to Ban Use of Atomic Weapons
(statement) r 331, 378
International Education Board r 149
Internationa] Education Institute 149, 156
International Assembly of Women (Kortright, N. Y.) r 264
International Association of Machinists h 791; a 977, 979, 1232
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development h 67,
71; a 1230
International Cartels (publication) h 892
International Cases (publication) h 926
International Chamber of Commerce h 881, 891, 916, 920
International City Manager's Association a 1209
International Commodity Agreements (publication) h 892
International Conciliation (article) a 1241
International Conferences and Their Technique (conference
Memoranda) h 891, 914, 915
International Control of Aviation (publication) h 556
International Congress of Writers (Madrid) r 261
International Cost Accounting Conference h 495
International Democratic Women's Federation. _ _ r384
International Double Taxation (publication) _ : : h 892
International Drug Control (study) h 887, 915
International Economic Handbook . h 891
International Economic Outlook (pamphlet) h 891
International Education Board h 353, 355, 359, 361, 690
International Education Fund (Rockefeller fund) h255
International Education Institute h 337
49720 — 55— — 5
62 COMPOSITE INDEX
Pag*
International Federation of Workers' Educational Associa-
tions :_- a 1159
International Fellowship of R econciliation r 4 1 2
International Fur and Leather Workers Union r 234, 354
International General Electric Co h 553
International Geographical Union h 286
International Health Board h 355, 357, 361
International Health Commission h 357
International Institute of Child Psychology r 72
International Institute of Columbia h 285, 288; a 1146
International Institute of Teachers College (Columbia Uni-
versity) r 256
International Juridical Association h 903; a 1221; r 239, 288, 370
InternationalJuridical Association Monthly Bulletin r 370
International Labor Defense (National Committee) h 223 ;
r 230, 232, 251, 254, 260, 271, 282, 294, 314, 332-334,
340, 358, 364, 370, 383.
International Labor Defense (Prisoners Relief Fund) r 230, 260
International Labor Office.... _____ h 776, 913; a 990
International Labor Organization (United Nations) h67,
71, 776, 911, 922, 923
International Ladies' Garment Workers. a 995; r 165, 371, 409
International Law and International Relations (publication) _ h 926 ;
r 173
International Law of the Future, Postulates, Principles, and
Proposals (study) h 887
International League for the Rights of Man r 231
International Literature (publication) r 262
International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union r 339
International Mind Alcoves (Carnegie Endowment) h 55, 56,
882, 930; a 1063; r 171, 173, 174
International Monetary Fund h66, 67, 71; a 1230,1231
International Organization in European Air Transport
(publication)..- h 888
International Parliamentary Union r 171
International Peace Prize r 273
International Polity Clubs h 876, 924, 925, 926
International Press Correspondence (publication) : r 317
International Press Institute (Zurich, Switzerland) r 133
International Publishers r261, 315, 345, 348, 370, 372, 392
International Publishing Company r410
International Relations (publication) h926;rl73
International Relations Club__ a 1215-1217; r 171, 173, 174, 175, 184
International Relations Club Handbook, 1926 h 876
International Relations Clubs h 876, 882, 883
International Secretariat (study) h 887
International Security (publication) h 884
International Social Science Research Council r 184, 185
International Socialist League h513
International Studies Conference h 897
International Trade Organization (United Nations) h 66, 67, 71
International Tribunals, Past and Future (study) h 887
International Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers
(British Columbia) r 361
COMPOSITE INDEX 63
Page
International Union of Revolutionary Writers r 245, 262
International Woman's Day r 241
International Women's Congress Against War and Fascism a 1 170
International Workers Order (TWO) h 223;
r 246, 295, 340, 345, 348, 36Q
International Workers of the World (I WW) h512;a 1165-
IWW (International Workers of the World) h 512; r 229
International Year Book of Experimental Education. h 397
Interparliamentary Union h 90$'
Interprofessional Association for Social Insurance a 1173, 1175-
Intourist (Russian Travel Company) h 273,
275, 279, 281, 282; r 158, 313
Introduction to American Civilization (publication) r 362"
Investigation of Certain Educational and Philanthropic Foun-
dations (article) a 1238
Interstate Circuit, Inc. v. United States (case) h 365
Into the Valley (publication) h 553
Introducing Teachers College (pamphlet) h 255, 273
Iowa University h 286, 395
Iowa University Press h 395
Iran (publication) h 929
IRC__ ____ a 1217
Islands on Guard (publication) h 929
Isaacs, Harold R r 32
Isaacs, Stanley M a 984; r 240
Italian Americans (article) h 319
Italy From Within (publication) h 929
Items (publication) r 51, 81, 126
Ives Law h 489
Ivy College h 830
IWW (International Workers of the World) h 512; a 1165
J
Jackson, Ada B r 386
Jackson, Andrew h 64; r 363
Jackson, Attorney General r 234, 305, 325, 354
Jackson, Hon. Donald L h 40, 41
Jackson, Joseph Henry h 928
Jackson High School h 64
Jacoby, Dr. Neil H a 1025
Jaffe, Philip .___ h 558
James, Henry _ h 338
James, William h 574 ; r 77
James Foundation of New York _ h 16
Jane Addams Memorial h 223
Janowsky, Oscar I h 917
Jansen, Dr. William a 985
Janski, Oscar '_ _ _ r 93
Japan : An Economic and Financial Appraisal (publication) _ _ h 927
Japan in China (publication) r 235
Japan International Christian University a 1209
Japan Public Administration Clearing House h 942
Japan's War Economy (publication) r 235
64 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Jarvis, Rebecca r 409
Jaszi, Oscar h 31; r 92
Javits, Jacob J h 763; a 980, 996
Jay h593
Jeanes Foundation h 359
Jefferson, Thomas,. h318, 319, 597, 598, 805; a 1015, 1031, 1061 ;r 155
Jefferson School of Social Science, h 34, 224; r 268, 291, 319, 345, 348
Jemison, Alice Lee : r 362
Jenkins, Edward C a 1236
Jenks. (See Anderson, Wrenn & Jenks.)
Jenner Committee r 165, 197
Jerome, V. J r 266
Jessup, Dr h 914
Jessup, Morris K h 360
Jessup, Philip C h 36,
74, 98, 341, 874, 884, 886, 888, 889, 918; a 1037
Jessup, Walter A h 338, 339, 344, 345, 567, 568
Jewish Labor Committee h 763
Jewish Peoples Fraternal Order (International Workers Order) _ r 345
Jewish veterans organizations h29
Jewkes, John r 122
Job-Hunting (pamphlet) a 1164; r 107
Job to be Done (leaflet) r 358
John A. Hartford Foundation hl6
John Reed Club Writers School r 245
John Reed Clubs r 260, 282, 286
John F. Slater Fund h 359
Johns Hopkins Institute (School of International Affairs) r 323
Johns Hopkins University h61,
220, 286, 360, 395, 485, 553, 677, 874, 938; a 975,
1009, 1113, 1124, 1227, 1231, 1232; r 323.
Johns Hopkins University Press h 395, 794, 936
Johnson, Alva h 31, 668, 877, 883; a 984, 1175; r 92, 198, 301
Johnson, Eldon L a 1041
Johnson, F. Ernest a 990
Johnson, Henry h 286
Johnson, Hewlett h36;a 1035
Johnson, Joseph E h 340, 923; a 1056, 1065; r 185
Johnson, Lee F a 979, 984
Johnson, Manning h 471; r 197, 198, 356
Johnson, Oakley r 160, 161
Johnson, Hewlett (Red Dean of Canterbury) r 250
Johnston, Eric A h 891, 920
Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee a 1176;
r 278, 279, 283, 296, 301, 321, 323, 332, 333, 345, 347,
359, 374, 385.
Joint Committee on Research of the Community Council of
Philadelphia and the Pennsylvania School of Social Work__ a 1235
Joint Legislative Committee Investigating Seditious Activities
(New York State) h467; r 249
Joliot-Currie, Madame Irene r 324
Jones, Amy Heminway h 927
Jones, Arthur Creech h 308
COMPOSITE INDEX 65
Page
Jones, Lauder W h 358
Jones Rufus M , r 302, 303
Jones, William Thomas a 1232
Jordan, David S h 344, 875
Josephs, Devereaux C h 338, 339, 344, 345; a 965
Josephson, Emanuel Mann a 1236
Josephson, Leon r 345, 358
Josephson, Matthew r 303
Journal of Educational Sociology a 1166
Journal of Genetic Psychology h 847
Journal of Social Psychology h 847
Journal of Teacher Education a 1238
Journey to the Missouri (publication) h 524
Journey of Simon McKeever (publication) r 346, 348
Journeys Behind the News (article) a 1238
Joyce, William H. Jr h 350, 379; a 1051, 1052; r 188
Joyce, Inc h 350; a 1051
Judd, Charles H h 268, 275
Judiciary (article) ■. r 92
Judson, Harry Pratt h 355, 360
Julliard Musical Foundation h 16
Julius Rosenwald Fund h 471, 472, 854; r 47, 54, 198
July, Robert W h 363
Jungle Portraits (publication) h 927
Junior Farmers Union h 881
Junior High School (publication) h 94
K
Kahin, George McT _ = ,._,.,___., a 1230
Kahn, Albert r 356
Kai-shek, Chiang. _ h 546, 547, 558, 560, 597, 929; a 1224; r 324, 362
Kai-shek, Madame h 929
Kaiser, Henry J h 16
Kaiser Co h 374
Kaiser Family Foundation h 16
Kalder, Nicholas h 939
Kalijarvi, Thorsten h 874
Kalinin, President r 269
Kallen, Horace M h484;r93, 143,304-306
Kamehameha Schools (Honolulu) h 553
Kandel, I. L h 268, 275, 345; a 970; 1145, 1239
Kant, Immanuel h 565, 575, 597, 929
Kantor, Theresa r 401
Katayev, Ivan r 257
Kate Macy Ladd Fund h 16
Katona, George a 1025
Kattenburg, Paul M a 1230
Katz, Milton h 347
Kaufmann, Walter A a 1232
Kazemzadeh, Firuz a 1230
Kazin, Alfred r 189
Keatley, V. B a 1239
Keel „ h508
06 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Keele, Harold h 190-194; a 950, 1118
Keeney, Mary Jane a 1223, 1228
Keeney, Philip O _______ r 236
Keenleyside, H. L h 783, 791, 926; a 991
Kelley, Nicholas h 338; a 965
Kelley, Drye, Newhall & Maginnes a 965
Kellogg, Paul - ---- a 1182
Kellogg, Vernon L h 355
Kellogg, W. K„__ r h 16
Kellogg Foundation hl3, 16
Kelly, Robert L h 268, 275
Kennan, George F h 347, 348; r 190, 306
Kennan, Richard Barnes h 327, 388
Kennedy, Raymond h 553
Kennedy-Coughlin forces r404
Kent, Fred I h 891
Kent, Rockwell____ a 1168, 1216
Kent State University h 250
Kentucky University a 1184, 1185, 1187, 1230, 1232; r 62
Kenwood Golf and Country Club ■_ _ _ a 1209
Keppel, Dr h 98
Keppel, Frederick P h 338, 339, 669, 875,
943; a 969, 975, 976, 1041, 1236, 1239; r 21, 30, 38, 118
Kerr, Charles H 1 h 395
Kerr & Co h 395
Kerrison, Irvine L, — a 1 166
Kestnbaum, Meyer h 350; a 1051
Key to Peace (publication) h 243, 246; r 121
Kiendl. (See Davis, Polk, Wardwell, Sunderland & Kiendl.)
Killian, James R., Jr a 1218
Kilpatrick, William, h 309, 320, 324', 327, 484; a 977, 985, 1145; r 307
Kimball, Lindsley F h 357, 362
Kimberly, John R h 355; a 1127
Kimberly-Clark Corp h 355; a 1127
Kimmel, W. G h 478
Kinf oik (publication) r 243
King h397
King, Henry C '___ h 344
Kingdom, Frank a 1173, 1174
Kings Crown Press (Columbia University) h395
Kingsbury, John A h 268, 275; r 157
Kingsbury, Susan M_ h 268, 275
Kinney, Anne (also known as Jane Howe) 337
Kinsey, Alfred C h 117,
118, 123-134, 140, 144, 146, 147, 150, 165, 166, 179,
266, 839, 840; a 1137-1139; r 24, 51, 67-71.
Kinsey Report h 117, 123-134,
144, 165, 166, 266, 839, 840; a 1137; r 24, 51, 67-71
Kiplinger Washington Agency a 1236
Kirchwey, Freda h220; r 110, 148, 307
Kirchwey, George W h 875
Kirk, Grayson L h 341, 344, 886, 920; r 51
Kirk, Robert H h 357
COMPOSITE INDEX 67
Page
Kirkland, James H h 344
Kirshom, Vladimir _ a 1165
Kise, Joseph h 74
Kitasato a 1105
Kizer, Benjamin H h 553
Klapper, Paul h 268, 275
Klein, Philip r 93, 309, 311
Kline, Alan B h 348
Klineberg, Otto _'_ h 848; r 184, 311, 312
Knopf, Alfred A h 351
Knopf, Inc h 351
Know Nothing Party _ h 318, 515
Knowland, Senator _ h 590
Knudsen, Mr r 119
Koch, Arnold a 1105; r 222
Kohlberg, Alfred _ h 389, 557-559;
a 1135, 1210-1214, 1227, 1228; r 23, 24, 32, 180, 181
Kohn, Hans h 929
Koopman, O. Robert a 1149
Korean-English Dictionary. „ _ _ _ : a 1003
Korean Independence (publication)-.. r 231
Kornilov _ _ r 257
Koshland, Daniel E h 553
Kotschnig, Walter _ h917
Kravchenko __ r 389
Kremlin Prepares a New Party Line (article) ,_ _ r367
Kresge Foundation :__ h 13, 16
Krey, A. C h 286
Kriz, Miroslav A__. a 1230
Kruse, William F__ ___ r 165, 405
KuKuxKlan_ _._ h 307, 308, 746
Kuhn, Fritz _ _ h 330
Kultura (publication) __ r 189
Kvale__ "_ r 411
Kwiat, Joseph J ,_ : _.__ a 1231
Kyrilov r 257
L
Labor Bureau, Inc r 248
Labor-Capital Co-Operation (article) : r93
Labor Defender (publication) r 230, 232, 260
Labor Government at Work (publication) h 793
Labor in America (publication) a 983
Labor Looks at Education (publication) a 1167; r 108, 109
Labor Parties of Latin America (publication) . h793
Labor Research Association r 377, 378
Labor Spy (pamphlet) a 1164
Labor Unions in Action (publication) a 981
Labor's Stake in World Affairs (publication) rl63
Latin, Mahmut N a 1230
Ladd Fund. h 16
Ladd, Kate Macy h 16
LaFollette, Senator h 569
68 COMPOSITE INDEX
Pas*
LaGuardia ; a 996
Laidler, Harry W h 135,
219, 305, 306, 308, 309, 756, 765, 767-770, 780, 782,
789, 790, 793; a 976-977, 984, 998, 1163; r 100-105,
107, 154, 312.
Laissez Faire (article) h 32; r 93
Lake Forest College h 941
Lamb, Lawrence C h 325, 403, 405
Lamont, Corliss ■ a 1215, 1216; r 174, 313-322
Lamont, Thomas S h 344
Lamont, Thomas W h 344
Lamp (publication) a 972
Lancaster, William W a 1181
Land of the Pepper Bird (publication) h 926
Land of the Soviets (publication) : r 313
Land of Soviets (Russian plane) r 247
Land of the Sun-God (publication) h 926
Land Problems and Policies in the African Mandates of the
British Commonwealth (publication) h 927
Landon, Alfred M h 150
Landsteiner a 1105
Lane, Clayton h 552, 553
Lane, Franklin K h 360
Lang, Paul Henry r 189
Lange, Oscar h 35, 39, 779; r 155, 323
Langer, William L h 884; r 178
Langmuir, Charles R , h 345
Laniel h 595; r 169
Lanks, Herbert C___ h 929
Lansing, Robert h 341; a 1057
Lapham, Lewis A h 553
Laprade, William T a 1239
Lardner, Ring Jr r 160
Large Scale Production (article) r93
Larsen, Roy E h 349, 699
Larson, Duke of Mongolia (publication) _ h 926
Larson, Emanuel a 1222, 1225
Larson, Frans August h 926
Laserson, Max M h 888
Laski, Harold J._ h 31, 32, 480, 506, 507, 926; a 1139; r 92, 141, 173
Laski, Victor r 121
Lasky, Melvin J r 189
Lasser, J. K a 1235, 1236, 1239; r 11
Lasser Tax Reports r 11
Lasswell, Professor r 81
Lasswell, Harold h 848
Latcham, Franklin C a 1239
Latin America : Its Place in World Life (publication) h 929
Latin American Information Service h 932
Latin American Studies Committee r 44
Lattimore, Owen h 313,
543, 544, 553, 929; a 1215, 1216, 1222-1225, 1228;
r 173, 174, 323-325.
COMPOSITE INDEX 69
Pag«
Laughlin, James h 351
Lauchlin Currie & Co. r 263
Laura Spellman Rockefeller Foundation h 102,
565, 668, 690, 691, 698, 701, 702, 718, 721, 854, 879,
896; a 1083, 108&, 1090, 1095, 1113, 1125, 1134, 1139,
1145; r 47, 87, 134.
Laurie, Arthur Bruce ■■_■ a 1230
Lawrence, Alton r 403
LaVine, Janice B a 1204, 1209
Lavoisier a 1092
Law and Contemporary Problems (article)- ; a 1241
Lawler, Vanett ____. h 64
Lawrence College __ -__■_■_ h875; a 1.041
Lawson _■ h 458
Lawson, John Howard r 241 , 339, 343, 348, 386, 391
Lawson-Trumbo case r 348
Lawyers Guild Review r 340
Lazarsfeld, Professor r 81
Leach, Mrs. Henry Goddard a 1.181
Leader. (See Little, Leader, LeSourd & Palmer.)
League Against Fascism r 409
League of American Writers h 223; a 1171,
1173, 1176, 1216; r 234, 245, 248, 249, 260, 261, 275,
281, 282, 286, 290, 295, 304, 305, 314, 318, 327, 332,
! 333, 336, 341, 346, 348, 355, 366, 370, 375, 377, 378,
380, 391.
"League of American Writers Bulletin r 260, 286,
- 295, 336, 346, 355, 366, 380
League to Enforce Peace (publication) h 926
League of Free Nations Association. _ .----. a 1177
League for Industrial Democracy (LID) h 21, 46,
47, 134, 136, 219, 221, 305, 306, 308, 309, 327, 467, 492,
724, 728-737, 740, 741, 743, 744, 747, 751, 754-757,
762-768, 770-793; a 976-981, 983, 984, 985, 986-989.
990, 993, 994, 997, 1163, 1164, 1167; r 45, 85, 96-108,
123,148,154,167,313,409,412.
League for Industrial Democracy: Definition of "Democracy"
(article) _. _" h 467
League for Mutual Aid___ h 223; a 1176
League of Nations h 71, 396,
397, 875, 878, 879, 881, 886, 887-890, 913-917, 922,
923, 927, 933; a 1103; r 182, 193.
League of Nations Mandate System (publication) h915
League of Nations Secretariat (publication) h 915
League on Power Control . a 998
League of Professional Groups for Foster and Ford__ r 258, 303, 393
League of Professional Groups in support of Communist Party
Elections r365
League of Women's Shoppers, Inc__ a 1170; r 228, 308, 346, 348, 355
League of Women Voters h 390; a 1202
League of Workers Theaters. r 264
Leander, Gunnar r 299
Learned, William S h 339, 345
70 COMPOSITE INDEX
Pagre
Leavell, Ullin W . a 1236
Lee, Algernon h 308; r 409, 410
Lee, C. Herbert h 339, 340, 345
Lee, Canada.. a 1174
Lee, Dwight E h 886
Lee, Governor a 1179
Lee, Ivy h 400
Lee, Michael E a 1198, 1201, 1202
Lee, Michael J ------ --- h 37
Lee, Rensselaer a 1009
Lee, Robert E___ ^ ----- h 354
Lefebure, Victor h 927
Lefferts, Barent h 340
Leffingwell, Russell h 338, 339; a 965
Lefkowitz, Abraham... ___ ------ h 767; a 984, 996
Legislative Investigation or Thought-Control Agency? (speech) - r 347
Lehman, Herbert H_ h 308, 489, 893, 914, 918; a 977, 995, 1197, 1207
Lehman, Willie r 298
Lehman amendment (Immigration Act) r 187
Leibnitz _--___. __-_ h 805
Leiden, Carl a 1230
Leider, Ben a 1171
Leider Memorial Fund a 1171
Leigh, Robert D h 929
Leighton, Comdr. Alexander h 137
Lenczowski, George a 1230
Lend-Lease (article) ---- h319
Lenger, Joyce : r 161
Lenin h 3 1 ,
278, 745, 771, 841, 842, 847; r 97, 151, 294, 310, 390,
402,406,414.
Leningrad (publication) a 1216
Leonard, Harold B a 1122, 1144, 1150, 1214
Leonard, J. Paul a 1149
Lerner, Abba P - h 35; r 155
Lerner, Max h 74,
883, 884, 928; a 1159, 1171, 1172, 1179, 1181; r 93,
106, 325-328.
LeSourd. (See Little, Leader, LeSourd & Palmer.)
L'Esprit International: the International Mind (publication) __a 1241
Lester, Robert M . h 339, 345, 669; a 1236
Let's look at our Foundations (article) a 1238
Let's Talk It Over (leaflet) r 280
Letters from Readers (column in New Masses) r392
Leubscher v. Commissioner (case) h 432
Levin, Harry r 189
Levenstein, Aaron h 793 ; a 979
Lewis, Alfred Baker- r 103, 329
Leviathan (publication) h 581
Levinson, Ronald B a 1232
Levitt, Al a 1175
Levy, Beryl Harold h 917
Levy, Jean a 983
COMPOSITE INDEX 71
Pago
Lewack, Harold h 740
Lewey, John h 484
Lewis, Alfred Baker h 771, 772, 778; a 981, 987, 990, 997
Lewis, Elizabeth Foreman h 928
Lewis, Fulton h 738
Lewis & MacDonald a 1181
Lewis, Strong & Earl (law firm) h 729, 762
Libbey, E. D h 16
Libbey Trust h 16
Liberal Party h 571; r 257
Liberalism and Sovietism (pamphlet) h 771; a 987, 997
Liberator (publication) r 249, 393
Liberty (article) h 32; 92
Libton, Ralph , r 86
Lichtenberger, Henri h 928
LID h 765; a 977; r 99, 100, 103-105
Lie, Trygve a 977
Liebers, Otto H h 352
Liebesny, Herbert J a 1230
Life (publication) r 363
Life of Andrew Carnegie (publication) h669
Lift the Embargo Against Republican Spain (publication) r 308
Lilienthal, Alfred M . h 389
Lilienthal, David h 300
Lillico, Stuart r 378
Lilly Endowment h 16
Linbergh, Charles E h 788
Lincoln, Abraham h 223,
253-255, 286, 317-319, 597, 598, 603, 643; r 251, 261,
292, 294, 305, 332, 333, 337, 347, 349, 385; a 989;
r 155, 203, 251.
Lincoln Brigade ... h 223;
r 251, 261, 292, 294, 332, 333, 337, 347, 349, 385
Lincoln-Mercury Division (Ford Motor Co.) h 376
Lincoln Experimental School h 253-255, 286, 674
Lincoln School h 700, 701, 705, 713, 719, 720;
a 1081, 1114, 1144-1146; r 136, 149
Lindeman, Edward C a 1159, 1175, 1176, 1236; r 106, 122
Lindgren, Raymond E a 1231
Lindley, Ernest H h 344
Linguistic Atlas of the United States and Canada a 1002
Linguistic Society of America a 999
Linton, M. Albert h 350; a 1051
Linton, Ralph h 137
Lions International Organization all56
Lippmann, Walter h 349, 928
Lipsit, S. Martin a 983
Lipsky, Celia r 161
Literary Digest h 148, 150
Littauer, M h 795
Littauer Center of Public Administration (school) h 795
Litterick, William a 1048
Little, Clarence C h 344
72 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Little, Herberts .' h 553
Little, Brown & Co h 348, 395; r 324
Little, Leader, LeSourd & Palmer (law firm) h 553
Litvinov r 379
Liveright, A. A r 329
Lizitzky, Gene. r 161
Llewellyn, Professor r 68
Llewllyn, Carl I h 220
Lobbying r 220
Locke. a 1168
Locke, John h 581, 804, 805; r 66
Lockwood, William W h 553
Lodge, NuciaP h 303
Loeb, Robert A h355
Loeb, RobertF . a 1127
Logan, Dr. John A a 1073
London, Jack h 206, 219, 220; a 993; r 148
London, Leopold r 161
London County Council a 985
London School of Economics h 215, 615,
620-622, 674, 703-705, 713, 939; a 1081, 1139; r 57
London University r 263
Long Island Railroad Co h 359
Longley, Clifford B h 346, 347
Longmans, Green & Co h 394; a 1235
Look (publication). h 490, 491, 495, 502, 503
Lord, Walter a 1235
Lorimer, Frank L h 917
Lorwin, Lewis L_ r 92
Los Angeles Board of Education h 379-382 ; r 188
Los Angeles City School Department h 379, 384 ; r 188
Los Angeles Times h 379, 382
Louis and Maud Hill Family Foundation,., h 16; a 1227, 1231; h 16
Louisiana Farmers Union _• r 405
Louisiana University h 61
Louisiana State University: h 831; a 1231
Louisville Courier-Journal a 1021
Louisville Times h 347; a 1021
Lovestone, Jay . — r 404
Lovett, Robert A h 344, 355, 360; a 1127
Lovett, Robert Morse h 135, 221-224, 305; a 1175; r 92, 148
Low, Bela r 409
Low Memorial Library a 1184, 1193
Lowden, Frank O h341
Lowell, Abbott Lawrence h 344, 574
Lowenstein, Prince Hubertus Zu h 928
Lowrie, Donald A . h 348
Lowry, Howard F h344
Loyalty and Legislative Action (publication) a 1132
Loyalty Review Board — r 237,
238, 242, 243, 248, 255, 256, 276, 278, 281, 282, 284,
303, 305, 307, 311, 318, 319, 321, 326, 327, 329, 334,
335, 352, 353, 366, 367, 381-385, 388, 394, 401, 402,
406, 414, 416.
COMPOSITE INDEX 73
Page
Loyola University Press i h 394
Lubin, Isadore h 220, 242, 769; a 1161; r 102, 148, 330
Lucas, Scott W a 1239
Luckmann, Lloyd h 255
Lundborg, F h 848,
Lunberg, George h 149*
Lundborg, Louis B a 1239'
Lurie, Leonard h 750; r 99 s
Lusk Committee (New York Legislature) „ h 253 r
286, 296, 297, 400, 467
LuskKeport h 286, 296;
Lustig, Alvin r 189'
Luther__ a 1168
Luthringer, George F _. a 1230
Lynch Terror Stalks America (handbill) r 383
Lynd, Robert S a 1216; r 110, 118, 330-333, 335
Lyons, Eugene h 928; r 122
M
Mabie, Hamilton Wright h 875
MacArthur, General h 556, 560-563, 579, 874; r 183, 201, 250
MacCauley h 108
MacCracken a 1220
MacCracken, Henry M r412
MacDonald, Dwight . h 33
MacGowan, Kenneth h220; r 148, 334
Machinery for Foreign Relations (article) h 3 1 9
Maclver, Professor r68
Maclver, R. M h 929; r 173, 335
Mackall, Lawton h 927
Mackenzie, Gordon N h64
MacKenzie, Norman A. M h 344, 874
MacLeish, Archibald M r 190, 335-337
MacMahon, Prof. Arthur a 1208
MacManus, Seumas - h 928
MacmillanCo a 1236; h 394
MacMurray h910
MacNair, Harley F h 927
MacNaughton, E. B h 352
Macy, Josiah - h 16
Macy Foundation h 16
Madison . a 1080
Madison, James „ h 593, 597
Madison Square Garden- -___ r 268, 276, 320, 357, 360
Magazine Publishers Association a 1156
Magdoff, Harry Samuel h 37; a 1202, 1203
Maker of Swords (play) r 108
Mailer, Norman r 190, 342
Main, JohnH. T 344
Maine University a 1232
Mainstream (publication) r 297, 346
Maisel, Albert Q h 929
Maker of Swords (play) a 1164
74 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Making Bolsheviks (publication) h 927
Malenbaum, Wilfred a 1230
Malkin, Maurice h47l; r 196
Mallory, Walter H h 886, 929
Malone, George W h 37; a 1179, 1197, 1198, 1201, 1202
Maltz, Albert a 1164; r 107, 165, 343-348, 391
Management-Employee Relations, Inc h 553
Manchester University a 1219
Mandates, Dependencies, and Trusteeships (study) h 887
Manhattan Center (New York, N. Y.) r 242, 323, 346
Manifesto and a Call to the National Writers Congress r 370
Manion, Clarence h 243, 245, 246, 254; r 121
Mann, A. R h 362, 363
Mann, Charles R h 269, 275; r 157
Manning, Richard I h 341
Manual Arts Press h 394
Manual of Corporate Giving a 1236
Mao Tsetung r 235
Marcantonio, Vito h 223;
r 238, 241, 252, 288, 301, 303, 322, 328, 377
March of Treason (study) h 223; r 285, 356, 382
Marine Trust Co h 731
Maritime Trade of Western United States (publication) h 888
Marked, John h 16, 854; r 47
Markel, Lester h 884; a 1048
Markel, Mary h 16, 854; r 47
Markle Foundation h 16, 854; r 47
Marks h 926
Marquat, General h 562
Marquette University a 1232
Marriott, John A. R h 928
Marshall, George h 151, 338; a 973, 1216
Marshall, John h 6
Marshall, Leon C h 286
Marshall, Robert h 40,
41, 457, 458, 471, 472; r 54, 107, 197, 201, 360, 399,
400, 405.
Marshall College a 1230
Marshall Field & Co a 1232
Marshall Field Foundation h 16, 28, 471, 472; r 54
Marshall Foundation h 40, 41, 457, 458, 471, 472; r 54, 107
Marshall Plan r 163
Marston, Edgar L h360
Martens, Ludwig C. K. A a 1216
Martin Adele C r 161
Martin, Boyd A h 553
Martin, Carloyn E a 1182
Martin, Charles E h 553, 874
Martin, Clyde E h 123
Martin, Leslie John a 1230
Martin, Prof. Oliver .___ a 1184
Martin, Speaker h 590
Marvel, William W _ h 340
COMPOSITE INDEX 75
Page
Martinsville Seven ________ r 284
Marx, Karl h 27,
32, 41, 217, 219, 277, 278, 315, 467, 551, 571, 573-576,
595, 612, 746, 749, 768, 770, 788, 801, 802, 821, 847;
a 1167; r 73, 92, 108, 117, 119, 124, 149, 151, 152,
155, 202, 203, 272, 294, 361, 368, 409, 411, 412, 414
Marxist (quarterly) r 272, 361
Maryland Association of Democratic Rights r323
Maryland Citizens Committee Against Ober anti-Communist
law__ ■_ r 365
Maryland University h 333, 390
Mask for Privilege (publication) h 33; r 121, 341
Mason, Lucy Randolph "__ r 399
Mason, Ma ■_-__■ h 360
Mason, Max _ _■ h 355,357,358, 363
Massachusetts Committee for Concerted Peace Efforts r 275
Massachusetts Institute of Technology- h 346,
353, 359, 395> 679; a 1033, 1216, 1218; r 248
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press h 395, 933
Massachusetts Legislature^ „ _ : .- h571
Masses and Mainstream (publication) r 272,
286,297,343,346,348,361
Masses and Terrorism (article) _______ r 93
Massock, Richard G__ h 929
Mathematical Association of America a 1112
Mather, Samuel ■_■__-___ h 341
Mathers _ h 394
Matson, Wallace Irving. a 1232
Matthew-Bender ___■ '__ a 1235, 1236
Matthews, J. B__ a 987, 1173, 1175; r 397,308
Mattocks, Raymond L__ h 345
Maurice and Laura Falk Foundation h 16, 84 ; r 45, 47
Max C. Fleischman Foundation ■_■ : h 16
Maxwell School of Citizenship -___' a 1205
May, Herbert L_ ■_■ a 1182
May, Oliver h 347
May, Rene A h 553
Mayer, John 1_ a 1048
Mayer, Milton h 32; r 351, 352
Mavflower Pact r 250
McBride, Robert M - h 927
McCain, James R h 360
McCallum, Revell h 854; r 47
McCarran, Pat______ h 33,
43, 215, 256, 529, 537, 539, 547, 557-560, 564, 883,
901, 927, 929; a 1060, 1136, 1215; r 29, 41, 148, 173,
174, 180, 181, 187, 225, 250, 265, 267, 281, 290, 291,
333, 355, 373.
McCarran, Sister Margaret Patricia- _ _ : h215,
244; a 945-947; r 148, 225
McCarran Committee h 33,
43, 529, 537, 539, 547, 557-560, 564, 732, 883, 901,
927, 929; a 1060, 1136, 1215; r 29, 41, 173, 174, 180,
181, 250, 265, 267, 281, 333, 355.
76 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
McCarran- Walter Immigration Act r 187
McCarthy, Joseph--- - h 33, 74, 208,
267, 269, 311, 732, 766; a 1166; r 101, 111, 197
McCarthy, Henry L a 984
McClelland, Thomas h 344
McCloy, John J_.._. h 346, 355; a 1021, 1127
McCormick, Colonel h 787
McCormick, Medill— a 980
McCormick, Ruth Hanna a 980
McCormick, Samuel B ; h 344
McCormick-Mathers Publishing Co h394
McCoy, Maj. Gen. Frank R a 1177, 1180
McCutcheon, Roger P a 1009
McDaniel, Joseph M. Jr h 347, 348; a 1239
McDonald, Hon. James G a 1177, 1182
McDougall, Archibald a 1230
McDougall, Curtis h 35
McEntegart, Bryan J a 946
McFerren, Darel D__ a 1230
McGee, Theodore h 517; a 984
McGill, James H a 1172
McGill, Ralph h 349
McGill University h 874; a 1139
McGovern, Prof. William M a 1184
McGrath, J. Howard r 270, 278, 319, 344, 345, 350, 383
McGraw-Hill Book Co h 394
Mclver, Professor h 131
McKeever, Simon r 346, 348
McKeon, Richard P r 189
McKinley, William . h 43, 136, 333
McKinley Republican - h 333
McKinnon, Mr r 150
McKinnon, Harold R ._ h 256, 259
McMullen, Laura W h 927; r 173
McMurray h 879
McNiece, Thomas M h 467-521, 601-666, 844
McNutt, Gov. Paul V a 1232
McPeak, William H h 347
McPherson, Aimee r 294
McWilliams, Carey - r -- T h 33, 34; r 121, 337-341
Meaning of Democracy (publication) _» h94
Means, Gardner C r 92
Meany, George h 308, 784; a 977, 980, 995
Mears, Elliott G h 888
Mediaeval Academy of America a 999
Medical Aid Division (Spanish Refugee Relief Campaign) r 337
Medical Education in the United States and Canada (report)- a 955
Medina, Judge Harold R a 1219; r 330
Meeker, Dr. D. OIan___ a 983
Meet the Germans (publication) h 926
Meet the Japanese (publication) „ h 927
Meet the People of the Progressive Theater (leaflet) r264
Meharry Medical College a 1124
COMPOSITE INDEX 77
Page
Meier, Arthur r 333
Meiklejohn, Dr. Alexander a 977
Mein Kampf (publication) r 132
Melby, Ernest O h 327, 388, 397
Melby, Hilda H a 1009
Melch, Holmes a 1239
Melcher, F. G ~~ a 1239
Mellett, Lowell h 74
Mellon, Mr h 297
Mellon, Paul h 349
Mellon, A. W h 16; a 1235
Mellon, R. K h 16
Mellon Educational and Charitable Trust hl6;a 1235
Mellon Foundation h 16, 42; a 1042
Mellon Institute of Industrial Research _ _ hl6
Mellon National Bank & Trust Co a 1048
Memorandum on the Composition, Procedure, and Functions
of the Committees of the League of Nations (mimeographed
study) h915
Men and Machines (publication) h 134
Men on Bataan (publication) h 553
Men of the Ford Foundation (article) a 1239
Men's Club of Hitchcock Memorial Church a 1209
Menshikov, Chief Michail A a 1207
Merchant of Venice (publication) h 500
Meredith, Elizabeth h 348
Merriam, Professor r 57
Merriam, Charles E h 286, 514, 565, 566, 573, 681, 596, 616-619
Merriam, Charles K 131^ 141
Merriam, John C h 338
Merrick, Lectures, 1945 h 929
Merrill, Charles E h 394
Merrill Co h 394
Merton, Professor r gj
Messersmith, George S r 261
Metchnikoff a 1105
Methodist Federation of Social Action h38
Methodist Federation for Social Service (youth section) r 187
Methods and Problems of Medical Education (article) a 1241
Meusel, Alfred r 93
Mexico (publication) _, h 927
Mezerik, A. G a 1239
Meyer, Agnes E r 10
Meyer, Eugene r 10
Meyer Foundation (Eugene and Agnes E.) rlO
Miami University h 250
Miami University (Oxford, Ohio) a 1231
Michigan Civil Rights Federation a 1172
Michigan Department of Public Instruction al 149
Michigan Law Review a 1238
Michigan University h 250,
286, 395, 524; a 1001, 1025, 1029, 1129, 1149
Michigan University Press h 395
49720—55 6
78 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Mid-Century Conference - a 1 032 ; r 240, 32 1 , 322
Mid-West Committee for Protection of Foreign Born r267
Middlebury College a 1230
Middlebush, Frederick A — h 344
Middleman (article) h 32
Middletown (publication) r 204
Midkiff, Frank A h 553
Milbank Memorial Fund h 16, 268, 275; a 1241; r 157
Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly a 1241
Milbank, Tweed, Hope & Hadley a 965
Miller, Spencer Jr --- r 396
Miles r - r a 974
Militarism in Japan (publication) h 556
Mill, Edward W— - a 1230
Miller, A. V r 9
Miller, David Hunter h 878
Miller, J. L h 928
Miller, James K a 1239
Miller, Leslie A h 352
Miller, M. S h 928
Miller, Margaret Carnegie b 338 ; a 965
Miller, Perry - r 189, 190, 349
Miller, Spencer, Jr - *" 928
Miller, William Marion a 1231
Millis, John S h 344
Mills, C. Wright a 983
Mills College h 554; r 150
Milne High School, New York State College for Teachers
(Albany, N. Y.) h 65
Milton a 1168
Miltwyck School - a 985
Mims, Edwin. h 360
Minary, John S h 352
Ming, William K., Jr _ _ _ _ _ _ h 33
Minimum of Education (article) h 483
Minkoff, Nathaniel h 779; a 977, 990; r 104
Minneapolis Public Schools, _ >- a 1149
Minneapolis Star & Tribune Co h 346, 376 ; a 1021
Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co h 375
Minnesota University h 286,
362, 395; a 953, 975, 1009, 1231; r 74, 82, 424
Minnesota University Press. h 395
Minor, Clark H_. h 891
Minor Foundation -- h 16
Minor, William H b 16
Miracle of America (publication) h 42 ; a 1043, 1044
Misner, Paul J a 1149
Missouri University a 1139
Mitchell, Broadus h 220
Mitchell, George r 339
Mitchell, N. P h927
Mitchell, Wesley C h 813, 848-850; a 998
Mittell, Sherman -— a 1232, 1233
COMPOSITE INDEX 79
Page
Mobilizing our Forces, Economic, Political, Cultural, In Behalf
of the New Freedom (pamphlet) r 105
Mobilizing Our Forces, Economic, Political, Cultural, in Behalf
of the New Freedom (roundtable) h 780, 789
Mobilizing Our Forces in Behalf of the Third Freedom
(conference theme) h 779
Modern Atheism (article) r 92
Modern Foreign Exchange (publication) h 927
Modern History (publication) r 362
Modern Language Association of America a 999
Modern Philanthropic Foundation _ a 1239
Modigliani, Prof. Franco a 1025
Moe, Henry Allen h 355; a 1127, 1240; r 24, 198
Mohan, Pearey a 1230
Molders of the American Mind (publication) h 485; r 143
Molyneaux, Peter __ 341
Money to Burn (publication) a 1235
Monroe, Parker h 340, 345
Monroney, Mike h 569
Monsanto Chemical Co a 965
Monserrat, Joseph a 984
Monson, Ronald A_ _ h 927
Montague, Andrew J h 342
Montague, William Pepperell h 309
Montana State University a 1231
Montgomery, George r 122
Moon is Down (publication) r 241
Mooney, Tom__ h 222, 223, 741; r 230, 232~, 255, 306
Mooney Committee ■__■ r 230
Moore, Dr. Geoffrey H____ a 980
Moore, Harriet (Gelfan) _____ a 1223, 1228 ; r 324
Moore, Warner R r 9
Moral Awakening in America (symposium) h 766 ; a 996
Morals (article) r 93
Morford, Richard __ r 322
Morgan, Arthur h 300; a 1175
Morgan, H. A h 300
Morgan, J. P h 347, 349; a 965; r 317
Morgan, Joy Elmer __ _ h 309
Morgan & Co h 347, 349- a 965
Morgens, Howard J a 1043
Morgenthau, Henry Jr h 929: a 1216
Morley, Felix h 927
Morning After the Revolution (conference theme) _ h 750 ; r 99
Morphet, Edgar L a 1240
Morrill, J. L a 953; r 424
Morrill, Justin P a 1116
Morris, Britton r 161
Morris, Edward S a 1181
Morris, Newbold h 308, 309
Morris, Roland S h 342
Morrissette, Bruce A a 123 1
Morrow, Dwight W h 342
SO COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Morse h 9 27
Morse, Wayne h 784; a 977, 980
Mortimer, Charles G a 1043
Morton, H. V h 927
Moscow Art Theatre r 389
Moscow Institute r 378
Moscow Izvestia (publication) r 412
Moscow News r 134, 378, 408
Moscow Trials r 313, 333, 343, 379
Moscow University h 266, 267, 273-276,
279-282; r 152, 157-159, 160, 161, 412
Moscow War Diary (publication) r 388
Mosely, Philip E h 38, 347, 348, 885, 897; a 1036, 1037; r 46
Most, Amicus h 749; a 984; r 99 ■
Mother (publication) h 927
Mother Bloor Celebration Committee r 258
Motherwell, Robert r 189
Motion-Picture Direction Course (Peoples Educational Cen-
ter) r334
Motlow, John D a 1229
Mott, Charles Stewart h 16
Mott Foundation h 16
Moulton, Rev. Arthur W r 291
Moulton, Harold G h 629, 643, 927
Mount Holyoke College h 555, 750, 831;r99 !
Mount Vernon Mortgage Co a 1232, 1233 :
Mount Vernon Trust Co a 1232, 1233
Mountjoy, Helen S a 1217
Movies (article) h 310 1
Mowat, R. B_____ h 929
Mowitz, Robert J a 1132
Mudd, Harvey S r 46
Mudd Foundation r46
Muhlenberg College a 1229, 1232
Muir, Ramsay ^ h 926
Mumford, Lewis h 848; r 100
Mumford, Milton C __ a 1048
Mundt, Karl h 37, 762, 902; a 1157; r 339, 380, 383, 405
Mundt-Ferguson-Nixon bill h 762, 902
Mundt-Nixon bill r 299, 380
Munford, David C h 348
Munro, Dana Carleton a 975
Munro, Henry F h 926
Murphy, Frank a 1206
Murphy, Gardner r 190, 349
Murphy, Prof. Jay a 1218
Murphy, Starr J _ h 355, 360, 363
Murray, H. A h 137; r 86, 190, 350
Murray, James E r 407
Murray, Philip h 766, 920
Murray, Walter C h 344
Murrow, Edward R _ h 267,
270, 271, 275, 307, 332, 342; r 157-159, 432
COMPOSITE INDEX 81
Page
Music Educators National Conference h 64
Musicians Committee (National Council of American-Soviet
Friendship) r 252
Muslim Religion a 1002
Mussolini r 1 19
Mustapha Kemal of Turkey (publication) h 927"
Mutual Life Insurance Co. of New York___ h 353. 359; a 1127, 1128'
Mutual Telephone Co h 552
Muzzey, Professor r 28'
Myers, Dean _• r 30'
Myers, Louis G h 357, 363
Myers, William I h 355, 361; a 1127, 1128, 1141
Myers, Prof. William Starr r 43
Myrdal, Alva r 184
Myrdal, Gunnar h 49 1
58, 577, 578, 592, 593, 939 ; a 967-970 ;r 89, 91, 124, 184
Myth of Good and Bad Nations (publication) h 186
N
Nabrit, S. M a 1240^
Naft, Stephen r 408, 409 s
Naked and the Dead (film adaption, War Department) r 343
Naked and the Dead (publication) r 341, 342
NAM (National Association of Manufacturers) r 103, 119, 121
Nankai University (Tientsin) ._ _ h 930, 93 1
Narodna Volya (Bulgarian Communist publication) r 339, 344
Nash Co h374
Nason, John W__L a 1177, 1181
Nation (publication) h 784,.
793; a 1172, 1240; r 311, 326, 376, 379, 388, 38&
National Academy of Sciences h 123,.
470, 471, 475, 618, 894; r 45, 53
National Action Conference for Civil Rights r 345
National Advisory Committee a 1176
National Advisory Committee (American Youth Congress) ___ r 230
National Advisory Council _ : h 267, 268, 275 ; r 157
National Advisory Council on Radio in Education h 675, 713
National Americanism Commission (American Legion)------- r 363
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
(NAACP)-___ - - a984
National Association of Cost Accountants h 495
National Association of Educational Broadcasters a 1032
National Association of Manufacturers, h 33, 34, 778; r 103, 119, 121
National Association of School Superintendents h74
National Association of Secondary School Principals h 35,
94, 105; a 1147
National Automobile Dealer's Association h 375
National Better Business Bureau r 213
National Broadcasting Co_ _ h 386 ; a 1031-1032
National Bureau of Economic Research h 605,
641, 849, 894-896; a 962, 963, 979, 980, 998, 1124, 1140
National Central University (China) h 930
National CIO War Relief Committee r 232
82 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
National Citizens Commission for the Public Schools h 675,
698, 699, 701, 703-705; a 955, 1157; r 221
National Citizens' Political Action Committee a 1170-1174
National City Bank of New York h 346
National Civil Rights Legislative Conference r 343, 383"
National Civil Service League a 1031
National Coal Board (publication) h 307'
National Commission for the Defense of Democracy Through
Education, NEA h 320, 321, 323-325, 327, 333, 388, 407
National Commission on History and Geography of the United
States h 61
National Committee to Abolish the Poll Tax_ _ _ _ a 11 70
National Committee to Aid the Victims of German Fascism h 223
National Committee of the American Committee for Democ-
racy and Intellectual Freedom r 233'
National Committee of the American League for Peace and
Democracy _■ r 231, 239'
National Committee of the Communist Partv r 266 :
National Committee to Defeat the Mundt Bill r 299, 355, 365
National Committee for the Defense of Political Prisoners fi 233 y
a 1170; r 251, 254, 260, 282, 303, 377
National Committee on Maternal Health a 1 139-
National Committee for Peoples Rights h 223 ;
a 1170; r 251, 254, 260, 290, 303, 371, 377
National Committee to Repeal the McCarran Act r 333'
National Committee on Research in Secondary Education h 94
National Committee of the Student Congress Against War_ r 255, 318
National Committee on Teachers Examinations E 688
National Committee to Win Amnesty for Smith Act Victims- fi 224;:
r 266, 277, 344
National Committee to Win the Peace r 269, 359, 377, 381
National Conference on American Policy in China and the Far
East ___ ._ r235, 303, 346, 348, 374, 383
National Conference of Christians and Jews r 52"
National Conference of the Civil Rights Congress r 358, 383
National Conference for Constitutional Liberties r 400*
National Conference on Foreign Relations of the United States, h 872*
National Conference for Mobilization of Education h 74^
National Conference to Repeal the Walter-McCarran Law and
Defend Its Victims r 291, 373'
National Conference on Social Work r 310"
National Congress of Parents and Teachers a 1156'
National Congress for Unemployment and Social Insurance, r 230,
232, 253, 260, 314
National Council for American Education E 322, 324
National Council of American-Soviet Friendship E 36 ,~
a 988, 1035, 1036, 1170, 1216; r 175, 228, 250, 254,.
264, 268, 279, 288, 289, 296, 302, 319, 320, 322, 323 v
331, 333, 346, 348, 360, 366, 377, 384.
National Council of American-Soviet Friendship (Committee
on Education) _ ...____ r 264, 265, 289, 320, 331, 366
National Council of American-Soviet Friendship (Committee
on- Education Bulletin) r 289, 366
COMPOSITE INDEX 83
Page
National Council of American-Soviet Friendship (report) _ _ _ _ r 252
National Council of the Arts, Sciences and Professions (South-
ern California Chapter) r 270, 347
National Council of the Arts, Sciences and Professions (Theatre
Division) r 342, 347
National Council of Education. _ r 151
National Council of Parent Education., h 696 ; r 136
National Council on Social Studies. h 35,
64, 478; a 1115; r 153, 190
National Council of the Arts, Sciences, and Professions h 38,
223, 224; a 1174; r 241, 252, 257, 264, 270, 274, 279,
280, 282, 283, 297, 299, 304, 311, 321, 332, 333, 341,
342, 347-350, 367, 374, 380, 385, 386, 391, 392.
National Council of Churches h 47
National Council of Education - h 263
National Defense Advisory Commission a 1206
National Delegates Assembly for Peace h 223
National Democratic Committee a 1181
National Education Association (NE A) , h 2 1 ,
32, 34, 35, 46, 47, 63-65, 74, 94, 104-106, 109, 135,
224, 230, 267, 313-315, 320, 321, 323, 325-327, 329,
330, 334, 382, 385, 388, 395, 396, 398, 405, 407, 409,
470, 475, 478, 482, 489-491, 494, 501, 505, 514, 516,
674-676, 679, 682, 686, 689, 696-698, 701, 703-705,
713, 714, 716, 720, 722, 893, 925; a 967, 970, 992,
1081, 1112, 1115, 1146, 1147, 1150-1158; r 45, 53,
85, 135, 136, 140, 141, 145, 146, 149, 154-156, 191,
199, 432,
National Education Association (Department of Superintend-
ents) r85, 140
National Education Association Handbook h 74, 704; r 138, 146
National Education Association Journal (publication) h 135; a 1240
National Emergency Conference h 223;
a 1172, 1173; r 307, 309, 310, 332, 377, 380
National Emergency Conference for Democratic Eights h 223;
a 1172, 1173, 1176; r 288, 303, 307-310, 312, 323, 326,
328, 332, 371, 377, 380.
National Executive Committee (American League Against War
and Fascism) _ r 253
National Farmers Educational and Cooperative Union of
America h 881
National Farmers Union h 780, 788; r 404-407
National Federation of Business and Professional Women's
Clubs h920
National Federation for Constitutional Liberties h 223 ;
a 1170, 1171, 1173; r 233, 252, 271, 284, 291, 306-308,
310, 312, 319, 329, 332-334, 339, 340, 345, 348, 349,
358, 364, 367, 383, 390, 402, 406.
National Film Board of Canada r 166
National Free Browder Congress r 267
National Grange h881
National Guardian (publication) r 280*
National Health Insurance (publication) h 793 ; a 981
84 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
National Home Library Foundation of Washington, D, C a 1232,
1233, 1234
National Housing Conference : a 979, 983
National Industrial Conference Board r 1 19 ; h 495
National Institute of Public Affairs h 899, 931, 937
National Interest (publication) h 595
National Lawyers Guild h 39, 903; a 1220; r 288, 340, 347, 349
National League of Women Voters h 920
National Library Association r 221
National Manpower Council a 1033
National Mooney Council of Action h 223
National Municipal League a 1031, 1209
National Negro Congress r 359, 360,385
National Non-Partisian Committee to Defend the Rights of
the Twelve Communist Leaders r 266, 344, 386
National Peace Conference h 881, 890 ;r 172
National Peoples Committee Against Hearst h 223 ;
r 238, 260, 308, 314, 377
National Planning Association h 779; a 990, 1236
National Planning Board h 473,
612, 613, 616, 625; r 50, 53, 129-132
National Planning Board (1933-34 report) — . '___ r 50
National Productivity Since 1869 (publication) h 656
National Public Housing Conference h779
National Reception Committee for Madame Irene Joliot-
Currie ■____ r 321
National Recovery Act administration and Government
Financial Policy (study) .-.--.- r 128
National Religion and Labor Foundation a 1170
National Republic (publication) a 1215; r 408
National Research Council (NRC) h 21,
45, 47, 123, 355, 482, 808, 809, 816, 879, 894; a 1005,
1124, 1137-1139; r 45, 47
National Resources Committee r 130, 132
National Resources Development Report (1942): r 131
National Resources Planning Board_____ a 990; r 53, 130-132, 141
National Right-To-Work Congress h 223
National Science Foundation h 48; a 1004, 1240; r 45, 46, 49
National Security Committee (American Coalition of Patri-
otic, Civic and Fraternal Societies) r 408
National Selection Committee a 1042
National Selection Committee on Workers' and Adult Educa-
tion a 1162
National Social Welfare Assembly a 1162
National Society, Sons of the American Revolution, h 190, 197,
261, 327, 335, 336, 368, 387, 393, 396, 403; r 147
National Student Federation of America r 355, 412
National Student League r 255, 260, 318, 393, 394
National Union Farmer (publication) r 405
National University of Mexico h 61
National War College h 524, 874, 941
National Writers Congress h 223; r 370
COMPOSITE INDEX 85
Page
Nationalism and Internationalism (publication) h 926
Nationalist Party (China) h 560
Nations Business (publication) _ _ _ al241
NATO _"__"_". r 9
Nature of Intellectual Freedom (speech) r 270
Naumoff, Benjamin a 984
Navarre School a 1204
Nazi Party h32, 146,248,292, 504,771,778,
788; r 92, 103, 118, 153, 231, 296, 312, 353, 380
Nazi press r 153
NEA Committee on Tenure and Academic Freedom h 501, 502
NEAHandbook h 74
Nebraska University h 358 ; a 1231
Negro in America (publication) h 34; a 9969
Negro Leader's Plea to Save Rosenbergs (article) r 272
Negro Problem and Modern Democracy (study) a 967
Nehru, Jawaharlal h 309
Neilson, William Allan h 269, 272, 275, 344
Nelson, Donald M h 553; a 1197, 1207
Nelson, Otto L., Jr h 342
Nelson, William Rockhill h 16
Nelson Trust „ h 16
Neruda, Pablo r 267, 275, 386
Neutrality Act r 304, 364
New Appraisal (publication) a 981
New Brunswick University h 874
New Century Publishers r 271, 315, 348, 349
New Concepts in Education (paper) r63
New Dance League r 347
New Deal Party h301; r 92, 117, 145, 162
New Democracy and the New Despotism (publication), h 619; r 132
New Education Fellowship h 493
New Fabian Essays (publication) r 132
New Frontiers (publication) h 467; r 167
New Jersey League of Women Shoppers. ■_ r 228, 308
New Jersey State Teachers College a 1215, 1217
New Man in Soviet Psychology (publication) h 843
New Masses (publication) a 1212;
r 230, 232, 233, 236, 237, 241, 245, 249, 251, 252, 259,
264, 271, 272, 276, 282, 286, 290, 295-297, 301, 304,
308, 309, 312-314, 316-318, 326-328, 332, 336, 340,
341, 345, 346, 349, 355, 361, 366, 367, 369-371, 375-
377, 379, 390, 392, 393, 402, 408.
New Masses Letter to the President h 223; r 371, 377
New Masses Symposium r 282,346
New Masses Theatre Night (symposium) r 346
New Philosophy of Public Debt (publication) h 643
New Pioneer (publication) r 369
New Policy for the AEF (article) ; h 35; r 152
New Protectionism (publication) h 926
New Republic (publication) h 135; a 1176;
1238-1240; r 190, 236, 239, 262, 269, 370, 371
86 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
New Restrictions on Charitable Exemptions and Deductions
for Federal Tax Purposes (article) a 1238
New Russian Primer (publication) ._ h 285, 927
New School for Social Research h 31 , 553,
894, 917; a 1160; r 106, 300, 304, 396
New Standard Dictionary a 978
New Statesmen and Nation (publication) r 388
New Testament h 130; r 71
New Theater (publication) „__ r 264, 349
New Theater League r 264, 292, 347, 349
New Threats to American Freedom (pamphlet) h 902
New Times (publication) __ r 243
New Trends in Corporate Giving (article) a 1237
New World Review r 271, 307, 316
New York Central Railroad ■ h 756
New York City Board of Aldermen r 258
New York City Board of Higher Education a 993
New York City College h 268, 275, 390; a 976, 1041, 1229
New York City Council- a 976, 984
New York City Sponsoring Committee '_____. r 253
New York Committee on Discrimination in Employment h 779 ;
a 990
New York Committee to Win the Peace r 269, 359
New York Conference for Inalienable Rights r 234, 265, 354
New York Council of Arts r 270, 284
New York Foundation h 16
New York Herald Tribune h 77;
a 1180, 1216, 1238; r 8-10, 88, 428, 429
New York Law Society a 1219
New York League of Women Shoppers r 308
New York Legislature h 253,286,296,297,400,701
New York Life Insurance Co a 965
New York Memorial Cancer Hospital. h 582
New York Post r 325
New York Public School System h 283 ; r 234, 319
New York School for Social Research a 995
New York School of Social Work a 995, 1175, 1205; r 310
New York Star (publication) r 342, 408
New York State Board of Regents h 698
New York State Chamber of Commerced h892
New York State College of Agriculture h 355 ;
a 1127, 1128, 1141; r 30
New York State College for Teachers, Milne High School
(Albany, N. Y.) : ^_„ h 65
New York State Conference on National Unity a 11 76
New York State Council of the Arts and Sciences r 342
New York State Joint Legislative Committee Investigating
Seditious Activities r 249
New York State Unemployment Insurance Advisory Com-
mittee. h 779; a 990
New York Telephone Co .....____ h 749
COMPOSITE INDEX 87
Paga
New York Times h 41,
89, 165, 166, 300, 330, 356, 400, 404, 409, 630, 750, 751,
849,862, 901; a 973, 980, 1002, 1045, 1048,1127, 1130,
1159, 1187, 1215, 1216, 1217, 1240; r 5, 30, 32, 33, 72,
93,116,174,176,183,195,202,231,250,253,267,275,
277, 286, 300, 306, 309, 324, 331, 340, 347, 357, 362,
365, 368, 373, 386, 399, 428, 429.
New York Times Book Review h 148, 166; a 1216; r 324
.New York Times (magazine) h 39; a 1237; r 116, 250
New York Tom Mooney Committee r 230
New York University h 64,
254, 268, 272-274, 327, 359, 361, 390, 395, 495, 517,
677, 697; a 976, 977, 983, 985, 995, 996, 1009, 1025,
1048, 1231, 1236; r 278.
New York University Press h 395
New York World Telegram and Sun a 1237
New York Yankees h 371, 589
-New Zealand (publication) ; h 929
New Zealand House of Representatives h 790
New Zealand's Labor Government at Work (publication) h 736
Newark College of Rutgers University _ _ al041
Newcomb, John L h 344
Newlan, Jesse H h 265, 286
News-Letter r 288
News Releases by American Heritage Foundation a 1241
News You Don't Get (publication) r 238,
251, 254, 259, 260, 290, 303, 349, 369, 371, 376> 377
Newson & Co _ h 394
Newton a 1092, 1168
Newton, Ray r 350
Niebuhr, Reinhold h 751; r 99, 190, 353-354
Nimitz, Admiral a 973
Nineteen Eighty Four "1984" (publication) h 141
Nirvana I r 139
Nisselson, Michael M a 1173
Nitze, Paul a 1161
Nixon r 299, 762,902
Nixon, J. W „ r 161
Nixon, Richard r 351, 381
NKVD (Soviet Military Intelligence) _ _ r 287
Nobel , h930
Nobel, Mary E a 1229
Nobel Prize a 991, 1101, 1103 ;t 242
Nolde, O. Frederick . h 342, 884; a 1181; r 176
Non-Partisan Committee to Defend Communist Leaders r 361
Non-Partisan Committee for the Reelection of Congressman
Vito Marcantonio_. h 223; r 238, 241, 252, 288, 231, 303, 328, 377
Noon, John W a 1182
Nordberto Bobbio (publication) r76
Norgenstern, George r 121
Norlin, George h 344
Norman, Dorothy r 189
88 COMPOSITE INDEX
Pag*
North, Joseph — r 266
North, Professor Robert C r 32
North Africa (publication) h 929
North African Affairs Committee (Algiers) r287
North American Committee to Aid Spanish Democracy r 230,
232, 237, 238, 259, 277, 288, 292, 309, 337, 350, 371, 378
North Atlantic Defense Pact r 273, 280, 283, 411
North Carolina University h 268,
272, 275, 395, 874; a 955 1181, 1232; r 81, 399
North Carolina University Press h 395
Northwest Commission to Study the Organization of Peace h 874
Northwest Farmers' and Workers' Education Conference a 1166
Northwestern University,, h 242, 555, 582, 831; a 1041, 1149, 1184,
1191, 1229, 1231, 1232; r 26, 39
Northwestern University Press h 395
Norton, Edward L h 361; a 1128
Norton, Helen G r 397
Norton, Thomas James r 122
Norton, W. W h 394
Norton & Co.. . h 394
Norwegian Government Disability Services h 778; a 990
Not Without Laughter (publication) r 297
Notes on a Drum (publication) h 928
Notre Dame University h 831; a 1014
Nourse, Dr. Edwin a 963
Now the Foundations (article) a 1240)
Nowak, Frank r 158.
Nowell, William r 394
Nunez, Rev. Benjamin a 985
Nursery Schools (pamphlet) h 289
Nurske, Ragnar a 1231
NYA Air Pilot Schools r 416
Nye-Kvale r411
Nystrom, J. Warren a 1181
O
Oahu Railway & Land Co h 553
Oakeshott, Michael B a 1140"
Ober Act of the State of Maryland a 1132
Oberlin Alumni Club of Washington, D. C a 1209
Oberlin College h 220, 272, 275; a 1197, 1204, 1205, 1209
O'Brian, John Lord h 350
Occasional Papers No. 3, A Modern School (publication) h 250,
251 287
Occidental College h 553; a 1041; r. 158
Occidental Life Insurance Co. of California h 553
Occupation of Japan (publication) h 901
Odegaard, Dr. Charles E a 1129^
Odegard, P. H r 184
Odets, Clifford a 1164
O'Dowd, Lt. Paul, Jr h 291
Odum, Howard W h 272, 275
O'Dwyer, Mayor r 267
COMPOSITE INDEX 89
Page
Of Human Eights (film) r 165
Office of Education Directory h 674
Office of Scientific Research and Development a 1206
Ogburn h 848
Ogden, David L a 1230
Ogden, Miss Esther G a 1182
Ogden, Robert C h 361, 362
Ogg, Frederic A h567;a 1236
Oglethorpe University h 831 ; a 1230
Ogura _ ___ r 119
Ohio Education Association h 504
Ohio Marches Toward Peace and Progress (article) r 293
Ohio State h 504, 506
Ohio State University h 107, 250, 267,
274, 310, 327-329, 395, 489, 518; a 1139, 1232; r 424
Ohio State University Press h 395
Oil (article) h 319
Oklahoma University a 1231
Old Deal (article) h 468
Old Colony Trust Co a 1128
Old Dominion Foundation h 16, 349; a 1042; r 162
Olden, Rudolf h 926
Older, Andrew r 160
Older, Julia r 160
Olds, Leland a 977, 996
Olds, Robert E h 342
Olin Foundation h 16
Oliver, Alfred Richard a 1231
Oliver, Sydney h 215
Olmsted, Shirley r 161
Olmsted, Sterling a 1 164
Omnibus (television program) a 1029
On the Abyss (publication) h 927 ; r 173
On the Agenda of Democracy (publication) h 482, 617
On the Picket Line (pamphlet) r 107
On Understanding Soviet Russia and Socialist Planning in the
Soviet Union (pamphlet) r 315
One Hundred Questions to the Communists (publication) r 408
One Worlders (Syracuse) r 351
O'Neal, Edward A h 920
O'Neal, Emmet h 553
O'Neil, Charles Joseph a 1232
Only Way for Writers (speech) r 342
Only Yesterday (publication) h 254, 303
Open Letter to American Liberals h 223 ;
a 1172; r 314, 328, 333, 340, 378
Open Letter to the American People (National Council of
American-Soviet Friendship) r331
Open Letter to the American People in Opposition to the
Hobbs Bill , r 373
Open Letter for Closer Cooperation With the Soviet Union. _ h 223;
a 1172, 1173; r 235, 240, 287, 289, 304, 314, 327, 355.
366, 378, 380, 391
90 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Open Letter of the Council for Pan-American Democracy r 332
Open Letter in Defense of Harry Bridges r 314
Open Letter of the League of American Writers r 332
Open Letter to J. Howard McGrath r 270, 278, 344, 350
Open Letter to New Masses r 328, 379
Open Letter to Nicholas Murray Butler _ _ r331, 354
Open Letter to the President of Brazil r 233, 312, 370, 376
Open Letter to the President on Franco Spain r 321, 345, 374
Open Letter to the President of the United States (in re Harry
Bridges) r 252, 347, 349, 390
Open Letter to the President by The National Federation for
Constitutional Liberties r 389
Open Lettter Protesting the Ban on Communists in the Amer-
ican Civil Liberties Union h 223
Open Road, Inc - a 1120, 1220; r 315
Opportunities and Dangers of Educational Foundations (arti-
cle) a 1239
Opus 21 (publication) h 147
Ordeal by Planning (publication) r 122
Oregon University h 349; a 1040, 1148
Organization of Public Health and Socialized Medicine (educa-
tional course) h 279
Orlov r 257
Orton, William A — ■ a 1236
Orwell, George h 141
Osborn, Fairfield h 352
Osborn, Frederick- h 338; a 965; r 74, 82
Osborne, Brig. Gen. Frederick H — _ h 151, 157
Our Changing Industrial Incentives (publication) h 793
Our Constitution (article) h 310, 3 1 1 , 3 18, 320
Our Federal Government (article) h 319
Our Land Resources (article) h319
Our Mightiest Ghost (article) . a 1238
Our Neighbors in North Africa (article) h319
Our Son, Pablo (publication) h 929
Our Sunday Visitor (publication) a 1044
Our Water Resources (article) _ h319
Outline of Modern Russian Literature (publication) r 367
Outlook (publication) r 153
Overstreet, Harry A h 308, 763
Owen, Charlotte -- r 161
Owens h 346'.
Ox Bow Incident (publication) r 164
Oxford h215
Oxford Pledge r 416
Oxford University Press h 394
Oxnam, Bishop --- h 261, 327
P
Pabelford, Norman J h 920
Pacific Spectator (publication) a 1240
Pacific National Bank (San Francisco) h 376.
Paepcke, Walter P h 349; a 1240)
COMPOSITE INDEX 91
Page
Page, Arthur W h338;a965
Page, Robert Newton h 342
Page, Walter Hines _._. h 361, 553
Paine, Rear Adm. Roger W~_ „_ a 1219
Painter, Sidney a 1009
Paley, William S h 352
Palmer h 347
Palmer, Frank a 1175
Palmer. (See Little, Leader, LeSourd & Palmer.)
Pan American Highway Through South America (publication) .. h 929
Pan-American Petroleum and Transport Co h 360
Pan American Union h 64, 912
Panamanian Conference on History and Geography h61
Panal on Pan-American Affairs r 334
Papanek, Dr. Ernst ,. a 984
Paramount Pictures. (See Ball v. Paramount Pictures.)
Parent-Teachers Association h 47 ; a 1209 ; r 432
Pares, Bernard h 929; a 1216
Paris, Ellsworth r7?
Parker, Dorothy a 1174
Parker, Edwin B h 342
Parker, William A a 1009
Parker, William R a 1009>
Parkin, G. R h 928
Parkinson, Thomas I h 355, 357, 361
Parmer, Charles B h 928
Parran, Thomas h 355, 361; a 1127, 1128
Parsons, Goeffrey r 9
Parsons, Talcott , h 137, 848; r 86
Parsons, Wilfred h 244
Parten, Jubal R h 350; a 1051, 1052
Participation of Observers in International Conferences (publi-
cation) h 915
Partisan Review r 282, 286
Parton, James , r 9
Pasadena Board of Education , h 403, 405
Pasadena School Board ^ h 325, 405
Pasternak, Boris r 257
Pasteur a 1105
Pasvolsky, Leo h 927, 934-936, 941
Patch, Buel W a 1240
Path to Peace (publication) h 926;
Patrick, Mary Mills h 926
Patriotic Education, Inc „___ ,' , h261
Patterns of Culture (publication) ., h 139
Patterns of Social Reform in North America (conference). „__ a 983
Patterson, Elmore C h 342
Patterson, Ernest Minor h 927, 928; r 173, 354
Patterson, Gardner a 1231
Patterson, Grove , r 158
Patterson, William A ,. .„ h 348;
Patton, James _ r 404-407
Pavlov ,__ h 142, 278, 283; r 87
92 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Payne, Robert h 929
Payne, Roger h 467
Payne Fund r 52
Peabody, George Foster h 361, 363, 694, 706
Peabody, Stuart a 1043
Peabody Board h 706
Peabody College for Teachers h 694; a 1145, 1149, 1236
Peabody Education Fund h 359
Peace Aims Group h 885, 886; r 177
Peace Atlas of Europe (publication) h 929
Peace Ballot Commission r 367
Peace Information Center r 273
Peace Pilgrimage r 356
Peace We Want (pamphlet) h 917
Peace with the Dictators? (publication) h 928 ; r 1 73
Peaceful Change (publication) h 927, 928; r 173
Peake, Cyrus h 580
Pearce h 942
Pearce, Richard M h 358
Pearl Harbor (publication) r 121
Pearson h 639
Pearson, Norman Holmes r 189
Pease, Edward R h 215
Peattie, Donald Culross a 1240
PeekskillUSA (publication) r 284
Peers, E. Allison h 928
Peffer, Nathaniel h 929; a 1215, 1216; r 173, 174
Pell, Orlie A. H a 1163, 1165
Penn State University h 114
Penniman, Josiah H h 344
Pennsylvania Railroad Co h 373
Pennsylvania State General Education Board h687
Pennsylvania University h 114,
138, 165, 272, 275, 355, 395, 811, 846; a 1024, 1025,
1139, 1184, 1187; r 26, 31, 158, 204, 354.
Pennsylvania University Law Review . a 1239
Pennsylvania University Press h 395
People vs. H. C. L. (pamphlet) r 227,
230, 247, 249, 254, 306, 312, 328, 353, 371
"People Of The World— A Day In Their Lives" (article) r 163
People Write a World Charter (speech) h 919, 920
Peoples Educational Center r 334, 365
Peoples Front For Peace h 223
People's Institute of Applied Religion_-_ a 1170; r 341, 347, 349, 401
Peoples Party r 409
Peoples Radio Foundation (certificate of incorporation) r 319
Peoples of the Soviet Union (publication) r316
Peoples Speaking to Peoples (publication) h 929
People's Peace (publication) h 929
Peoples World (publication) r 160
Pepperdine College h379; r 188
Percy, Charles H h 348
Percy, LeRoy h342
COMPOSITE ItffiEX 93
Page
Perelamn, Norman _"_-_ _ _ h 793
Perlo, Victor _ _. _ : _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ r 287
Perkins _____ _____ h 669
Perkins, George W h 342; a 1181
Perkins, James A ____-.__:_____ h 339, 340
Perlman, Mildred h 784, 792
Permanent Charity Fund h 16
Permanent Committee of the World Peace Congress_____ _ : r 273,
280,284,389,403
Permanent Court of International Justice __„„ h 922
Perpetual Peace (publication) h 929
Perry, Ernest J h 351
Perry, Kalph Barton h 309
Persians (publication) h 927
Perspective of India (publication) rl89
Perspective, U. S. (publication) r 189
Pescatello, Michael h 340
Peters, William A h 342
Peterson h 394
Peterson, Sir William __ h 344
Pew Foundation h 13, 16
Peyre, Henri a 1009
Pfeiffer, Timothy h 794, 837
Phelps Stokes Fund ___. h 471; r 54
Phi Beta Kappa a 1205, 1221
Philadelphia Citizens Committee to Free Earl Browder r 354
Philadelphia Inquirer Magazine a 1240
Philanthropic Foundations and Higher Education (publica-
tion)___ h 58, 479, 669-671, 684, 702, 707, 711; a 1236, 1239; r 134
Philanthropy in America (publication) a 1236
Philanthropy Faces a Change (article) a 1240
Philanthropy and Learning (article) . a 1236
Philanthropy in Negro Education (publication) a 1236
Philanthropy Uninhibited (article) _ a 1239, 1241
Philanthropy's Venture Capital (article) al 237
Philippines — Problems of Independence (publication) h 901
Phillips, Duncan r 189
Phillips, Ellis L r 52
Phillips, George r 383
Phillips, Henry A h 926,927
Phillips, John Marshall a 1231
Phillips Foundation r 52
Philosophical Research Institute (San Francisco). _h 42; a 1042; r 162
Philosophy of Dialectical Materialism (educational course) h 279
Phylon _■ a 1240
Pickett, Clarence E r 187
Pierpont Morgan Library a 1009
Pike, H. Harvey a 1182
Pilgrim Lutheran Church a 1209
Pilnyak r257
Pincus, John A a 1230
Pinkevitch, Albert P h 285
Pioneer Youth r 412
49720 — 55 -7
94 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Pioneer's Progress (book) : __._. h31;r92
Pitirim, Professor ______ r 64
Pitman Publishing Corp h 394
Pittsburgh University h 220, 355, 361 ; a 1238
Pittsburgh University Law Review a 1238
Planning Committee on Board of Education of Scarsdale, New
York__ a 1209
Planning Foundation Programs (article). a 1239
Plantz, Samuel . h 344
Plastires, Premier.^ • r 358
Platform for All Americans (article). _ h 42
Plato „._. a 1168
Plays for Children Contest (International Workers Order) r 345
Plymouth Co... h 374
Pocono Conference h65, 68
PM (publication) - . a 1171; r 283, 346
Poetry of the Negro (publication) r 297
Poggioli, Renato r 189
Poland Today (booklet).. __._ r 387
Policy Committee (African Affairs Council) r268
Policy and Program Adopted by the National Convention,
1950 (leaflet) r 270, 347
Polish Research and Information Service r387
"Political Action for Labor" (conference theme) r 106
"Political Action Techniques" (conference theme) r 106
Political Affairs (publication) r 341, 414
Political Affairs and the Constitution of the Communist Party,
U.S.A. (publication).. r 315
Political and Civil Rights in the United States (book) h 39
Political and Social History of Modern Europe (publication) . _ h 926
Political Awakening of the East (publication) h 926
Political Handbook of the World, 1946 (publication) h 929
Political Offenders (article) r93
Political Police (article) r 93
Political Problems (study) r 177
Political Quarterly a 1219
Political Research Committee (American Political Science
Association) r 131
Political Science and Comparative Law h 572
Politics (article) h 319
Politics and Economics (article) h 748
Politz, Alfred . ■_ a 1025
Politz Research, Inc a 1025
Polk. {See Davis, Polk, Wardwell, Sunderland & Kiendl.)
Pollard, John A •_ a 1240
Pomeroy, Wardell B h 123
Pomona College a 1232
Pool, Rabbi David De Sola r 265
Poole, D. C r 158
Pope Arthur Upham a 1216
Pope Leo XIII h 607; r 425
Pope Pius XI h607; r 294, 425
Population Council, Inc a 965
COMPOSITE INDEX 95
Paste
Populists h 515
Porter, Paul K h 135, 744-747,
750, 751, 763, 765, 784, 791; a 977, 991; r 97, 99
Portland Police Department — r 338
Portraits from a Chinese Scroll (publication) h928
Portugal for Two (publication) h 927
Possible Peace (publication) h 926
Post Standard (Syracuse, N. Y.) . r 351, 352
Postwar Planning, etc. (pamphlet).- r 131
Potash, Irving _„ . _ r 361
Potomac Appalachian Trail Club a 1209
Pound, Roscoe.__ h 897; a 1180
Poverty (publication) h 219
Power of Freedom (publication) a 1240
Power Industrial (article) r93
Powers, H. H h 926
Powers, William H r 351
Poynton, John A h 338
Poyntz, Juliet Stuart r 410
Pragmatism and Pedagogy (publication) h94
Prang Co h 394
Pravda (publication) h 32, 848
Precedents for Relations Between International Organizations
and Nonmember States (conference memoranda) h 891, 914
Prejudice in Textbooks (pamphlet) r 408
Frendergast, William B h 904 a 1132, 1221
Prentice-Hall, Inc___ h 394
Presenting the American Student Union (pamphlet) r 230,
255, 308, 353
President Truman's Commission on Higher Education r 108,
142, 143
President of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, r 184
President of the United States : h 35,
41, 74, 152, 153, 212, 213, 216, 223, 298, 311, 317-319,
360, 438, 482-484, 512, 531, 536, 537, 573, 574, 581,
590, 603, 604, 607, 617, 643, 741, 745, 757, 766, 785,
786, 790, 809, 849, 850, 872, 901, 911; a 1063, 1207;
r 20, 21, 58, 65, 97, 103, 108, 121, 126, 131-133, 142,
143, 148, 155, 162, 178, 179, 185, 187, 195, 202, 234,
240, 245, 247, 250, 261-263, 265, 266, 269, 272, 274,
277-279, 285, 291, 304, 305, 309, 311, 313, 317, 321
325, 331-333, 343-345, 347, 354, 357, 361-364, 371,
374, 381, 385, 390, 392, 402, 405, 412, 415.
Presidential Leadership (publication) h 795
President's Commission on Administrative Management h 617
Presidents Commission on Higher Education h 482,
484; a 1167; r 142
President's Committee on Civil Rights a 1131
President's Council of Economic Advisers h 777 ,
849; a 963, 980, 1025
President's Research Committee on Social Trends h 850
President's Review (printed reports) a 1072
Press releases of Attorney General (June 1, Sept. 21, 1948) r 234
96 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Prestes Defense Committee r 238, 239, 249, 328
Prestes, Luiz Carlos r 233,
238, 239, 249, 254, 259, 312, 328, 332, 370, 376
Preston, Hon. Prince H., Jr h 37
Price, DonK ■___ h 137, 347; r 86
Price, Governor a 1206
Price, Gwilym A h338; a 965
Price Control in the Postwar Period (pamphlet) h891
Price, Waterhouse & Co a 1182
Primer on Charitable Foundations and the Estate Tax a 1240
Princeton office of population research hl33
Princeton University h 151,
220, 347, 353, 356, 359, 362, 395, 495, 553, 832, 933;
a 1209, 1230, 1231, 1232; r 43, 73, 158.
Princeton University Press h 395 ; r 73
Principles of the Collective and Socialist Society (educational
course) h279;rl59
Principles of Exchange Stabilization (publication) h 892
Principles of Giving (publication) a 1240
Principles of Philanthropy as a Science and Art (memo-
randum) r30
Prisoners Relief Fund (International Labor Defense) r 230
Pritchett, Henry S h 339,
342, 344, 345, 671, 679-682, 689, 714; a 1240
Private Fortunes and Public Future (article) a 1238
Privileges of American Citizenship (publication) rl21
Pro America (organization) h 322, 324, 326
Problem of Financing the Medical Schools (article) a 981
Problems of Leadership and Control in Soviet Literature (pub-
lication) r 367
Problems of Philosophy (publication) h 847
Procter & Gamble Co____ a 1043
Program for Labor and Progressives (publication) h 793
Program for Modern America, Concentration of Control in
American Industry (publication) a 998
Progress in International Organization (publication) h 927
Progressive (publication) h 468, 628
Progressive Citizens of America a 1 173, 1 174
Progressive Citizens Association . r 399
Progressive Education (publi cation) h34,
291, 303, 484, 487, 488, 493; r 143, 145, 146, 151, 153
Progressive Education Association h 21 ,
34, 35, 46, 47, 263, 265, 292, 397, 475, 488, 493, 674-
676, 679, 682, 686, 689, 696-698, 701, 703-705, 713,
714, 716, 720, 722; a 1081, 1112, 1147-1149, 1175;
r 45, 135, 136, 146, 151-153, 362.
Progressive Education Journal (publication) h 285; r 152
Progressive Education Society h 285
Proletarian Literature in the United States (Publication) r 282
Proletarian Youth League of Moscow r393
Proletariat (article) r 93
Prominent Americans Call For * * * (pamphlet) r 280,
374,387,403
COMPOSITE INDEX 97
Page
Promise of Sociology (publication) r 77
Proper Study of Mankind (publication) ■___ h 132-134,
170, 176; a 967, 972; r 85-87, 89, 125
Prospects for Democracy in Japan (publication) r 236
Protest Against Attack on Right of Communist Party to Use
Ballot (Daily Worker) r 258
Protest Brutal Nazi Persecutions (handbill) r 353
Protestant Digest (publication) r 302
Protestant Digest Association r 302
Protestantism Answers Hate (dinner-forum) r 302
Provident Mutual Life Insurance Co h 350 ; a 1051
Provisional Committee for a United Labor and Peoples May
Day—- .- ----- 7 r387
Provisional International Social Science Council r 184
Provisional Sponsoring Committee (National Emergency
Conference) r 332
Provisional United Labor and Peoples Committee for May
Day - r 359
Psychological Abstracts (publication) _ h 847
Public Accountability of Foundations and Charitable Trusts
(publication) - a 1236, 1240
Public Administration Clearing House h 894,
896, 942; a 1031, 1141, 1142; r 221
Public Administration Clearing House of Chicago h 942
Public Administration Committee h933
Public Administration and the Public Interest (publication) _ _ h 795
Public Administration Review a 1208
Public Affairs Committee, Inc h 34, 74 ; r 408
Public Affairs Pamphlets r 134, 376, 379, 408
Public Benefactions of Andrew Carnegie; Carnegie Corp.; The
Foundation (publication) h 669
Public Debt and Taxation in the Postwar World (publication), h 793
Public and International Affairs (Princeton) rl58
Public Opinion and Foreign Policy (publication) h 884
Public Opinion and Propaganda Studies (publication) h 524
Public School System (New York, N. Y.) h 283; r 234, 319
Public Use of Arts Committee r 247, 301
Publishers' Weekly a 1237, 1239
Pulitzer Prize (1946) r 363
Punahou School (Honolulu) h 553
Puner, Morton h 388
Pupils of the Soviet Union (publication) r 174
Purpose of Education in American Democracy (publication)-- h 697
Pusey, Nathan M h 344; a 1041
Pushkin, Alexander r 361, 367
Pushkin (publication) r 367
Pushkin Committee h 223
Q
Queens College h 555; r 319
Quigley, Harold h 580
Quigley, Hugh r93
Quiet Revolution (article) : r 162
98 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Quill, Eleanor . „,_ a 1016
Quinn, Theodore a 979
R
Race Differences (publication) r 312
Races of Mankind (publication) h 34; a 1215; r 165, 232, 408
Radcliffe College h 286, 874
Radford, Betty r 161
Radin, Paul r 354
Radius, Walter A a 1231
Ragan, Philip H a 1240
RaigueL- h 927
Railroad Brotherhoods h 788
Rainey, Homer P . . h 697
Rakosi, Matthias r 413
Rand Corp a 1047, 1049; r 46, 49, 81
Rand, McNally & Co h 394
Rand School Press a 1165; r 408
Rand School of Social Science r 110, 408-410
Randolph, A. Phillip r 385
Randolph, Bessie C h 874
Random House h 395
Rankin, Congressman r 263
Ransom, John Crowe r 189
Rapp-Coudert Committee r 234
Rathbone, Perry I a 1231
Rau, Professor h 242
Rauh, Joe h 41
Raushenbush, Carl a 1164
Raw Materials in Peace and War (publication) h 928
Ray, Annada Sankar r 189
Raymond, Harold Bradford a 1229
Raymond Rich Associates a 1235
Read, Elizabeth F h 926; r 173, 355
Readers Digest. , — . h 408, 569
Rearmament— How Far? (Fabian tract) h 308
Rebel Song Book a 1165; r 108
Recent Developments in Britain (speech) a 984
Recent Social Trends in the United States (report) h 850
Recent Trends in British Trade Unionism (publication) h 793
Reception Committee (Soviet flyers, Moscow to New York
1929) r 247
Recommendations of the President to the Trustees (document)- . h 56 ;
r 183
Recovery, the Second Effort (publication) h 927; r 173
Red Cross.. .... h 586, 679, 731; r 27
Red Decade (publication) r 122
Red Network a 1175
Red Tiger (publication) h 926
Redefer, Frederick h 265
Redfield, Robert h 926; a 1009; r 189, 355
Reed, Alfred Z h 345
Reed, John r 245, 260, 282, 286, 313, 392
COMPOSITE INDEX 99
Face
Reed, Philip D...... h342, 349, h" 920
Reed, Vergil D ___ a 1025
Reed Club Writers School r 245
Reed Clubs.. r 260, 282, 286
Reed College a 1227
Refugees Behind the Iron Curtain r 231
Regenery, Henry h 389, 395; a 1192
Regenery Co h 389, 395; a 1192
Regional Accrediting Associations ■___ a 1147
Regional Farmers Union r 399
Registration of Aliens (publication) ___ ... r 307, 311, 340, 349
Rehearsal (pamphlet).. r 107
Rehearsal (play) _■ r 345
Reichstag Fire Trial Anniversary (advertisement) r 253
Reichstag Fire Trial Anniversary Committee r365
Reid, Chandoe h 74
Reid, Helen Rogers r 9
Reid, Hollis r 399
Reid, Ira r 28
Reid, Ogden M r 8-10
Reid, Stephen ... a 983
Reid, Whitelaw __ r 9
Reid Foundation r 8-10, 429
Reisman, David h 848
Reither, Wm. Harry a 1232
Relief For The Alert Citizen r 216
Relation Between International Commercial Policy and High
Level Employment (publication) h 892
Relations Between International Organizations and Nonmem-
ber States (publication) h 915
Religion in Soviet Russia (publication) r315
Remington, William W h 36, 41; a 1199-1201, 1223, 1228
Remsen, Ira h 344
Rennie, Wesley F a 980, 996
Rentschler, Gordon S h 346
Report of the Commission on the Social Studies — Conclusions
and Recommendations of the Commission (publication), h 476; a 967
Report on the Enemy (publication) h 320
Report on the Ford Foundation a 1237
Report on Foundations a 1240
Republican Platform Committee r 280, 355
Report on President's Commission. a 981
Report of the Study for the Ford Foundation on Policy and
Program a 1235
Reporter (publication) a 1241
Repplier, M. T a 1043
Republic (Ford Foundation Agency) h26;a 1054-1055
Republic (publication) : h 576
Republic Steel a 1044
Republican National Committee h298, 334, 737
Republican Party. _ h 227, 298, 328, 333, 334, 380, 386, 511, 513, 624,
737, 751, 762, 784; a 989; r 61, 198, 223, 281, 355, 357
Research Institute of America a 979
100 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Research on the Organization of Medieval Trade (publication), h 831
Research Policy Committee (American Council on Education), r 52
Resources for the Future, Inc . . h 346 ; a 1027, 1032
Retail, Wholesale, and Department Store Employees of Amer-
ica, CIO h 779; r 104
Reticence of Mr. Mellon (subtitle) h 297
Return of Adam Smith (publication) r 122
Reuter h 848
Reuther, Victor a 1161
Reuther, Walter P h 42, 308, 309, 757, 766; a 995-997, 1161
Review and Evaluation Committee (Inter-University Labor
Education Committee) r 163
Review of Legal Education in the United States and Canada
(publication) a 1241
Revenue Act of 1938 a 979
Revenue Act of 1950 a 1238
Reves, Emery h 929
Review (publication) : h 930
Revise the Neutrality Act (speech) r 275
Revolt (publication)... h 740, 743, 744, 747-751; a 986, 993; r 97-99
Revolutionary Radicalism (pamphlet) ___.. r 249
Revolutionary Youth (organization) r411
Rexroth, Kenneth . r 189
Reynolds, James J a 1048
Reynolds, Z. S h 16
Reynolds Foundation h 16
Rhees, Rush __' h 344
Rhind, Flora M h 357, 363
Rhode Island University a 1184
Rhodes Scholarship Trust a 1183; r 169
Rhodes School h901
Rhys, Albert h 315; r 154
Rice, Mollie r 161
Rice Institue a 1227, 1229
Rich, Raymond a 1235
Rich, Hon. Robert Fleming h 134, 501
Rich Land, Poor Land (publication) h 134; r 121
Richards, Alfred N h 355
Richards, Charles R h 363
Richmond News Leader- _ . h 354, 360
Right to be in Error (speech) h 984
Right to make Mistakes (pamphlet) a 980
Rinehart & Co h 394
Rinehart r 343
Ring and the Book (publication) h 567
Rippy, Prof. J. Fred h 60, 62; a 1195, 1196; r 37, 44
Rise of Liberalism (article) h 32; h 92
Road Ahead (publication) h 793; r 122
Road to the Grey Pamir (publication) h927;rl73
Road to Serfdom (publication) h 33, 594; r 121
Robbins, Lionel a 1140
Robbins, Y. L r 159
COMPOSITE INDEX 101
Page
Robert Marshall Foundation h 40,
41, 457, 458, 471, 472; r 54, 107, 197, 201, 360, 399,
400, 405.
Roberts, Allen _. h 315; r 154
Roberts, George a 1 182
Roberts, Katharine _ h 929
Roberts, Owen J. h 349, 642; a 1028
Roberts, Stephen H ___ fa 928
Roberts Dairy Co. v. Commissioner (case) h 430
Robertson, J. R r39
Robeson, Paul h34;r 121,356-362
Robinson, Edgar E h 256
Robinson, Edward h 357, 363
Robinson, Geroid T r 158
Robinson, Richard Dur_lop__ a 1230
Robinson, William E r9
Rochester University h 356,
362, 395; a 1009, 1124, 1139, 1227, 1230, 1231
Rochester University Press h395
Rockefeller, David h 342
Rockefeller, John D h 2,
8, 13, 16, 20, 28, 31, 34, 35, 36, 40, 42, 43, 51, 64,
102, 123, 212, 219, 226, 250, 254, 293, 354, 355, 360,
586, 669, 690, 692, 701, 703, 721, 848, 854; a 1068,
1070, 1073, 1081, 1083, 1094, 1095, 1123; r 20, 27, 28,
30, 47, 116, 134, 149.
Rockefeller, JohnD. Jr.__ h 255, 355, 357, 361, 362; a 1084, 1095; r 47
Rockefeller, John D. Ill h 355, 357, 361, 362;
a 1066-1067, 1084, 1095, 1127, 1128, 1182
Rockefeller, Nelson a 1208
Rockefeller, Winthrop a 1240
Rockefeller Agency a 1 105
Rockefeller Brothers _„ h 854; r 47
Rockefeller Corporation h 589
Rockefeller Foundation h2,
8, 13, 16, 20, 28, 31, 34-36, 40, 42, 43, 51, 64, 123,
212, 219, 226, 241, 250, 273, 286, 288, 293, 309, 310,
317, 336, 337, 353-356, 359-362, 400, 401, 472-475,
508, 523, 525, 535, 537, 538, 544, 546, 557-559, 567,
584, 595, 602, 615, 620-622, 668-670, 674, 690-693,
701, 704, 705, 710, 711, 717, 718, 720, 854, 869-871,
879, 880, 883-885, 889, 892-894, 898, 901, 904, 905,
930-934, 936, 938-943; a 950, 1001, 1004, 1006, 1034,
1044, 1063, 1066-1075, 1082-1084, 1086-1088, 1090,
1092, 1094-1095, 1096, 1099-1105, 1107-1110, 1113,
1116-1135, 1137, 1139-1146, 1176, 1183, 1210-1211,
1214, 1218, 1226, 1241; r 4, 19, 23, 24, 26-30, 33, 41,
42, 45, 46, 52, 54, 58, 68-71, 79, 87, 88, 91, 114, 116,
128, 133-136, 149, 154-156, 169, 170, 176-182, 190,
198, 199, 209, 426, 429.
Rockefeller Foundation Report a 1105; r 169, 176
Rockefeller Foundation Story a 1238
102 COMPOSITE INDEX
v ._:;'_ Page
Rockefeller General Education Board __________ ' _ : r 47,
52,59,134,136,149,154,156
Rockefeller General Education Board Report, 1940 r 154, 198
Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research. ___. h 353,
354, 359, 668, 690, 718; a 1127, 1128
Rockefeller, "internationalist" the man who misrules the world
(publication) , a 1236
Rockford College a 1041
Rocky Road to Dublin (publication) h928
Rodman, Selden r 189
Rodriguez, Dr. Balmore a 985
Rogin, Larry a 1166
Role of the Foundation in Education (publication) a 1238, 1240
Role of Foundation in Public Affairs (publication a 1240
Role of the Foundation in Postwar Planning (publication) a 1240
Role of Workers' Education in Political Action (conference
theme) _~ a 1160
Roll Call for Peace (Daily Worker) r 268
Rollins, Prof. Carlton R a 983
Romantic Czechoslovakia (publication) h 927
Romualdi, Serafino a 984
Ronald Press Co h 395
Rooney, Hon. John J h37
Roosevelt, Eleanor h 308, 309, 763 ; a 977 ; r 399
Roosevelt, Franklin D h 35,
41, 74, 153, 212, 570, 573, 581, 741, 745, 790, 901;
a 1063, 1205; r 97, 121, 162, 178, 234, 263, 272, 305,
325, 332, 347, 351, 354, 357, 363,-364, 392, 415.
Roosevelt, Theodore h 409, 679
Roosevelt College h 395
Roosevelt College Press h 395
Roosevelt Myth (publication) r 121
Root, Ballantine, Bushby & Palmer (law firm) h 347 ; a 965
Root, Elihu h 339, 342, 584, 588, 877, 879, 889; r 26
Root, Elihu, Jr h 339; a 965, 1057
Roper, Elmo h 350; a 1051
Roper polls h 149
Ropes, Ernest a 1224
Rorty, James a 996
Rose h942
Rose, Arnold h 49
Rose, Wickliffe h 355, 361, 362
Rosenberg, Ethel h 33; r 257, 258, 272, 285, 309, 387
Rosenberg Julius h 33; r 257, 258, 272,285,309, 387
Rosenberg Foundation . h 16
Rosenbergs a 997
Rosenman, Samuel L a 1207
Rosenwald, Julius h 355, 471; a 1237, 1240; r 47
Rosenwald Fund h 471, 472, 854; r 47, 54, 198
Rosinger, Lawrence K h 897, 901; a 1180
Ross h 848
Ross, Professor. r 77
Ross, Andrew - a 1222, 1225
COMPOSITE INDEX 103
Page
Ross, E. Denison __ h 927
Ross, Milton a 1240
Rossiter, Prof. Clinton a 1055
Rotary Clubs h 379; r 188
Roth, Andrew a 1225, 1226
Roth, Esther r 362
"Round Trip" (film) _ r 165
Roundtable Broadcasts (University of Chicago) rl33
Rousseau, Jean Jacques r21
Row, Peterson & Co h 394
Rowe, David Nelson h 417,
523-553, 597; a 1135, 1136, 1214; r 28, 29, 34, 35,
41-44, 50, 52, 54, 58, 59, 65, 66, 79, 123, 124, 199,
200,213.
Royal Institute of International Affairs. h 894, 933, 936; r 170
Rubber (article) ----- h 319
Rubenstein, Jack, r 411
Rubenstein, M h 841, 842
Rubin, R. N r 161
Rudd, Colonel h 261, 262
Rude Pravo (Publication) r 389
Rugg, Harold h 197, 254-256, 258-262, 264, 468,
484; a 1146, 1175; r 146, 149-151, 153, 168, 362, 363
Rugg pamphlets r 150
Rugg Social Science textbooks h 259; r 150
Rugg textbooks h 197, 255, 256, 258, 259; r 149, 150, 363
Ruggles, Melville J h 348
Ruml, Beardsley h 339, 352, 879, 880; a 1236; r 49, 87
Rushmore, Bisbee & Stern (law firm) h 354, 360
Rusk, Dean h 240-
242, 356, 357, 361, 362, 391, 415, 668; a 1066, 1067,
1084, 1121, 1122, 1127, 1131, 1144, 1150, 1210, 1211,
1214; r 180, 198, 209
Ruskin College Scholarships a 1162
Russell, Dr h 700
Russell, Bertrand h 926
Russell, Frederick F h 357
Russell, James Earl a 1230
Russell, John M h 339
Russell, Phillips __. h 926
Russell, William F h 64, 272, 275
Russell Sage Foundation h 9,
16, 31, 60, 472, 473, 779, 854; a 990, 1117, 1235, 1236,
1239-1241 ; r 14, 45, 47, 91, 184
Russia (publication) h 319, 929
Russia at War (publication) h 883
Russia — Democracy or Dictatorship (pamphlet) h307
Russia and Russia and the Peace (publication) a 1216
Russian Institute, Columbia University — h36, 347
Russian Reconstruction Farms, Inc.-. ... - h 222; r 229, 232, 247, 302
Russian Research Center (Harvard University) h 840
Russian State Travel Co. (Intourist) h 275, 281; r 158
Russian-Telegu Dictionary a 1030
X04 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Russian War Relief , Inc h 222; a 1171; r 246
Russia's Race for Asia (publication) a 1216; r 174
Rustin, Bayard r 399
Rustow, Dankwart A a 1230
Rutgers University h 42; a 981, 984, 991, 1041, 1042, 1166
Ruttenberg, Stanley h 352, 784, 792; a 1161
Ryan, W. Carson h 345
Ryerson, Edward L h 342
Ryerson, Martin A h 356
Ryhd, Hanna h 926
S
Saarinen, Eero r 189
Sacks, Milton a 983
Sacramento Defense Committee r 154
Sacramento State College ■- a 1229
Sadlier, William H J 394
Saerchinger, Cesar h 928
Saidler, Inc h 394
Safety (article) h 310
Sage, Russell h 9,
16, 31, 60, 472, 473, 779, 854; a 990, 1117, 1235, 1236,
1239-1241; r 14, 45, 47, 49, 91, 184.
Sage Foundation h 9,
16, 31, 60, 472, 473, 779, 854 ; a 990, 1117, 1235, 1236,
1239, 1240, 1241; r 14, 45, 47, 49, 91, 184.
Saint Aimee McPherson r 294
Saint Becton r 2 94
St. Louis Post Dispatch r 279, 332, 392
Saint Pope Pius r 294
Sale, Chic h 829
Salem Lutheran Home Association _ . — _ h 429
Sales Management (publication) h 496
Salt, Waldo r 164
Salter, Arthur h 927, 928; r 17?,
Saltzman, Charles E a 1182
Saltzman, Lee - — r 161
Samokhvalova, Miss - r 159
Samuel Adams School for Social Science . r 349
Samuel J. Tilden High School h 767; a 984
San Francisco Bar h 256
San Francisco Board of Education h 197,
255, 257, 260, 262; r 146, 150, 363
San Francisco Chronicle h 553, 624, 625; a 1231
San Francisco City Board of Education h 197, 255, 257, 260, 262
San Francisco City Government r 338
San Francisco Schools h 257, 258
San Francisco University h 256; r 150
Sanborn, Benjamin H h 394
Sanborn & Co h 394
Sanders, Dr. Theodore a 983
Sante Cream Cheese Co a 1171
Santa Anita Foundation r 46
COMPOSITE INDEX 105
Pag«
Sarah Mellon Scaife Foundation __" h 16
Sardinian Project (publication) a 1073
Sargent, Aaron M h 187,
189-233, 236, 242-409, 492, 608, 624, 863; a 1049;
r 7, 146-149, 153-156, 188, 225, 426.
Sassoon, Philip h 926
Sattgast, Charles R a 1236
Saturday Evening Post h 320; a 1239
Saturday Evening Post r 293
Saturday Review a 1238, 1240
Saturday Review of Literature a 1216
Sauer, Carl O J r 83
Saunders, W. B h 166; a 1137
Saunders Company (book publishers) h 166; a 1137
Savage Howard J h 345, 378, 669, 681, 689, 717; a 1236
Sawyer, Charles h 37; a 1197, 1199, 1200-1202, 1207
Sawyer, Wilbur A h 357
Sayre, A. Monell h 345
Sayre, John Nevin r 398, 412
Scaife, Sarah Mellon h 16
Scaife Foundation h 16
SCAP -___ a 1216
SCFOTO (Soviet propaganda organization) h 316
Schaeffer, Barbara r 322
Schapiro, Meyer r 189, 190
Schapiro, Theodore r 408, 410
Schappes, Morris U r 253, 309, 347, 349
Schappes Defense Committee r 253, 309, 347, 349
Schemer, Leo r 401
Scherer, Paul h 344
Schieffelin, W. J. Jr h 342; r 267
Schine, G. David h 43
Schlesinger, Arthur M., Jr h 32, 41; a 1040; r 189, 190, 363-365
Schlesinger, Cecelia a 1222
Schlossberg, Joseph a 977 ; r 409
Schmidlapp, Jacob G h 342
Schmidt, Henry r 339
Schnabel, Joseph H h 351
Schneider, Isidor r 387
Schneiderman-Darcy Defense Committee- _ r 340
Schodt, Eddie W .-_ a 1231
Schoeck, Dr. Helmut a 1184, 1191
Scholastic Magazines h394
School of Business Administration (University of Michigan) _ _ h 286
School for Democracy h 224; r 233, 268, 319
School of Education (College of the City of New York) h 275
School of Education (University of Chicago) h 275
School of Education (New York University) h 272, 275, 390, 517
School of Education (Stanford University) h 912
School for General Studies , a 998
School of Industrial Administration (Carnegie) ,. a 1025
School of International Affairs (Columbia University) h 893,
933, 934, 936, 941
106 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
School of Public Welfare (University of North Carolina) h 275
School and Society (publication) 97, 110;
a 1239, 1240
School Review a 1237, 1240
Schools of Arts and Sciences (Tulane) a 1041
Schools of Washington, D. C h 286, 514; r 362
Schorer, Mark___ r 189
Schrader, George A., Jr a 1232
Schulgen, General -„_ h 579, 580
Schultz, Rabbi Benjamin h 389; r 239
Schultz, Prof. Theodore a 1025
Schurman, Jacob Gould — _ h 344
Schuster. (See Simon & Schuster.)
Schwartz, Delmore r 189
Schwarz, Marjorie ___ r 161
Science (publication) a 1239
Science Research Associates h 394
Science and Society (publication) h 223; r 152, 245, 355
Scientific and Cultural Conference for World Peace h 224;
a 1174, 1175; r 270, 283, 297, 349, 350, 386
Science in the U. S. A. in the Service of Monopolies and Mili-
tarists (article) h 841, 842
Scientific Disarmament (publication) h 927
Scientific Monthly h 131; r 71
Scotland Educational Institute h 74
Scott, Agnes h 360
Scott, Austin W a 1240
Scott, Frank h 308
Scott, Hugh a 1240
Scott, James Brown h 342, 879, 889
Scott, Masha r 242
Scott, Roland A a 1231
Scott College. h 360
Scott Foresman & Co h 394
Scottsboro Negroes r411
ScreenWriter (publication) r 240
Scribner, Charles h 395
Scribners (publication) h 476 ; a 1236
Scribner's Sons h 395
Scripps Foundation for Research in Population Problems, h 854 ; r 47
Scudder, Stevens and Clark a 1236
Scudder, Vida D a 977
Seaman, Bernard a 989
Sears, Henry. a 1182
Sears & Co a 1182
Seattle Art Museum h 553
Second Annual North Dakota Conference of Farmers and
Workers. a 1161
Second biennial American Writers Congress r282
Second State University of Moscow h 285
Second United States Congress Against War and Fascism a 1175;
r 230, 232, 253, 376
Second World Peace Conference r 273, 280
icoMEOsiTE -..wmx 107
•■•;■, ■■ Page
Second World Youth Congress. ^.±.1,^ : .-r 412
Secondary Education (publication) yzzz- — —-_":< h 94
Secondary Education for Youth in America (publication) _ _ . _ _ h 697
Seconding by International Organizations and From National
Services to International Agencies (conference memoranda), h 914
Securities Exchange Act a 995
Security and Armaments Problems (study) rl77
Security Council (United Nations) h 67; a 1059; r 192
Security, Loyalty, and Science (publication) a 1132,
1218, 1219; r 288
Security and World Organization (publication) — _ h 890
Seditious Activities Investigation Commission (State of Illi-
nois) - h38;r299, 323
Seditious Activities Committee (New York State) h 467
Seeber, Edward D _.__ . a 1231
Seeds of Treason (publication) r 121
Seeing America (article) h 319
Seeing is Believing — Here is the Truth About South Africa
(pamphlet) r 358, 384
Seelye, L. Clark h 344
Seidman, Joel h 307
Seidman, Dr. Joel__ , a 988, 1163
Selassie, Emperor Hailie h 874
Selberstein, Robert a 1223, 1228
Selby, Walter Owens r 292
Sekles, George h 34, 902
Seldes, Gilbert .v. r 189, 190, 365
Seligman, Edwin R. A h 907; a 993
Seligman, Eustace a 1 182
Seligman, J h 356
Seligman, W h 356
Seligman & Co h 356
Sellin, Theodore a 1016
Selsam, Howard r 237, 247
Senate Investigating Committee on Education (State of Cali-
fornia) h 315, 316; r 154, 155
Sender, Toni a 995
Senior, Clarence - h 765; a 977; r 100
Sergeyeva, N r 243
Service, John Stewart.. h 40; a 1222, 1225
Sevareid, Eric h 40
Seven Great Foundations (publication) a 1235
Seven and a Half Million Speak for Peace (pamphlet) __ r 228,
231, 234, 239
Seventh Annual Institute on Federal Taxation _:.____ a 1236
Severance, Gordenio A h 342
Sex Life of the American Woman and the Kinsey Report (pub-
. lication) h 130; r 71
Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (publication) h 123,
124, 140, 165, 166
Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (publication) h 123,
124, 140, 144
Seybold, Geneva a 1240
108 COMPOSITE INDEX
Seyfert, W. C a 1240
Seymour, Charles h 344 ; r 9
Seymour, Whitney North a 1052, 1054
Shafer, Congressman,, r 85, 141
Shafer, Paul W__._ h 134, 480, 507
Shah, Hiru Chhotalal a 1230
Shahn, Tillie G , h 552
Shakespeare in Harlem (publication) r297
Shall Our Government Cancel the War Loans to the Allies?
(pamphlet) __ ; h 907
Shall Strikes Be Outlawed? (publication) - all 63
Shame of the Cities (publication) h 219
Shane, Theodore King a 122°
Shapiro, Karl J__ j_ r 189, 190, 365
Shapiro, Meyer (Schapiro) .__ r 365
Shapley, Harlow r 257
Sharer, Ena Lu r 161
Sharkey, Joseph T__- r 267
Sharp, Walter E h 886; a 983
Shaw, Albert h361
Shaw, George Bernard h 215
Sheffield, James R h 342
Shea h311
Sheng-Cheng h926
Shepardson, Whitney H h 340, 363
Sherman, John h 641
Sherman, Maurice S : h 342
Shih, Hu h 309
Ship of State ._ r 203
Shishkin, Dr. Boris a 980, 991
Shoemaker, Jtmes H h 553
Shotwell, James T h 64,
342, 588, 877, 885, 888, 890, 907, 918, 919, 927, 928;
a 1058; r 173, 177, 185.
Should Labor Unions be Regulated? (publication) ■ „ _ _ al 163
Shuck, Luther Edward, Jr a 1230
Shumlin, Herman a 1173
Shurz, Carl a 1241
Shurz Memorial Foundation , a 124 1
Shuster, George N h 342, 350; 351; a 1051
Sibley h 832
Sibley, Elbridge r 83
Sibley Harper h 342, 918
Sides, Virginia V a 1240
Signet Special (publication) r69
Silence of Colonel Stewart and Others (publication) h 297
Sillen, Samuel r 250
Sills, Kenneth C. M h 344
Silver Burdett Co h 394
Silver Lake Lodge No. 488 (IWO) r 345
Silvermaster, N. Gregory r 263, 287
Silvermaster-Perlo Groups r287
Simmons, Ernest J h 36; a 1037; r 366, 367
COMPOSITE INDEX 109
Page
Simon, Professor r81
Simon, Abbot a 1175
Simon & Schuster Inc h 395
Simons, Hans h 917
Simonson, Rebecca C h 309; a 985
Simpson, Richard M a 1 120
Sinclair, Frances a 1232
Sinclair, Upton h 220, 308, 740; a 993; r 97, 148
Singer, L. W h 394
Singer Co., Inc h 394
Sirota,; Alex r 356
Sister Margaret Patricia McCarran ^_ h 215,
244; a 945-947; r 148, 225
Sisters of the Holy Name______ T __J _____ h 244
Situs of International Organizations (publication) h915
Situation in Asia (publication) r 324
Sixth Annual Institute on Federal Taxation (report) __ a 1235
Six Hundred Prominent Americans Ask President to Rescind
Biddle Decision (pamphlet), r 252, 291, 310, 345, 364, 390
Skaife, Mr h 321
Skaug, Arne h 778; a 990
Skilliter, Persis Emma al204
Slater, John F h 359
Slater Fund _____ h 359
Slavic-American (publication) r 382
Slayden, James L h 342
Slee v. Commissioner (case) h431
Slichter, Sumner H h 892
Sligh, Charles R., Jr a 1240
Sloan _ a 1118
Sloan, H. S _ a 1240
Sloan Experiment in Applied Economics (article) a 1240
Sloan, Alfred P h 16, 28, 32, 34; a 1241; r 52, 133, 134
Sloan Foundation h 16, 28, 32, 34; a 1241; r 52, 133, 134
Slocum, William F h 344
Slossbn, Preston h 929
Small Farm (publication) h 34
Smedley, Agnes r 298
Smiley, Albert K__. h 342
Smiley, Joseph Royall a 1231
Smith, Gen. Bedell a 1198
Smith, Corley a 995
Smith, Edgar F h 344
Smith, Edwin S h 41
Smith, Francis A h 731
Smith, Geoffrey S h356; a 1127
Smith, Gerald L. K h 330
Smith, Hon. H. Alexander _"___ a 1182
Smith, Harold D a 1203, 1206, 1207
Smith, Hilda r 109
Smith, Hilda K r 369
Smith, Hilda W a 1169; r 369
Smith, Jeremiah, Jr h 342
49720 — 55 8
HO COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Smith, Jessica. r 241, 306
Smith, John B _.— a 1231
Smith, Rebecca M ■__ h 393
Smith, S. Edwin a 1173
Smith, T. V a 971
Smith, TredwelL. r 158
Smith Act h 33, 39, 224, 902; r 240, 266, 277, 285, 291, 344
Smith College h 272, 275
Smith & Durrell h 395
Smith-Hughes Act___ -- a 1116
Smithsonian Institution a 1226
Snader, Lyle O h 6
Snee, Father Joseph M a 1055
Snow, JohnHowland h 134, 507; r 85, 141
Snyder, Franklyn B_ h 344
Social Contract (article) j__. r 92
Social Democratic Federation h 766 ; r 101, 409
Social Democratic Labor Party (Sweden) a 969
Social Democrats r 415
Social Economic Movements (textbook) a998
Social Frontier (publication) — , h 468, 488, 489; r 145, 146, 168, 255
Social Problems and Scientism (publication) h 114,
133, 144; r 31, 63, 68, 71, 72, 204
Social Reform and the Communication of Ideas (conference
theme). a 983
Social Reform and the Conflict of Rural and Urban Values
(roundtable discussion) a 983
Social Science Division (Rockefeller Foundation) h 538
Social Science Foundation h 64
Social Science in Modern Society (article) 1 r 127
Social Sciences Publishers, Inc h 395
Social Science Research Center (University of Minnesota) r 82
Social Science Research Council h 21,
45, 47, 50, 132, 133, 136, 150, 154, 169, 170, 173, 184,
469-471, 473, 475, 482, 548, 549, 565, 566, 569, 570,
584, 590, 601, 612, 617, 618, 620, 794, 800, 806-811,
813, 814, 816, 820, 825, 832, 837, 848, 855, 879, 888,
889, 894, 898, 901, 904, 932; a 959, 998, 1003, 1005,
1012, 1026, 1093, 1124, 1142, 1186, 1189, 1190, 1228;
r 4, 26, 39, 45, 47-53, 59, 61, 62, 66, 73, 74, 79, 81-83,
85, 89, 115, 118, 125-129, 131, 141, 184, 185, 218, 226,
426, 427.
Social Science Research Council Reports r 53, 126, 128
Social Sciences (publication) r 140
Social Sciences at Mid-Century (publication) r82
Social Security (article) h 310, 319
Social Security Act h 232; a 995, 1080
Social Service Review ... a 1238, 1239, 1240
Social Studies (publication) h 478
Social Studies Commission h 58, 400, 479
Social Work Journal a 1237
Social Work, General Discussion, Social Case Work (article) _ _ r 93
Social Work Today (publication) r 310, 311, 329
COMPOSITE INDEX HI
Page
Social Work Yearbook a 1241
Social Workers Committee to Aid Spanish Democracy a 1176
Socialism (article) r 93
Socialism of Our Times (publication) h 750, 751 ; r 99, 409
Socialism in the United States (publication) h 306, 793
Socialist and Labor Songs (publication) rl08
Socialist Call (publication) , h 468
Socialist Labor Party h 467
Socialist Party '._ _ h 25,
27, 29, 31-33, 35, 36, 40, 136, 201, 202, 210, 214,
219-221, 224, 227, 279, 288, 306, 314, 319, 393, 400,
401, 467, 468, 492, 506, 512-514, 577, 612, 737, 746,
747, 751, 762, 764, 765, 780, 790-792, 901; a 900; r 98,
100, 105, 129, 131, 147, 155, 163, 187, 202, 203, 205,
393, 394-397, 400, 401, 402, 409, 410, 412, 414^16, 422
Socialist Party of America r 98
Socialist Workers Party r 414-416
Socialist Workmen's Circle _ r 409
Society of American Chemists h 603
Society of Biblical Literature and Exegesis a 999
Society for Cultural Relations With Foreign Countries (VOKS) r 158,
159,161,313
Society for Cultural Relations Between Soviet Union, and
Foreign Countries r 158, 313
Society for Curriculum Study h 310; a 1112, 1149, 1150
Society of Nations (publication) „__ h 927
Sociology and Social Research (publication) . r 205
Solidarity (publication) r 416
Soledad Sugar Co h 353; a 1127
Soljak, Philip L h 929
Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundations hl6
Solution in Asia (publication) r 324
Sombart, Werner h32;r 92
Soaie*N,Qtes on '''War and Peace (publication) _ _ _ h 928
Some Trends in Adult Education (publication) a 1165
Son of China (publication) h 926
Songs Useful for Workers Groups (pamphlet) a 1165, 1169; r 108
Sons of the American Revolution . h 190,
197, 261, 327, 335, 336, 368, 387, 393, 396, 403; r 147
Sons of the American Revolution (California Society) hl97;
r 146, 147
Sons of the American Revolution (Americanization Commit-
tee) r 147
Sorensen,. Roland A a 1231
Sorokin, A r 64. 78
Sorokin, Prof, Pitirim A a 1185, 1192
Soul of Black Folk (publication) r 272
Soule, George h 929; a 979; r 93, 110, 369
South is Closer Than You Think (leaflet) r 360
South by Thunderbird (publication) h 928
South Carolina University a 1231
Southeast International Relations Clubs Conference h 876
South-Western Publishing Co h 394
112 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Southern California Chapter (National Council of the Arts,
Sciences, and Professions) r 270
Southern California Country (publication) r341
Southern California University __ h 395, 523, 874; a 983, 1229; r 363
Southern California University Press h 395
Southern Conference on Human Welfare h 903; a 1174,
1219, 1220; r 107, 309, 360, 380, 399-401, 403, 408
Southern Council on International Relations h 874
Southern Education Board h 706
Southern Farmer (publication) r 399
Southern Methodist University a 1014
Southern Negro Youth Congress r 401, 411, 415
Southern Patriot (publication) r 403
Southern Summer School a 1164; r 107
Southwestern University h60
Soviet Academy of Sciences r 361
Soviet Challenge to America (publication) h 285; r 152
Soviet Civilization (publication) r 322
Soviet Literary Gazette h 847
Soviet-Nazi Pact r 296, 312
Soviet Russia and the Postwar World (pamphlet) r3l5
Soviet Russia Today (publication) h 223,
901 ; a 1172, 1222, 1225; r 175, 228, 235, 240-242, 246,
247, 252, 259-261, 264, 269, 271, 287, 289, 290, 304,
312, 314-317, 324, 327, 328, 331, 333, 340, 347, 355,
356, 366, 371, 377, 378, 380, 385, 387, 391.
Soviet Russia Today Book Club r 316
Soviet Russia Today Lecture Bureau r 316
Soviet Scholarship and Tolstoy (article) r 367
"Soviet Summer" (publication) r 160
Soviet Union and Present World Affairs (Carter's speech) r 246
Soviet Union State Scientific Council r 153
Soviet Union Today, An Outline Study (publication) „ _ h 929; r 173
Soviet Women (publication) r 384
Soviet Women's Anti-Fascist Committee r241
Spanish Loyalists r 238,
247, 294, 317, 327, 335, 337, 355, 364, 385, 391
Spanish Refugee Appeal (Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee) r 278,
296, 321, 332, 333, 345, 347, 359, 374, 384
Spanish Refugee Relief Campaign r 259, 301, 309, 337, 341
Spanish Republicans : h 902
Spanish Speaking People (article) h 320
Spanish Tragedy (publication) h 928
Spaulding, Francis T h 96, 361
Spaulding, Frank E h 361
Speaking for Peace (report) r 270, 342, 385
Speier, Hans r 46
Spellman, Laura . h 102, 565,
668, 690, 691, 698, 701, 702, 718, 721, 854, 879, 896;
a 1083, 1089, 1090, 1095, 1113, 1125, 1134, 1139, 1145;
r 47, 87, 134.
COMPOSITE INDEX 113
Page
Spellman Rockfeller Memorial ---_ h 102, 565,
668, 690, 691, 698, 701, 702, 718, 721, 854, 879, 896;
a 1083, 1089, 1090, 1095, 1113, 1125, 1134, 1139, 1145;
r 47, 87, 134.
Spencer, John H h 874
Spero, Prof. Sterling ..__. a 995
Spider and the Clock (publication) r 392
Spillane, Mickey h 146
Spinney, Ann C h 348
Spinoza h 805
Spirit and Structure of German Fascism (publication) r 240
Spoehr, Herman A h 358, 363
Spofford, Charles M h 339; a 965
Sponsoring Committee (World Peace Congress) r 273
Spotlight on the Far East (publication) r 235, 236, 296, 324, 376
Spragens, Thomas A h 350
Sprague, Charles A h 342
Sproul, Robert Gordon h 344, 356,361, 552, 553; a 1127, 1128
Stachel, Jack r 361
Stackpole, Stephen H h 339, 340
Staley, Eugene h 881, 884, 889, 900, 921, 928
Stalin — h 141,
278, 314, 318, 319, 745, 773, 901; a 1015; r 97, 103,
151, 197, 252, 274, 276, 294, 326, 331, 352, 356, 404,
413,414.
Stalin-Hitler Pact r 276, 326, 352, 356
Stamm, Robert a 1171
Standard Oil Co. (New Jersey) h 346, 349, 276; a 972, 1021
Standard Oil of California a 1044
Standard- Vacuum Oil Co h 553
Stanford Law Review a 1219
Stanford University h 196,
197, 220, 231, 256, 356, 362, 395, 524, 554, 562, 672,
874, 892, 912, 934, 941; a 1030, 1113, 1115, 1145,
1149, 1150, 1229, 1231; r 81, 135, 147, 150, 291.
Stanford Research Institute h 524 ; a 1231
Stanford School of Education h 214; a 1048
Stanford University Press h 395
Starling, Thomas r 399
Starnes, Joe r 273
Starobin, Joseph r 324, 388
Starr, Mark h 308,
780, 785, 789, 793; a 977, 979, 983, 985, 990, 996,
1167, 1168, 1169; r 108,371.
Stassen, Harold E t 919
State Bar of California h 196
State Bar Journal of California a 1237
State Board of Education of California h 197; r 146, 147
State Department of Education (Sacramento, Calif.) r 146, 147
State Normal School (Buffalo, N. Y.) h 485
State of Our National Finances (pamphlet) ___- h 907
State Publishing House (Moscow) r 262
114 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
State Scientific Council h 285;
State Travel Co. (Russian) h 275, 281; r 158
State University of Iowa h 555, 567, 568; a 1229
Statement of American Proposals for a New World Order
(publication) h 890
Statement by Negro Americans (article) r 266, 357
States and Subversion (study) a 1132
Status of Observers at International Conferences (conference
memoranda)- " h 914
Statutes of Mortmain r 11
Stauffer, Samuel . h 137
Stearhboat Inspection Service h 846
SteckCo h394
Steel (article) h 310
Steele, Walter S h400;
a 1170, 1173, 1215; r 175, 228, 245, 249, 252, 256, 264,
265, 281, 292, 349, 364, 384, 394, 395, 399, 400, 408,
409, 411.
Stefan, Hon. Karl 37
Steffens .. h 219
Stegner, Wallace . r 189
Stein, Guenther a 1216
Steinbeck, John r 241
Steiner, Jesse F h 286
Stembridge, Jasper H h 929
Stephan, Frederick F r 46
Stephens College h 350; a 1048
Stem, Alfred a 1174
Stern, Anna a 1009
Stern, Bernhard J r 93, 372-375
Stern. (See Rushmore, Bisbee & Stern.)
Sterne, Emma Gelders h 928
Sterner, Richard h49
Stetson University h94
Stettinius, Edward R., Jr h 917; r 119
Stevens, Bennett r 372, 375
Stevens, David H , h 358, 362, 363
Stevens, Harry R _ a 1230
Stevens, J. P h 356
Stevens, Robert T h 74, 142,208,356
Stevens & Co h 356
Stevens Institute of Technology !. h 495
Stevenson, A a 1190
Stevenson, Mrs. Eleanor B h 350; a 1051
Steward Machine Co. v. Davis a 1080
Stewart, Colonel h297
Stewart, Albert Edward r298
Stewart, Alice r 161
Stewart, Marguarite Ann (Mrs. Maxwell Stewart) h 897, 901
Stewart, Maxwell S h 33,
34, 74, 897, 903; a 1180, 1216; r 121, 134, 375, 408
Stewart, Walter W h 356, 357, 361, 362; a 1084
Stewart-Warner Corp h 32
COMPOSITE INDEX 115
Page
Stickler, Issac h 351
Stine, Russell Warren a 1232
Stinmetz, Charles P h 135
Stock, J. Stevens a 1025
Stockholm University a 970, 1139
Stockholm World Appeal To Outlaw Atomic Weapons r 273
Stoddard, George D a 1148
Stokes, Anson Phelps __, h 356, 361
Stokes, Phelps h 220, 471; a 993; r 54
Stokes Fund _ h471; r 54
Stone, Chief Justice Harlan h 573; a 1220
Stone, Donald h 74
Stone 1 , Peter ^ . r 232
Stone, William T h 927; r 173
Stop Shipments to Japan (leaflet) r 289, 323
Storen, Helen Frances h64
Story of the Dutch East Indies (publication) h 929
Story of the Fellowship of Reconciliation, 1915-35 (publica-
tion) I r 398
Story of the Rockefeller Foundation (publication) h 669,
879, 893, 942; a 1073, 1090, 1091, 1117, 1130, 1235;
r 19.
Stouffer, Professor r 81
Stouffer, Samuel A h 154; a 967, 972
Stout, George Leslie a 1231
Stowe, Harriet Beecher h 455
Stowell, Ellery C h 926
Stranger at Coney Island (publication) . 1 r 286
Strategy for Advancing the Social Sciences (article) r 51
Straus, Donald B h 552, 553
Straus, Nathan a 1206
Straus, Oscar S._ h 342
Strauss, Anna Lord h 348, 897, 920; a 1180, 1182
Strauss, Frederick h 356
Strauss, Levi h 553
Strauss & Co h 553
Strawn, Silas H „ h 342
Strayer, George D : h 697
Street, C. J. C h 926
Streetcar Named Desire (publication) r389
Streit, Clarence K h 928; r 173
Stresemann (publication) h 926
Strikes and Lockouts (article) r93
Stripling, Robert E a 1172
Strobell, George H h 740; r 97
Strode, George K h 357, 358; a 1073
Strode, Hudson . h 928
Strong, Anna Louise h 315, 927; r 154, 160, 173
Strong. (See Lewis, Strong & Earl.)
Strong, Edward a 1175
Strubbe, Charles F r 351
Structure of Education in American Democracy (publication) .. _ h 697
Struggle Against the Historical Blackout (publication) rl78
116 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Struggle Against War (publication) r 230, 258, 312, 318, 350, 415
Struik, Prof. Dirk a 1215; r 349
Stubbs, Roy Manning a 1230
Studebaker, J. W a 1148
Studebaker Corp h 346,350, 374
Student Advocate (publication) r 236, 306, 312, 394
Student Almanac, (publication) r 230, 235, 277, 326, 353, 380
Student Congress Against War h 223; a 1170; r 255, 318
Student League for Industrial Democracy a 982, 983; r 393, 394
Student Outlook (publication) - h 751, 755; r 99
Student Peace Service Committee • rl87
Student Strike (Philadephia) r 379
Students in the Class Struggle (article) .. _ h 749
Studies in Income and Wealth (publication) h 64 1
Studies in the Problem of Sovereignty (publication) h 926; r 173
Studies in the Scope and Method of the American Soldier (pub-
lication) h 161
Studies in Social Psychology in World War Two (article) h 150
Study of American Public Library (publication) h898
Study of the Conditions of Political Freedom (publication) __ _ h 831
Study of the Influences in Roman Life and Law (publication) ._._ h 831
Study of the Latin American Philosophy of Law (publication) _ h 831
Study of Secondary School Curriculum (publication) h 706
Sture, Ernest a 1231
Sugarman, Norman h 417-420, 422, 435-461,
734, 735, 786; a 1101, 1102, 1106; r 22, 96
Sullivan & Cromwell (law firm) h 353, 359, 553
Sulzberger, Arthur Hays h 356; a 1127; r 33, 428
Sumner, William Graham a 972
Sun Yat-sen (publication) h 929
Sunday Worker (publication) r 242, 297, 303, 394, 411
Sunderland. (See Davis, Polk, Wardwell, Sunderland &
Kiendl.)
Supporters of Anti-Nazi Seamen (organization) a 11 72
Surdna Foundation h 16
Survey of Education in the U. S. S. R. (educational course) — h 279
Survey Graphic (publication) a 1240
Survey of Psychological Research (educational course) h 279
Survey Research Center of the University of Michigan a 974
Survey of University and College Endowment Funds (publica-
. tion) a 1236
Sutch, W. B h 736
Sutherland, Arthur E a 1055
Sutherland, George h 342
Suzzalo, Henry h 339, 344, 345, 877
Svadkovsky, Professor r 159
Svennilson, Ingvar h 942
Swarthmore College a 1 177
Swedish Institute of International Affairs h 933
Swift, Harold H h 356, 361
Swift & Co h 356, 361
Swing, Raymond Gram a 1213
Swope, Gerard a 1136
COMPOSITE INDEX 117
Page
Syracuse Herald-Journal r 352
Syracuse Peace Council r 351
Syracuse Post Standard r 351, 352
Syracuse University h 395, 553, 555; a 1197, 1205, 1232
Syracuse University Press h 395
T
Taft, Robert A h 210,
342, 574, 590, 591, 595, 766, 889; a 1057, 1157
Taft, William Howard h 910; a 1057; r 20
Taft-Hartley Act in Action (pamphlet) a981
Taft-Hartley labor bill — a 1160, 1166
Talbot, Phillips a 1230
Talk About Russia With Masha Scott (publication) r 242
Taney, Chief Justice h 3 18
Tarbell h 219, 669
Tate, Allen r 189
Tawney, R. H .- a 1140
Tax Exempt Charitable Corporations (publication) a 1238
Tax Exempt Foundations (publication) a 1236, 1240
Tax Planning for Foundations and Charitable Giving (pub-
lication) a 1235
Taxes (publication) a 1240
Taylor, Cecil Grady — a 1231
Taylor, Charles L h 339, 342
Taylor, Eleanor K a 1236, 1240
Taylor, George h 538, 553
Taylor, Glen H h 35
Taylor, James M h 344
Taylor, Wallace W h 65
Teacher Tenure Act_ : h505
Teachers College (Columbia University) h 33,
64, 65, 74, 94, 252, 253, 263, 268, 272-275, 285, 286,
288, 390, 400, 484, 485, 553, 674, 675, 677, 694, 696,
697, 700, 701, 703-705, 713, 719, 720, 780, 789, 912,
928, 938; a 1081, 1115, 1144-1146, 1149; r 120, 121,
136, 149, 157, 173, 257.
Teachers College v. Goldstein et al. (case) _ . all46
Teachers College Faculty Committee h94
Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association a954
Teachers Union of New York r 281
Teapot Dome and Elk Hill (subtitle) h 297
Television and Education in the United States (pamphlet) h 385
Temple University a 1229
Temporary National Economic Committee (TNEC) r 15, 39, 45
Ten Years of Workers Education (publication) r 397
Ten Years of World Cooperation (publication) h927
Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) r 100, 101
Tennessee Williams r 189, 389
Tenney Committee h 904; a 1132, 1221
Tenney Report h 315
Tepoztlan, Mexico (publication) h 926
Terlin, Rose a 1175
*!•
118 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Territorial Problems (study)___ ._ r 177
Tewkesbury, Donald G h 553
Texas University „___ h 395; a 1149
Texas University Press h 395
Text of the Trustees of the Ford Foundation's Plans To Aid
World Welfare (article) a 1240
Textile Mills Securities Corp. (case) h 429, 437
Textile Workers Union of America h 778; a 979, 1166; r 104
Textile Workers Organization Committee r 403
Thacher, Judge Thomas D a 1220
Thanh, N. Due a 983
That Next War? (publication) h 927
Thatcher, Mollie Day all65
Theatre Division (National Council of the Arts, Sciences, and
Professions) r 342, 347
Theoretical Study of Ethnic Groups (publication) h 831
These Americans Say: Lift the Embargo Against Republican
Spain (booklet) r 227,
242, 244, 251, 255, 275, 305, 308, 312, 327, 350, 353,
377.
They Sent Me to Iceland (publication) h ..9.2 9
They Tried To Get Me, Too (article) r 197
They Work to Give Millions Away (article) al239
Things Men Fight For (publication) h 926
Third American Slav Congress (Manhattan Center, NYC) r 323
Third American Writers Congress r261, 286,346,391
Third Freedom (conference) a 989, 994
Third Freedom, Freedom From Want (publication) h 774, 777
Third Reich (publication) h 928
Third Route (publication) h 926
Thirty Pieces of Silver (play) r 284
Thirty Year Catalogue of Grants (publication) h 669; a 1236
Thirty-Five Years of Educational Pioneering (pamphlet) h219
This Happened in Passadena (publication) h 408
This Is One Way to Sell Radicalism (article) h755
This Is Russia (publication) h 927
This Week Magazine a 1239
Thomas ._.__ a 1172, 1175
Thomas, Charles Allen h 339; a 965
Thomas, E. P_ h 891
Thomas, Elbert D h 929; r 399
Thomas, Norman h 135, 306-309, 512, 513, 762,
765, 773, 793; a 981, 983, 984, 988, 995; r 103, 105
Thomas, R. J h 776
Thomas, Steven Alexander a 1230
Thomas, Valentine A h 927
Thomas Committee, h 256
Thomas for President Club h 751
Thomas Jefferson : World Citizen (publication) h929
Thomas Masaryk of Czechoslovakia (publication) h 926
Thompson, J. Walter a 1025
Thompson, Norma S h 357
Thompson, Robert r 358, 361, 386
COMPOSITE INDEX 119
Page
Thompson Co __ a 1025
Thorndike, E. L ._ h 677
Those Subversive Foundations (article) a 1239
Thut, Professor h 388
Thwing, Charles F h 344
Tilden, SamuelJ h 767; a 984
Tilden High School _ _ _ _ h 767; a 984
Tilt, James T a 1237
Time (publication) _ _ h 199, 349; a 1238
Timid Billions (article) a 1238
Tiner, Hugh M h 379; r 188
Tinsley, Ted •_ r 249
To Safeguard These Rights (leaflet) ______ _ r 241, 270, 299, 332, 385
To the Ultimate Benefit of Mankind (publication) a 1235
To Insure the End of Our Hysteria (article) rll6
Todes, Charlotte '____• r 373
Tokyo Bureau of Municipal Research h 942
Tokyo Community Church a 1209
Toledano, Ralph r 121
Toledo Blade (publication) 159
Toledo University. _h 831
Tolstoy a 1168
Tom Mooney Committee (New York) r 230
Tomb, Lawrence C h 888
Tomorrow's Food (publication) a 996
Toronto University h 496, 780, 788 ; a 990
Toward an Abiding Peace (publication) h 929; r 173
Toward a 1 armer-Labor Party (pamphlet) h 780,
789; a 988, 997, 1163; r 105, 107
Toward Greater Freedom: Problems of War and Peace (pam-
phlet)___ h912, 917
Toward Higher Ground (pamphlet) _ _' h 907
Toward Independent Labor Politics in Britain (publication) _ _ h 793
Toward Nationalization of Industry (pamphlet) h 767,
768; a 988, 997; r 102
Towards a Policy (publication) h 921, 922
Toward Social Security (publication) a 990
Toward an Understanding of the U. S. S. R. (publication) h 928
Tower, Charlemagne h 343
Tower Press h 395
Town Club of Scarsdale, N. Y a 1209
Town Hall (All Eisler program) r 250
Toynbee, Arnold J h 575, 936; a 1140
Trachtenberg, Alexander. h513;r 372, 409, 410
Tragedy of Waste (publication) h 134; r 248
Transitional Period (publication) h890
Travel Grants for Area Research (SSRC pamphlet) r 61, 62
Travis, Maurice r 356
Treatise on Civil Government (publication) h581
Trexler, Harry C h 16
Trexler Estate (foundation) h 16
Triggs, Oscar Lo veil h 220
Trilling, Lionel r 189
120 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Trinity Episcopal Church a 1204
Trotsky, Leon r 98, 328, 379, 397, 404, 414
Trow, William Clark h 287
Trowbridge, Augustus h 356, 362
Truman. President h 757 ;
a 1158, 1204; r 108, 162, 187, 240, 265, 266, 269, 274,
277-279, 285, 331, 344, 345, 357, 374, 381, 383.
Truman's Commission on Higher Education r 108, 142, 143
Trumbo, Dalton . r 241, 339, 343, 348, 386, 391
Trustees of the Bail Fund of the Civil Rights Congress of New
York - r 350
Trusts for Charitable and Benevolent Purposes (article) a 1240
Tsetung, Mao r 235
Tsurumi , Yusuko - h927
Tufts College a 1048
Tulane University _ . a 1009
Tunis, JohnR - a 1175
Turkey at the Straits (publica tion) h 888
Turner, Betty r 161
Turner, Ralph E r 189
Turning of the Tides (publication)... h 134, 136, 480, 507; r 85, 141
TV-Radio Workshop h41; a 1040
TV station, Jacksonville, Fla. (Washington Post Co.) . r 10
TVA (Tennessee Valley Authority) r 100, 10 1
Twelve Communist leaders r 266, 357
Twelve Communist Leaders (National Non-Partisian Com-
mittee to Defend the Rights of) _ . _■ r 266, 344, 386
Twentieth Century Capitalist Revolution (article) . r92
Twentieth Century Fund h 16, 724, 854; a 1172, 1216, 1235;
r 4, 24, 47, 50, 109, 110, 118, 166, 174
Twentieth Century Fund; Philanthrophy and Learning
(publication) __ h 669
Twenty-Five Years of Sex Research (article) . ._ a 1137
Twenty-year Report of the Phelps-Stokes Fund ._. a 1235
Tyler, Professor r 81
Tyler, Gus ____.__. ___ h 792
Tyler, H. W h 272, 275
U
UAW-CIO a 990, 995
UCLA r334
Ulyanov (article) r 92
Umscheld, Arthur George a 1229
Un-American Activities Committee (California) rll6
Un-American Activities Reports r233
Un-American Activities in the State of Washington (study) __ a 1132
Uncle Tom's Cabin (publication) h 455
Under Five Sultans (publication) h 926
Underground Stream (publication) ' r 343
Underhill, Professor a 990
Underhill, Frank H h 780, 788
Undermining the Constitution (publication) rl22
Undermining Our Republic (pamphlet) h260
COMPOSITE INDEX 121
Page
Unemployment Insurance Review (publication) r 230, 260
UNESCO in Focus (publication) h 397
Unified Polytechnical School h 277
Union Carbide Co h 375
Union Carbide & Carlson a 1044
Union Casualty Co a 981, 990
Union of Concerted Peace Efforts (pamphlet) r 309, 406
Union for Democratic Action (Washington Chapter) r 407
Union Leadership Pro j ect (University of Chicago) rl63
Union Now (publication) h 928; r 173
Union Theological Seminary h 74, 361, 362; a 977, 1127, 1128
Unique Function of Education in American Democracy (publi-
cMtkn) ■__. -- h 697
United American Spanish Aid Committee r 248,
249, 305, 318, 319, 375, 377, 378
United Automobile Workers of America (CIO) h 41 ,
42, 776; a 977; r 165
United Educators, Inc h 394
United Fruit Co . h 359; a 1128
United Kingdom Delegation to the United Nations a 995
United Mine Workers ,____ r 228
United Nations h28,
33, 35, 39, 42, 56, 57, 65-67, 69-71, 74, 349, 380-382,
384, 385, 396, 397, 619, 769, 772, 781, 784, 789, 791,
872, 874, 875, 881, 884, 886, 887-893, 914, 916, 918-
921, 929, 934, 935, 939, 942; a 970, 977, 984, 985, 991,
1021, 1049, 1050, 1057, 1059, 1094, 1103, 1157, 1158,
1161, 1162, 1167, 1179, 1217, 1229, 1230; r 19, 101, 102,
104, 108, 155, 160, 165, 174, 176, 182-185, 187, 188,
191, 192, 251, 268, 278, 323, 326, 333, 362, 380.
United Nations Charter h 69; a 1059, 1062
United Nations Declaration of Human Rights (pamphlet) h 619
United- Nations News (publication) a 1241
United Nations Organization films rl66
United Nations Studies (publication) al241
United Negro College Fund, Inc a 1031
United Neighborhood Houses a 984
United Office and Professional Workers of America (UOPWA)- r 239,
328, 329, 371
United Productions of America r 165
United Rubber, Cork, Linoleum, and Plastic Workers of
America a 981
United Services Organization (USO) h34;r232
Unii#t "S€Htes Advisory Commission on Educational Ex-
change a 1 167
United States Committee of the Inter-American Association for
Democracy and Freedom a 985
United States Congress Against War__ r 232, 335, 350, 352, 398, 415
United States v. Butler a 1080, 1081
United States Chamber of Commerce h 495, 920; a 1044; r 158
United States Citizens in World Affairs (publication) a 1158
United States and the Far East (publication) h 929
United States Flag Foundation r 351
122 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
United States News and World Report r 197, 210
United States and Russia (publication) r 264
United States News and World Report ^ _ a 1238
United States Vice President r 245
United States Workers' Theater r 264
United Student Peace Committee r 393, 411
Universal Declaration of Human Rights r 165, 188
University radio station, Ann Arbor, Mich a 1230
University of Alabama a 1218
University of Arizona a 1230
University of Atlanta h64
University of Berlin h 31; a 1139; r 93
University of Boston r 158
University of British Columbia h 874
University of Buffalo a 1114
University of California h 19,
196, 255, 257, 356, 361, 395, 496, 553, 694, 723, 877,
904, 937, 940; a 1014, 1025, 1127, 1128, 1132, 1139,
1184, 1188, 1221, 1230; r 42, 81, 83, 150, 184, 236, 240,
292, 301, 324, 334, 363.
University of California Press h 395
University of California Provost rl50
University of Cambridge r 158
University of Chicago h 19,
32, 33, 36-39, 41, 60-62, 268, 275, 286, 355, 356, 360,
395, 523, 524, 565, 581-583, 672, 674, 675, 694, 701,
703-705, 713, 719-721, 880; a 955, 961, 1009, 1025,
1035, 1036, 1081, 1114, 1115, 1124, 1195, 1196, 1229,
1235; r 11, 37, 80, 81, 83, 133, 135, 155, 158, 163, 255,
299,301,318,351.
University of Chicago Law School a 1132
University of Chicago Press___ h 395; a 1235
University of Chicago Roundtable h 32, 41 , 581
University of Chicago Roundtable Broadcasts rl33
University of Chicago Union Leadership Project rl63
University of Colorado h 395
University of Colorado Press h 395
University of Connecticut h 388
University of Delaware--- a 1229
University of Denver h 64, 888, 941; a 955
University of Frankfort h 31; r 92
University of Gottingen a 1139
University of Harvard h 19,
32, 62, 63, 220, 224, 346, 347, 350, 354, 359-361, 376,
404, 468, 525, 553, 574, 599, 617, 628, 678, 694, 705,
795, 830, 840, 892; a 970, 981, 993, 1009, 1021, 1071,
1124, 1133, 1139, 1145, 1148, 1184, 1191, 1193, 1196,
1219; r45, 64, 75, 77, 81, 157, 158, 178, 231, 248, 263,
306, 363, 364, 366, 367
University of Hawaii h 553
University of Idaho h 553
University of Illinois h 220, 388, 390, 395, 496
University of Illinois Press h 395
COMPOSITE INDEX 123
Page
University of Indiana h 937; a 1137, 1138, 1229, 1231
University of Iowa h 286, 395
University of Iowa Press h 395
University of Kentucky a 1184, 1185, 1187, 1230, 1232; r 62
University of Louisiana h61
University of London r 263
University of Maine a 1232
University of Manchester a 1219
University of Maryland h 333, 390
University of Michigan h 250,
286, 395, 524; a 1001, 1025, 1029, 1129, 1149
University of Michigan Press h 395
University of Minnesota h 286,
362, 395; a 953, 975, 1009, 1231; r 74, 82, 424
University of Minnesota Press h 395 ; r 82
University of Missouri a 1 139
University of Moscow h266, 267,
273-276, 279-282; r 152, 157-161, 412
University of Nebraska h358;a 1231
University of New Brunswick h 874
University of New York h 64, 254,
268, 272-274, 327, 359, 361, 390, 395, 495, 517, 677,
697; a 976, 977, 983, 985, 995, 996, 1009, 1025, 1048
1231, 1236; r 278.
University of North Carolina h 268, 272,
275, 395, 874; a 955, 1181, 1232; r 81, 399
University of North Carolina Press h 395
University of Notre Dame h831;a 1014
University of Oklahoma a 1231
University of Oregon h 349; a 1041, 1148
University of Pennsylvania hll4, 138,
165, 272, 275, 355, 395, 811, 846; a 1024, 1025, 1139,
1184, 1187; r 26, 31, 158, 204, 354.
University of Pennsylvania Law Review a 1239
University of Pennsylvania Press h 395
University of Pittsburgh h 220, 355, 361 ; a 1238
University of Pittsburgh Law Review a 1238
University of Princeton h 151,
220, 347, 353, 356, 359, 362, 395, 495, 553, 832, 933;
a 1209, 1230, 1231, 1332; r 43, 73, 158.
University of Rhode Island al 184
University of Rochester h 356,
362, 395; a 1009, 1124, 1139, 1227, 1230, 1231
University of Rochester Press h 395
University of San Francisco h 256 ; r 150
University of South Carolina a 1231
University of Southern California, h 395, 523, 874; a 983, 1229; r 363
University of Southern Calif orn ia Press h395
University of Stanford h 196,
197, 220, 231, 256, 356, 362, 395, 524, 554, 562, 672,
874, 892, 912. 934, 941; a 1030, 1113, 1115, 1145,
1149, 1150, 1229, 1231 ; r 81, 135, 147, 150, 291.
University of Stockholm a 970, 1139
124 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
University of Texas h 395; a 1149
University of Texas Press h395
University of Toledo -- h831
University of Toronto h 496, 780, 788; a 990
University of Utah a 1041
University of Virginia h 358, 874; a 1139
University of Washington _ — ._ h 61,
286, 395, 530, 531, 538, 552, 553, 974, 877; a 1143;
r 79.
University of Washington Press h 395
University of Washington's Far Eastern Institute a ■ 1 143
University of Wisconsin h 220,
395, 694; a 964, 990, 993, 1009, 1139, 1229, 1231
University of Wisconsin Press h 395
University of Yale h 220,
242, 353, 358, 359, 361, 417, 523, 524, 526, 527, 529,
540, 546, 553, 843, 893, 932, 937; a 983, 1009, 1025,
1041, 1124, 1128, 1139, 1194, 1188, 1191, 1231, 1232;
r28, 34,35,41,42, 81,199.
University of Yale Press h 395, 524
University Center (Atlanta) h 677
University Publishing Co h 394
USO (United Services Organization) h 34 ; r 232
United States v. Butler (case) h 642
United States Army in World War II, the Army Ground Forces
(publication) h 161
Unknown Country (publication) h 929
Unseen Assassins (publication) h 927 ; r 173
Untermyer, Samuel r 19
Upjohn, W. E h 854; r 47
Upjohn Unemployment Trustee Corp h 854 ; r 47
Upper Iowa University. _■ h 568
USA-USSR (pamphlet) r 360
Use and Abuse of Endowments (article) a 1240
Use of Charitable Foundations for Avoidance of Taxes
(article) - a 1238
Use of the Foundation in your Estate Planning (report) a 1235
USSR (publication) h 36
USSR; a Concise Hand book r 316, 367
USSR Foreign Policy (publication) r 367, 379
Utah University - a 1041
Utley, Freda a 1216
V
Valentine, Alan h 344
Van Dusen, Henry P h 356, 362; a 1127, 1128
Van Dyke, John C h 927
Van Fleet, General h 156, 163; r 183
Van Hise, Charles R h 344
VanNostrand, D h 394
VanNostrand Co h 394
Van Sant, Edward R a 1231
Van Till, William h 388, 390
COMPOSITE INDEX 125
Page
Van Valkenburg, Samuel h 929
Vandenbosch, Army a 1230
Vanderbilt, Commodore h 769
Vanderbilt Law Review a 1218
Vanderbilt University h 60,
359, 360, 395; a 1041, 1048, 1124, 1128, 1231
Vanderbilt University Press h 395
Vanderlip, Frank A h 344, 345
Varieties of Religious Experience (publication) h 574; r 77
Variety (publication) r 342
Varney, Harold Lord h222; r 114, 202
Vassar College h 220,
268, 275, 901; a 1220; r 277, 302, 394, 412, 413, 415
Vassar Experimental Theater a 1165; r 108
Vatican Library a 1058
Vaughn, Kenneth W h 345, 688
Veblen a 1167; r 108
Velde, Hon. Harold H h 25, 40
Velie, L a 1241
Venezuela (publication) h 928
Vernon, Raymond a 1231
Vested Interests (article) r 93
Veterans of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade h 223 ;
r 261, 294, 305, 332, 333, 347, 349, 385
Veterans Against Discrimination of the Civil Rights Congress
of New York r 347, 349
Veterans' Bureau Scandals (subtitle) h 297
Veterans of Foreign Wars h 29
Viallate, Schille h 926
Vice President of the United States r 245, 285, 289
Viekke, Bernard H. M h 929
Viking Fund (publication) a 1236
Viking Press h 395
Villard, Oswald Garrison h 781, 790; a 1175
Vinacke, Harold M h 928
Vincent, George E h 356, 357, 362
Viner, Jacob. r 190, 379
Vinson, Robert E h 345
Virginia Law Review a 1238
Virginia University __■ h 358, 874; a 1139
Vishinsky's Law of the Soviet State (publication) a 1003
Vital Speeches (publication) h 325, 405
Viton, Albert h 928
Vladeck, William C __ a 984
Voice of Alabama (WAPI, WAFM-TV) h 361; a 1128
Voice of Freedom Committee r 228
Volunteer for Liberty (publication) r 294
VOKS (Ail-Union Society for Cultural Relations with Foreign
Countries) h 273, 275; r 158, 159, 161, 313
Volker, William h 16
Volker Charities h 16
Von Hayek, Friedrich a 1 140
Von Mises, Ludwig h 254; a 1192; r 149
49720—55 9
126 COMPOSITE INDEX
W Page
Wade, Mason h 929
Wadsworth, Senator r 99
Wadsworth, Eliot h 343, 891
Wadsworth, Philip Adrian a 1232
WAFM-TV (Voice of Alabama) h 361
Wagner, Ellasue h 927
Waite High School a 1204
Waiting for Lefty (play)__ a 1164
Wakefield, Lyman E h 343
Waksman, Dr. Selman A a 977, 991
Waldman, Louis r 409
Waldrom, Webb h 926
Waldrop, Frank r 362
Walker, Everett ■_ r 9
Walker, Gordon S a 949
Walker, Sydnor H h 358
Wallace, DeWitt h 569
Wallace, Henry A h 35, 36, 37; a 1174, 1197,
1203, 1207; r 252, 268, 304, 320, 342, 347, 367, 405
Wallace, Robert C h 345
Wallace's Open Letter to Stalin r 268, 320
Walling, William English „__, h 220
Wallis h926
Walsh, J. Raymond h 778 ;
a 1159, 1172, 1173, 1174, 1175; r 106, 379
Walsh, Robert K _. h 735
Walsh investigation (1917) r 19
Walter Hines Page School h 361, 553
Walter-McCarran law r 290, 291, 373
Walton, EdaLou r 286
Wambaugh, Sarah h 917
WAPI (Voice of Alabama) h 361
War in China (publication) h 928
War of the Classes (publication) h219
War Debts and World Prosperity (publication) h 927
War and Peace Studies h 885, 886; r 177
War, Peace and Revolution (research project) r 147
War and the Private Investor (publication) h 900, 921
War Resisters International Council r411, 412
War Resisters League r 187, 411, 412
War and the Working Classes (publication) r 243
Ward, H. F_.__ r 298
Ward, Dr. L. F r 30, 31
Ward, Robertson D__ h 339
Wardwell. (See Davis, Polk, Wardwell, Sunderland & Kiendl.)
Ware . h 301
Ware, Edith E h 927; r 173
Ware, Harold r 247, 302
Warne, Colston h 750, 751 ; r 99
Warren h 639
Warren, Chief Justice h 364
Warren, Andrew J h 358
Warren, Robert Penn r 189
COMPOSITE INDEX 127
Page
Wartime Facts and Postwar Problems (publication) h 928
Washburn, Gordon Bailey r 189
Washburne, Carleton a 1175
Washington, George h 52, 354, 598, 805; a 1061; r 169, 203
Washington Book Shop Association r 341
Washington Committee to Aid China a 1222, 1224, 1225
Washington and Jefferson College a 1231
Washington and Lee University Law School a 969
Washington Committee for Aid to China r 289, 323
Washington Cooperative Book Shop r 242,
243, 271, 324, 355, 367, 369, 388
Washington Evening Star r 243, 270, 274
Washington Post a 1043,
1224; r 283, 289, 313, 330, 338, 348, 357, 391, 428
Washington Post Co r 10
Washington Post Co. common stock rlO
Washington Post and Times-Herald a 1043; r 10, 325, 428
Washington Securities Co . (Seattle) h553
Washington Square College (New York, N. Y) r 412
Washington Star (publication) h 735
Washington Times-Herald r 10, 325, 350, 375
Washington University (St. Louis, Mo.) h 354, 356, 395;
a 1041, 1124, 1127, 1143, 1144, 1148, 1149, 1231, 1232
Washington University Law Quarterly a 1 238
Washington University Press h 395
Washingtons Birthday Workers Education Conference^ a 1159; r 106
Washington's Farewell Address r 169
Wasson, R. Gordon h 347, 348
Watkins, Myron W r 93
Watkins, Senator a 1179
Watson, Goodwin h 265, 488, 516; a 1174
Watson, John B h 142
Watson, Thomas J h 343, 891
Watt, Robert J h 776; a 990
Way Out of Depression (publication) h 927
Way Out of War (publication) h 928
Way Things Are (publication) r 348
Wayfarer in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania (publication) h 928
Wayland College : a 1229
Waymack, W. W h 343
Wayne University a 1 132
We Americans (article) h 319
We Are Moving Away From Americanism (article) r 250
We Are the Government (publication) h 33; r 121
We Chinese Women (publication) h 929
We Consumers (article) h 310
We Have Seen America (pamphlet) r 320
We Hold These Truths (pamphlet) r 234, 346
We Join Black's Dissent (reprint of article) r 279, 332, 391
We Uphold the Right of All Citizens to Speak for Peace (signed
statement) r 279
Wealth and Culture (publication) a 1236; r 122
Weary Bluss (publication) r 297
128 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Weaver, Warren h 358, 363
Webb, Beatrice h 319, 573; r 155
Webb, Paul h 345
Webb, Sydney h 215, 319, 573; a 1139; r 155
Webber, James B., Jr h 346, 376
Webbink, Paul h 137, 794, 837; r 48, 86
Webster, Bethuel M a 1052
Webster, Sir Charles a 1140
Webster Publishing Co h 394
Webster's New International Dictionary. a 976
Wechsler, James _ a 1175
Wedemeyer, General h 548
Weil, Richard, Jr h 351
Weinberg, Bernard-- a 1232
Weininger h 848
Weiss, John K h 349
Weissman, Bessie r 242, 367, 388
Welch, Holmes a 1241
Welch, John a 983
Welcome, Land of Soviets (pamplet) r 247
Wellemeyer, J. F., Jr h 473; a 1009, 1227
Welles, Sumner h 554, 916, 929; a 1216
Wellesley College h 349; a 977
Wells, Herman B h 345
Wells College h 831
Weltfish, Gene h 34; a 1215; r 165, 174, 381-387, 408
Werner, Morris R a 1237
Werth, Alexander r 174, 190, 387-389
Wesleyan University h 224 ; a 1041
West, Charles h 874
West, Reed _ h 590, 591
West Indian Odyssey (publication) h 928
Western Electric a 1044
Western Reserve University a 955
Western Reserve University Law Review a 1239
Westinghouse Electric Corp a 965
WEVD _ .___ a 985
Weybright, Victor r 189
Weyl, Walter E h 926
Weyl v. Commissioner (case) h 432, 734 ; a 978, 994 ; r 96
Wharton School of Finance and Commerce (University of
Pennsylvania) a 1024, 1025, 1032, 1187
What About Communism? (publication) h 41, 397
What About Our Japanese-Americans? (publication) h 34
What Is the Congress of American Women? (leaflet) r 384
What Is Communism? (broadcast) h 32, 41
What Germany Forgot (publication) h928
What is the I. J. A.? (leaflet) r 288
What the I. L. O. Means to America (publication) h 928
What of Africa's Peace in Tomorrow's World (leaflet) r 358
What of Germany, France, and England? h 907
What Great American Philanthropic Foundations do with their
Money (publication) a 1235
COMPOSITE INDEX 129
^™ Page
What Price Israel (publication) h 389
What Price Telephones (publication) h 793
Wheeler, George Shaw a 1223, 1228
Wheeler, Monroe r 189
Where is the Money Coming From? (publication) hl34
Whidden, Howard P h 892
Whig Party h 318
Whipple, George H h 356, 362
White, Andrew D h 343
White, Gilbert a 954
White, Goodrich C a 1041
White, Harry Dexter r 89, 115, 197
White Llewellyn h 929
White, Lynn T. Jr . h 554
White, Walter a 984
White, William Allen h 356
White House picket line r 237, 276, 336, 356, 395
Whitehead, Alfred North h 118; a 1114
Whitelaw, Wm. Menzies a 1230
Whitney, General Courtney h 562, 563
Whitney, J. H h 346, 350; a 1021
Whitney, William C h 16, 472; r 198
Whitney Foundation , h 16, 472; r 198
Whitney & Co h 346, 350; a 1021
Whittemore, Arthur E a 1182
Whittier r 352
Whiting, B. J a 1009
Who Is Loyal To America (article) r 250
Who's Running the Ford Foundation? (article) . al241
Who's Who h60, 74, 785, 873; a 1222, 1223; r 9
Who's Who in America (1936-37) r363
Why Men Fight (publication) h 926
Why War? (publication) h 928
Wibel, Mary E a 1158
Wickens, Mrs. Aryness J a 1024
Wickersham, George W r20
Wickliffe, Rose h 357
Widener, Alice a 1241
Wiggins, A. L. M h 891
Wilbur, Brayton h 554
Wilbur, Ray Lyman h 356, 362, 537, 552, 554, 559 ; a 1 1 13
Wilbur, Wm. Cuttino, Jr a 1229
Wilbur-Ellis Co h 554
Wilcox, Clair___ h 893, 918
Wilcox, Francis O h 874
Wild, Dr. Payson S., Jr a 1041
Wiley, Alexander a 1241
Wiley, John h 395
Wiley, William Leon a 1232
Wiley & Sons, Inc h 395
Wilkins, Ernest H h 272, 275
Willert, Arthur___ h 928
Willets, Dr r 27, 180, 181
130 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Wffletts, Fred - a 1135
William H. Minor Foundation hl6
William Rockhill Nelson Trust h 16
William and Mary College h 851
William Volker Charities h 16
William C. Whitney Foundation h 16, 472 ; r 198
Williams, Aubrey. r 399
Williams, Clement C h 345
Williams, Clyde r 46
Williams, John Sharp -- h 343; a 1057
Williams, Lynn A h32
Williams, Robert W a 1182
Williams, Tennessee r 189, 389
Williams, Whiting r 158
Williams, Wilbur Laurent a 1231
Williams, William Carlos r 190, 389-392
Williams College. a 1172, 1220; r 326, 327, 380
Williamson, Genevieve r 161
Williamson, Johnny r 361
Willits, Joseph H h 358, 359, 567, 584, 585; a 1135, 1210-1214
Willkie, Wendell h 595; r 168
Willoughby, General h 561, 562
Willys Co h374
Wilshire-Ebell Theatre r 365
Wilson, Charles E h 346, 376; a 1021
Wilson, Edmund. r 190, 393
Wilson, Howard 64; a 1216
Wilson, Leroy A h 339
Wilson, Luke I._ a 1223, 1228
Wilson, M. L h 352
Wilson, O. Meredith h 349; a 1041
Wilson, Woodrow h 345, 360, 531, 553; r 65, 162, 179
Wiltwyck School a 984
Win the Peace Conference a 1174; r 359, 381
Winning the War on the Spiritual Front (publication) h 918
Winslow, Charles Edward Amory h34, 917
Winston, Henry r 361
Winston, John C h 395
Winston Co h 395
Winter, Carl r 361
Winterich, J. Q a 1241
Wirt, Dr. William A h 299-301, 399
Wirth, Louis h 33
Wisconsin University h 220,
395, 694; a 964, 990, 993, 1009, 1139, 1229, 1231
Witch Hunt (publication) r 341
With These Hands (film) - r 165
Withers, John W_„_ h 272, 275
Wither, William h 793
Witman, Shepherd L a 1182
Wittfogel,*Karl h 538; a 1184, 1193
Wittmer, Felix a 1215, 1217; r 174, 175
Woefel, Norman h 292, 485, 487^90; r 143-146, 153
COMPOSITE INDEX ' 131
Page
Wolchok, Samuel h 779, 780, 788; r 104
Wolf, Charles, Jr a 1230
Wolff, Kurt r 189
Wolfson, Theresa __-_ h 220, 308; a 980, 981,988
Woman, Position in Society (article) r93
Woman Power (publication) r 383
Woman Today (publication) r 309
Women's Action Committee for Victory and Lasting Peace r 32
Women's International Democratic Federation -- - r 384
Women's International League for Peace and Freedom r 412
Women's Trade Union League r 409
Wood h256
Wood, General h 787
Wood, Ben D • ,... h 687
Wood, John E. F h 347
Wood, John S a 1200
Wood, W. Barry, Jr h 356; a 1127
Woodley, W. John R a 1231
Woodley Petroleum Co h 350; a 1051
Woodrow Wilson Foundation a 1241
Woodrow Wilson school (Princeton University) h 553
Woods, Arthur M h 356, 362
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute al 124
Woodward, Robert S h 339, 343
Woody, Thomas h 272, 275
Wooley, Mary B _ . r 412
Woolsey, Lester H h 878
Wooster, J. W., Jr a 1241
Worcester Art Museum (Worcester, Mass.) a 123 1
Worker (publication) r 231,
245, 248, 266, 271, 272, 286, 297, 316, 320, 325, 339,
341-343, 345, 348, 354, 360, 362, 386, 404, 406.
Worker (Southern Edition) r 316, 339, 348
Worker's Book Shop (New York, N. Y.)~ r271, 297, 315, 341, 348, 367
Workers Book Shop Catalog . r 341, 367
Worker's Education (article)-- a 1167
Workers Education Bureau of America r 396, 397
Workers Education at the Cross Roads (publication) r 396
Workers Library Publishers r 315
Workers Monthly r293
Workers Party of America r 229, 415
Workers School r 233, 319
Working Class Theatre r 345
Workmen's Circle Call (publication) a 1167
Workshops on Education (publication) a 1159
World Affairs Council h 57; r 184
World Affairs Council of Northern California h 553
World and Africa (publication) r 271
World Almanac and Book of Facts for 1953 a 1237
World Appeal to Outlaw Atomic Weapons (Stockholm) r 273
World Armenian Congress a 1173
World Bank h 900
World Book Co h 395
132 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
World Commercial Court h 922
World Conference of the Teaching Profession h69
World Congress Against War (Amsterdam) r 255, 318, 350, 398
World Congress on Education for Democracy at Teachers Col-
lege h94
World Congress of Intellectuals ■_ r 235, 282, 283, 309
World Congress for Peace, Paris (leaflet) r 273, 280, 386
World Cooperation and Social Progress (pamphlet)_. h 781, 791; a 997
World Court h 917, 927
World Court (publication) h 927
World Economy in Transition and Raw Materials in Peace and
War (publication) h 884, 900
World Federation of Democratic Youth r 413
World of the Four Freedoms (publication) h 929; a 1216
World of Great Powers (publication) h 883; a 1179; r 176
World Health Organization (United Nations) h 67; a 991, 1103
World Investment Bank h 923
World Investment Commission h 922
World Labor Today (publication) h 793 ; a 981
World News and Views (publication) r 243
World Order in Historical Perspective (publication) h 929
World Peace Appeal r 280, 284, 374, 387, 389, 403
World Peace Conference h 224
World Peace Congress (Paris). _r 273, 282-284, 374, 386, 387, 389, 403
World Peace Council r 273, 280
World Peace Foundation h 74, 874, 876, 929
World Peace Prize r 273
World Production and Consumption of Food (publication) h 892
World Student Association for Peace, Freedom and Culture, r 393, 394
World Today (publication) h 929
World Tomorrow (publication) r 397
World Tourists, Inc h 273, 274; r 157, 356
World Trade and Employment (pamphlet) h 891
World Trade and Its Future (publication) h 928; r 173
World Wide Broadcasting Foundation h919
World Youth Congress r 244, 277, 302, 405, 411-413, 415, 416
World Youth Festival r 186,413
Wormser, Rene A a 1183,
1184, 1185, 1187, 1188, 1189, 1191, 1192, 1193, 1223;
r 222.
Worth, Alexander a 1215, 1216
Wortham, N. E h 927
Woytinsky, W. S h 938
Wreden, Nicholas h 348
Wrenn, Heaton L. (see also Anderson, Wrenn, & Jenks) h 554
Wright, Archie r 404
Wright , Benj amin F h345
Wright, Louise L h 554
Wright, LukeE h 343
Wright, Orville a 1062
Wright, Quincy h 33, 74, 889, 917, 919
Wright, Ralph h 784, 791
Wright, Wilbur a 1062
COMPOSITE INDEX 133
Page
Wriston, Henry M h 343, 345, 874, 889; a 1060
Writers and Artists Committee (American League for Peace
and Democracy), r 259, 335, 337
Writers Congress r 292, 324, 334, 365
Writing and Publishing Forum of New York Council of Arts,
Sciences and Professions r 304
WTOP, Inc. (Washington Post Co. radio station) rll
Wu, Yuan-li a 1231
Wuorinen, John Henry a 1231
Wylie, Philip h 147
Wyzanski, Charles E h 346, 376; a 1021
X
Xavier University h 42; a 1041
Y
Yagoda, Louis a 985
Yale Executive Committee on International Relations h 524
Yale Institute of International Studies h 524, 874
Yale John Dewey Society a 983
Yale Law Journal a 1239
Yale Law School a 1132
Yale University h 220, 242,
353, 358, 359, 361, 417, 523, 524, 526, 527, 529, 540,
546, 553, 843, 893, 932, 937; a 983, 1009, 1025, 1041,
1124, 1128, 1139, 1184, 1188, 1191, 1231, 1232; r 28,
34, 35,41,42, 81, 199.
Yale University Press h395, 524
Yanks Are Not Coming Committee r 367
Yard, Molly r 411
Yavner, Louis E a 996
Year of Stalingrad (publication) r 387
Yearbook of Philanthropy since the year 1920 a 1237
Yellow Fever (publication) a 1072, 1183
Yergan, Max a 1216
YMCA (Young Men's Christian Association) h 347; a 1204,
1205; r 232, 396
YMCA Schools (New York, N. Y.) a 1209
YMCA of Washington, D. C a 1209
Yntema, T. O h 376
Yoshida, Premier h 572
Yotoku, MiyagL, r 298
You and Your U. S. A. (pamphlet) a 1048-1049
Young a 972
Young, Donald h 132, 133, 135, 136, 137; r 48, 49, 85, 184, 185
Young, ErnestL h 348
Young, James W h 348, 349
Young, Owen D h 357, 362
Young, Dr. Ralph A a 1025
Young Circle League of the Workmen's Circle r409
Yourg Communist International r415
Young Communist League a 1175;
r 237, 277, 296, 306, 353, 358, 370, 382, 393, 396, 401
49720 — 55 10
134 COMPOSITE INDEX
Pag«
Young Democrat Clubs____ h 784, 792
Young Europe (publication) h 927
Young Men's Christian Association (YMC A) h 347 ;
a 1204, 1205; r 232, 396
Young Peoples Socialist League r 187, 395, 396, 414 416
Young Republican Clubs h 784, 792
Young Socialist (publication) r415
Young Socialist International r415
Young Women's Christian Association r 394, 396, 410
Young Worker (publication) r 395
Young Workers League r 395
Youngren, Harold T h 376
Youngville, U. S. A. (pamphlet) r 230, 236, 336, 369, 376
Your Money's Worth (publication) h 134
Youth Committee Against War r 187
Youth Tell Their Story (publication) h697
Y's Men's Club, YMCA (Toledo, Ohio) . a 1209
Yu Pin, Paul.__ a 1224
Yugoslav- American Home (New York, N. Y.) r 320
Z
Zabel, Morton D r 189
Zablodowsky, D r 161
Zell . a 1166
Zellerbach, James D h 350; a 1051, 1183
Ziegner, William : a 1175
Zilberfarb, Johannson I h 285; r 153
Zimmerman, Prof. Carle C a 1184, 1194; r 64, 75, 76
Zimmerman, Charles a 996
Zimmern School of International Studies (Geneva, Switzer-
land) a 1205
Zoll, Allen A h 321, 329, 330, 335, 382
Zook, George F h 482
Zorbaugh, Harry W h 273, 275
Zorbaugh, Harvey r412
COX COMMITTEE SUPPLEMENT
Index for Hearings Before the Select Committee To Investigate Tax-Exempt
Foundations and Comparable Organizations, House of Representatives, on
House Resolution 561, November 18 to December 30, 1952
(Prepared by Sydney S. Spivack for Russell Sage Foundation, 505 Park Avenue,
New York, N. Y.)
A Page
Abrams, Frank W 220, 245, 319
Abuses of tax exemption (see also Tax exemption; Taxation)., 304,
400, 503, 561, 565, 649
By educational institutions 662-663
By family foundations 775, 778
Extent unknown 788, r 6
Academic freedom 557
Accountability:
Attitudes toward 45, 155-156, 304, 405-406,
412, 422-423, 440, 454, 464, 768, 792, r 6, 12-13
Carnegie group 155, 340-341, 379, 572, 763
Ford Foundation 202-203, 230, 251-252, 286
Rockefeller Foundation 501-503,557-558,760
Russell Sage Foundation 48-49,389
Sloan Foundation. 454
Small foundations. 633, 646, 649
Summary of report on public 786-792
Accumulation of funds 37, 641, 645-646
Unreasonable 29, 33, 59, 470, 764
Adamic, Louis 360, 536-537
Adler, Mortimer 295
Africa 180, 257
Agenda___ 328, 388
Agriculture 139, 150, 496, 770, 773
In foreign countries 231-232, 240, 242, 499
Alabama, University of 301
Aldrich, Malcolm Pratt 403^09
Aldrich, Winthrop W 563
Altruism . 156
American Academy of Arts and Sciences „ 545
American Asiatic Association. _ . Qftfr
American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (see
also Teacher-training) 311, 312-313
American Association of Teachers' Colleges 311
American Bar Association 590, 736
American Bureau for Medical Aid to China 655
135
136 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
American Cancer Society 154, 771
American Chemical Society 127
American Chinese Policy Association 65 1
American Civil Liberties Union 607, 692, 736
American Committee for Defense of Political Prisoners 693
American Committee for Democracy and Intellectual Freedom, 594
American Committee for the Protection of the Foreign Born__ 732
American Committee for Yugoslav Relief 446
American Council of Education ^ 14, 15, 171, 173
American Council of Learned Societies 14,
122, 362, 507-508, 542-547, 664, 666
American Dilemma, An, (Myrdal) 303
American Economic Association 545
American Federation of Art 170
American Federation of Teachers 614
American Foreign Policy. (See United States in World
Affairs, The.)
American Foundation for the Blind 14
American Foundations and Their Fields (Rich and Deardorff) _ 86
American Foundations for Social Welfare (Harrison and An-
drews) 19
American Foundations Information Service 22, 451
American Fund for Public Service ; 692
American Historical Association 15, 545, 664
American Jewish Congress 447
American Jewish League Against Communism , 651
American Labor Education Service 415
American Law Institute 777
American League for Peace and Democracy 588
American Library Association 169
American Medical Association ^ 95
American Municipal Association 133, 146
American Peoples Fund 724
American Philological Society <. 15, 545
American Physical Society 200
American Political Science Association 545
American Public Health Association 88
American Relief Administration _ 692
American Rescue Ship Mission 741-743
American-Russian Institute 359, 427, 594
American Slav Congress 446
American Student Union 594
American Veterans' Committee 415, 782
American War Heroes Foundation 21
American Writers' Congress 698
American Youth Commission 173, 177
Amter, Isreal 698, 703
Andrews, F. Emerson 19-53, 83-85, 155, 386, 561
Anthropology 124
Appropriations. (See Grants.)
Arabian American Oil Co 579
COMPOSITE INDEX 137
Page
Area studies 132-133, 145-146, 343-346, 507-508
Africa 180
Burma 509
China 508-509, 521
Far East 344
India __„ 508
Indochina 509
Indonesia 509
Japan 343, 508-509
Latin America 344, 508
M. I. T. Research Center for International Studies 181
Near East 508
Pakistan 250
Russia 180-181,
247-249, 282-283, 303, 344-346, 373-374, 394, 507-
508, 510-514; r 9
Scandinavia 1 ; 771
Arkansas, University of 268, 310
Arkansas teaching experiment 41, 47, 53, 186-187, 238
Art, teaching of 169-170, 361
Ashford, Bailey K 92
Association of American Colleges 163, 169
Association of American Law Schools 745
Association of American Universities 106, 163, 171, 317
Association of Land Grant Colleges and Universities 106
Association of State Universities 106
Association of the Bar of the City of New York 517, 736
Atherton, J. Ballard 426
Athletics, intercollegiate 112-113, 275-277
Atlanta University 366, 730
Atomic energy 151,488-489, 535,593
Attorney-General's List 291, 294
, Effect of citation on grants 297, 505, 518, 599
Australia 334, 355
B
Babb, Jervis J 776-777
Bacon, Peggy 617
Bailey, Forrest 692
Baker, I. F 426
Baldwin, Roger 692
Ballantine, Arthur A___ 183, 569-570
Banting, Frederick 349
Barkin, Solomon 649-650
Barnard, Chester I 474, 515, 555-565
Barnes, Kathleen 428
Barnett, Robert W 541
Barrows, David P ■___ 576, 658, 660
Beadle, George W 539
Beals, Carlton 617, 698, 700
Beard, Charles A 597
Belknap, Chauncey 537
Bell, Laird 772-773
138 COMPOSITE INDEX
Pago
Benedict, Ruth 594-595
Benjamin, Herbert 698
Berea College 245
Berkeley Mill 84
Berle, Adolph A 658-659,696, 785
Berlin, Free University of 231, 236, 258
Bessie, Alvah C 605, 698, 702, 721
Billingsley, Sarah. Jane rl4
Bingham, Barry 246
Birla, G. D 426
Bisson, Thomas A 364, 540, 657, 725
Black Mountain College 414
Blackstone Mill J 84
Blair, Edwin F 607
Bloor, Mother 694
"Blue chips," 45, 46, 50-51, 368, 396
Boas, Franz L 733
Bodde, Dirk 362, 542
Bogolepov, Igor 673-688
Bohr, Niels 489
Bolin, Lazar 428
Bontecou, Elinor 424, 516
Borton, Hugh 527
Boulanger, Nadia 617
Bowman, Isaiah 374
Boyd, Mark J . 90
Brady, William G 527
Brandeis, Louis D 294
Brandeis University 588
Branscomb, Harvie 169, 775-776
Branston, Louise 708, 725
Brodsky, Joseph 695
Bronk, Detlev W «41
Brookings Institution ._ 138, 149, 682
Brown, Dyke 201
Brown, James, IV 447
Brown University 163, 332
Statement of Henry M. Wriston 163-193
Bryn Mawr College 344
Buck, PaulH 166
Budenz, Louis Francis 542,
715-726, 729-730, 735, 743-745, 783-785
Bulova Foundation 27, 32
Bunche, Ralph J 246
Bundy, Harvey H 577,600
Bureau for Intercultural Education 305
Burma 231, 233, 355, 509
Bush, Vannevar_ 51, 150-161, 324, 759
Business enterprises, foundation control of 304, 765; r 13
Butler, Nicholas Murray 369, 569, 573, 582
Buttrick, Wallace 299, 760-761, 765
i*wS»ig* —
COMPOSITE INDEX 139
C Page
Cagney, James 702
California, State of 787
California, University of 302, 364, 536
California Committee on Un-American Activities 427
California Institute of Technology 477, 539
Canada 355
Cancer research 154, 455, 771
CARE _'__ 53
Carlsberg Foundation 497
Carmichael, Oliver C 20
Carnegie benefactions 83, 370
Alleged infiltration from the left 697, 699
Libraries 48, 335
Number of foundations 14, 323-326
Relationships between foundations 323-325, 334
Teacher pensions 335
Carnegie Corporation of New York 15,
20, 25, 108, 164, 169, 170, 303, 323-382
Testimony of Charles W. Dollard 323-369
Devereux C. Josephs 380-382
Russell Leffingwell.__ 369-380
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace 183,
306, 325, 676, 715, r 7, r 12
Testimony of John W. Davis 569-572
Joseph E. Johnson 572-600
Alfred Kohlberg 657-662
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Education 14,
24, 106, 108, 113, 150, 191, 325, 335
Carnegie Hero Fund Commission ._ 25, 325
Carnegie Institute of Pittsburgh 323
Carnegie Institution of Washington 15, 123, 149-161, 324
Carnegie United Kingdom Trust 497
Carr, Robert K 516
Carroll, James 91
Carroll, Thomas H 200
Carter, Edward C „.. 526, 527, 652, 654, 657
Casey, William J 649
Ceylon 355
Chamberlain, Joseph P 527
Chambers, Whittaker 658-659, 661, 785-786
Chapin, W. W 660
Chapman, John 428
Chartered foundations versus charitable trusts 3
Charters, foundation 36
Chekhov Publishing Co 248, 252
Chiang Kai-shek 525, 652, 666
Chicago Tribune 302
Chicago, University of 114, 177, 244, 275-278, 306, 308
Child welfare 437, 442, 771
China . 508, 509, 521, 609
China Aid Council 548
China Medical Board 303
140 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
China's Kesponse to the West (Fairbank) 542
Chlorella, values of 334
Choate, Joseph H 573
Chrysanthemum and the Sword, The (Benedict) 594, 595
Citizens' Committee to Free Earl Browder 544, 73 1
Civil liberties 514-517, 725, 736
Civil Rights Congress___ 614, 698
Classification of foundations:
According to areas of activity 41-42, 134
As to type 24-30
Clerical Workers Industrial League 694
Cleveland Foundation 1 29
Coffin, Henry Sloane 607
College, definition of term 165
College Entrance Examination Board 165, 337
College Retirement Equities Fund 164
Collier, John 231
Columbia University 344, 394, 508, 513, 662-663, 678
Coming of the War (Langer and Gleason) 179
Commission for the Financing of Higher Education 106,
118, 166, 175-176, 179, 495
Commission on Industrial Relations 789
Committee for Cultural Freedom 537
Committee for Economic Development . 273
Committee on Peace and Law Through United Nations 590-591
Committee to Defeat the Mundt Bill 589
Committee to Defend America by Aiding the Allies 593
Common Council for American Unity 360
Common Good funds 30
Commonwealth College 359, 429
Commonwealth Fund. ___ 24, 115, 134,299
Testimony of Malcolm P. Aldrich - 403-409
Communication of results (see also Reports) 405, 505
Communist, The — 652
Communist infiltration, alleged 664-668,
677-678, 692-703, 707-712, 717-724, 762, 781, r 6-7
Communist International 692
Communist Party -_- 431,435, 652, 699, r 7
Agitation Propaganda Cultural Commission 690-691
Cultural commission 717
Subcommission on foundations 717-724
"Under discipline" within, defined 723
Communist Workers Alliance 698
Community chests 35
Community trusts 29, 35
Composing for the Films (Eisler) 531
Compton, Arthur H 426, 603
Compton, Karl T 196,220,457
Conant, James B 171
Congress of American Women 588
COMPOSITE INDEX 141
Congressional investigation: Pa se
Answers to questionnaire 600
Apprehension as to results 45, 396-398, 547, 552
Constructive 192,
256, 259, 298, 380, 464, 473, 558-559, 575-576
Fairness, assurance of 2
Recommended legislation r 14-15
Report of Select Committee r 1-15
Text of enabling resolution 1-2
Value in stimulating thinking 157,367-368,441
Connecticut College 301
Conroy, Jack 721
Contributions, charitable, reluctance to reduce level of. 624, 627, 632
Control of foundations 177-178,
197-199, 203-204, 221-224, 311, 438, 454, 776; r 11
Controversial areas 50, 486-487, 552-553, 761
Cooperation between foundations 257,
417-418, 451-452, 471-472, 499-501
Copland, Aaron 617
Corbin, Arthur L 607
Cornell Medical Center 641
Cornell University 268, 336, 507, 511, 514, 725
Corporation contributions — 27, 32-33, 35, 459
Business expense versus philanthropic expenditure 34, 459
Income fluctuations, effect on ~-r-. — ^8, 33
Interrelation between business and individual contribu-
tion 624, 644
Corporation foundations 27-28, 624-632
Future of 458-459, 467-469, 764
Recent growth 32, 33
Cottrell, Frederick 151
Council of State Governments 133, 146
Council on African Affairs 445, 733
Council on Foreign Relations 179, 526, 564, 665, 669-670, 672
Correction by H. M. Wriston 781-782
Cowles, John 220
Cox, E. Eugene, Jr ii, 216, 222, 225, 260; r 1
Craig, Burt J 196, 214
Craig, Charles F 92
Cressy, George 428
Criticism of foundations r 5-6
Attitude toward 339-340, 346-347, 393, 397, 554
By grantee 189, 347
Reasons for 559, 597
Croly, Herbert - 413
Cullen Foundation 299, 304
Cultural and Scientific Conference for World Peace 615
Cultural Relations Between the United States and the Soviet
Union (Department of State) 549,618
Curie, Marie Sklodowska 761
Current Digest of the Soviet Press 508
Cushman, Robert 515, 725
.9*"
142 COMPOSITE INDEX
D Page
Daily Worker 365, 594, 617, 692, 699
Darling, Samuel T 92
Darnall, Carl R 91
Dartington Hall Trust 537
Dartmouth College 344
Das Kapital (Marx) 333
David, Donald K . 196, 220
Davis, Chester C 214, 240, 244
Davis, Hallie Flanagan 537, 698
Davis, John W 183, 569-572, 590, 593, 600
Day, Edmund Ezra 511
Dean, Arthur H 527
Dean, Vera Micheles 537, 588
Declinations 397, 504, 559-560
Negative value of 16, 504
Demography 124
Denmark 497-498
Dennett, Raymond 525
Dennis, Eugene ^ 721
DeVane, William C . 200
Dewey, John 270, 277
Dewey, Thomas E 295
Dickey, Charles D 246
Dodds, Harold-__. 168
Dollard, Charles 301, 323-369, 396, 510, 762
Donor, benefits to (see also Control) 629
Douglas, James H., Jr 246
Douglas, William O 515
Draper, William H., Jr 527
DuBois, W. E. B 361, 722
Duke Endowment 37, 39, 299
Dulles, John Foster 184,
563, 569-571, 576, 590, 600, 658-662, 780, 785-786
Dunn, Robert W 693
duPont Co 44-45
E
East European Fund 247
Economics (see also National Bureau of Economic Research) _ _ 42,
143-145, 192, 461, 551-552
Edison Institute 219, 221
Education (see also Medical education; Public health) 142, 188
Accreditation 170-171, 316-318, 337-338
Catholic 177, 190
Defeatism in 172-173
Dependence on government 189-190
Foundation services to 107-123, 372, 769
In the South 110, 306-307
Liberal 271-275
Ph. D. cult 267-270, 318-320
Progressive ; 277-280
Public versus private institutions 168
Testing 170-171, 317-318
COMPOSITE INDEX 143
Page
Educational Testing Service 171,303
Eisenhower, Dwight D 184, 344, 508
Einstein, Albert 489, 761
Eisler, Hans 288, 529-533, 701-702, 725, 744
Eliot, Charles W 267
Embree, Edwin R 46, 253, 283, 299-308., 347
Embree, John F 548
Emerson, Thomas I 606-616, 698, 723, 783-784
Emory University 102, 114, 166, 177
Encyclopedia Britannica 273
Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences ^ _ _ 532
England, foundations in 260,474, 497
English Charitable Trusts Acts 5, 790-791, r 6
English medical system 151
Ensminger, Douglas 234, 237
Ernst, MorrisL 737
Erskine College__ 301
Eurich, Alvin C 266, 308-321
Europe, foundations in 159-160, 377, 497, 498
Evaluation of work of foundations 135, 262, 284, 347, 471, 563
Evans, Roger F 652
Evasion of taxation. (See Taxation.)
Evergood, Philip___ 361
Evolution of the Philanthropic Foundation (Hollis) 8-12
Ewing, Bayard 84
Exchange of persons. 543, 573, 579
Exemption, tax. (See Tax exemption.)
Expenditures, foundation 23, 175, 598, 625, 764
Overseas 488, 580, r 11
Experience, cumulativeness of 46, 773
Experimentation (see also Venture capital) :
Continuing need for 192, 257, 281-284, 376, 396
Discovery multiplies opportunities 456
Risks, in education 107,115
Risks, in social sciences 376
Ezekiel, Mordecai 588
F
Fairbank, John K 362, 542, 609, 723
Falk Foundation, Maurice and Laura 134, 777
Family foundations 25-26, 31, 396-397, 459^60, 763
Farm Research Bureau 693
Faust, Clarence H 246, 265
Federal Bureau of Investigation. 528, 661, 737
Feeney, Thomas J r 14
Fellowships 48, 345, 350, 356-357, 488, 601-621, 769
Medicine 404
Public health 101
The arts 306, 606
Field, Frederick Vanderbilt 365,
374, 425, 523, 657, 700, 713, 724, 783, r 7
Field, Marshall 436-452, 490, 783
j^ -
144 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Field Foundation 134, 299, 436-452, 694, 783
Testimony of Marshall Field and Maxwell Halm 436-452
Fight__ 698
Financial statements. (See Reports, content of annual.)
Findlay, Carlos 91
Flanagan, Hallie 537, 698
Fletcher, C. Scott 273
Flexibility 87, 363, 415, 501
Flexner, Abraham 111,
113, 150, 299, 338-339, 348, 486, 762-763, 765
Flexner, Simon 90, 299, 338, 760
Florida, University of 463
Foerster, Friedrich 588
Food Research Institute, Stanford University ___ 138, 149
Forand, Aime J ii
Ford, Benson 196, 221
Ford, Edsel 196, 214
Ford Henry 196
Ford, Henry, II 196,218-227
Ford Foundation 15, 16, 25, 41, 44,
47, 53, 134, 181, 184, 186-187, 205, 213, 299, 487, 581,
664, r 12.
Testimony of Alvin C. Eurich 308-321
Henry Ford II 218-227
H. Rowan Gaither, Jr 195-218
Paul Hoffman 227-262
Robert M. Hutchins 262-308
Ford Hospital, Henry 219, 221
Foreign operations, and tax exemption 237
Foreign Policy Association 306, 526, 537, 665, 713
Foreman, Clark 722, 784-785
Form 990A and Form 1041A (see also Information returns;
Tax exemption) :
Available to the public under suitable restrictions 22
Forms unintelligible 392
Information return made available by Treasury Depart-
ment for public inspection 59-60, 636-637
Lessen the danger of abuse 561
Processing of 990A forms 60, 61, 62
Fosdick, Raymond B_ 664, 759-762
Foster, John W 573
Foster, William Z 692
Foundation, The (Keppel) 20
Foundations (see also Accountability; Expenditures; Funds;
Investment policies; Personnel; Programs; Reports; Taxa-
tion; and other items):
Characteristically American 159
Classified according to type and areas of activity 24-30,
41-42, 134
Control of 177-179, 197-199,203-204
■."Sw
COMPOSITE INDEX 145
Page
Corporation 27-28, 32, 33, 458-459, 467-469, 624-632, 764
Defined 13,21
English 260, 474, 497
European 159-160,377,497-498
Evaluation of work of 135, 262, 284, 347, 471, 563
Exemption application for 65-68
Family 25-26, 31, 396-397, 459-^60, 763
Future of 456-457, 465-467, 563
History of 5, 8-13, 371, 561, 643, r 3
National 30-31
Need for 356, 377, 447, 467,495, r 4
Hole of 16,
282, 395-397, 440, 454-458, 473, 490-493, 572, 765, r 3
Scope size, and number of 4, 21, 25, r2
Timidity on the part of 16, 299-309, 341, 347, 375-376, 765
Fowler, Cody 590
Franklin, Benjamin 12, 36
Franklin Technical Institute 12, 37
Franklin Union 12
Friends of the Soviet Union 693, 724
Frontier Films 425, 434
Fulbright fellowships 404, 543, 573, 579
Fund for Adult Education 247,264, 273
Fund for the Advancement of Education- 245, 246-247, 264, 308-321
Funds, foundation 34, 100, 392, 470, 629
Testamentary gifts to, limitation of 667
G
Gaither, H. Rowan, Jr 195-218, 244
Garfield, James A 274, 278
Garfield, John 702
Garland Fund 430, 692, 711-712
Garrett, Ray 786
Garrison, Lloyd K 736, 785
Gates, Frederick T 284, 299, 349, 566, 765
Gay, Edwin F 148, 567
Gellhorn, Walter 515-517, 725, 735-746, 785
General Education Board 25, 89, 123, 166, 177, 301
Testimony of Dean Rusk 475-555
Genocide Convention 591-592
Germany 158-161, 231, 258, 509
Gifford, Walter S 563
Girard College 13
Gitlow, Benjamin 692
Glueck, Sheldon and Eleanor 777
Golden, Clinton S 285
Goodwin, Angier L : ii
Gorgas, William C 91, 92, 102,299
Gorgas Memorial Institute 86
Government, and educational institutions. 154, 181-182, 189-190, 468
Government, and public administration 42, 133, 146, 670-671
146 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Government operations and foundation operations 35,
49-53, 87, 154, 181-182, 282, 352, 371-372, 376, 421,
447-448, 465^66, 493-£96, 499, 669, 760, 778.
Government research- 43, 117, 181, 352, 376, 392, 468
Grad, Andrew W 548
Graham, Shirley 722
Granger, Lester , 587
Grant Foundation 134
Grantees:
Control of - 116, 119-120, 152, 157, 176, 179
Criticism of foundations by 189, 347
Followup 40, 116, 119, 178-179,
225-226, 237, 260, 350, 433-434, 450-451, 463, 590
Freedom of 40, 135, 498-499, 511-512, 770, 772, 775
Screening of - - 239, 357-358, 367, 374, 444
Grantmaking versus operating foundations 39, 385, 478, 580
Grants (see also Fellowships):
Conditioned 15, 16, 47-48, 101, 116
Grantmaking procedure 118-119,
157, 176, 330-334, 438, 478, 484
How initiated 264-265, 390
Officers versus board of trustees 329, 478-479, 481-483, 647
Prestige value 16, 398
Problems created by expiration of 111, 115, 175-176
Projects versus endowments 99, 176-177
Relations with grant seekers 559
Small foundations 641
Subcontracting. 239, 253, 581
Grassi, Giovanni Battista 88
Graves, Mortimer 542-546
Great Island Conference 307
Gregg, Alan 303
Griswold, A. Whitney 607
Griswold, Erwin N 777-778
Gromyko, Andrei A 681
Gropper, William 698-699
Guggenheim, Simon - 601, 603-604
Guggenheim Memorial Foundation, John Simon 299,
303, 306, 697-698, 712, 721, 771 ; r 8
Testimony of Henry Allen Moe 601-621
Guilford College 301
H
Hacker, Louis M 168
Hackett, Lewis W . 90
Halm, Maxwell 436-452, 783
Haldane, J. B. S. 533-534, 598, 648
Hale telescope 151, 477
Hall, Robert B..__. 343
Hampton-Sydney Institute 301
Han-seng, Chen 364
Hardman, J. B. S — - 538, 703
Harkness, Edward S 403
COMPOSITE INDEX 147
rage
Harkness, Mrs. Edward S 403
Harkness, Mrs. Stephen V 403
Harper, William Rainey 177
Harrison, George L 607
Harrison, Shelby M . 19, 386
Harvard University 115, 186,225,268,542, 617
Law School 777-778
Russian Research Center 303, 344, 394, 508
School of Business Administration 133
Hatcher, Harlan 772
Havens Relief Fund 13
Haverford College 344
Hayden Foundation, Charles 304
Hays, Arthur Garfield 695
Hays, Brooks ii, 52
Heaton, Herbert -_ 771
Heckscher, Foundation 694, 699
Hendrix College 301
Hicks, Granville 538, 599
Highlander Folk School 416, 432
Hifl Family Foundation, Louis W. and Maud 770
Hill-Burton Bill 406
Hiss, Alger 183, 569-571, 584-585, 657-662, 780, 785-786; r 7
Hoerschelmann, Edouard E 679-680, 715
Hoffman, Paul G 219-220, 226-227, 227-262, 358, 368, 473, 648
Holland, William L 426, 526, 527, 548
Hollis, Ernest V 3-18, 83, 149, 155
Hollingshead, Byron - 175
Holmes, Horace 261
Holmes, Oliver Wendell 294, 435
Home economics 463
Hoover, J. Edgar 528, 737
Hoover Commission on the Reorganization of the Executive
Branch of the Government 133, 146
Hoover Relief Administration 692
Hopkins, Mark 274
Hormel Foundation 770
Hornbeck, Stanley 785
Horton, Mildred McAfee (Mrs. Douglas Horton) 246
House Resolution 561, text 1
Hsu, Y. Y 657
Hughes, Langston 605, 698, 721
Human relations in industry 133, 146, 768, 771
Humanities 487, 547, 565
Hutchins, Robert M 231, 244, 262-308, 314, 351, 619
I
Icor . 693
Illinois 289, 308, 787-788, 791
India__ . 231-232, 355, 508
Indochina 509
Indonesia 231, 233, 509
Industrial Relations, Commission on 13, 463-464, 500-501
148 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Information returns 22, 381, 395, 561
Existing forms inadequate 85, 370-380
Processing of 60-62
Sample form 990a, 73-76
Sample form r 990t, 77-78
Institute for Inter-American Affairs 101, 103
Institute for Philosophical Research 295
Institute of Human Relations, Yale University _ 282
Institute of International Education 254, 573
Institute of Pacific Relations 287, 425, 433 ; r 7
And Carnegie Corporation 360, 363, 365-366, 374
And Carnegie Endowment 581-582
And Rockefeller Foundation 507, 519-529, 540-542, 548
Testimony of Manning Johnson 713
Alfred Kohlberg 652-657, 660, 665-666
Maurice Malkin 700
Insulin 349
Intercollegiate athletics 113, 275
Intercultural Publications Corp 249
Intercultural relations 437
Intermediaries between foundations and grantees. See also names
of specific organizations, e.g., American Council of Learned
Societies; Social Science Research Council 15, 122, 362
Charge of intellectual inbreeding 138
Middleman in the search for grants 321
Internal Security Act of 1950 59
International Assembly of Women 588
International Conciliation 574, 578, 587-588
International Education Board 476-556
International Harvester Foundation 28
International Juridical Association. 446, 613, 694, 697, 737, 744-745
International Labor Defense 693, 698
International Mind Alcoves 594
International relations 42, 306-307, 578-585
International Relations, Walter Hines Page School of 362
International Relations Club 587-589
International Workers Order 693
Internationalism r 11
Investment policies, foundation 58-59, 353
Investments by charitable organizations in profitmaking enter-
prises 18, 28, 58, 77-78, 667
Isaacs, Harold R 664
J
Jaffe, Philip J 657, 713
Japan 343, 364, 508-509
Jefferson, Thomas 279, 343
Jefferson School of Social Science 613, 731
Jerome, Victor J 702, 721, 744
Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health 90, 763
Johns Hopkins University 54 1
Walter Hines Page School of International Relations 362
Johnson, Alvin 530-533
COMPOSITE INDEX 149
Page
Johnson, Manning 704-713
Johnstone, William C 589
Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee 518, 613
Joliot-Curie, Frederic 535-536
Jones, Lewis Webster 310
Jones, Mark M _._,__ 765-768
Jones, T. Duckett 200
Josephs, Devereux C ,. 342, 380-382
Judd, Walter 661
Judgment of men ■ 374
Juilliard Musical Foundation 300, 306
Juvenile delinquency 777
K
Kandel, I. L 186
Karpovich, M. M 345
Katz, Milton 214, 245
Katzner, J. Benjamin 645-646
Kazakevich, Vladimir 513
Keele, Harold M ii
Passim r 14
Kellogg Foundation, W. K 1 299, 771
Kennan, George F 249, 252
Kennelly, Edward C rl4
Kentucky, University of 463
Kenyon College 257
Keppel, Frederick P 20, 44, 170, 301, 351, 371.
Keynes, John Maynard (Lord Keynes) 144, 335
Kiger, Joseph C r 14
Kimball, Lindsley F 562
King, Carol Weiss 695, 726
King, W. L. Mackenzie 567
Kinsey, Alfred C 303
Kirk, Grayson L 665
Kluckhohn, Clyde 345
Knight, Edith M r 14
Koch, Robert 88, 91
Kohlberg, Alfred 366, 524, 651-672, 781, 785-786
Kollontai, Alexandra 693
Kozelka, Richard L 771
Kresge Foundation 299
Kress Foundation, Samuel H 299
Kreymborg, Alfred 361
Kronenberg, Henry H 311
Kunitz, Joshua 513
Kuntz, Edward 695
L
Labor Herald 693
Labor research 693
LaGuardia, Fiorello 737
Lamont, Corliss 513, 594, 700, 713, 724
Lane, Clayton 527, 665
49720—55 11
150 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Lange, Oscar 539, 724
Langer, William L : ._ 179
Languages, teaching of 179-180, 545
Larsen, Roy E 114, 121, 246
Lasser, J. K . 649
Latin America 508
Lattimore, Owen 183, 256, 287, 362, 374; 525, 540, 657, 666, 672
Laughlm, James 249
Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial 476, 523, 544
Lauritsen, Charles C 200
Lawrence, Ernest O 151
Lawson, John Howard 698, 72 1
Lawyers' Committee on American Relations with Spain 446
Leadership training^.. 460-461, 538
League for Mutual Aid 425
League of Nations 523
League of Women Voters . 579
Lefhngwell, Russell C 369-380, 389, 510
Leonard Wood Memorial for the Control of Leprosy 86
Lerner, Max 413, 423, 588
Lesser> Dave ... 698
Leverage • 342, 349, 454-455, 470, 494, 554
Levine, Isaac Don 785-786, 658-659
Lewis, Mrs. Alexander 663
Lewis, Shura 663
Lewis, WilmarthS 607
Liberian Foundation 299
Libraries 168-169, 335-336
Library of Congress. 507
Lindeman, Eduard C 215, 285, 302, 413, 589
Lippmann, Walter 246
Liquidating funds 38, 303
Lister, Joseph (Lord Lister) 88
Litvinov, Maxim 675, 679
Little Royal F 83
Lockwood, William 428
Longley, Clifford B 214
Lonsdale Company 84
Louisville, University of : 309
Lovestone, J 700
Lowell, Abbott Lawrence 267
Loyalty Review Board 544
Lull, George F 95
Lynchburg College 301
Lysenko, Trofim 158, 534
M
Macalester College 774-775
Magdalen Society >, 12
MagidofT, Robert 428
Malkin, Maurice 689-704, 782-783
Mann, Thomas 538
Manuscript collections, historical 109
COMPOSITE INDEX 151
Page
Marcantonio, Vito 737
Markle Foundation, John and Mary K 25, 299, 771
Marquis, Donald G 200
Marshall, C. B 527
Marshall Foundation, Robert.. 81, 378, 693, 712
Marshall Plan__ 571, 585
Martens, Ludwig 692
Maryland 637
Marx, Karl 144, 185, 293, 333
Mason, Edward S 345
Massachusetts, Commonwealth of 788
Massachusetts House Committee on Un-American Activities.- 427
Massachusetts Institute of Technology 90, 181, 337, 460, 466
Mayo Elton 146
Mayo Foundation 771
McCarran Act 435
McCarran Subcommittee. (See U. S. Senate, Subcommittee
of Internal Security of the Judiciary Committee.)
McCloy, John J 231
McCormick Memorial Fund 299
McFarland, Russell r 14
McGillen, Clarence A., Jr r 14
McKay, Claude,. 722
McPeak, William 201
McWilliams, Carey . 364, 721
Measurement of success or failure. (See Evaluation.)
Medical education. 87, 95, 111-112, 115, 150, 338-339, 486, 495, 763
Medical Education in the United States and Canada (A.
Flexner) 111, 113, 150,299,338-339
Medicine, full-time clinical professorship 17
Mellon, Paul 246, 295
Memorial Hospital, New York 455
Mendell, Clarence W 607
Mental health 133-134, 146-147,439
Mexico 492
Michelsen Foundation, Christian 497
Michigan, State of 791
Michigan, University of 343, 772
Middlebush, Frederick 105-123
Midwest Deposit Library 351
Milbank Memorial Fund 134, 299, 385
Millsapp College 301
Minnesota, University of 539, 768-772
Mistakes, acknowledgment of 40,
87, 143, 157, 170, 220, 256, 288, 350, 366, 368-369,
371, 407, 440-442, 554, 605, 760, 763, 779.
Mitchell, Wesley C - 148
Modern Language Association 15
Moe, Henry Allen 303, 601-621
Molotov, V. M 675
Moore, Harriet L 657
Morgan, Ruth 413
Morning Freiheit 699
152 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Morrill, J. L 768-772
Morrow, Dwight W 407
Mosely, Philip E 249, 252, 513
Mudd, Roger H r 14
Mueller, C. F., Co _ 28
Muller, Herman J 603
Municipal Finance Officers Association 133, 146
Murphy, J. Morden 426, 527
Murphy, William J 771
Murray, Philip 433
Museiim of Modern Art 531
Myers, ElkanR 640-645
Myers, William I 123-149
Myrdal, Gunnar 303, 359
N
Nason, JohnW 779
Nathan, Lord 791
Nathan, Otto 588
Nathan Report 791
National Bureau of Economic Research 127,
129, 130, 136, 143, 144, 148, 551-552
National Citizens' Commission for the Public Schools. 114, 121, 347
National Commission on Accreditation Procedures _ 316
National Committee for the Defense of Political Prisoners 698
National Conference on Academic Freedom 733
National Council of American-Soviet Friendship.. 446, 544, 594, 724
National Council of the Arts, Sciences, and Professions 615, 733
National Education Association _____ ___ 187, 310
National Emergency Council for Democratic Rights 739-741
National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis 86, 101, 771
National foundations 30-3 1
National Information Bureau 451
National Lawyers Guild 446, 608, 613, 695-696, 736, 744-745
National Planning Association 354, 415
National Research Council 14, 93, 302
National Science Foundation 30, 117, 118, 565
National Youth Administration 173
Near East 243, 508
Nehru, Jawaharlal 232, 234
New Hampshire 649, 788, 790
New Masses 365, 524, 617, 652, 692, 698
New Mexico 186
New School for Social Research 424, 529-533
New York, State of 786, 787-788
New York Community Trust 30
New York Foundation 304
New York Teachers' Union 614
New York University Law School 28
New Zealand 355
Nichols, Henry J 91
Nobel prizes 489, 535, 603, r &
Noguchi, Hideyo 91
COMPOSITE INDEX 153
Page
Nolde, 0. Frederick 577
Norman, E. Herbert 548
North, Robert C_______ ■____ 664
North Carolina, University of 301, 344
North Carolina State College 301
North Carolina State Health Department 89
North CentralAssociationofCollegesandSecondarySchools__ 163, 315
Norway 497-4 98
Novy Mir 693
Nuffield Foundation 474, 497
Nutrition Foundation 770
Odegard, Peter H_ 201, 540
Odets, Clifford 702
Office of Naval Research. 546
Office of Scientific Research and Development (OSRD), Com-
mittee on Medical Research 87, 93
Office Workers Industrial League 699
Old Dominion Foundation 246, 295
Olds, Irving S 319, 607
Ontario Charitable Gifts Act of 1949 650
Open Road, The, Inc 442, 738-739
Operations, foreign 355, 407^09, 488-493 ; r 1 1
Africa 257
Australia 334, 355
Burma 233
Canada 355
Cevlon 355
India... 231,355
Indonesia 233
Mexico 492
Near East 243
New Zealand - 355
Pakistan 231, 233, 240, 250, 355
South Africa 355
# Turkey ... 241
Opinion research^. - 131-132
O'Toole, Donald L ii, 269-270, 319-320, 595-596
Oumansky, Constantin 677-678, 681
P
Paepcke, Walter P 246, 319
Pakistan 231, 233, 240, 250, 355
Palliative versus preventive work 31, 42—43, 442, 485, 566
Pares, Bernard _ 594
Pasteur, Louis 87, 88, 91, 761
Pauling, Linus 539, 723
Peabody Education Fund , 13, 37
Peabody Institute 186
Pecora, Ferdinand _ 695
Pennsylvania, State of_ 786
Pennsylvania, University of 364, 542
154 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Pensions 106, 164-165, 190-192, 336-337
People's Institute of Applied Religion 442
Peoples of the Soviet Union, The (Lamont) 5 94
Perkins, James A 332
Permian, Philip B 590-591
Perpetuities 14, 36, 566, 568, 667
discretionary 37,470, 764
Perry, Ralph Barton 592-593
Personnel, foundation 38-39, 121, 243-245, 460
Bureaucracy 303
Care in selection 572, 585-586
Infiltration by leftists 666, 668, 762
Loyalty 289-298
Number of employed 389, 412, 459, 478, 591
Overseas 237-238
Qualifications of executives 326-327, 562
Phelps-Stokes Fund 445, 692
Philanthropic Giving (Andrews) 19
Philanthropoid 253, 337
Philanthropy, motivations of. (See also Taxation; Business
enterprises, control of) 638
Physical sciences 125, 142-143, 152, 304
Pilgrim Trust 497
Plain Talk . 658
Poillon, Howard 151
Polier, Chad 694
Polier, Justine Wise 446, 694
Pound, Roscoe * 762
Prentis, H. W., Jr 319
President's Commission on Higher Education 177
Preventive versus palliative work 31, 42-43, 442, 485, 566
Primus, Pearl 722
Princeton University 538
Pritchett, Henry S 165, 301, 337, 765
Pritt, D. N 695
Programs, foundation 42, 195-218, 256, 342-346, 776
Progressive Party _ 615
Propaganda by foundations _: 296, 422, r 12
Influencing legislation 591, 773
Prospectus 249
Psychology 124, 130-131, 145
Public accountability. (See Accountability.)
Public administration 133, 146, 771
Public Administration Clearing House 133, 146
Public Affairs Committee 364, 586
Public health 86, 95, 111-112, 115, 305,404, 763
As weapon against communism 94
Public interest 340, 379, 422
Public relations 394,464, 503, 512, 554
Puerto Rico 84
Q
Questionnaires. (See also Congressional investigation) 747-758
COMPOSITE INDEX 155
R
Page
Radicalism in educational institutions.-. 187-189, 238-239, 320-321
Rainey, Homer P 173
Rayon Foundation 84
Recreation 42
Reece, B. Carroll ii; r 14
Reed, Philip D 246.
Reed, Walter 88, 91, 102
Reed Club, John 698-
Reeves, Floyd W 173-
Refugees, aid to . 530, 539, 686-687
Refutations and rebuttals 781-786-
Regan, Thomas J 413
Regional educational project 113
Registry trust 49, 252, 391, 561, 575, 764, 768, 791
Regulation (See also State regulation; names of States) 18,,
45, 48-49, 156, 251-252, 340, 393, 397-399
Digest of state, of charitable corporations 786-792
Fear of excessive paper work 155-
Need for. 565-
Review board 49, 252, 421
Select Committee's recommendations r 14-15
Reid, Ira D. A 726, 729-734, 785<
Reiss, Bernard 721
Religion 42, 152, 337
Rentschler, Gordon S 220
Reports, annual ■ 49,85, 155,
352-353, 346, 379-380, 405, 419^20, 501, 557-558
Content of 389-391, 395,
399-^00, 405-406, 454, 459, 501-504, 557-558
Distribution of.. 205, 353, 391, 395, 464, 502-503, 574, 620, r 13
Quarterly 346, 352
Research, basic 134, 136, 151-153, 159,474,497
And applied research 457, 496-497, 769'
Corporations reluctant to engage in 469, 777
Gambling odds involved 45.
Government reluctance 376, 563-
Increased opportunities from discoveries 456, 495-496
Innovations from foundations 160*
Research agency, independent 363, 366, 526-
Research Branch, Information and Education Division, U. S.
Army 132, U5-
Research Corporation 151
Review by public authority 49, 252, 421
Rhode Island, State of 84, 649, 787, 789-790
Rhode Island Charities Trust 84
Rice, W. G., Jr 589
Rich Associates, Raymond 86, 420 :
Rich Foundation 27
Risk money. (See Venture capital.)
Rivers, W. F , 426
Roberts, Owen J 246
Robeson, Paul 58&
156 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Robinson, Earl 721
Rockefeller, John D 87, 567
Rockefeller, John D., Jr 556, 567
Rockefeller, John D.. Ill 565-568
Rockefeller, Nelson A 307, 415
Rockefeller benefactions 37, 83, 89, 90, 203, 257, 299
Rockefeller Foundation 101, 103, 109, 113, 114, 134, 148,
173, 179, 287, 339, 475-555, 652, 655, 656, 725; r 12
Testimony of Chester I. Barnard 555-565
Dean Rusk 475-555
Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research 89, 299, 339, 475
Rockefeller International Health Board 89, 92
Rockefeller, Laura Spelman, Memorial 476, 523, 544
Rockefeller Sanitary Commission.. 87, 89, 299, 476, 486
Rockefeller Yellow Fever Commission 91, 102
Rogers, Lindsay 168
Roosevelt, Eleanor 533, 695
Roosevelt College 305, 308
'Root, Eliliu 369, 569, 573, 765
Ropes, E. C 428
Rorty, Malcolm 148
Rose', Milton Curtiss 411-435
Rose, Wickliffe : 90, 299, 763
Rosenau, Milton J 90
Rosenberg Foundation 708, 725
Rosenfeld, Moses W 623-640
Rosenwald, Julius 38, 46, 262, 303, 474
Rosenwald Fund 38, 302, 306, 712, 721
Rosinger, Lawrence K 362, 541, 725
Ross, Helen 447
Ross, Ronald 88
Rowe, David N 548
Royal Institute of International Affairs 426
Royal Society 534
Ruml, Beardsley 307, 763-765
Runyon, Damon Memorial Fund 771
Rusk, Dean 475-555, 597, 647-648, 665
Russell, Frederick F_ 91, 92
Russell, PaulF 90
Russell Sage Foundation 19,
48, 49, 53, 83, 134, 155, 299, 383, 724, 786
testimony of F. Emerson Andrews 19, 53, 83-85
Donald Young 383-403
Russia 158,
180-181, 247-249, 252-253, 255, 258-259, 282-283,
303, 344-346, 373-374, 394, 427-429, 507-508, 510-
514, r 9.
Grants to institutions in U. S. S. R 548
Relations with 664-665
Testimony of Igor Bogolepov 673-688
Russian Research Center, Harvard University 303, 344, 394, 508
Ryerson, Edward L 577
COMPOSITE INDEX 157
Sage Foundation. (See Russell Sage Foundation.) Page
Sailors' Snug Harbor 667
St. Laurent, Louis 583
Salem College. 301
Salinsky, Jacob 53g
Salzburg Seminar in American Studies 404, 409
Sarah Lawrence College 305, 722
Sawyer, Ralph ' 619
Sawyer, Wilbur 93
Scandinavia 771
"Scatteration" 284, 349, 418, 441, 451-452, 485, 491, 566, 580
Schneider, Isador 721-722
School for Democracy 613
Schulkind, Adelaide 692
Schuman, Frederick 587
Scientific and Cultural Conference for World Peace 588, 617
Scientific research abroad 158-161
Scope, size, and number of foundations 4, 21, 25, r 2
Seabury, Samuel 737
Searight, Mary E r 14
Sears, Roebuck Foundation 773
Secrecy 304, 392, 399, 776, r 13
Reasons for 26, 156, 560, 646
Small foundations 558, 633-634, 639
Securities and Exchange Commission 286, 304, 422
Security, Loyalty, and Science (Gellhorn) 735
Security, national 556-557
United States, a target for ideological penetration 514-515
Sedgwick, William T 90
Select Committee, members of listed. (See also Congressional
investigation) ii; report of r 1-15
Selekman, Ben M 402
Senn, Milton 439
Sexual B ehavior in the Human Male (Kinsey ) 303
Sforza, Carlo 1 574
Sherman Antitrust Act 472
Shore, Isaac 695
Shotwell, James T 573, 593
Sigerist, Henry E 428
Siler, Joseph F 91
Simmons, Ernest J 428
Simmons, James Stevens 85-104
Simpson, Richard M ii, 50-51,
204, 230, 250, 252, 286, 392-395, 450, 468-£70, 494-
495, 564-565, 669
Slater Fund 13,299
Sloan, Alfred P., Jr 319, 453-475
Sloan Foundation, Alfred P., Jr 179, 299, 453-475
Sloan-Kettering Institute for Cancer Research. 455, 470
Slonimsky, Nicholas 513
158 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Small foundations 115-116, 260, 414-418, 623-646
Accumulation of funds 641
Central staff suggested 501
Costs. 625'
Inefficiencies of 29, 451-452, 472, 565
Reasons for secrecy 558, 633-634, 639
Role of trustees 625, 634
Small Town (Hicks) 538
Smith, Adam 185, 333
Smith, Walter Bedell 550
Smith College 537
Smithsonian Institution 13
Smyth, Henry D 489
Snape, William H., Jr r 14
Snow, Edgar 657
Social Science Research Council 14,
122, 136, 138, 148, 362, 508, 666, 771
Social sciences 43-44, 134, 375, 487, 551, 648, 768, 777
As source of strength for American way of life 137, 139; r 9
Defined 124
Excluded from National Science Foundation 30, 565
Extensively discussed 123-149
Foundations engaged in research in the 134
National register of social scientists 546
Need for foundation support 229-230,
255, 306, 343, 375-376, 437-438, 487, 759
Social welfare 42, 305
Sociology 124, 131, 132, 145
Soper, FredL 92
South Africa . 355, 364
South Carolina 788
Southern Conference Educational Fund 424, 433
Southern Conference for Human Welfare. 424, 433, 443, 587, 614, 731
Southern Negro Youth Congress ; 734
Southern Regional Council 731
Soviet Union Today, The (American-Russian Institute) 594
Spanish Refugee Appeal 588
Sparks, Frank H 773-774
Spaidding, Francis T 201
Spelman Fund of New York 476
Stachel, Jack 695, 703, 721, 744
Stander, Lionel 702
Stanford University 114, 115, 306, 678
Stassen, Harold E 295, 593
State, County and Municipal Workers of America. 614
State regulation {see also names of States) 400, 649, 786-792
Statistics 124
Stef ansson, Vilh jalmur 589
Stern, Bernard J ^_ 359
Sternberg, George M 91
Stettinius, Edward R., Jr 307
COMPOSITE INDEX 159
Page
Stevens, David H 537
Stevens Institute of Technology 530
Stevenson, William E 409
Stewart, Marguerite 586
Stewart, Maxwell S 364, 586, 657, 722
Stiles, Charles Waddell 92
Stokes, Rose Pastor 692
Stone, Harlan F 739
Straight, Dorothy Whitney (Mrs. Leonard K. Elmhirst)__ _~ 412
Straight, Michael Whitney 411-435, 700, 782-783
Strode, George K 90
Strong, Anna Louise 657 702
Strong, Richard Pearson 92
Subversive Activities Control Board 59
Subversion 122 762
Effect of foundation activities on maintenance of capital-
istic system 137, 139,
140, 151, 182-184, 287, 354, 378, 381, 400, 462, 550-
552, 559, 595, 762, 772, 773 ; r 7
Leftist tendency of foundations 235-236, 257, 286-288, 320
Problems of definition and control 123, 518-522
Reasons for criticism 357, 381-382
Screening, manpower required for 80, 82
Sugarman, Norman A 55-82
Sumner, James B 603
Survey Graphic 364
Survey Research Center, University of Michigan 145
Swan, Thomas W 607
Swarthmore College 344, 779
Swope, Gerard „__ 427", 527, 665
T
Taft, William Howard 573
Taggard, Genevieve 722
Tarr, Edgar 583
Taub, Ellen 695
"Tax avoidance" 629
"Tax evasion" 629
Tax exemption. (See also Abuses; Taxation.)
For corporate contributions 27, 58, 83, 644
For foundations 17, 58-59, 60-68, 79-83, 237
For individuals resulting from gifts through foundations __ 632
Forms used in filing returns 60, 61, 65-78
Manpower required for examination of returns 79
Sample application for 65-68
Prohibited transactions 58-59
Procedure for judicial interpretation 62-63
Question of, for operations in foreign fields 237
Suggestion of increased, to encourage charitable contribu-
tion .. 100, 250-252,
286, 448-450, 470-471, 494-495, 564, 644, 669, r 13
r
160 COMPOSITE INDEX
Taxation. (See also Abuses; Tax exemption.) Pag»
"Avoidance" and "evasion" 629, 779, r 13
Evasion by foundations 18, 304
Evasion by individuals 560, 629
Effect of, on future of foundations 456, 465, 468-469
Remission of, as source of philanthropic funds 34,
230, 392, 394, 470-471
Taylor, Eleanor K 786-792
Taylor, George E 344
Taylor, Mary L r 14
Teachers' Insurance and Annuity Association 164-1 65,
191, 324, 777
Teacher-training 41, 108, 185, 186, 305
Carnegie Foundation 108
Emphasis on method versus content 184-187, 314-315
Ford Foundation- 186, 238, 267, 271-275, 309-318
Harvard University 268
Teaching with Books (Branscomb) 169
Technical assistance 103, 231-243, 499-500, 564, 579
Technical Cooperation Administration (point 4) 241
Television, educational 267, 274, 280-281, 296
Terman, L. M 145
Texas, University of 344
Textile Workers Union of America 649-650
Textron, Inc 83, 304, 650, 789
Thomas, Norman 692
Thorndike, E. L 145
Thorner, Daniel 364
Thurstone, L. L 190
"Timid Billions" (Embrea) _ _ - 299-308
Timidity, on part of foundations 16,
299-309, 341, 347, 375-376, 765
Tobey, Charles W 83
Tobias, Channing 444, 694, 697
Toynbee, Arnold J 308
Trachtenbert, Alexander 703, 717, 725, 731, 744
Trotsky, Leon 693
Trustees 33, 36, 156, 387, 609
Characteristics 17, 302, 775
Compensation of 38, 84, 224,
254-255, 327-329, 388-389, 407, 438, 471, 481
Divesting donor of control 197-199,
203-204, 221-224, 438, 454, 776
Duties of, versus duties of business directors. _ ' 370-373, 562-563
Frequency of meetings 327-328
Geographical concentration of „ 329,
387, 406-407, 438, 480-481, 576-577, r 10-11
Interlocking directorates 16, 215-216, 254, r 10
Pressure by tax authorities on appointments of 669
Qualifications- -f 39,
202, 215, 221, 327, 387, 392-393, 454, 479-480, 778
Reliance on 285, 459, 552
Remoteness from operations 660, 664, 665
Role of, in small foundations 625, 634
Selection of 223-224, 327
Size of the board 214, 326, 438, 454, 479
COMPOSITE INDEX 161
Pago
Trusts and Foundations 497
Tulane University 344
Tulsa, University of 301
Turch, Charles J 774-775
Turkey 241
Twentieth Century Fund 14, 19, 134, 303, 385
U
United China Relief 655
United Federal Workers of America 614
United Public Workers of America 614
United Nations 525, 571, 573, 578, 585-586, 590, r 12
U. S. Army:
Medical School :. 90
Research Branch, Information and Education Division. 132, 145
U. S. Department of Defense _ ■ 296
U. S. Department of State.- 233, 250, 409, 513, 528, 541, 549, 618
U. S. House of Representatives, Committee on Un-American
Activities 161, 294, 298, 401, 408,
505, 516, 529, 544, 583, 588, 599, 608, 734, 737, 741
Committee on Ways and Means 286
U, S. Public Health Service 87, 92, 93, 101
U. S. Senate, Subcommittee of Internal Security of the Judi-
ciary Committee 361, 364, 371, 401, 408, 519, 521, 583, 684
United States in World Affairs, The 670, 681
United World Federalists. 596
University administration 268-269, 277, 512
University College 534, 648
Hospital Medical School 489
Unravelling Juvenile Delinquency (Glueck and Glueck) _ _•_ _ _ _ 777
V
Vanderbilt University 114, 344, 775-776
van Kleeck, Mary 401, 703, 706-707, 724
Vassar College ^ 537
Vatican Library 573
Vedder, Edward F__. 91
Venture capital.. 15, 16, 17, 43, 49,
84, 220, 229, 255, 342, 356, 454-455, 583, 758, 770, 779
Effect of publicity on 405
Evaluation of pioneering studies 135, 170
Grubstaking 604
Use in medicine and public health 86, 87, 99
Vermont, University of _ _ : 463
Voice of America 1 _■_■ 249
W
Wabash College 773-774
Wadsworth, Eliot 569-570
Wallenborg Foundation ...-. 497
Walsh, Frank P 13, 500
Walter Hines Page School of International Relations 362
Ware, Harold 693, 694
/
162 COMPOSITE INDEX
Page
Warren, Andrew J 93
Washington, University of 344
Watson, Cecil 771
Watson, Thomas J 595
Waymack, W. W 577
Wealth and Culture (Lindeman) 589
Wealth of Nations, The (Smith) 333
Weaver, Warren 557, 563
Webber, James B., Jr 196, 220
Weiner, William 695
Weiss, Louis S 726
Welch, William H 299
Wellesley Summer Institute 414
Wells, Herbert George 759
Wenner-Gren Foundation 134, 497
Whipple, G. H 90
White Williams Foundation 12
Whitmore, Eugene R 91
Whitney, Helen Hay, Foundation 200
Whitney, John Hay, Foundation 283
Whitney, William C, Foundation 411-135, 697
Who Should Go to College (Hollingshead) 175
Wilbur, Ray Lyman 523, 526
Wilkerson, Doxey A _. 359, 726
Williams, Aubrey 173
Williams, Claude 443
Williams, John Sharp 573
Williams College _■ 587, 588
Willits, Joseph H 563, 652-657
Wills. (See- Funds, foundation.)
Wilson, Charles Edward 220
Wilson, Robert R 775
Wisconsin 788
Wittfogel, Olga Lang 360
Woltman, Frederick . 512
Women's Action Committee for Victory and Lasting Peace 664
Wood, Leonard, Memorial for the Control of Leprosy. 86>
Woodruff Foundation 101
Workers Laboratory Theatre 694
Workers' School 613, 69a
World Health Organization 101
World Peace Foundation 581
Wright, Richard 722
Wriston, Henry M 163-193, 317, 332, 495, 585, 781-782
Wyzanski, Charles E 220
Y
Tale University 264, 678
Institute of Human Relations 282
Law School 278, 281, 607
COMPOSITE INDEX 163
Page
Yergan, Max 364
Young, Donald 383-403
Young, Owen D 173
Young Men's Christian Association 364
Yugoslavia 360, 643
Z
Zlotowski, Ignace 539
O
y
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11